Is Varanapally notable enough for an article? It was PRODded as non-existent, I found enough references do de-prod it, but now the question is, should it go to speedy or AfD, should it be redirected, or should it be expanded into something worthy of being on Wikipedia? I must confess my ignorance on India-related matters. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail) 03:01, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
The 3 other contributions of the brand new editor Anudath09 (talk·contribs) should be given a once-over for technical accuracy. I'm not familiar enough with the subject matter to know if he's inserting valuable information and making legitimate corrections or if he's engaging in self-promotion. With WP:AGF and my own ignorance in mind I left them alone. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail) 03:06, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
IMO it is not notable enough for a separate article, the image and text can be inserted into the Narayanguru article. Not notable enough to stand alone. His edits to narayana guru and kayamkulam are harmless additions(i fixed the bold text and table alignment disruption in kayamkulam article). The user seems to be a local resident looking up his neighbourhood in wikipedia and trying to add the information he knows about it. --Sodabottle (talk) 04:21, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
I noticed that we do not have category for Wikipedians from Chennai, and hence tried creating one. However, it appears that such a category did exist, and was deleted (see here) as per Wikipedia:CSD#C1. This actually means the category was deleted because it was empty for more than 4 days.
The page also says:
If you are creating a new page with different content, please continue. If you are recreating a page similar to the previously deleted page, or are unsure, please first contact the deleting administrator using the information provided below.
My questions:
Is there any way for me/admins to rollback the delete?
I feel that the delete was unnecessary.. Surely the category was empty because not much ppl knew about it ;-) is what I feel. I don't want to create the category for it to become empty again. So can we have a roll call of Chennai Wikipedians, who would like to add themselves to the category, please? Shivasubramanian (talk) 07:40, 18 November 2009 (UTC)
I think Ganeshk is suggesting that if the category is added to a few pages (even as a redlink), then it can be undeleted without the risk of immediate re-deletion. Abecedare (talk) 05:46, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
I am new to Wiki but would like to put the history of Occupational Therapy (OT) in India in the page [1]. However it was removed citing the reason that the history is from Indian OT's blog page. However this is the only written material available and hence can somebody help in putting this important link in OT page.
Welcome! As per Wikipedia policy, information must be attributed to reliable sources. Blogs are not reliable sources, and cannot be used as references in Wikipedia articles. If you can find a reliable published source that mentions this information, you should be able to add it to the page in question after discussion. Regards, SBC-YPR (talk) 12:33, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
Looking at Bhadrajun, there seems to be a problem (beyond the need for some serious copyediting-- please be my guest) that a particular story about the place traces back to the Mahabharata. Unfortunately there is no real citation for that, and searching the huge thing is a unwieldy to the point of being impossible. Is there some standard form for citing a passage? Mangoe (talk) 20:59, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
A reference should quote one of the standard versions; such as the Ganguly translation which can be found online at [2], and quote chapter / section / verse of the reference. However, versions will differ in detail and in content. Those translations considered more reliable are AFAIK available only in print form, though others may know better than me about this. Imc (talk) 08:10, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
Oops! I agree, that is a problem with Ganguly. Strictly speaking, when used as a reference here one of the more 'authoritative' versions should be used, and Ganguly is not usually considered a reliable reference. Both my Narasimhan (abridged version), and my van Buitenen volume 1 that I have in print have reference apparatus. I agree that references to the 'Mahabharata' can be suspect if no further detail is given. Imc (talk) 07:51, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
Neutrality Check
Hey, I just recently came across the Indian Air Force article, and that thing needs to be checked for neutrality. It seems that some User has decided to put entire sections saying how the Pakistani airforce is the best in the world, and India is incredibly scared of them, and how America which was Pakistans ally at the time is always praising them. I removed one sentence, I think I'll leave the rest to wikipedians who are more experienced then me in this. 97.125.178.38 (talk) 07:33, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
Was mostly from two edits yesterday, deep reverted now. You can also post on the talk page if there's some content you think needs to go.-SpacemanSpiff07:45, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
Ok folks, someone else ought to watch this article now. Patent POV pushing going on and my revert was undid as vandalism :) Deepak, I look forward to reading your edit summary when you revert. -SpacemanSpiff05:23, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
Ran across this article, and it's in pretty sad shape. Granted, it only gets about 10 hits a day (per stats.grok.se), but if anyone's big into the history of the Princely States you might be interested. I'd help out, but I know zero about "salute states", and I also already spent a good 2hrs or more today turning Mangral into something readable. MatthewVanitas (talk) 05:26, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
I decided to GA review this article, but the nominator hasn't been active on Wikipedia for a while. There are some issues that need to be addressed, most were identified during the FAC review of the article in February (also the time when the major contributor to the article retired). I don't have access to the sources and am not exactly familiar with the subject, so if anyone is willing to take up the role of the nominator and address the issues, that would be great. The GA review is located at Talk:Kannada literature in the Kingdom of Mysore/GA1. The FAC review is linked from the article history section on the talk page. If I'm unable to find someone who can work on the article over the next couple of weeks, I'll have to fail it. cheers. -SpacemanSpiff04:10, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
I have nominated an article on V. S. Srinivasa Sastri for a GA. But as, unfortunately, I don't have uninterrupted access to internet these days, it would be difficult for me to keep a regular eye on the proceedings. It would be great if someone could keep an eye on it and respond to suggestions if provided.-The EnforcerOffice of the secret service13:39, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
I feel parenthesis are better at explaining the nature of the constituency. Parenthesis seem to be the convention in all parliamentary constieuncy articles - UK, Ireland,EU, etc .But i agree with Cartick on the "state" part. As long as we dealt with only recent elections it wasn't an issue. Now we have started creating articles for pre independence elections for bicameral legislatures and saying "state" is ambiguous--Sodabottle (talk) 08:00, 5 December 2009 (UTC).
Hi. Please can somebody fix the Infobox Indian jurisdiction so it uses Template:Location map India Rajasthan like Chittorgarh Fort rather than the horrid colored district one we have at present e.g Jaipur. In fact I'd like to replace all of the colored Indian state maps with decent blank ones with just the districts outlined not colored horribly. Eventually I hope to get high quality svg maps for the Indian states but I think we should be using blank maps for pin and have long disapproved of the quality of the colored locators. I will do my best to find blank state maps to use in the Infobox jurisdiction rather than these very amateurish maps we currently have which I believe degrade the quality of the articles. Dr. BlofeldWhite cat19:21, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
Book-class
Since this is one of the biggest projects, and that several Wikipedia-Books are India-related, could this project adopt the book-class? This would really help WikiProject Wikipedia-Books, as the WP India people can oversee books like India much better than we could as far as merging, deletion, content, and such are concerned. Eventually there probably will be a "Books for discussion" process, so that would be incorporated in the Article Alerts. I'm placing this here rather than on the template page since several taskforces would be concerned.
I think it is a great idea. I support the changes that need to be made to the India project banner to enable this. Regards, Ganeshk(talk)01:51, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
Per Ganeshk (who's very nicely clarified it for me). Sorry for the delay in our responses Headbomb, but good on you for following it up. Ncmvocalist (talk) 07:52, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
I'm not sure this is the right place to raise this question, but can't see any other. I'm looking for guidance regarding the correct variety of English to use in India-related articles. WP:ENGVAR is clear in establishing the principle of using local standard English in e.g. USA, Britain etc. but makes no explicit mention of India. Can anyone clarify the position? Thanks. --Yumegusa (talk) 10:08, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
Thank you, ABC. Would it, in your opinion, be reasonable to consider the likes of Chakra to fall into the category of 'Indian', from this perspective? --Yumegusa (talk) 22:41, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
Edit filter for changing Andhra Pradesh to Telangana?
Anyone here know how to set an edit filter for this? It's getting to be annoying now, with so many articles being changed by multiple editors and IPs. All this before Telangana is even a state. Even if it does become a state, birth places will still be AP, based on point in time. cheers. -SpacemanSpiff02:54, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
A new article, List of Hindi writers has been created using images, including many non-free and single usage ones, though List of Hindi language authors already exists! It seems to have been nominated for deletion but template was removed! Also the same user has been replacing older images in same category, with personal paintings/reproduction etc as in...Bharatendu Harishchandra, without prior discussion. For the time being, I have readded one, a smaller, older image issued by govt of India, in the text section for the time being! Some consensus needed. Thanks! --Ekabhishektalk14:03, 23 December 2009 (UTC)
(after ec) I have redirected List of Hindi writers to List of Hindi language authors. If the redirect is reverted, we can discuss it on the article talk page, and take it to AFD, where this no-brainer is sure to be affirmed.
The issue of the drawings is complicated by both copyright and encyclopedicity concerns. See this current RFC on the topic for an overview of the issues involved. To summarize my understanding of the consensus:
User-drawn portraits can be used only if they are in public domain or released under a free license, which requires that they not be derivative works of copyrighted photographs or drawings.
User-drawn portraits should be used only if they serve the same encyclopedic purpose as existing images, and no copyright free photograph is available.
Heavy pro-British bias in East India Company Articles.
I was reading through the articles on the British East India company (specifically East India Company and Company Rule in India) out of curiosity to find out how we (the British) behaved while we ruled India. The articles seem to be hopelessly bias towards the British as according to the articles it seems that aside from the Opium Wars and the 1858 uprising we managed to rule India perfectly.
Unfortunately history education in Britain doesn't cover the British empire at all, so I know very little about it. But is it possible for some more neutral content to be added - or at least a sensible discussion to be had on the talk pages so we can add the non-neutral template to the articles as they clearly are non-neutral. As per Wikipedia guidelines (WP:Cite) such information will need to be well sourced.
Mysore is on the mainpage today as the featured article. Kudos to User:Amarrget al who got it to FA standards in 2007!. Hope more editors will watchlist the article for the day to keep the inevitable vandalism at bay. Cheers. Abecedare (talk) 01:59, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
That said, if you create around 10 more articles, I can claim, "CarTick and I have created 1000 new articles, between the two of us". ;-) Abecedare (talk) 00:05, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
Can more people watch the article? The govt has decided to merge a few suburbs and expand the city, however, it's not clear when individual mergers will happen, although it's all slated to happen before 2011. But it's obviously going to cause a lot of edit wars with misinterpretation of sources etc, especially as relates to "third largest" vs "fifth largest" city. cheers. -SpacemanSpiff22:14, 30 December 2009 (UTC)
GO. admin units are executive issues (same case for district bifurcation etc). they do announce it in the assembly as policy notes (but no voting)--Sodabottle (talk) 05:22, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
I've got the feeling the current article Thendral isn't really addressing the full scope of concepts referred to by that name, but my ignorance of the Indian subcontinent makes it hard for me to guess how to move forward. A simple Google search seems to pull up all kinds of stuff called Thendral that doesn't obviously have to do with a 2009 TV series. Actually what first prompted my curiosity about this term was tuning around on the Sri Lanka Broadcasting Corporation's streamed radio, including one station called Thendral. At any rate, I'd love any suggestions on how to proceed, or any contributions to that article to explain what Thendral means in the broad sense. - Regards, PhilipR (talk) 00:57, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
Created a new article for the arsenal outside Calcutta well-known for the development of hollow-point ammunition (and created an article for its developer Neville Bertie-Clay). This arsenal apparently also played an earlier role in the ammunition controversy which played a role in the 1856 Rebellion; anyone interested in shoring up that part of the history? MatthewVanitas (talk) 09:24, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
Category:Members of the Society for Biblical Studies in India
There's an interesting discussion on whether the capital of India is Delhi or New Delhi, and there have been multiple changes in different places (changing from New Delhi to Delhi). I've undone those edits wherever I came across them, and got the IP to start a discussion at Talk:New Delhi#capital of India; Abecedare has posted links to the GoI website and CIA factbook for the New Delhi bit. However, the changes continue in articles I didn't know existed. There's also a discussion at Wikipedia:Reference desk/Humanities#Is NEW Delhi really the capital of India. Feel free to participate in all these discussions :) cheers -SpacemanSpiff09:02, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
Could you perhaps point me towards someone who would translate a few lines of indian for a german wikipedia entry? http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buffalax , the video in reference 4, I would like to have the corect translation of the first few lines in the article if possible. Feel free to edit it. Thank you Sas2009 (talk) 11:00, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
The, um, 'Indian' in the video is English and the subtitles accurately render the words in the song. What you need is someone who can translate English text into German. --RegentsPark (sticks and stones) 12:01, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
Really? English with such a heavy accent it sounds indian? I can translate the english subtitles into german but do not have any good idea how spoken hindu or tamil sounds. From the sources I cited however and from the comments by Buffalax in the video it seems unlikely to me the audio is just heavily accented english. Sas2009 (talk) 12:43, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
P.S. I understand [3] just fine but I do have problems with the video in the article to give you an idea of my grasp of the English language. Sas2009 (talk) 13:08, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
English with such a heavy accent it sounds indian I think that's the point of the joke. It took me a few minutes to figure out that the song is sung in English - it doesn't sound like that at all - and that the subtitles are accurate. I agree with Ganeshk that this shouldn't really be a stand-alone article. Not, i.e., unless it is a phenomenon of some sort that is covered in reliable sources. --RegentsPark (sticks and stones) 16:54, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
Thanks a lot, sorry if you do not like it. If someone writes a german article on [Soramimi] maybe it can be merged in, my japanese is non-existant so I do not dare to. Sas2009 (talk) 13:38, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
Warburg's Tincture
I've added the article Warburg's Tincture, which I created recently, to the this WikiProject. I trust this is okay. (Warburg's Tincture was a medicine used in the treatment of malaria in India in the 19th-century. It was supplied by the British Government to colonial troops stationed in India.)--Roland Sparkes (talk) 01:55, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
I would very much like the collaboration and assistance of those located in India who could add further historical content to this article, especially in regard to any mentions to archival and journal/newspaper material located in India. Thanks--Roland Sparkes (talk) 01:55, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
Discussion regarding the Inclusion or Removal of Urdu-language Scripts
Hello, there is a current discussion here regarding the inclusion or deletion of Urdu scripts in film titles. Any comments would be appreciated. With regards, AnupamTalk23:09, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
Wikipedia Day @ Bangalore
Dear all:
The Wikipedians in Bangalore are planning a Wikipedia Day event in Bangalore on Sat, Jan-16. Would like to invite all of you for the event.
Also look forward to ideas, suggestions on what we could do specifically, that would be of interest to all.
Some thoughts/ideas we discussed when we met in Sat:
Wiki Page in multiple Indian languages that showcases the wikipedia journey and what it means from an Indian context and language perspective. We had volunteers from 6-7 languages.
Talk by renowned personality familiar with Wikipedia and Indian languages
Potential panel discussion - Promoting Indian language wikipedia, Building Wikipedia communities.
A Wikipedia trivia quiz
This is also a call for help and support to make this happen.
This is an invite to all Wikipedians in / travelling to bangalore to attend the event.
FWIW, the "see alsos" and references in the article are cut-and-pasted from a previous version of wikipedia's Landslide article, and are irrelevant to the subject. Abecedare (talk) 18:39, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
Can more people keep a watch over this one? His death has brought both fans and detractors to the article, lots of OR gets added, lots of copyvios etc. cheers. -SpacemanSpiff06:39, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
Yes, had a lot of copy vios over the past couple of days. "3395 million people from the US come to Wikipedia in any given month" is a very compelling reason! That girlfriend of Mark Sanford was supposed to be notable and all that a while back too. -SpacemanSpiff07:11, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
I came to INB, to post a similar request for eyeballs, and see that Spaceman has already done so. I'll second it anyways. Abecedare (talk) 19:02, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
WP 1.0 bot announcement
This message is being sent to each WikiProject that participates in the WP 1.0 assessment system. On Saturday, January 23, 2010, the WP 1.0 bot will be upgraded. Your project does not need to take any action, but the appearance of your project's summary table will change. The upgrade will make many new, optional features available to all WikiProjects. Additional information is available at the WP 1.0 project homepage. — Carl (CBM · talk) 03:06, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
Unreferenced BLPs
There are recent efforts on wikipedia to delete all unreferenced BLPs either speedily or through the prod process (see this and this, and this for some related discussion. Among the roughly ~50,000 such articles that fall in this category, >1700 are under the purview of this project. I have created a list of such articles that are liable to be deleted soon in my userspace at:
Ideally these articles need to be reviewed to see which can be sourced and comply with the notability guidelines, and which need to be deleted. Any suggestions on how we can organize to undertake this effort systematically are invited.
PS: Note that the above list is neither complete (since it contains only articles that have been explicit categorized in a India subcategory), nor auto-updated; it's just a useful starting point to focus our efforts. Abecedare (talk) 16:33, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
I suggest the following: Pick any article to review and then mark the list entry with what action was taken (and add your signature), so that effort is not duplicated. Remember to remove the "Unreferenced BLP tag" if you have sourced the article. Ideally the article (talkpage) can be tagged with {{WP India}} template and assessed at the same time. Happy editing! Abecedare (talk) 17:20, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
There are about 500 biographies related to Indian cinema that are in the unreferenced list. It would help if editors experienced in this area could review them.
Several of the film related biographies either already cite IMDB as a reference (or as an external link), or an IMDB link could be trivially added. Is this sufficient to remove the {{UnreferencedBLP}} tag ?
I have moved the page to project-space as that's a more sensible location for it. Less sure of the table formatting, becuase of pagesize and ease-of-editing concerns, but it's worth a try - if it doesn't work well we can always revert, or rather create a parallel page with the additional information. (I will be mostly off-wiki for the next couple of days, but plan to resume work on the list soon fater that). Abecedare (talk) 14:50, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
Participants
Please sign below if you intend to participate in this BLP clean up effort (just so we have an idea of the volunteers involved). Abecedare (talk) 18:20, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
I've asked User:the wub for help on that to list the categories, then it'll be easier. As such I'm not sure splitting to different project pages will be that helpful given the number of people working on this, something addressed in one page might not show on the other etc. Posting the link to the main one on the sub-projects might be a better option IMHO. cheers. –SpacemanSpiff23:07, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
They've won one seat in an election so far (2003) and have coverage sufficient to pass GNG, so it's worth translating. Hmar People's Convention is also redlinked from Hmar and four other articles and I can't find any similar organization on en.wiki, so a good candidate for transwiki/translating IMO. cheers. –SpacemanSpiff07:30, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
not even sure, if the article will pass notability test. even if it does, most of the stuff (including phone) need to be removed. looks like the school administration has its hand. --CarTick14:38, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
Caveat: this only gets 167 hits a month, but it was interesting enough that I wanted to knock it around: Bar Mati Pantj (also known by Maheshwari Meghwar).
It was an unintelligible stub, then an IP did a pure copyvio of a sectarian website. I'm trying to modify it enough to avoid copyvio (and that copy was pretty non-WP anyway). But it's still really vague, and I can't even ascertain basic info like "is this a Sufi sect or a new religion entirely?" If anyone has any familiarity with this group, or alternate names under which more info might exist, that'd be appreciated. MatthewVanitas (talk) 17:59, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
Who elected to keep the obvious typo ('j' is next to 'h' on the keyboard)? "Barmati panth" is the religion of the Maheshpanthi sect, who seem to be local to Gujarat, Kutch and Sindh. They are obviously not Sufi (Hindu names?), but they could be very syncretic. There probably isn't much information about them. Maybe ethnological materials from the days of the Bombay Presidency, but I wouldn't know where to look. The best bet may be old newspaper articles. There may also be a connection with the Meghwal. Merging into Meghwal may be best. rudra (talk) 11:00, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
The hits on GoogleBooks seem to indicate there's some syncretism going on: "...or religious leaders of the Barmati Panth, which was one of the numerous offshoots of Nizari Ismailism." MatthewVanitas (talk) 00:40, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
This business about Nizari Ismailis should be taken with a grain of salt, and investigated thoroughly. The real Nizaris are the sect of the Aga Khan. They are descended from the Assassins, who were all but destroyed by Hulagu Khan in the 13th CE. They had no real presence in India until one of the Aga Khans fled from Persia. I strongly suspect that "Nizari" is being used here as short-hand for "heterodox (Shia)", of whom there were a number of small sects in southern Punjab and Sindh. (In fact, Multan was under an Ismaili dynasty until Mahmud of Ghazni killed them off around 1000 CE. The eclipse of the Shias in Western India and their scattering dates to that time.) At any rate, names like "Maheshpanthi" and "Maheshwar(i)" strongly suggest that they are really Saivites, with "Nizari" really meaning elements of Islam in the form of mystical songs and texts. rudra (talk) 03:17, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
Rashtriya Geet
Is "Rashtriya Geet"/"Rashtriya Gita" a particular song, or does it simply mean "national anthem"? I see a book with that title is a " collection of national and patriotic songs".[6] Another website calls it a national song and gives lyrics.[7] (Could anyone translate them?) Will Bebacktalk01:06, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for that information. This website for a "virtual nation" says that their anthem is Rashtriya Gita.[8] It sounds like they are saying, in effect, "our anthem is national anthem". Will Bebacktalk11:29, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
Rashtriya Gita (rather Geet), are just National songs and can be many for our "mental" or "virtual" nations, while Rashtra Jaan and Rashtra Geet as mentioned above, remain singular; glad it is that way, simpler! :)--Ekabhishektalk14:47, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
Actually, the difference doesn't seem to be very significant. Although I'd venture to say that the marking of rivers and colouring of territories looks horrendous. Methinks the map ought to be redone better in SVG. Regards, SBC-YPR (talk) 15:38, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
i like thew new one. dont know how accurate the old one was, but if the new one is to be a replicate, including the geographical features such as rivers and mountain ranges will enhance its appeal and accuracy. --CarTick18:34, 30 January 2010 (UTC)
I think AfD is a good option. I would have suggested merge first, but this title is so POV that it shouldn't even be a redirect. There's some stuff in this that could belong to the main article, but I'm sure someone will come by to add that. –SpacemanSpiff09:05, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
The Coconut page has spent most of its history written in Indian English (with spellings like flavour), because of its significance in India and other countries in the Commonwealth. Recently, one American editor has unilaterally changed it to American (flavor), on the grounds that the first early stub versions of the article were in American, and that the coconut is insignificant in India compared to the importance of the USA (where coconuts aren't grown much). If you wish to voice an opinion, please add your commets to the discussion at Talk:Coconut in the Language section at the end of the page. Thank you! 217.206.228.30 (talk) 15:16, 4 February 2010 (UTC)
using Facebook to lobby otherwise movie-loving, encyclopedia-fearing gentlemen to log on to wikipedia atleast once in their lifetime to drop off their potentially valuable (which I am sure they have no clue) private pictures doesnt sound like a bad idea. I dont use Facebook and so if anyone knows how to do this. --CarTick18:58, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
Is this renaming true? Almost every source I find seems to refer back to wikipedia (except the cited source, which seems to be a blog of sorts and could easily have picked this up from wikipedia). --RegentsPark (sticks and stones) 12:50, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
Rename to Gurjar Samrat Mihir Bhoja Marg, I didn't find anything except that boloji thingy. However, since a Delhi Chief Minister doesn't have the authority to name a national highway in Uttar Pradesh, I figured it might have been a small stretch and left the redirect back. If no one else can find a ref, I think that should be deleted too. Is someone taking the above category to CfD? Also, this OR/peacocking has been moving into mainstream articles like History of India etc for quite a while now, so one might need to check those articles first. —SpacemanSpiff16:32, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
Boloji.com is a user-contribution based website and the article being cited for the "Gurjar Samrat Mihir Bhoja Marg" name is just one such contribution. It is not a reliable source, and unless the factoid can be independently verified, it should be removed from the article and the redirect deleted.
I created this category along with "places named after Gujjars" when i just joined wikipedia and i already have given my concern that i have no problem with deletion of it.[Here] However you can rethink upon category:Gurjar era.Regard Chhora (talk) 17:27, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
Gurjaras and Pratiharas appear to be closely related and Pratiharas seem to be one of the several clans of Gurjaras. i dont see a problem with the move. CarTick (talk) 18:28, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
(edit conflict)This one is a borderline case, while Pratihara appears to be more commonly used, there is some significant usage for Gurjara-Pratihara too. Perhaps this needs a discussion on the article talk page to see which one should be preferred.
Hey, just wanted to bring this article to the projects attention as it is under their scope. There have been recent conflicts over neutrality in this article, specifically over criticism from reliable sources which are disputed as inaccurate. The article could use a clean-up and a few more eyes to improve it. Hope this helps, --Taelus (talk) 10:29, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
The key problem recently seems to be that Britannica, a reliable source, includes some criticism of the group, but this is not being phrased very well in the article. It is complicated further because seemingly Britannica admitted their article could use a rework, but this was roughly a year ago and it hasn't been updated. --Taelus (talk) 11:10, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
Unlikely, he appears to be a local politician from a town with a population less than 20k at the time of his death. The article is probably a loosely translated Hindi obituary. —SpacemanSpiff21:23, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
This notice is to advise interested editors that a Contributor copyright investigation has been opened which may impact this project. Such investigations are launched when contributors have been found to have placed copyrighted content on Wikipedia on multiple occasions. It may result in the deletion of images or text and possibly articles in accordance with Wikipedia:Copyright violations. The specific investigation which may impact this project is located here.
As part of this process, the existing, but incompatible, Category:Indian location articles needing coordinates tree has been emptied of articles by converting all of them to use the new tag support, and should now be considered deprecated in favor of the new use of state names as parameters to {{coord missing}}.
A bot is currently working on automatically recategorizing around 12,000 articles currently tagged as {{coord missing|India}} into their respective Indian state subcategories.
Does {{coord missing}} makes [[:Category:<State name> articles missing geocoordinate data]] or [[:Category:<State name> needing coordinates]] now or does it not populate the state cats at all ? -- TinuCherian - 19:06, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
The new template create the state cats if the state name is passed. Anome has made changes to WP:IIJ to have the state cats ([[:Category:<State name> articles missing geocoordinate data]]) populated when the state name is passed to the template. [[:Category:<State name> needing coordinates]] is being discontinued. Hope that clarifies. Regards, Ganeshk(talk)13:02, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
Cat Scan shows a number of biographies on Indian people are missing sources. Bios lacking sources are in danger of being deleted (not by me). Your help would be appreciated. Maurreen (talk) 20:58, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
Just happened to see WP:IND/UBLP. Nice effort folks. Sorry I was busy with more of Wikipedia evaengalism since some months and my contributions to WP was heavily affected. Hopefully I may be able to do more justice to contributions hereafter. Whatz happening at WP:INDIA ? Did I miss some major events/discussions? -- TinuCherian - 09:52, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
I have nominated Indian Standard Time 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.Cirt (talk) 17:06, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
Can some editors go through the contributions of Wikindia24x7 (talk·contribs)? I've had to delete a few fantasy articles, pushing some strange POV of excellent train service in Madhya Pradesh, some fictional districts, revert dubious changes like a town with a population of less than 100k becoming larger than Bombay overnight etc. I've also had to block two socks VikasJain (talk·contribs) and Anas999 (talk·contribs). All three accounts have multiple warnings ranging from copyright vios, to uploading BLP attack content, to introducing factual errors within articles etc etc. Some sort of clean up needs to happen. cheers. —SpacemanSpiff18:50, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
This notice is to advise interested editors that a Contributor copyright investigation has been opened which may impact this project. Such investigations are launched when contributors have been found to have placed copyrighted content on Wikipedia on multiple occasions. It may result in the deletion of images or text and possibly articles in accordance with Wikipedia:Copyright violations. The specific investigation which may impact this project is located here.
Interestingly, most of the articles flagged pertain to Andhra Pradesh and have been substantially contributed to by one editor Rajasekhar1961 (talk·contribs), who has since been blocked for copyright violation. Since the extent of the damage is quite large, would it be possible to have a bot- or script-assisted cleanup, perhaps by using the data that has been collated here? Regards, SBC-YPR (talk) 07:00, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
All credit to SBC, SpacemanSpiff et al for the effort and time they devoted in overhauling and largelyrewriting the articles to bring them up to current FA standards. Nice work and great saves! Abecedare (talk) 05:35, 3 March 2010 (UTC)
Can some editor interested in Indian politics review (and if needed even stubbify) this article ? It has been a constant target of BLP violations directed both against Tytler and his adversaries; and even his name, birthdate and religion change between versions! For example, I just reverted this edit, but the version reverted to was comparably problematic and untrustworthy. I have made a deeper revert for now, and semi-protected the article, but even the current version is likely to have problems and a review by experienced editors in the area would help Abecedare (talk) 15:40, 3 March 2010 (UTC)
There is an ongoing discussion on the talk page as to whether the recent sex scandal ought to be incorporated into the article. Please comment. Regards, SBC-YPR (talk) 05:35, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
This article could use some attention. A new editor is adding a lot of information, and much of it seems unsourced. I know nothing of the topic, so hopefully someone here can help. Thanks, PDCook (talk) 05:55, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
No better or worse than any of our other caste articles (save a couple). I think we need to take a stance in this project and tag all these caste cruft articles with {{disputed}} and {{original research}} so that readers at least know what they're getting is mostly codswallop. And we've got to make sure that these tags stay on until reference checking is complete. I know I'll never get anywhere with this proposal, but I guess it's worth a try :) —SpacemanSpiff18:27, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
Ancient Indian History from indigenous sources -Puranas, Rajatarangini etc.
The contents of most of the articles on Ancient Indian History reflect the history as misunderstood, misinterpreted or willfully distorted by foreign oriental schlors.
These contents are hotly contested by various scholars with evidence from Indian Literature mostly avilable in Sanscrit. One among them is Pandit Kota Venkata Chelam. Some of his books written in the 1950s are now out of stock but are availble for download by searching for them based on his name.
His view point in summery is as follows:
Lengthy quote
An appeal to Young Indologists
The history of India, particularly of the ancient period, as it is found in the Text Books of schools and colleges and in the writings of research scholars of Indology, requires thorough revision. European scholars, who attempted to construct our history, seriously erred in chronology.
1. The false assumption that the Aryans came from outside India and the wrong identification of Chandra-Gupta-Maurya of 1534 B.C, with another Chandra-Gupta, the contemporary of Alexander(326 B.C.), led to several errors in chronology and other aspects of our history.
2. The Puranas, which are a storehouse of historical information, were discredited as mere fiction. Several facts from the Puranas that do credit to our history and culture are entirely omitted in the historical writings of Europeans and their Indian followers.
3. Some Indologists went to the length of interpolating in and otherwise tampering with the writings of ancient foreign visitors of India and with the Buddhist literature
4. Many ancient inscriptions like the Kumbhalghar Inscription (V.S.1537) were destroyed.
5. The genuine Inscription of Janamejaya ( Indian Antiquity pp333,334) dated Kali 89 or 3012 B.C. has been rejected as being spurious. Several other important ancient inscriptions between 4148 B>C. And 300 B.C., were destroyed.
6. Some coins and inscriptions have been misread, mis-interpreted, misapplied and misrepresented and some are forged so as to be used for supporting the modern theories.
7. The Aihole inscription and others that establish correctly the date of the Mahabharata War, 3138 B.C., have been neglected.
8. Some important dates which are supposed to be the Anchor Sheets of Ancient Indian chronology have been arbitrarily determined, with no regard for or reference to ancient literature.
All this was to show that the historical literature of Bharat was unreliable as a document of history.
Although later researches by Indian Savants have brought to light several facts, the writings of these savants are not accepted by prominent Indologists for the simple reason that these writings do not fall in line with their modern theories. It is strange to expect that scholars that are bent upon showing the errors in the modern historians in the field should fall in line with the same writers. The interests of truth will heavily suffer if this attitude towards fresh research scholars of Indian history continues.
For about forty years I have been working in the field of historical research studying both Indigenous and modern histories and inscriptions etc., and during the last 9 years I have published genuine Historical facts in 24 books, some in Telugu and some in English running into 3000 pages. I have been sending my publications to research scholars and other prominent persons interested in the subject. Although the bulk of the scholars are too conservative even to examine my writings, some of them have accepted that my writings give a lead to the attempts for constructing a genuine history of Bharat. I am happy to note that there is a wide-spread desire in our country today, that our history should be rewritten so as to be nearer the truth.
I have done, through my writings, what I could towards the achievement of the legitimate wish of our people. I appeal to the younger generation to pursue the subject and do justice to the great culture and history of our country.
I have labored, long enough and am retiring in my 72nd year. I assure my young friends that as they proceed with the subject they will find in our ancient literature, inscriptions and coins, wonderful material that will enable them to construct history of our mother-land from 3138 B.C.. Beware of forged inscriptions etc.
This Ancient Hindu History consisting of two parts is the last of my works. In the first part of this book I have traced the dynasties of kings from 3138 B.C., the date of the Mahabharata War, to 1193 A.D., and I have also given historical accounts of these dynasties. This information is quite in accordance with the puranic accounts and genuine inscriptions. In this second part, I have proved that the genuine history of Bharat is to be found in the vast Sanscrit literature, that the so-called archaeological evidence cited by modern historians is full of misleadings, misrepresentations and misapplications and that this evidence besides being so very faulty has failed to help a correct reconstruction of ancient Hindu Chronology and has always tended to horribly curtail it.
My good wishes to all those interested in bringing the genuine history of our Bharat.
Kota Venkata Chelam
References:Pandit Chelam's books in English
1. Manava Srishti Vignanam or
The Genesis of the Human Race
2. The plot in Indian Chronology
3. Chronology of Nepal History Reconstructed
4. Chronology of Kashmir History Reconstructed
5. The Historicity of Vikramaditya and Salivahana
6. Age of Buddha, Milinda & Amtiyoka and Yuga-Purana
7. Chronology of Ancient Hindu History- Part-I
8. Chronology of Ancient Hindu History- Part-II
(Archaeological evidence misused)
9. Age of Mahabharata War
10. Indian Eras
GDdprasad, if you wish to agitate for a revisionist reading of Indian history, you are free to do so without interference on your existing blog, but wikipedia is not the right venue for such efforts. On wikipedia we only aims to summarize (in a neutral manner) what reliable sources say on the subject, and Chelam's writings don't meet our standards. Also be aware of our conflict of interest policies before using wikipedia to promote Chelam's views any further. Abecedare (talk) 18:51, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
A note has been sent regarding this by User:HPN on behalf of the team that has been spending time in putting this draft together. It has been suggested that the comments be made on or before Saturday, the 13-March-2010 on the talk page. This effort has received active support and guidance from Achal Prabhala (Wikimedia Advisory council). Center for Internet and Society have been gracious in extending their support, and prior experience in matters related to forming a formal entity in India.
Assistance is requested in sharing a translated version of this note in the notice boards of all other Indian language Wikipedias. Please volunteer.
There's a slow edit war going on here. I was on the verge of taking some action but instead decided to ask someone here to take a look at this featured article and clean up the recent messes and postpone any action to later (if the disruptive behavior is repeated). —SpacemanSpiff06:32, 14 March 2010 (UTC)
Yes, the page is setup to show FAC, GAN and FLC. FAC and GAN are listed at sections, 11 and 12. I think there are no FLC candidates to list, so the section does not show up on the page. Regards, Ganeshk(talk)12:20, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
Dear Wikipedians in Chennai, Can any of you take a picture of the new Assembly/Secretariat Complex in Anna Salai and upload it.? Suddenly the Tamil Nadu Legislative Assembly article finds itself without an image of the meeting place. Thanks!--Sodabottle (talk) 07:43, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
Can someone take a look at this? It's a blend of a hagiography and a litigation outlet. I've cleaned up in the past and have reverted loads of one sided litigation text. I think it needs some sort of protection and loads of clean up. cheers. —SpacemanSpiff17:36, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
This article on a Jat clan was deleted in January following an AFD (see version). Over the past week, User:Royal Jat Warrior has worked on the article at the Article incubator to rectify the sourcing issues. Can someone knowledgeable in the area, please review the new version of article and check if it meets the standards to be moved to mainspace ? (A single sentence review would suffice for this purpose) I don't know which of the sources used in the draft are trustworthy, so would prefer a second set of eyes. Thanks. Abecedare (talk) 03:01, 20 March 2010 (UTC)
The default output produced by this template is "Rs" and not the ISO code "INR". Can the template be modified to produce "INR" as output? Likewise with "US$" (ISO: "USD") etc. Regards, SBC-YPR (talk) 16:39, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
All of the Flag of India standards, IS 1, IS 300 and IS 400 can be bought at http://www.standardsbis.in/Gemini/home/Home.action. However, the problem that I run into is that since I am an American (with pretty much no Indian ancestry or relatives), I will be charged 1900 INR (about 41 USD) per document. If an Indian gets them, it would be 190 INR (or 4 USD). Can Indian Wikipedians with PayPal account can get the documents? (I ask for PayPal because I can send money to people that way to compendate them). User:Zscout370(Return Fire)06:53, 27 March 2010 (UTC)
Can anyone please correct the Tamil text given in the article to as it given at [10]. I am planning a FAC soon, any suggestions for improvement are also welcome. --RedtigerxyzTalk11:11, 27 March 2010 (UTC)
Can any1 confirm that spelling is right. The tamil article in created in 25 _______ (can't read Tamil) 2009. The version before my expansion in 09 does not have link. The tamil article may be created after I requested someone to add tamil text, though that user was not sure of it. The Tamil text was written based on the pronunciation I explained to him, which could be inaccurate. --RedtigerxyzTalk15:06, 27 March 2010 (UTC)
Here is confirmation (sort of). அராவான் gets two ghits and அரவான் gets 3900. And here is a chapter from Ponniyin Selvan which depicts Aravaan koothu and spells it as அரவான். And here is a play by S. Ramakrishnan with the same name. Also personally i am pretty much confident of the spelling as i (and my text books) have spelled it always as அரவான்--Sodabottle (talk) 15:27, 27 March 2010 (UTC)
I made several edits to B. M. Sreenivasaiah College of Engineering today, to clean it up (remove superfluous & poor quality images, remove college telephone directory (!), remove icon from heading, NPoV, add {{fact}} and {{advert}} tags, etc). all of these have been reverted, and after my raising the matter on the talk page at that. Perhaps someone from this project will have more luck. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits17:57, 27 March 2010 (UTC)
"01:26, 28 March 2010 Ragib (talk | contribs | block) deleted "Greater pakistan" (G4: Recreation of a page that was deleted per a deletion discussion: G4: Recreation of a page that was deleted per a deletion discussion) (view/restore)" User:Zscout370(Return Fire)07:42, 28 March 2010 (UTC)
I have nominated Kochi, India 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. —Aaroncrick (talk) 09:06, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
Gurjara Pratihara Article
Hi all,
What should be heading of this article-Pratihara dynasty or Gurjara Pratihara dynasty.Thr is a user who is moving it to parihar rajputs nd then pratihar rajputs.According to me it should be named as Pratihara dynasty or Gurjara pratihara dynasty.However the branch of pratihara from which geart kings such as Mihir bhoja, mahendrapala, mahipala etc belonged is always termed as Gurjara pratihara.thanksChhora (talk) 02:41, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
The name should be Gurjar Pratihar (to be accurate). This dynasty was a clan of the famous Gurjar community. If someone is trying to name it as Rajput Pratihar then its wrong, as Rajput pratihar is a different community which never ruled during that period of time (up to 12th century AD). The Rajput pratihar or simply parihar clan has nohting to do with the Gurjar Pratihars. Royal Pratihar were of Gurjar origin and they used the word Gurjar before pratihar just to imply that and moreover It can be seen clearly from so many links provided (and clearly mentioned in "Royal asiatic socisty of great britain and ireland"). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ashokharsana (talk • contribs) 05:44, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
Date change vandal
There's a date change vandal from 117.204.1**.*** going around changing birth, death, film release dates etc. Keep a closer look on watchlists and check the contribution history to revert other articles too. Very wide coverage. —SpacemanSpiff16:58, 25 March 2010 (UTC)
Does this vandal have any favourite set or type of articles? It would be good if you could also give a few links to the contrib pages of some IPs this vandal uses.--Deepak D'Souza (talk) 11:48, 27 March 2010 (UTC)
There are many articles being affected similarly across the project; I think the Thai Pusam article was also affected by the same one. Ncmvocalist (talk) 08:39, 28 March 2010 (UTC)
Is it possible to get a list of all contributions from the IP range 117.204.1**.*** to check?. This is a BSNL dynamic ip connection, so switching of the modem would change the assigned IP. He might have changed other articles not currently in anyone's watchlist.--Sodabottle (talk) 09:05, 28 March 2010 (UTC)
Yes please on the range block, and ASAP. This vandal is prolific and has been appearing on a daily basis for weeks now. Their fictitious dates are (intentionally) difficult for ordinary editors to spot and correct if they aren't already on the lookout for suspicious number edits from 117.204.1**.*** in Indian entertainment-related articles. It took me a while to believe that all these edits were really in bad faith -- why would they do this? -- but when I saw the editor coming back to the same articles they'd already vandalized and changing the dates yet again to something completely different and random (though plausible), I knew we had on our hands that most evil of specimens, the number vandal.
I filed an abuse report on this vandal at Wikipedia:Abuse response/117.204.1xx.xxx in February but I might as well have sent it into a black hole. In that report I cataloged the growing list of IPs the vandal had appeared from at that time. By now the list would be much longer.
I have spent too many hours cleaning up this user's deliberate messes. The sooner the range block, the better I will sleep at night. AtticusX (talk) 07:41, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
Even if abuse response sends a mail to BSNL, nothing will happen. Its BSNL and nothing happens there anyway :-). Spiff has said he will ask CU to assess the impact of a range block on other users. Hopefully there is minimal collateral damage and we block this vandal. --Sodabottle (talk) 08:07, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
Saw that Atticus. Thanks. our friend seems to have a broader reach than i suspected. I still push for a broad range block (117.204.112.0/20). The damage this guy can cause far outweighs locking a block of BSNL IPs out of wikipedia.--Sodabottle (talk) 10:02, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
IP was back again yesterday. Per our email discussions, i reported to ANI and had the range blocked. (It was a weekend, so i didnt want to disturb our admins :-), so i asked for help at ANI). --Sodabottle (talk) 08:15, 11 April 2010 (UTC)
As detailed in last week's Signpost, WildBot has been patrolling Wikipedia-Books and searched for various problems in them, such as books having duplicate articles or containing redirects. WikiProject Wikipedia-Books is in the process of cleaning them up, but help would be appreciated. For this project, the following books have problems:
The problem reports explain in details what exactly are the problems, why they are problems, and how to fix them. This way anyone can fix them even if they aren't familiar with books. If you don't see something that looks like this, then all problems have been fixed. (Please strike articles from this list as the problems get fixed.)
Also, the {{saved book}} template has been updated to allow editors to specify the default covers of books (title, subtitle, cover-image, cover-color), and gives are preview of the default cover on the book's page. An example of such a cover is found on the right. Ideally, all books in Category:Book-Class India articles should have covers.
This message was delivered by User:EarwigBot, at 22:31, 7 April 2010 (UTC), on behalf of Headbomb. Headbomb probably isn't watching this page, so if you want him to reply here, just leave him a message on his talk page. EarwigBot(owner • talk)22:31, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
welcome an old user
Note that the below has not been archived; it's just been collapsed so it can be reversed. To CarTick, I think you've gone about this the wrong way which has predictably led to this level of friction. If you are thinking of welcoming this user back, whose been subject to such a large amount of controversy in the wider community, you need to hold this discussion with the wider community (at an admin noticeboard), disclosing material facts that you are aware of. You are of course most welcome to leave a post here neutrally notifying this WikiProject, and any other WikiProjects, that a discussion is being held at AN about it (and it's OK seeing it concerns a contributor at the relevant WikiProject, meaning other contributors at the relevant WikiProject may wish to comment). But I don't think I'm alone in holding an opinon that this noticeboard is simply not equipped to manage the level of drama and controversy that this discussion is likely to create, either right now within the members here, or in the future (when other members of the wider community become aware of it). Again, I emphasise that this collapsing is in no way binding, but I do hope that if this is reversed, whomever does it will only do so after very careful consideration of what's been said. As much as one might like to think it, this issue is not limited to merely editing Indian articles. Ncmvocalist (talk) 05:39, 11 April 2010 (UTC)
Please note, no decision has been made about the discussion collapsed below. It has been collapsed due to the reasons stated above. Please bring up further discussion of this topic at WP:AN as the Wikiproject India noticeboard is not an appropriate place for this.Aditya Ex Machina14:23, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
Note: I am uncollapsing this discussion. This is plain ridiculous. Nichalp is neither an indefinitely blocked nor an indefinitely banned user. Under those circumstances, what CarTick is suggesting doesn't need to be discussed at AN or any of the other forum. Let's cut this wikilawyering. I personally have no opinion on this as Nichalp's last edit was way before my first and I have never interacted with him. However, given that he's neither blocked nor banned, only that his flags were removed, there's no reason that posting on his talk page asking him to come back requires some extended community discussion. Somewhere down the line Wikipedia seems to have lost its way and gone ahead in favor of a full-fledged bureaucracy, trying to find problems for every solution. —SpacemanSpiff15:01, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
Second that. Nicely put spiff (i was scratching my head how to make this point for a couple of days). I personally wouldn't sign a petition to bring him back, but if he is not banned/blocked, we (from WP India) are the ones who should be discussing whether to ask him back or not. Also please note that people who have done far worser things than Nichalp are regularly unblocked at AN/I . I see no harm done in "discussing" a petition to bring him back. But if it is put to vote, i vote against such an action. --Sodabottle (talk) 15:21, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
SpacemanSpiff, retired users aren't banned/blocked. Because they've retired. Consequently any attempt to make it seem like the community wants Nichalp back deserves community-wide attention, and not just from Indians. You may want to note that this wasn't just "posting on his talk page asking him to come back". CarTick could do that on his own. This was rather a signature campaign. A petition of sorts. His actions affected the community. The community (and not just WT:INDIA) should have a say in this. WP:BURO might be a nice link to pull out at times, but as far as I'm aware there has been no precedent to this, no rules have been written regarding calling sockmasters/FA-writers back, and thus there has been no attempt at bureaucracy. When in doubt, seek consensus. When seeking consensus, make sure the community gets to participate, and not just a handful of people in an obscure corner of Wikipedia. ::Sodabottle, you made the point yourself. People who have done far worse things than Nichalp are unblocked at AN/I. Not WT:INDIA. Not WT:MILHIST. Not WT:POKEMON. Any petition that will potentially affect the community as a whole, should involve the community as a whole. Aditya Ex Machina16:10, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
{{collapsetop|Not the best place to be having this discussion}}
I have been thinking about this for a while. we all remember the valuable contributions made by Nichalp to Indian articles and the circumstances surrounding his departure. While, we all dont know for sure what really happened, does it really matter?. Even if he has really done what we all believe he did, is it really a big deal in the larger picture. I suggest we formulate a "welcome back" message and post it in his page and sign by all of us who would like to have him back. Wouldnt it be great to have him back and be active like how he used to be? --CarTick17:06, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
I don't like posting here, but the "does it really matter" thing is rather odd. Nichalp wreaked a great deal of havoc with his socks and created a huge drama fest. He was eventually stripped of his flags ([12]) and I doubt he'll ever gain the trust of the community again. Is it really a big deal in the larger picture? If the larger picture is Wikipedia in general, then it still is a big deal. Would it be great to have him as active as he used to be? Not if his activity was anything like the later stages, with the paid editing / Zithan sock infestation. Also see [13]Aditya Ex Machina17:31, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
just letting you know, i am aware of the content hiding behind both the links you highlighted. --CarTick17:38, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
I understand, but it was not mentioned in your original post. Those who wish to call Nichalp back should be properly aware of the facts. Aditya Ex Machina17:41, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
Aditya, Paid editing was never taken seriously until he did it. Here is a guy who could churn a new FA in a week. Wikipedia isn't ready for paid editing yet. I doubt he knew this would be response he will get. I do want to thank him for all the great things he did here.
CarTick, I am not sure that we can convince him to get back. He retired from here. But I am ready to try. He was such great guy to work with. Where do I sign? Regards, Ganeshk(talk)03:04, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
So you say he was unaware about the socking policy? I think he was perfectly aware of the response. Paid editing by definition violated Wikipedia's core policies. What he did was plain wrong and I'm not sure I'm ready to forgive him for it. A petition to call him back would warrant, at the very least, a parallel petition asking him to stay the heck away. Aditya Ex Machina12:55, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
dont you think you are overreacting. we were all disappointed or outraged when it happened. Permanent punishment, i dont believe, is the core of wikipedia policies. I dont know if he is ever going to come back and i also dont know what to expect of him if he ever comes back. But, a reformed user is always welcome and your comments are utterly unhelpful. are you willing to take on some of the jobs which Nichalp used to do and was very good at? --CarTick15:05, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
I do not think I am overreacting. I do think that you haven't thought this through. And if you want my honest opinion, I think the fact that Nichalp got his flags as an Indian has prejudiced your ideas. If Nichalp was a contributor of any other nationality then we would not be having this conversation. But this is just my opinion.
What do you mean by "your comments are utterly unhelpful"? If you believe my arguments are not valid then you'd have plenty of your own arguments to negate mine. Or do you need my help to cover up Nichalp's past?
you are not understanding the issue completely and what i really am intending to do, and instead, forcing me to defend things I myself have disapproved of. As far as I am concerned, the only issue is, like Ganesh mentioned, if Nichalp can be convinced to really come back. may be he completely lost his "interest" in wikipedia. --CarTick17:54, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
Perhaps I misunderstood. You intend to call Nichalp back, yes? You intend to give the idea that the community wants him back? I assume that was the purpose behind soliciting signatures, else you would have posted on his talk page already. Aditya Ex Machina19:30, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
yes, u clearly understand what I intend to do. other than that, u have a very narrow minded view of what wikipedia is. guess, i am done with you, not pursuing this further unless i get more positive responses. --CarTick21:17, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
I do apologize that my narrow minded view of what Wikipedia is hampered your quest to get a sockmaster back on Wikipedia. Nevertheless, you might soon realize that less drama created is better, and we're better off without Zithan/Nichalp. Or perhaps you won't realize this at all in which case its probably best that you don't get any more positive responses. Good day, Cartick. Aditya Ex Machina10:59, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
From what I understand Nichalp's retirement and his subsequent misdemeanours were not related. He left wikipedia to concentrate on his studies. His sockpuppetry came up much later as a way to make some pocket-money. --Deepak D'Souza (talk) 19:00, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
(mild comment) From what I can see from this discussion, nichalp is not banned and, if he returns, is expected to do so under his own nichalp account. He can even apparently request his sysop and crat buttons back. CarTick, if I understand his motivation correctly, is trying to encourage him to return and, again this is my reading, assumed that Indian wikipedians would be happy to see him back. Personally, I was very disappointed by the whole paid editing mess and even though nichalp seems to have put that behind him, and even though I'd be happy to see him editing again, I'm not going to sign on to a 'welcome back' petition. However, I see no reason why this needs wider scrutiny (based on my reading of the arbcom discussion above) or why cartick cannot seek a local consensus for asking him to return. --RegentsPark (talk) 16:35, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
I read the above discussion in detail. I do not see any statement saying Nichalp can request his tools back when he returns. I see quite the contrary, in fact. And I do not see the one-account restriction either. It seems to be just a suggestion right at the end by Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk·contribs). Additionally, I have explained above why I believe local consensus is not sufficient for a community petition. Perhaps the fact that this is generating a lot of friction already would warrant a wider view. Aditya Ex Machina16:52, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
Aditya, my reading of the discussion (and I could be wrong) is that there was some debate as to whether his flags should have been revoked at all. The email that Coren left for nichalp on his talk page specifically stated that they were being removed 'temporarily' because nichalp had not responded to an email request for explanation. I take that to mean that nichalp can request them back, and may even get them if his explanation is accepted by arbcom. There was almost no talk of banning and, considering that there was some doubt about the buttons removal, I think it reasonable to assume that there is no sign of a ban. Personally, I doubt if nichalp will come back as nichalp (he may already be here!) and I think too big a deal is being made of CarTick's initial request. --RegentsPark (talk) 17:10, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
He had retired by that time, so the question of banning does not arise. As for your last statement, I agree. I should disengage. Aditya Ex Machina17:16, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
Sorry, but you're not making any sense. Nowhere has he been banned, he hasn't been blocked. His flags have been revoked. So if a few editors from a certain project want to jointly ask him to return to editing, it's their choice. WP:BURO is designed exactly for these kind of situations, to stop having a set of people overlord on what anyone can and can not do.—SpacemanSpiff17:00, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
exactly, noticing that there are increasingly less Indian wikipedians working actively, and knowing that Nichalp was a great editor and there are still wikipedians who think greatly of Nichalp and wouldnt mind having him back, and assuming that his actions are not permanently punishable, i was just trying to create an atmosphere where Nichalp can get back in here, if he ever decides to come back. well, i was surprised to find that a lot of us are not really ready to forgive him, but, hey, i do respect everyone's opinion. In fact, i wouldnt mind extending our invitation to a lot of other editors who seem to have retired due to various reasons, including the ones I have very much disagreed with like Sarvagnya and Dinesh. whether it is a naive effort, probably. but, i dont see nothing wrong in trying. I personally dont have the time to start a wider discussion and like i have said i dont deem it necessary. Aditya is welcome to start a wikipedia wide discussion. --CarTick17:02, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
Spiff, you've completely missed my point, which makes me wonder whether you've read what I wrote above at all. CarTick, you've got your positive responses. Go ahead with your message to Nichalp. Aditya Ex Machina17:05, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
I did think this noticeboard was a device to discuss India-related topics rather than a device to promote political factions in favour of or against particular users. It's very easy to toss around foolish (false) claims, such as wikilawyering, particularly when one cannot see that the minor issues that have been pointed to are just a veneer for the major issues which would eventually be raised. It's one thing to discuss making a petition to have an editor return, or to even make that petition and notify the relevant projects that a petition was created - but it's another thing to engage in campaigning or votestacking (forms of canvassing that are prohibited by policy, both in spirit and in letter). I fully stand by what I said - this was started in a poor manner that was misguided, and due to the muddying of the waters, was creating more heat than light. I'd like to think that this was actually well-intentioned, but good intentions cannot eliminate problems on their own. I'm not going to stand in the way of those clearly adopting a black and white view and and foolishly waving around buro, but nothing will change the ultimate fact: although actions/words may seem to mean something in the head of the person making those actions/words, they aren't always seen (or interpreted in) the same way by others. Also, if some people see puffery and inappropriate conduct, one can either (a) bluntly point to the problem or (b) take a more cautious approach - letting that user be receptive to feedback, without the humiliation, while trying to protect the project from the problem. Personally, I preferred to err on the side of good faith and caution, but perhaps I should've adopted the former approach. Who knows - I don't hold a strong view on the actual topic of the discussion either way. I think if one doesn't "have the time", he/she should wait until he/she does, but it is obviously impossible to stop people from learning the hard way. Ncmvocalist (talk) 15:51, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
Sorry, but that's nothing more than a load of crock. It is quite easy to toss around foolish statements that others are being foolish, but there's no campaigning and other such bullshit involved when people talk about an activity that isn't prohibited. —SpacemanSpiff03:22, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
I made it quite clear that talking about a user coming back isn't prohibited - it's the way in which it was done here which made it more than just a bit problematic. But if some people aren't going to be courteous enough to actually read comments before responding, then I think we've found the actual source of "bullshit" here. Ncmvocalist (talk) 06:21, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
My 2c: There is nothing preventing Nichalp from resuming (unpaid) editing whenever he so desires. And there is nothing wrong with some editors encouraging him to do so (it is certainly not canvassing, any more than leaving "get well soon" notes on the page of a editor who is ill would be canvassing), That said, if I was to advice Nichalp as a well-wisher, I would not recommend that he become active again. As this thread clearly shows, his resumed activity will not be conflict free and is unlikely to be wholly pleasant experience for him. There are several volunteering opportunities, besides contributing here, that can be both engaging and worthwhile. Abecedare (talk) 06:54, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
The confusion regarding "East Indians"
I thought this would be the best place to put it. A new and entusiastic editor( Semiticsmile) has gone about moving articles and unfortunately, has created a bit of a mess.
He/She has created a new article East Indian people which I dont think is encyclopedic. It seems to be a mix-up of some things the editor has put together but seems to talk about "Indians" as "East Indians". I had tagged it as OR and Synth but he/she has gone about and removed it. I understand that in many western countries people from South Asia may be reffered to as "East Indians" to differentiate them from "American Indians" and "West Indians" but the term doesn't seem to have much academic currency and is certainly not used by Indians to refer to themselves. Nor do Indians see themselves as a single ethnic community. The article seems to be heading towards becoming a poor duplicate of Demographics of India and should be redirected there.
Secondly, some people may refer to "Eastern India" as East Indians but this usage is very rare and they do not form an ethnic community. Neither does this article seem to be about them since it Includes "Punjabi" and Gujarati and also talks about "Dravidians" so it can hardly be about people from Eastern India.
The third part which not many people may be aware of is that there is a small community centered in and around Mumbai which calls itself "East Indians". Semiticsmile has moved this article a few times till it came to Mumbai Catholics which isnt appropriate because that is not how the community identifies itself. When I tried to move the article back to its original name I could not. I have asked the editor to stop editing for a couple of days annd will invite him/her to this discussion.
Oh, and btw, East Indian people is definitely a copy vio of something, I've had to delete many copyvios of this editor in the past, but can't seem to find the source for this one. For future reference, whenever you see a reference to Helen (actress), random uses of the images of Shilpa Shetty, Aishwarya Rai etc, it's an indicator that it's this particular editor, so let me know :) cheers. —SpacemanSpiff20:05, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
Thanks. We seem to attract a lot of filmy disruptors nowadays. I was surprised too when I found that there was no Indians or People of India article, but I don't think it is an accident. Some of the older members may know of any such reason? --Deepak D'Souza (talk) 09:37, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
Are there any Marathi speakers here who have an opinion about the AfD on this article? I unfortunately can't read Marathi and don't know whether there might be further sources about this person beyond the English-language coverage to which I have access. Many thanks. Gonzonoir (talk) 10:36, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated book prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the talk page of the book.
After restoring some text and categories at Right to Information Act, I went further back to an older version here which shows all references, external links, templates etc have been removed! Some page protection must be added, plus heavy repair work needed. Thanks! --Ekabhishektalk19:07, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
I have nominated Delhi 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. Dana boomer (talk) 02:25, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
Kalki Bhagavan
Could someone with the appropriate language skills have a look at the Kalki Bhagavan article and the references there. There is very little English sources concerning the latest controversy, so it's hard for me to evaluate the notability issue. Best wishes/ Pax:Vobiscum (talk) 12:33, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
After a long series of edit wars by many editors the article Bangladesh Liberation War has become indefinitely fully-protected and discussion on how to fix the now apparantly broken article has opened up on its Talk Page. We are looking for intrested editors who can maintain a cool head to discuss important changes to the article and it's related articles. Thank You.
Can someone explain to me the definitions of the terms I keep seeing in Indian cinema articles related to various films' box office performance — "Flop", "Hit", "Super Hit", "Mega Hit", "Below Average", etc.? The terms sound suspiciously POV. Are they grounded in actual numbers, or anything other than the editors' own assessment? Or is there a reliable source that these assessments are coming from? When an IP editor comes along and changes a "Flop" to a "Mega Hit", one suspects vandalism, but if the assessments are unsourced, unverifiable, and somewhat subjective in the first place, one is tempted to just remove the assessment rather than revert. AtticusX (talk) 13:50, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
Yes it is best to remove the assertion itself if it is unsourced. Nothing is grounded in actual numbers as far as indian cinema is concerned. The various film industries themselves put out gross receipts for some (but not all) films (which i guess they pull out of thin air). And here the fans of various stars try to inflate their favourite actor's performance while running down his rivals. So any adjective about an Indian film's performance that is not a direct quote from a RS should be removed.--Sodabottle (talk) 14:06, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
The WikiProject Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons (UBLPs) aims to reduce the number of unreferenced biographical articles to under 30,000 by June 1, primarily by enabling WikiProjects to easily identify UBLP articles in their project's scope. There were over 52,000 unreferenced BLPs in January 2010 and this has been reduced to 35,715 as of May 1. A bot is now running daily to compile a list of all articles that are in both Category:All unreferenced BLPs and have been tagged by a WikiProject. Note that the bot does NOT place unreferenced tags or assign articles to projects - this has been done by others previously - it just compiles a list.
Your assistance in reviewing and referencing these articles is greatly appreciated. If you have any questions, please don't hestitate to ask either at WT:URBLP or at my talk page. Thanks, The-Pope (talk) 16:37, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
Would someone please remove the junk in Madhubani district. I am concerned specifically about the "Important Villages" section ("developed by..." and other inappropriate text), but I suspect similar junk is in other sections. I was thinking about reverting the article to a much earlier version, but it's not clear to me what would be best. Johnuniq (talk) 04:31, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
Blocked the 117.204.112.0/20 range for another month. Please let us know if you see him at any other IP. Thanks. Abecedare (talk) 06:53, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
Nice catch Atticus. I had marked 12th May as the date of expiry for the block. - off by one day. He has been systematically checking his edit privileges every week and trying to post hoax messages in his IP talk page for the past month. He is a persistent one.--Sodabottle (talk) 07:24, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for reinstituting the rangeblock, Abecedare. Yeah, the abuse report finally got processed on April 26, and they sent a message off to the ISP, but I don't really anticipate any miracles coming out of that. AtticusX (talk) 08:32, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
I need help with the article on Navin Chawla, the current CEC of India. Any Indian with interest in political history and who grew up in the 1980's best remembers Chawla as a remove blp vio Aditya Ex Machina14:02, 13 May 2010 (UTC) which in itself is hard to come by against bureaucracy in a country like India. Now his wikipedia page is being sanctified with references to Mother Theresa and praising Chawla for EC's functioning these 50 years. I would like to put up a NPOV message on the page's title until everything's been discussed. People have a right to know that all these praising poetry about Chawla is mostly not true. please help. Thank you.
WP:BLP issues apply to noticeboards too. Since he has not been convicted of anything, and since Wikipedia is not a courtroom, please avoid such allegations without reliable sources backing up your claims. Aditya Ex Machina18:52, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
Haryana, Delhi and HP are termed as part of "Greater Punjab Region" based on a couple of references but this definition has been disputed. There's a discussion at Talk:Haryana#Recent_Revert and I would appreciate any opinions on this issue. cheers. —SpacemanSpiff03:42, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
The Om Gupta, "Encyclopedia of India Pakistan and Bangladesh" being used to support the "greater Punjab" terminology is an unacceptable circular reference. In particular, the exact quote that is being cited was formulated by User:Sukh in this edit to the Punjabi people article in Jan, 2006. More generally, none of the numerous compendiums created by the prolific Om Gupta should ever be used as references on wikipedia since they are simply outdated versions of wikipedia articles (and possibly article from other sources), and as far as I can see, violate GFDL/CC-BY-SA license too.
That said, it is true that Delhi is located in the (historic) Punjab region, the "greater" apparently being appended to disambiguate it from the Indian and Pakistani states. However, I am not sure that it is useful to present this in the article lede without context, since readers are less likely to know the location of "Punjab region" than know the location of Delhi itself - so it serves little/no expository purpose. In my opinion, it would be better to add this detail (with proper context) in the history or geography section. Abecedare (talk) 05:04, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
Here are the original discussions on the Om Gupta references: at RSN and at WT:INB last year. Wish there was a way to blacklist references, as we can blacklist external links. Abecedare (talk) 05:21, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
Very clearly Anupam's frame of reference is the British Indian Punjab as he has mentioned in one of his comments on the Haryana talk page. The British Indian era is a recent historical happening and quite obviously the Greater Punjab region he is trying to protect was a historical creation of the British. If we (other users and myself) are trying to highlight older history, which stayed true for much longer than 100-200 years of British India, then that is not equivalent to rewriting history. In fact, Anupam is doing a great injustice to the ancient Kuru Janapada and the brave peoples of Haryana by trying to belittle their historical identity. The British merged Haryana into Punjab only after the mutiny of 1857. That does not qualify for a sweeping statement that Haryana was historically a part of Greater Punjab region. Only true for British times in India. In the same way, "Delhi is located in the (historic) Punjab region" of when (which historical period)? Very clearly, Delhi was a capital of Haryana as early as 12th century if not before that. Quoting a source from a reputed American journal, Pasanaha Chariu of Vibudh Shridhar (VS 1189-1230) an Apabhramsha writer, provides the first reference to the legend of the origin of the name Dhilli for Delhi.
हरियाणए देसे असंखगाम, गामियण जणि अणवरथ काम|
परचक्क विहट्टणु सिरिसंघट्टणु, जो सुरव इणा परिगणियं|
Translation: There are countless villages in Haryana country. The villagers there work hard. They don't accept domination of others, and are experts in making the blood of their enemies flow. Indra himself praises this country. The capital of this country is Dhilli.
I don't think the Punjab region reference needs to be necessarily removed from the Haryana etc articles. All that is needed is to place the information in the right section, present it with proper context (eg, "under British Raj, the region was part of the Punjab province"), and keeping it short since the article(s) are written in summary style. Ditto for the Kuru Janapada claim. The History of Haryana article can go into more details. (This point also applies to Delhi and other articles). Abecedare (talk) 08:14, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
A historical region of the northwest Indian subcontinent bounded by the Indus and Yamuna rivers. It was a center of the prehistoric Indus Valley civilization and after c. 1500 b.c. the site of early Aryan settlements. Muslims occupied the western part of the region by the 8th century, introducing Islam, and although they later conquered the eastern part, Hinduism remained entrenched there. The Moguls brought the region to cultural eminence until their empire declined in the 18th century. The Punjab was controlled by Sikhs from 1799 to 1849, when it was annexed by Great Britain. It was partitioned between India and Pakistan in 1947.
Another reputable source, The encyclopedia Americana, Volume 23 states that the Punjab region "extends between the Indus River on the west, in Pakistan, and the Yamuna (Jumna) River on the east, in India." The Pakistani province of Punjab and the Indian states of Punjab, Haryana, and Himachal Pradesh, and Delhi fall under this historical Punjab region, spreading from the Indus to the Yamuna. I would like to mention that in India, Punjabi is an official language of the states of the region: Punjab, Himachal Pradesh, Haryana, and Delhi. In light of these facts, as well as the knowledge you possess, I humbly request you to formulate a conclusion on this issue. I look forward to hearing from you soon. With regards, AnupamTalk08:24, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
Sorry if I was not clear enough. I don't dispute that Delhi belonged to the (historical) Punjab region as defined by the sources above, the Punjab province during the British rule etc. I think it is fine to mention this in the article, though (as I said above), it is better placed in the Geography or History section, where the meaning of those terms which may not be familiar to many readers can be defined briefly, else they are likely to inadvertently confuse it with Punjab (India).§ Does that make sense ?
§: An example of what I talking about: "Anne Hathaway was born in 1555/56" is a perfectly accurate statement, but it is likely to confuse a reader who is only familiar with Anne Hathaway, the actress (this actually occurred with me when I saw this diff a few hours back). So when we can foresee that readers may be confused, it is better to spell out what we mean (eg, "Shakespeare's wife, Anne Hathaway, was born ..."). In the case of Punjab region, Punjab province etc, this is best done in the relevant section instead of the lede. Abecedare (talk) 08:48, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
Dear Abecadare, thank you for your comment. I really appreciate it. However, can you please evaluate the sources I mentioned above and comment as to whether they verify the claim that the Indian states of Haryana, Punjab, Himachal Pradesh, and the NCR of Delhi fall under the historical Punjab region of India and Pakistan? This is the issue that a one editor is disputing although I feel that this is a well attested fact that is given in the sources mentioned above. If you do not dispute this claim could you please restore your removal of the content from the article on Delhi as it is buttressed by other sources as well. Thanks for your understanding. With warm regards, AnupamTalk04:44, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
I have added the historical geographic associations of Delhi alongside the description of it's current surroundings. The edit may have introduced a bit of redudancy, so if anyone can think of way to avoid that, please feel free to take a stab at it. It may be better to continue any further discussion on this topic on Talk:Delhi page. Abecedare (talk) 05:24, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
Dear Anupam, if what you are saying is history, then what is this stuff being written by proper specialists, who are experts and not generalists compiling dictionaries and encyclopediae. What I am referring to is works like this, "India, the ancient past: a history of the Indian sub-continent from c. 7000 BC to AD 1200" by Burjor Avari, Publisher Taylor & Francis, 2007, ISBN0415356164, 9780415356169. On page 68, the author says, "The centre of Kuru power was Kurukshetra while the Panchala base was further east. With the steady drying of Saraswati and Drshadvati, the Kuru moved base to Hastinapur. A new center called Indraprastha (modern Delhi) was founded. However, depite constant warfare, the Kuru and Panchala always stayed together in crucial moments and maintained a strong hold on Madhyadesa".
Very clearly, Haryana (Kuru Janapada) is being talked of in conjunction with Panchala, a state to the east of Haryana. Which is obviously referring to the present Western UP, where Haryanvi is still widely spoken and understood. This Kuru-Panchala combination is being referred to as the holding power of Delhi as well as Madhyadesa (whole of North India basically). Punjab does not come into the picture from any angle whether it be with reference to Haryana or Delhi. Kind regards Rorkadian (talk) 12:40, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
Dear Rorkadian, I do not and never had any objections to your insertion of "Kuru" into the article on Haryana. You are welcome to keep it and I appreciate your efforts in researching on Haryana related topics. My argument is that the state of Haryana also fell under the historical Punjab region and therefore should merit an inclusion in the article since this is attested by encyclopædic references. I hope this clears things up. With warm regards, AnupamTalk04:44, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
Dear Anupam, thanks a lot for the kind words. In fact, I've browsed through your article on the Pathans' descent and I appreciate it. Well, coming back to the issue at hand. It is a touchy subject because the incorrect choice of words can make it sound like hegemonistic designs or thoughts. On the other hand, if we record this on the Delhi page, then it may also become necessary to record Delhi's past as the capital of Haryana in the times of the Tomars and Chauhans. Anyway, whatever we do, we must be careful in presenting it in a way that it does not hurt people's sentiments. And the other thing is about historical perspective. It may be necessary to qualify the phrase "historical Punjab region" by letting readers' know that it pertains to recent history and not ancient and medieval histories. Kind regards, Rorkadian (talk) 06:53, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
Dear Rorkadian, thanks for your compliments! I do not mind if we use the phrase "historical Punjab region" and we can format it similarly to the way Abecedare formatted the clause in the Delhi article. Let me know what you think. Also, I have no objections to stating that Delhi served as the capital for the Tomara dynasty and the Chauhans; feel free to include that in the History section of the Delhi article. I look forward to hearing from you soon. With warm regards, AnupamTalk07:53, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
Hi WikiProject India, the above article should probably be categorized within WikiProject India, however I am not sure which category it would best fit under so thought I would leave it to those more experienced with this project to have a look at the article and add the appropriate project banner to the talk page. Thanks for your time! ialsoagree (talk) 02:59, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
Language template question
in the template for indian state languages, Manipuri is shown, but the languages more correct name is Meitei, or Meitei-lon, and the article on this language is titled Meitei language. should the template be changed to reflect this, or perhaps the common name put in parenthesis after the official name? i would guess template changes should be discussed before being made, even if they seem routine.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 15:24, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
Hello, could an Indian editor please review the above article and assist in finding sources? It looks like it's primarily suffering from systemic bias. Sincerely, Blurpeace05:16, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
The problem is not Systemic bias, the problem is its notability. It is a speedy-delete. I found no RS on the net about this Bihari lal. I searched for "Bejing common games in 2008", which seem non-notable or a hoax. --RedtigerxyzTalk16:27, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
Hope folks here are keeping an eye on Draft amendments - there is still no work of government clause and tax-payer funded works are locked out for 60 years until they go into public domain ! Comments on the draft may be sent within 10 days to [Kapil Sibal] - some reactions [15][16]Shyamal (talk) 09:44, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
Hi. This is regarding the moving of the VIT University article to Vellore Institute of Technology recently by *Truth* (talk) . I have suggested that the article be moved back to its original location at the (Talk) page on the article. The rationale behind this has been clearly explained, with evidence, on the aforementioned (Talk) page. Views on this move are welcomed. Please check the discussion at the Vellore Institute of Technology(Talk) page. Thanks in advance.
Karnataka State Film Awards has been AfDed by someone claiming that is only a film industry in "one state in India". I have tried to reason with the nominator, but he has no clue how things in India work. Would be happy if editors familiar with Karnataka/Kannada/Indian regional films weigh in there.--Sodabottle (talk) 13:06, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
I would request editors to add captions in Indian languages to this image. I think this image has won the Picture of the Year 2009 contest on Wikimedia Commons. See here for votelist on Commons. Thank you! --JovianEye (talk) 17:11, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
I'm having a problem as an admin at Chitpavan with an editor, Authentickle (talk·contribs), who has been adding inappropriate material such as this. I've protected the page and reverted the worst of it, and the editor now accepts that he has to use reliable sources very carefully, but I remain concerned. I can't get involved in editing the page or giving too much advice about content, in part because I'm there as an admin, and also because I know nothing about the topic. If someone here could take a look and get involved on the talk page, that would be very helpful. SlimVirgintalk|contribs15:30, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
The problems at the above continue. It is part of Wikiproject India. If anyone from the wikiproject is able to help, please see the talk page. Many thanks, SlimVirgintalk|contribs05:38, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
There's a new stub on this Indian playwright and folk singer who died in 1952. Finding sources other than one website is proving tricky, so help from someone who speaks Hindi and is able to search for some sources would be appreciated. Fences&Windows14:37, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
While this is unrelated to English wikipedia, I want to report it here in the hope that some Assamese speaking wikipedian will fix it. There is a large scale article move in Assamese wikipedia by a particular user. The user is moving articles to incorrect spellings. From his contributions, it appears that his computer is not configured to display complex indic unicode script, hence he is moving articles like কম্পিউটাৰ বিজ্ঞান to কম্িপউটাৰ িবজ্ঞান. The user doing this is as:বিশেষ:অৱদানবোৰ/Anshuman.jrt.
The 4 admins at AS wikipedia are all retired. There are also no active users other than Anshuman.jrt,. So, I am requesting an assamese speaking wikipedian to handle this as soon as possible. Regards. --Ragib (talk) 19:44, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
Can someone help with this please? The vandalism (possibly unintended) is going on. If unchecked, almost all of the articles of the AS wikipedia will be affected. --Ragib (talk) 05:41, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
Does Classical music refer only to Western classical music?
For those interested in terminological issues: there is a discussion going on Talk:List of art music traditions#Move proposal on (e.g.) whether "Classical music" should be reserved for Western Classical music, and other forms should be called "art music". Someone may want to take a look; remember that the point is not to say "Oppose" or "Support" but to discuss and arrive at a consensus. Shreevatsa (talk) 02:04, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
What do you mean by Khalistanies were able to ..., it constitutes attack on individual editors..May be the editors you are referring to simply liked preserving history. Remember "Those Who Forget History Are Doomed to Repeat It"--DawnOfTheBlood (talk) 06:46, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
You KNOW what it means. You alone do not own India... and I am sure you wont like to hear Paki or some other name for you...I would respect wikipedia policies and 'would rather stay away from this crap to avoid myself from personal attacks. Enjoy--DawnOfTheBlood (talk) 07:12, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
I take "khalistani" means a Sikh separatist. And i dont think it is a bad word. I am Tamil and i dont think "Tamil separatist" is a bad word too. I dont think anyone is attacking you personally. --Sodabottle (talk) 07:34, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
No, I don't know you. However, the article in question clearly, and with zero ambiguity, represents the Khalistani pov. Thus I don't feel that my commentary is out of place. Moreover, let it be clear that I'm not seeking a white-wash. We know very well that the Indian state committed gross human rights abuses during the Punjab insurgency. I don't oppose the existence of the article Human rights in Punjab, India, for example. But this article seeks to portray the Punjab insurgency as a conflict between the Indian state and the Sikh people as a whole, which is a pov projection I cannot digest. Remember that the Khalistani movement targetted and killed democratic and secular people within the Sikh community. And btw, I was once called a "Sikhextremist" on Wikipedia. --Soman (talk) 14:24, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
Sigh! Every time you try to get rid of a Sikh-related POV fork, they just descend in droves and vote anonymously. I would expect that the closer would ignore at least the anon votes. Would taking it to ANI help? --Deepak D'Souza (talk) 04:49, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
The Khalistani militant gangs are now edit-warring on Holocaust (a high ranked), where they have added links to this article[17]. This is part of a strategy by the propagandists to increase the Google page rank of the "Ghallooghara" article59.160.210.68 (talk) 09:16, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
Could I ask all of you to limit this discussion to the article in question and not the ethnic/religious background of your fellow users? I closed the AFD as no consensus because there was not a consensus. Poor writing is not a reason to delete an article, it is a reason to improve an article, and we don't just "ignore the anon votes" as that would be contrary to the whole point of allowing anon ip users to contribute in the first place. Generally, if you are going to make an accusation of vote-stacking/canvassing/sockpuppetry you need to say so and include evidence to support your claim. If you can't manage to do that then hinting around about it after the fact isn't going to help. If you think the article has a POV problem, then re-write it. If there is trouble with that then request page protection and/or dispute resolution. Beeblebrox (talk) 15:32, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
With due respects beeblebrox, I'm a bit flummoxed by your close. 1984 Ghalloghara, to the extent that it exists as an english language term (which is doubtful), refers solely to the 1984 anti-Sikh Riots. The sole purpose of the article is to conflate the term ghalloghara with 'holocaust', which is a fairly obvious attempt to introduce a POV (that the 1984 anti-Sikh riots were a holocaust which no reasonable source would call it). The same article was deleted in a prior AfD and then reintroduced with a new title. Enough people pointed out the POV fork nature of the article but your close focuses on 'merge' and 'redirect'. If ghalloghara is acceptable (I challenge anyone to spell it right three times in a row!) then should we also have a redirect from 1984 Holocaust? --RegentsPark (talk) 16:37, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
Per his pov views, editor RegentsPark wants to convertHindu Terrorism/Saffron Terror into Hindu Nationalism, it is same as calling mass murders of Christians, Muslims, Sikhs and even the murder of Mahatama Gandhi at the hands of Hindu extremists as 'Hindu Nationalism.--DawnOfTheBlood (talk) 20:43, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
So may be it is part of the same pov idiology that he believes in suppressing any information which exposes attrocities committed by the same majority against Sikh minority in his country and hence respected editor RegentsPark wants to see article 1984 ghallooghaaraa deleted ASAP. --DawnOfTheBlood (talk) 20:43, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
Also, this respected editor could not use this AfD opportunity to challenge the opposing editors and their provided references.--DawnOfTheBlood (talk) 20:43, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
This one is a real unforgiving POV fork; with a tone of "Look, we have been holocausted!". Whats the procedure | AFD2 or review? This one's gotta go anyway. Arjuncodename02418:04, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
The WP:IND newsletter has been defunct for some time now. I have tried to revive it by creating content for a June 2010 issue here. Please feel free to help out and make further edits, so that it can be released by this weekend. Regards, SBC-YPR (talk) 15:27, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
I'm struggling to find verifiable sources to support this unreferenced biography of a living person (poet and Hindustani Times copy-editor) and I wondered whether someone over here might like to take an interest.--Plad2 (talk) 06:27, 25 June 2010 (UTC)
A discussion thread has been started at Talk:1961_Indian_Annexation_of_Goa#Title regarding the title of the article (i.e., whether to use "Invasion of Goa" or "Annexation of Goa" in the title). If you are interested in the topic, please discuss the issue there. --Ragib (talk) 23:20, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
Did you receive the above newletter on your talkpage? To start or stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section here -- TinuCherian - 06:07, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
Vellore
Hi
I have just edited the Vellore article and it needs a few clarifications (such as acronyms with no explanation of what the letters stand for) and references.
Thanks for the clean up. I have cleared all the "clarification needed" bits and sourced a few claims. But large parts of the article are unsourced. Will take a huge effort to source them. I am adding vellore to my "To do" list, but it will be weeks before i get around to it.--Sodabottle (talk) 07:09, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
Some weekend amusement
Our friend, the date change vandal, is still trying to do mischief. As a reply to his unblock request, he has been asked to register an account. So keep an eye open for unexplained date changes.--Sodabottle (talk) 15:18, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
WP:IND Newsletter is back! It's been nearly a year since the last edition, but we hope to bring out issues on a more regular basis now. The India Wikiproject was set up to increasing coverage of India-related topics on Wikipedia, and over the past few months the focus has been on improving article quality. A number of the project's featured articles underwent featured article reviews over the past year. Of these, Darjeeling and Flag of India survived the review process, while the rest were demoted. During the same period, Gangtok, Harbhajan Singh, Darjeeling and Mysore were featured on the main page respectively on August 20, September 17, November 6 and December 29, 2009. Meanwhile, articles on topics as diverse as Political history of Mysore and Coorg (1565–1760), Marwari horse and Iravan were promoted as featured articles, and respectively appeared on the main page on March 25, May 17 and May 28, 2010. Consequently, the number of FA-class articles under the project's scope dropped from 67 in August 2009 to 63 in June 2010. The number of good articles, however, saw a more than 40% increase, from 91 to 130 during the same period, while the number of featured lists saw a 33% increase from 12 to 16.
Due to the recent policy changes regarding unreferenced Biographies of Living People (BLPs), an effort was started in January 2010 to source all unreferenced BLPs coming under Wikiproject India. 1200 such articles were identified initially and more were added to the list later. Due to the sourcing effort, the number of Indian unreferenced BLPs is down to 565 currently. During February-April 2010, There was a large scale disruption of Kerala related articles by a Thrissur based IP vandal. Editing from a dynamic IP BSNL connection, the vandal changed dates of birth, death and ages of a number of Malayalam and Tamil film actors. Later he added a few international biographies to his list. He also marked some living people like Arvind Swamy as dead. A month long range block was imposed on his IP range two times and each time he came back to vandalise dates once the block expired. Currently the range has been blocked for three months till September 11, 2010.
This picture, shot in India, won the Commons:Picture of the Year contest 2009. Translations of the description in Indian languages are solicited.
Wikipedians in Bangalore have been organising periodic meetups over the past year, in collaboration with the Centre for Internet and Society. The next meetup is scheduled for July 18, 2010. Indian and other Wikipedians from all Wikipedias in various languages are welcome to attend.
A discussion is underway here to reach a consensus regarding the use of Indian number names (lakh, crore etc.) in Wikipedia articles. Please participate and add your comments.
Some unintended vandalism is going on at the Assamese Wikipedia by the sole active editor. This is a request for Assamese-conversant Wikipedians to help resolve the issue.
A discussion is in progress here in order to determine whether non-Western (including Indian) forms of classical music should be referred to by the nomenclature of art music instead of classical music. Please participate and add your comments.
Watchlist the Articles for Deletions page for India related discussions. Opinions from more Indian Wikipedians are required in many of the discussions.
If you've just joined, add your name to the Members section of WikiProject India. You'll get a mention in the next issue of the Newsletter and get it delivered as desired. Also, please include your own promotions and awards in future issues. Don't be shy!
Lastly, this is your newsletter and you can be involved in the creation of the next issue (Issue 2 – (July 2010)). Any and all contributions are welcome. Simply let yourself be known to any of the undersigned, or just start editing!
Looking forward toward more contributions from you!
Hello, I'm new to WikiProject India, but not to Wikipedia. I ran across the article concerning Rajya Sabha members from Assam. It seems to be an offshoot of the article Members of the Rajya Sabha, and has comparatively few edits in over a year. I saw that it was part of this wikiproject so I thought I should post a question on this board. I propose merging this article back with Members of the Rajya Sabha, and have posted a merge template on it. You can remove the template if you believe I was in error, but please include why on this thread, as I would appreciate the feedback. Thanks!--Flaming Goldfish (talk) 03:07, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
The Rajya Sabha members from X state has potential for expansion as material about different elections that elected them can be added. So they are not an exact duplicate of the Indian Rajya Sabha members article. I would advice against merging them.--Sodabottle (talk) 06:33, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
Kannada poet
Gudibande Poornima was proposed for deletion. I deprodded using one source, but I am having trouble finding much else in English. I don't understand any Kannada and there's no machine translation for Kannada-English, so I'm stuck with trying to show notability. Any help would be appreciated. Fences&Windows23:56, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
I ran across National Development Front as part of the July copyediting drive by the Guild of Copyeditors. The article describes the group in ways that may not be adequately or accurately sourced or couched (such as describing the group as "extremist," which is almost always a loaded term, and "hard-line"). I declined a major copyedit because of the potential for POV problems and placed an expert and POV check tag on the article as needing to be resolved before I could do any major copyediting on it. I am not familiar enough with this subject to really tackle a significant content dispute if someone wants to edit war over it, but I am concerned about the article's tone, so I thought bringing it here might get a few more eyes on it. And, of course, it may ultimately be fine, but I'd rather someone a little more knowledgeable take a look. Thanks. — e. ripley\talk12:09, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
The NDF article has been a mess for long time now. There have been both pro- and anti-pov editing, most of it highly unconstructive. Perhaps the best way is to stubbify the article to a minimum, and rebuild it again from scratch with more collective effort. --Soman (talk) 18:26, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
I applied for and got semi protection for both articles for a week. The IP keeps changing the population percentages on the fly. For those interested i have initiated a discussion in the Kanyakumari district talk page.--Sodabottle (talk) 07:28, 13 July 2010 (UTC)
Out of point this; but just thought to apprise the noticeboard that the "ghallughara" term has recently been added to the lead section of Operation Blue Star ([18]). There has been repeated attempts to categorize the operation as a "massacre" which i disagree. ([19], [20], [21]) .20:57, 13 July 2010 (UTC)
The MORTH has completed the scientific renumbering of the national highways. Renumbered Highways. We at WP:INR have a huge task in hand in updating all the information. Am not sure if we must go about creating new articles and keep old numbered articles keep them as is or rename the existing ones as far as possible.Also am wondering if some amount of work can be taken as a AWB task / bot task creating the template from the data.Your thoughts / suggestions on this are welcome. You are also invited to WP:INR and help with this update task. Thanks Srikanth (Logic) 21:29, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
Is it standard practice to include all renderings of English titles in non-English scripts as redirects? Seems like potential redirect explosion to me. --RegentsPark (talk) 13:59, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
No its not standard practice; but when we have one we need a reason to delete. If, for example, this has been wrongly translated then that is a good enough reason. 14:25, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
The Deshastha Brahmin article had a {{Primary sources|date=October 2008}} from October 2008 when I arrived here a few days back. I've provided 64 sources and made tweaks to reflect what the sources are saying since I started editing this article. While it is still a work in progress, I am seeking feedback and critique on how we can improve the article. Recommendations are also welcome on how to deal with sensitive topics that have plenty of sources/published literature. By sensitive, I mean inter-caste rivalry, specifically. Zuggernaut (talk)
Most of the articles in Category:Indian caste system are a mess. That's some good work you've done at Deshastha Brahmin. The article needs to be modified to make it easier to understand for someone who is new to the topic (say, someone from Africa or US). For example, the article switches to the terminology "Konkanastha" without mentioning that it is another term for Chitpavan -- things like these need to be fixed. Similarly, avoid the use of terms "brahminically inferior" that will confuse non-Indian users. Once you've done these, take the article to Wikipedia:Peer review. utcursch | talk21:01, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for the valuable feedback, Utcursch. I will make those changes but will also work on the so far untouched sections. Once all work is complete, I will take it to a peer review. Zuggernaut (talk) 21:17, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
This article seems controversial. Maybe someone can check the article history and its talk page and decide what should be done. I am totally unqualified. Thanks, Aymatth2 (talk) 23:13, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
Iyer
Iyer is currently is GA. I asked for an individual reassessment [22] after I found several sources that didn't comply with Wikipedia policies. After digging deeper I found aroun 50-55 sources may possibly have problems. I wanted to ask for a community reassessment but the person who performed the review has retired. Whom should I make the request to for a community reassessment? -Zuggernaut (talk) 07:42, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
The article is currently subject to a content dispute with some old troll repeatedly reverting constructive edits. I have requested semi-protection but the article definitely deserves attention of reputed Indian editors. --Deepak D'Souza (talk) 16:44, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
Cleaned up Kapu (caste); any other caste articles that get lots of hits but are trainwrecks?
The Kapu article was pretty terrible, and gets 3-4,000 hits a month. So many caste articles are bad that I'm trying to prioritise them using stats.grok.se to make sure I'm spending time on articles that a lot of people see. Mostly been trying to delete self-publish/cruft "references", fix proper references into proper/readable footnotes, move huge tangents into their own articles, basic copyediting and organising, etc. If anyone else wants to take a stab at neatening Kapu up a little further (turning some of the "Sources" into actual footnotes? removing some fluff?) that would be awesome. MatthewVanitas (talk) 20:31, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
Saffron Terror
A handful of biased editors are purposely preventing from expanding the article with references. Is there anyone who can look in to that and allow to add facts in that article. Wasifwasif (talk) 03:50, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
What was the intention of attacking the media office? Any personal (property) issues between Headlines Today and the saffron terrorists? Wasifwasif (talk) 14:10, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
Going by your logic, all mob attacks on media offices will become terrorism (including the Dinakaran office attack in Madurai). --Sodabottle (talk) 14:18, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
What Mr. Wasifwasif says here is not right, but, i think that the point here is that while the attack on the Headlines Today office cannot be termed saffron terror in itself, we have to agree that it is definitely related to saffron terror. Swaroop (talk) 11:59, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
@Pectore, Please don't try to mislead. Whats the reason for Saffron terrorists to attack headlines today? Its just for bring out some facts. Had someone proved that, the video is fake? Never. Its tested and certified by CFSL. The roots of this incident is clearly linked with saffron terror. Are you saying no?
@Sodabottle, Dinakaran attack has roots with the desire to capture the seat. Similarily headlines today attack has its with saffron terroists whose missions are very much obvious not only to India but to the entire world from 30th january 1948. Wasifwasif (talk) 12:48, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
Tarring a whole bunch of activities as "terror" whether done by hindus, muslims, or christians is not correct. There are many incidents of religous/political violence in india. Not all of them are terror attacks and what is this "obvious" business? we all have POV, what is obvious to you may not be true at all. Its simple - If a majority media outlets and reliable sources call this a terrorist attack tag it as one. If they don't, then dont try to label it as terrorism.--Sodabottle (talk) 13:26, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
And Pectore asks a fair question. If you are insisting allegations against Madhani be proved in a court of law before adding them to his article, you should apply the same standard to this attack article also. By your logic on Madhani article, for the headlines today attack to be labeled as "terrorism", terror charges have to be brought against the perpetrators and proven in a court of law. (a standard i agree upon for all articles related to crimes/criminals) --Sodabottle (talk) 13:31, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
@Sodabottle.Pardon my ignorane. can you give me the difference between Religious violence and Religious terrorism.? It will be help for all to seggregate.
What i meant "obvious" there is obvious to almost all.
Taking it in your way, I am not objecting to add a word ""alleged"" here. But what is the rationale behind emptying the contents.? Wasifwasif (talk) 13:40, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
If you cannot distinguish between religious violence and religious terrorism them, then you shouldn't be editing terrorism articles at all. Not all incidents of religious violence automatically becomes terrorism. This incident belongs to Religious violence in India, unless it is called as a terrorist attack by a majority of the reliable sources. None of the reliable sources label it such. But the Hamid Ansari plot is a good example for an "alleged terror" activity because a majority of the reports call it such. But the attack itself is labelled as "mob violence" or "vandalism". I don't oppose the addition of former as an "terror allegation". But the later hasn't been called one such. And how is it "obvious" to everyone? obviously some of us are opposing its inclusion and it is not obvious to us.
Regarding the Hamid Ansari assassination plot, there are other issues with your proposed text as well - regents park removed the youtube link as it cant be used a source per wikipedia RS standards. You have replaced it, when you restored the paragraph. One of the two fanatics discussing says and the so called nationalists say. is personal commentary and has to be reworded. I support its inclusion with rewording and sourced from third party sources (like this one) describing what is in the video.--Sodabottle (talk) 14:02, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
Thanks. you are even not able to differentiate it.otherwise you would have mentioned here clearly. Not all incidents of religious violence automatically becomes terrorism. yes. Difference.? I agree, former is Terror plot, and latter is not? But why to empty contents? Wasifwasif (talk) 14:17, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
Yes the second is not. When media reports saffron/hindutva group members indulge in "alleged terror"/"terror" activities it goes into the Saffron Terror/ Hindu Terror article (eg. Hamid Ansari plot); when media reports RSS/suspected RSS activists "attack/vandalise" headlines today office, it goes into "Religious violence in India" or violence section in RSS article or "political violence in India" article. We don't do the labeling we let the reliable sources do it for us.--Sodabottle (talk) 14:21, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
I would, but we are still in the midst of a disagreement. If it is upto me, i would remove the attack section as a single line addition into the hamid ansari plot section. If you agree, i will start the work (else we will be reverting each other again)--Sodabottle (talk) 14:28, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
(ec) :Wasifwasif, it should be fairly obvious that not all religious violence is terrorism. The riots that are endemic in India are, for example, violence but not terrorism. Much of the anti-Christian violence in Central and Eastern India is religious in nature, but not terrorism. Just like all terrorism is not religious, all violent things religious are not terrorism. My (friendly) suggestion is that you discuss each incident you wish to include separately on the article talk page, rather than attempt a wholesale addition to the article. You've been reverted by three different editors and you could easily find yourself on the wrong end of an edit warring report. Honestly, I think some of the material you're trying to add is probably includable in some form in the article, but that will only happen if you approach this in a different way. (BTW, I don't understand why the article is titled 'Saffron terror' if it purports to be about 'Hindu terrorism'?) --RegentsPark (talk) 14:25, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
If we call it "Hindu Terrorism" or "Hindutva Terrorism" a lot of opposition arises. We can't agree on a name what to call it--Sodabottle (talk) 14:28, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
Moving onward
Okay i have commented out everything in the "alleged examples" section and added a neutrally worded two sentence description of the Hamid Ansari assassination (as a majority of the media articles have a terror/alleged terror descriptor. I have not added the attack on HT office as an example (as the media articles dont describe it as a terror attack). I have no position/views on the rest of the examples.--Sodabottle (talk) 14:47, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
I suppose we can extend this approach to other sub sections of the "alleged examples" a) include only incidents that have been dubbed as "terror"/"alleged terror" by majority of the Reliable sources b) descriptions have to be completely neutral and dull with liberal use of "alleged", "purported" and "suspected" c)If the link to Sangh Parivar organisations has been contested, add it as a rebuttal d) If court cases are pending mention them clearly. If courts have ruled them as acts of terrorism then used "convicted of terrorism" else clearly state it is not. e) Work on a case by case basis and add content. --Sodabottle (talk) 15:15, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
As discussed at the previous meetup, we are working towards bringing out a multilingual newsletter for the India Wikiproject, including news from active Indian language Wikipedias. A draft template for this (which I created by tinkering around with the existing newsletter template) is available in my userspace here. Please go through it and leave comments here. Regards, SBC-YPR (talk) 15:08, 31 July 2010 (UTC)
It appears that a publisher of books on India, Gyan Publishing House, has engaged in wholesale plagiarism of Wikipedia articles. Unfortunately, we've unwittingly engaged in WP:CIRCULAR by creating circular references. The tricky part is that we cite books by the publisher extensively. One that appears to include plagiarism, Encyclopaedia of India, Pakistan and Bangladesh, is cited about 40 times,[23] and altogether their books are cited perhaps more than 200 times, though we don't know that all of their books are based on plagiarism. Even so, cleaning this up is going to have an impact on many articles in this project. Will Bebacktalk11:54, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
Note on Encyclopedia of India, Pakistan, Bangladesh by Om Gupta
I'm quoting Will Beback's note on the encyclopedia:
== Encyclopaedia of India, Pakistan and Bangladesh ==
It has been discovered that this book:
Gupta, Om. Encyclopaedia of India, Pakistan and Bangladesh. Gyan Publishing House, 2006. ISBN8182053897, 9788182053892.
Contains significant amounts of material plagiarized from Wikipedia articles. (Some other books from the same publisher also have this problem). There is no practical way of determining which material came from Wikipedia, and which came from other sources. Further, widespread plagiarism is an indication of poor scholarship. For those reasons, and according to Wikipedia policy, WP:CIRCULAR, I will deleting all citations to the book. However I will not delete the material that cites it, as there's no indication that the material is inaccurate. For more background, see WP:RSN#Circular references: Gyan Publishing and ISHA Books, or the archive it goes there. Will Bebacktalk22:17, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
Since this had been used in many India-related pages, I want to bring this to attention of the Indian Wikipedians. Please do not use this as a reference. --Ragib (talk) 22:23, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
_in_Amritsar,_India.jpg)
