The page created for Rajindar Singh is actually for Rajendra Singh. I have moved the page and renamed it accordingly. Sudhanshu Nimbalkar, Please be careful when we create new pages. This is important that we fact check correctly before we write any information. -- Adamgerber80 —Preceding undated comment added 14:35, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@VarunFEB2003: First of all thanks for your participation and attitude. Apart from the question you have asked there are many things you need to get know first. You didn't ping any of us. You the symbol "at rate of - @" will not ping us to this conversation. You have just wiki-linked our user pages. We'll not know that you have started a discussion, to ping any user you want use the Template:Ping. The template is of the syntax '{{ping|User:Example user name}}'. Replace the example user name with the username you want and by doing so, a notification will be sent to user and he/she'll have a chance to participate in the respective discussion. And another important thing is that you must not use a sub-page template of your user page to sign anything. You must use the four tildes (~~~~) to sign anything. And now coming to the question you've asked, yes, it is important to deal with the articles you have mentioned but it is not the task of this group. This group is purely dedicated and exclusively created, to create, develop/improve the articles related to the Indian Armed Forces only. And you must not take the article personally. your concern with articles related to India having top-importance may discussed on the talk page of Wiki-project India (Project page:WP:IND Talk page:Wikipedia talk:Noticeboard for India-related topics). Put '{{help me}}' on you talk page for any kinds of help and queries. KCVelaga☚╣✉╠☛11:32, 24 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Ok Kc lets leave it here only ill work on them personalyy i know the ping thing but for some reason @ sign didnt work it works too i have tried. and personally here meant that we work on it not as part of the group but seperately as we work for other articles. You do not wish to do it no problem. and if u could pls be a bit polite - VarunFEB2003 (talk) 17:29, 24 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@VarunFEB2003: What do you mean by being polite? I was so polite, I've just told what we are doing and what is the objective of the group that's it. I too want to improve the articles you've mentioned, but I extensively edit military related articles as I'm interested and have knowledge about them. As I have told before, you could find a editors in those topics on WP:IND. I again insist you to use the four tildes '(~~~~)' instead of user template '{{user:VarunFEB2003/sign}}'. And you must address the user by their complete username. And it would be good if you don't use the language that is used the social media. I can see that you're using the words - u, pls etc instead of you, please. Please don't use such language as it cannot be understood by all the editors. KCVelaga☚╣✉╠☛00:40, 25 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
These are the basic sources to create, how you may find more on a search. Please add the article to the progess made section after you've created them. Remember, not just creation is important but the quality matters as you know it. Thank you for your contributions. Regards, KC Velaga✉14:12, 4 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Krishna Chaitanya Velaga:@Strike Eagle: Hi, I had a thought of that if it gets free from Incubator we'll need some more things. So I thought of creating userboxes, topicons and our official barnstar. What should be our official image we should be using for these purposes. Moreover should we not have a our projects portal if we become a WikiProject. Keeping these things in mind I thought i'll create them (in my sandbox) after taking review and suggestions. I need some suggestions and the image to be our official logo (or just image). Thanks VarunFEB2003 (talk) 14:20, 31 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@VarunFEB2003: Thank you very much for for efforts, I am very grateful for that. Please continue your efforts in creating the userboxes, top icons you have and all the stuff. I'll have a look and suggest you any improvements after. And for the portal, there is no need of portal, all the that we need is get to graduate from the incubator and get recognized as a task force. Regards, KCVelaga☚╣✉╠☛14:38, 31 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Krishna Chaitanya Velaga: Hi, Did you get the pic? And I love creating templates, can you tell me the names of templates we still need to create and what material they'll contain. It can be added to the worklist if we want. Thanks VarunFEB2003I am Online 13:33, 4 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@AshLin: As you mentioned before that you have access to some Indian MilHis sources. I need some help now. I am in a process of making the Param Vir Chakra recipients to GA status and eventually Param Vir Chakra to good topic status. I have expanded and nominated Rama Raghoba Rane for GAN. But in the review I was asked to add more information. But I couldn't manage to get them. However, I am in the process of retrieving the information, I just thought if you do some help regarding this. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 13:03, 28 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
DiplomatTesterMan, nevermind, I agree with Adamgerber80 and Peacemaker67 in their reasoning that as Central Armed Police Forces come under the ambit of Milhist, the National Police Memorial (India) should too. My original reasoning would have that as the memorial concerns itself with police forces and topics related to it. Also, I refactored the section so as to make it archiving-friendly. Regards, SshibumXZ (talk·contribs). 07:14, 24 October 2018 (UTC); edited 07:17, 24 October 2018 (UTC).[reply]
I would say that since the CRPF is clearly paramilitary, is organised into battalions, and engages in COIN ops, and part of the memorial is dedicated to the CRPF, the memorial falls under Milhist. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 01:20, 24 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@SshibumXZ: Hi. I have made a few additions to the article. I hope they are ok. The content I have added of course needs sorting out and paraphrasing at places, and needs more cites, but I hope the few changes I have made have helped a little. DiplomatTesterMan (talk) 19:02, 24 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
All Param Veer Chakra's have the award citation. But Nazir Ahmad Wani is an Ashoka Chakra winner. In that case I went through a couple of article and they do not have the full cite. DiplomatTesterMan (talk) 17:16, 16 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) Apology for pinging you but this talk page is dead, and appears like no one is checking it. I would like to hear your thoughts. I checked the BIO of recipients of the highest gallantary award winners from US [30][31] and it appears as though all of them [32][33] have the award citation section that quotes the full citation. I would like to keep the citation on Wani's page. Please let me know your thoughts. --DBigXrayᗙ17:20, 16 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@DBigXray: Thanks for the message on my talk page, and also making this page active by starting this discussion here. Yes, it should watched. Coming to the acutal question, it is perfectly fine to mention the full citation as a quote. When there is an official press release or a government website mentioning the statement as the official award citation, we can keep it. I did the same for several GAs of PVC recipients. For instance, Somnath Sharma and Piru Singh. KCVelaga (talk) 17:34, 16 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
1. As you pointed out DBigXray... I went through some Medal of Honor recipients in the article List of post-Vietnam War Medal of Honor recipients (Kyle Carpenter, Ty Carter etc, yes they have long multiple line citations directly quoting the official citations. So in terms of a standardization across Wikipedia for the highest awards in a country given to military personnel, citations themselves shouldn't be a problem.
2. Do Ashok Chakra citations deserve as much room as Param Veer Chakra citations, yes.
3. Usually citations are not too long. That is, they are not multiple pages in length. So length persay is not an issue considering the importance of what the citation is conveying.
4. MOS:QUOTE isn't a problem too here since - It is generally recommended... Consider paraphrasing quotations into plain and concise text when appropriate ... Phrases like: generally recommended, Consider and when appropriate are being used. Also MOS:QUOTE deals with copyright protected content - "Brief quotations of copyrighted text may be used to illustrate a point, establish context, or attribute a point of view or idea. While quotations are an indispensable part of Wikipedia, try not to overuse them. Using too many quotes is incompatible with an encyclopedic writing style and may be a copyright infringement." Is this copyright protected and to what extent... (next point)
5. This leave the issue of copyright itself. Param Veer and Ashok Chakra citations are officially chronicled in the Gazette of India (and a register) as per the official rules and regulations for gallantry awards in India. (Ministry of Defence LINK). Since the "register" is not accessible that leaves the Gazette. So all that is left to be seen is under what under what copyright laws does the Gazette of India function. DiplomatTesterMan (talk) 18:00, 16 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
6. But if the citation has been quoted from a source other than the Gazette itself, under what copyright does that source function and does their copyright have any jurisdiction over the citation itself (i doubt it). DiplomatTesterMan (talk) 18:02, 16 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
1. Gazette of India Notifications are published by Department of Publication and are printed by the Government of India Printing Presses regularly. This is an authorized legal document of Government of India. All parts, section and Sub-section of Gazette of India are uploaded in the egazette website by the concerned Government of India Printing Presses which can be accessed free of cost by the general public being available in the public domain.
2.Controller of publication is the authorized publisher, custodian and seller of Government of India Publications and periodicals including Gazette of India and Delhi Gazette with its copy right. It is quality product and economically priced. It undertakes storage, sale and distribution of all saleable publications brought out by various Ministries/Departments. Any infringement of the Indian Copyright Act is a legal offence. Dispute in Book trade, if any, will be settled within the Jurisdiction of Delhi.
Note that point 2 is just for publication copyright where the matter being sold, as far as the wordings go.Authorized is the keyword. We are accessing the information the publisher, Controller of publication, publishes as the Gazette, which in itself comes under GODL once published. DiplomatTesterMan (talk) 18:25, 16 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
DTM, this would need expansion so as to have a minimum of 1500KB of prose. I am thinking about "DYK that, India pondered for XX years before making the post of Chief of Defence Staff (India)."--DBigXrayᗙ04:51, 15 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I think we all are aware of the issue of "Pakistan not declaring its martyrs/casualty" but I found a good article[1] on this today. This invariably leads to contradictory figures in the infobox sections and other places. --DBigXrayᗙ10:54, 4 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@DBigXray: Thanks for bringing this to our attention. This of course makes the figures in our articles suspicious. But I am not sure how we can let the readers know (footnote?), but that would also require a larger discussion, more sources, and which articles -- and a lot of other stuff. Happy to hear more thoughts on this. Also pinging @AshLin: for attention. KCVelaga (talk) 04:52, 5 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@DBigXray: An Indian magazine article claiming to find the truth about Pakistani casualties, especially a magazine that has had several articles on how India carried out an accurate surgical strike in Balakot, Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa, in February 2019, is hardly credible. We will need to cite to third-party (i.e. neither an Indian nor a Pakistani) internationally recognized newspapers, just as the lead in 2019 Balakot airstrike does. (Pinging @Slatersteven:) Fowler&fowler«Talk»23:12, 28 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I meant this about both country-sources. My point is that if you are going to introduce a statement about official Pakistani figures, which appear inaccurate or POV, it doesn't really help if you are using an Indian source to point that out. peacemaker67's caution about using third-party sources remains relevant here. In my view, it is better to not have any casualty figures, if third-party sources do not exist Fowler&fowler«Talk»12:50, 29 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for sharing. I wasn't aware of this, so I am glad that I know about it. I was under the impression that SFF were the SF group involved in Bluestar. but now this makes more sense. --DBigXrayᗙ08:59, 24 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@DBigXray: I just want to tell a few more things since you've shown interest. That Sandeep Unnithan article clearly mentions The Mavericks to be all Indians unlike SFF (he distinguishes SFF from SG). What this means is that these people on Quora are clearly Bullsh*tt*ng. What happens next is that people get confused between SFF and SG and make unwanted ad hoc edits to Wikipedia. We need to keep an eye on this (especially since I am about leave for a Wikibreak, you will have to help).
Furthermore, after the reading and comparing all WP:RS on this topic with all WP:Not Rs, I have come to the following conclusion: SG was initially formed as 4 Vikas of the Special Frontier Force, but later became a separate unit. Afterall, what else can explain the transition to this badge from this?— Vaibhavafro💬10:11, 24 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
There is no historic proof of this nor do the sources in this articles themselves ever site that something called Fourth Battle of Panipat ever occurred. They don't describe a full fledge battle. Just a mere conflict of interest, not even a battle. What has come now is anyone can claim something has occured and use selective lines from some source to claim that something that never happened has actually occured? This is totally historically inaccurate and fails WP:V, WP:NOR, WP:RS, WP:Notable and should be deleted. The term Fourth Battle of Panipat isn't used in any WP:RS or historical context either but a 2023 joinee (no PA just saying) User:Ronnie Macroni is making up fictional battles related to India like this all across Wikipedia and they don't meet the basic requirements of being encyclopedic historic articles and all meets criteria for deletion. Please prevent fictional battle from becoming Wikipedia articles, this is Wikipedia not wikia/fandom also Fourth Battle of Panipat lacks any credibility unlike the First Battle of Panipat, 2nd and 3rd ones and should be deleted! Dilbaggg (talk) 05:38, 28 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
