Jump to content

Wikipedia:Notice board for India-related topics/INCOTW/Removed/2006

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Uttarayan[edit]

January 16;

Support:

59.95.201.94 13:47, 17 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, anons are not allowed to vote. You need to register in order to vote.--May the Force be with you! Shreshth91($ |-| r 3 $ |-| t |-|) 15:06, 18 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  1. --Aksi great 13:53, 17 January 2006 (UTC) Note:This user has 12 edits.--May the Force be with you! Shreshth91($ |-| r 3 $ |-| t |-|) 15:25, 19 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  2. --Samir ind 14:12, 18 January 2006 (UTC) Note:This user has 1 edit.--May the Force be with you! Shreshth91($ |-| r 3 $ |-| t |-|) 15:25, 19 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  3. --Salim87 12:20, 19 January 2006 (UTC) Note:This user has 3 edits.--May the Force be with you! Shreshth91($ |-| r 3 $ |-| t |-|) 15:25, 19 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
  • One of the biggest and best festivals in Gujarat.
  • This article is factually incorrect. Uttarayan is an astronomical term for the six-month period (not the day) when the Sun moves north (as opposed to dakshinayan when it moves south). Makar Sankranti, which is one of the 12 sankrantis that happen every year marks the beginning of this period. deeptrivia (talk) 13:57, 17 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The nomination may therefore by changed to Makar Sankranti, unless of course you intended to work on the astronomical concept itself. deeptrivia (talk) 12:27, 19 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • 59.95.201.94, You have to be registered to nominate an article. - Ganeshk (talk) 14:03, 17 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • If deeptrivia is right, then I think that the nomination should be for the kite flying festival. It is obvious that the nomination was for that (looking at the date of nomination). --Salim87 12:58, 19 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • I am very concerned by the fact that all the users who have voted for this article have very few edits (12, 1 and 3 respectively). Shouldn't we have some sort of minimum requirements to vote to remove the possibility of sockpuppets.--May the Force be with you! Shreshth91($ |-| r 3 $ |-| t |-|) 15:25, 19 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • I don't think you can set a criteria for users to vote. That spoils the whole point of Wikipedia. Then maybe you should not let anon users to edit anything. I have been a fan of wikipedia since the past few months now. Have started an article also. My interests have been in the aviation sector of India and my city ahmedabad where I have been constantly updating (both with and without logging in). That is the gr8 thing with this site. you can log in anytime if you feel like it, or you can go on without that. it is very easy to make edits. it does not matter if it is 12 or 1000 as long as they are good ones. So, if you are going to highlight my name everytime with tags like "This user has 12 edits" then frankly, i dont care to log in or vote in wikipedia.
It is perfectly in order to make comments such as those made by Shreshth91. While it is very difficult to establish sockpuppetry, it is amazing to see three new users figuring out about INCOTW very fast and then voting for the same topic. Each topic would get its chance, so do not fret. Personally, I do not make any nominations for INCOTW when the pipeline has 4+ articles - no article is undesirable for INCOTW, all are welcome. Similarly all editors are welcome, but sockpuppetry is not welcome. --Gurubrahma 17:34, 20 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nagpur[edit]

February 05, 2006;

Support:

  1. Gppande 08:33, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
  • Nagpur is the second capital of Maharashtra. Currently it is seeing one of most important and biggest aviation development. It very beautiful city with a very strategic position on map of India. Also Nagpur's article has been edited by many Wikipedia users over past several months and I would surely like to see it feature more on this great site!!!

Cricket in India[edit]

February 06, 2006;

Support:

  1. Aksi great 12:21, 7 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Madhav 17:09, 22 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
  • I think this article can be improved greatly if the entire community works on it. For a sport considered to be a second religion to each person in India, the article is vey boring with half the article filled with names of cricketers only.

Peshwa[edit]

Peshwas were ruling most parts of the India. However this article and the peshwa rulers need attention February 15, 2006;

Support:

  1. Aravind parvatikar (talk) 14:00, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  2. utcursch | talk 04:54, 24 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Sauron 10:51, 6 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Kochi, India (1 votes, Nominated February 17, 2006)[edit]

February 17,2006;

Support:

  1. thunderboltz 14:57, 17 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
  • The city is growing in geometric proportions each day. Its also the biggest city in Kerala. Every other day, there is a million dollar investment here. Also, thousands of foreign and domestic tourists vist the city every month. The existing article is pretty good, and with a little bit of effort, I think we can raise it to a featured article level. So, why not take the challenge? thunderboltz 15:09, 17 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bold text

Tourism in Kerala[edit]

March 2, 2006;

Support:

  1. thunderboltz 05:21, 2 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Anjali 10:52, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  3. utcursch | talk 05:04, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
  • Kerala is a hot shot tourist destination in India, with thousands of international and domestic tourists visiting every year. The articles on Kerala have a large number of visitors too. I've created a stub. We can develop it to a featured article level. Lots of beautiful pictures are already available on wikipedia.
  • I think Tourism in India should receive more priority than Tourism in Kerela. Not that I am opposed to the article's nomination, but don't you guys think we should work on the Tourism in India article first? --Spartian 19:34, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Kunjarani[edit]

March 19, 2006

Support:

  1. Gurubrahma 13:27, 19 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  2. --Bhadani 13:47, 19 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  3. -- thunderboltza.k.a.Deepu_Joseph |TALK 14:25, 19 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  4. --hydkat 21:57, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Spartian 16:47, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
It is a pitiful stub still. Considering that Kunjarani has been active for over a decade in winning laurels for the country, the least we can do is spend a week on her article. The article needs a section on awards and achievemenbts and one on her early life, at least. Information should be easily available. --Gurubrahma 13:27, 19 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

India[edit]

Support:

  1. thunderboltza.k.a.Deepu_Joseph |TALK 04:38, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Dwaipayanc 09:47, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Chez (Discuss / Email) • 03:57, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comments

The article was submitted recently for WP:FARC, citing the following reasons:
Does not meet criteria 1, 2a, 2b, 2c for a featured article. It also has a template underconstruction on the main page. It has two sentence paragraphs, almost no references for the curious, not comprehensive, badly formatted (the national symbols of India is sitting in the middle of the page) and has stublike sections..
1. Lack of easily verifiable references and citations Quite simply, for an article this size, it cites just a few references, and those hardly at all within the text.
 2. Use of weasel terms.
3. Short, choppy sentences.
With such a strong Indian wikipedia community, I dont think we should have let that happen. thunderboltza.k.a.Deepu_Joseph |TALK 04:38, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The points raised on FARC aren't anything to worry about. In fact, one of the points raised was that it is tit for tat in response to Nichalp's views on the PRC article. Nothing to worry about, I don't think it is in desperate need to collaboration. Nobleeagle (Talk) 05:39, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with noble eagle. It has already been improved in past few days. FARC was mostly a sham. Their are other articles in far more need of attention. India article does not need a colloberation tag to motivate us to keep improving it :) --Blacksun 17:29, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Rameshwar Nath Kao[edit]

Support:

  1. hydkat 08:46, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  2. --Gurubrahma 05:49, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comments

This article is a pitiful stub on a man who was considered a legendary spymaster in the intelligence circles. He was the first Secretary (R) of the then newly created Research and Analysis Wing (RAW) - India's main spy agency.

Very interesting - I know absolutely nothing about this guy. It would be great if you guys can expand on it. --Blacksun 14:30, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bollywood[edit]

  • Number of votes: 3, Nominated: May 1 2006

Support:

  1. Nobleeagle (Talk) 23:04, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  2. thunderboltza.k.a.Deepu_Joseph |TALK 09:29, 4 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Vastu 04:43, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comments

As Blacksun stated above. We need Bollywood FA Articles. But I think the article that really deserves to be featured is Bollywood itself. Right now it just isn't featured article material..

Perhaps Cinema of India deserves more attention than something as narrow as Bollywood? Vastu 04:06, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps both? Nobleeagle (Talk) 04:41, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed. I was only commenting on how you said this article deserves to be featured. Vastu 04:48, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Khalistan[edit]

Support:

  1. Andy123(talk) 08:26, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Definately needs lots of work. Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 17:15, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comments

This article is subject to disputes and factual inaccuracies which makes it look as if this movement is still alive and kicking in India. I think this is more than a good reason to start working and contributing..

Wouldn't it be better to rename it the Khalistan Movement, as Khalistan never actually became an international state. It was just the dream of a group of people. I know this isn't the place to discuss, just wanted to get some things sorted before it is subject to any sort of collaboration effort. Nobleeagle (Talk) 08:32, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You're right. Done --Andy123(talk) 17:03, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with you, my vote goes for it to be renamed to "Khalistan Movement". 220.227.152.109 18:49, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I've moved this back for the time being. Please see Talk:Khalistan. Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 17:22, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Exactly where do you want to discuss this matter, why not here? 220.227.152.109 18:49, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Because this is not a page to discuss renaming issues or infact any content issues in regards to Khalistan. That's why we have a Khalistan talk page. Kindly refrain from turning this into an even longer discussion or rant. Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 13:01, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hinduism[edit]

  • Number of votes: 4, Nominated: May 31 2006

Support:

  1. --Blacksun 14:48, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  2. --Dangerous-Boy 23:07, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  3. sumal 07:26, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  4. CG 14:30, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Rajatjghai 21:11, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
  • The article is no longer FA quality. Hoards of text has been added that not only ignore referencing but does not even wikilink!! It also suffers from false referencing and deletions of controversial sections. If the article is not improved, it will go to FARC. I have listed the issues in more detail in the talk page of the article. --Blacksun 14:48, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

U. Muthuramalingam Thevar[edit]

  • Number of votes: 1, Nominated date: July 08, 2006

Support:

  1. --Soman 22:09, 8 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Pyarelal Nayyar[edit]

  • Number of votes: 1, Nominated date: July 13, 2006

Support:

  1. Chirag 18:05, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Rajesh Khanna[edit]

Support:

  1. Hameednoor 22:29, 9 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
  • One of the most popular actors with a hysterical fan following at his peak. Is credtited with being called the first superstar. For a movie actor of his status, the article is very poor. - Hameednoor 22:29, 9 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hameed is upset because I reverted his edits to the article. It wouldn't hurt to have more detail in the article, which is sketchy, but it should NOT be personal opinion re the greatness of Rajesh Khanna, and it should be referenced. The articles re Bollywood actors are all too often filled with rumors lifted from film gossip columns, or dimly remembered from gossip columns. The assertions may be true but then again may not. - Zora 03:10, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I do not know what Sri Hameed had written, but in its present form it does not match with the status of an Actor like Rajesh Khanna. Moreover, just now I have edited it in brief safely including some facts like he performed in RAvindra Nath's song free of cost; tried to side line Khanna and included names of other awards he has been given. But again all that has been vanished. What a mockery are you doing here?-- Jatin ram

I fully agree with Jatin Ram, the editor(s) of Wikipedia is biased towards the Big Begger Amitabh Bachchan, who is habitual manipulator and try to destroy the write up of Rajesh Khanna.

Pokhran-II[edit]

  • (Number of votes: 1, Nominated date: 9th October 2006)

Support:

  1. Shyam (T/C) 21:59, 9 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
  • Article is very important and interesting. It requires large amount of work. It should reach to get FA-status. - Shyam (T/C) 21:59, 9 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

R. Madhavan[edit]

  • (Number of votes: 1, Nominated date: 18th October 2006)

Support

  1. Thamizhan 20:40, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
  • The article is developing and could use help and become only the second Indian cine artiste to become a FA. Please help. Cheers Thamizhan 20:40, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Afraid this article is way too elementary in style. It just strings up the facts, some of which I am not sure of. For example, I believe his mother is a bank officer, not a housewife. Also, are we sure his wife's maiden surname is Krishnan? I thought she was a north Indian.

= Om Prakash (child labourer)[edit]

  • (Number of votes:2 , 21st November 2006: )

Support:

  1. as nominator Agεθ020 (ΔT • ФC) 00:44, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  2. would like to see more information on this article. --Mitul0520 21:27, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
  • First Indian to win the International Children's Peace Prize. Currently, only one external link. In the next few days more reports should be coming from Indian newspapers, and the article could become a GA article--Agεθ020 (ΔT • ФC) 00:44, 20 November 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Vijay Amritraj[edit]

Support:

  1. as nominator. --Gurubrahma 05:57, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
  • One of the greatest Indian tennis players; had a Hollywood career as well; article in bad shape - not a single reference given - can be easily improved with Google resources.. --Gurubrahma 05:57, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]


R. Madhavan[edit]

  1. as nominator. -- Prince Godfather 16:03, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
  • Best Indian celebrity article, improvement would be greatPrince Godfather 16:03, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Notice_board_for_India-related_topics/INCOTW/Removed/2006&oldid=1136085787"