Wikipedia talk:Noticeboard for India-related topics/Archive 53

Odisha Page Moves

A discussion for moving Odisha related articles to "... Odisha" from "... Orissa", and to built clear consensus whether all related articles will henceforth use Odisha in the articles is taking place here. Everyone is invited to participate in the discussion. Amartyabag ^TALK2ME 16:05, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

 Done Pages moved. Skinsmoke (talk) 23:38, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for the move. Hindustanilanguage (talk) 06:39, 15 February 2013 (UTC).

Just to clarify, my interpretation of that discussion (see Talk:Odisha), coupled with how the discussion was advertised here by Amartyabag, is that all mentions of Orissa, no matter what period they refer to, should be as Odisha. Am I correct? This would be in line with how we deal with Chinese placenames (where we use Pinyin transliteration for periods prior to the adoption of Pinyin internationally, such as Nanjing, not Nanking), and in the United Kingdom (where we refer to placenames by their modern Welsh name, rather than the former anglicised versions, such as Caernarfon, not Carnarvon or Ceredigion, not Cardiganshire). Skinsmoke (talk) 10:20, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

I feel we should retain Orissa when referring to events before 2011. For eg, it would be extremely confusing if Bihar and Orissa Province were to be moved to Bihar and Odisha Province. Whatever rules we have for Bombay vs Mumbai, should apply here.—indopug (talk) 12:37, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

Interestingly, Bihar and Orissa Province is one of the very few Odisha related articles that hasn't been moved. Whether that was intentional or not, or simply because nobody bothered to look at articles starting with the letter "B", I'm not sure. Skinsmoke (talk) 12:48, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

I switched the reference to the modern state in that article but, obviously, where a historical name is necessary, we should use Orissa. However, references to the region that are not historical names should use Odisha (even for events prior to 2011). --regentspark (comment) 12:55, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

I agree with all changes of text referring to "the modern-day state of Odisha". However, when discussing an event that occured at that place before 2011, it should remain "Orissa". For eg: "Indira Gandhi gave her last speech in Orissa", not Odisha, because that was what it was called at the time. Just like how Satyajit "Ray was born in the city of Calcutta".—indopug (talk) 13:08, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

I think there need to be a case to case usage of the word, for example it would be confusing to say that for example "In 2007, Orissa had an industrial growth rate of x %, however in 2012, the industrial growth rate of Odisha increased to y %." For historical events which particularly refer to the Province say Bihar and Orissa Province should not be changed, but say "The river Subarnarekha served as the border between Bengal and Maratha-controlled Orissa" should be "Odisha", because that was something before the British came and English became a common usage language. I don't know what might have been the common usage of the word in English at that point of time. Further, as Skinsmoke and regentspark argues, that "Orissa or Odisha is not that well known outside India under either name and [...] that Odisha is the most used within India by a huge margin". As, the entity is clearly identifiable by the name "Odisha" and considering that it is a phonetical change/romanisation rather than change in the name as a whole, there is no point in not changing all historical references to "Odisha". As "Odisha" has now been decided as a WP:COMMONNAME, except for reference to "Orissa Province" or "Bihar and Orissa Province", "Orissa became a part of India" or similar sets of words which convey anything related to formation of the Province, Odisha should be used in all other cases. Amartyabag ^TALK2ME 18:30, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

Amartyabag, I think, has cogently addressed the issue. We should have a clear preference for Odisha over Orissa, except when we refer to a historical entity that contains the word Orissa and is clearly different from the state of Odisha. Thus, Indira Gandhi's final speech should be in Odisha rather than in Orissa. --regentspark (comment) 19:20, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

"Orissa or Odisha is not that well known outside India under either name and [...] that Odisha is the most used within India by a huge margin"—what about the fact that Indian English-language sources exclusively used "Orissa" before 2011? Many do even today. I'm not sure where you get the idea the word "Orissa" was never extensively used.

As per WP:COMMONNAME, " If the name of a person, group, object, or other article topic changes, then more weight should be given to the name used in reliable sources published after the name change than in those before the change.", as per evidence provided in the RM discussion at Talk:Odisha, "Odisha" is used more extensively after 2011 in RS. So, usage after 2011 will be given more weight against the sources before the change. I have never stated that the word "Orissa" was not used extensively before the change, but I stated quoting "that Odisha is the most used within India by a huge margin". Amartyabag ^TALK2ME 13:02, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

"it is a phonetical change/romanisation rather than change in the name as a whole" - isn't this true of Calicut/Kozhikode as well? But I don't think we change historical mentions of that?—indopug (talk) 03:47, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

Kozhikode is not a particularly good example to choose. This was a page that had been incorrectly moved back to Calicut out of process, and against the consensus in the previous Requested moves discussion. It has now been reverted. I have since gone through every link to that page and updated them. I changed those historical references that needed changing to <no wiki>[Kozhikode|Calicut]</no wiki> because, as this was a technical move, there was, unlike Odisha, no discussion of what name should be used in historical circumstances. However, I agree that Kozhikode should be treated in the same way as Odisha as, essentailly, it is again a change in romanisation, as opposed to the Madras move to Chennai, which is a completely different name. Again, this is how this situation is treated in the rest of the world. Skinsmoke (talk) 07:09, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

X was born in Bombay, not Mumbai. Indeed, X may have died while it was still Bombay and wouldn't have a clue about Mumbai. We are talking tens of thousands of articles here and I rather think that there is a policy or guideline that says we respect the chronology/do not introduce anachronisms. There are similar issues relating to the use of British India and Pakistan etc that are likely to cause all sorts of fireworks. I think this historical naming issue is a huge can of worms and I don't think it is well-served by a discussion headed "Odisha Page Moves". I, for one, missed it.--2.219.218.79 (talk) 16:21, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

Oh, and of course the situation in India is not helped by the sheer number of times the placenames change. We cannot even design a bot that can handle this because of the exceptions already referred to above by others.--2.219.218.79 (talk) 16:23, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

Should we consider going for a WP:RFC to generate a wider discussion on this issue and let the matter settled?? Amartyabag ^TALK2ME 16:46, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

Any such RfC probably needs to be at a higher level than just this project, as I have just said on my talk page. Wales and China are being rolled out as examples for India and - please forgive any apparent cynicism - who is to say that India will not then be rolled out as an example for why the consensus should apply to, say, Russia? I can see a potential, however much good faith is assumed, for an unwittingly-intended steamroller effect here. It may already apply to Russia, I've no idea. --2.219.218.79 (talk) 17:09, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

I'd caution against going for a global RfC, as it is highly likely to get bogged down in wikiwars between different groups of nationalistic editors (can you imagine that the Serbs and Albanians are going to compromise on this? Never mind the Greeks and Turks, Ukrainians and Russians, or Azeris and Armenians.). The end result will be no decision one way or the other, but a hell of a lot of bad feeling along the way, which is likely to spread into other fields within Wikipedia.

I do understand the argument that someone who was born in what is now Mumbai only knew it as Bombay. However, we are not writing Wikipedia for that person (who may well be dead). We are writing for our current and future readers, many of whom are already too young to remember Bombay or Peking or Leningrad. When we are talking about less well-known places, I wonder how many of our readers (of whatever age) will be familiar with Ragusa, Puerto d'España or Prezla (a prize for anyone who can come up with the answer without looking them up!). It is far more useful to know that someone was born in Mumbai (which is, incidentally, the category we would place the article in), and, if they wish to know, they can then go and look up the article to find out what it was called at the time. The article on New York City quite rightly records that The first documented visit by a European was in 1524 by Giovanni da Verrazzano, a Florentine explorer in the service of the French crown, who sailed his ship La Dauphine into New York Harbor, where he spent one night aboard ship and sailed out the next day. If it said that he sailed into the waters around Nouvelle Angoulême, which is what he named it, even our French readers would be bewildered.

There will be instances where the former name still holds the common name in reliable current English sources. We still don't expect to see an article on the Black Hole of Kolkata (or to see mention of that in other articles), but they will be few and far between. Skinsmoke (talk) 18:02, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

In answer to the query about what we do for Russia, I just had a quick look at Leon Trotsky. There are numerous examples of the former name (now known as new name) being used, but also They cited the successes of the newly formed (15 January 1918) voluntary Red Army against Polish forces of Gen. Józef Dowbor-Muśnicki in Belarus, White forces in the Don region, and newly independent Ukrainian forces as proof that the Red Army could repel German forces, especially if propaganda and asymmetrical warfare were used. As far as I'm aware, the name Belarus was unknown in English until after the collapse of the Soviet Union, and at the time would probably have been called White Russia. However, the article refers to Saint Petersburg, Petrograd and Leningrad with no explanation to indicate that they are the same place. It's only one example, but I have to nip to the shop right now. Skinsmoke (talk) 18:28, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

Well, no global RfC = no consensus. We've got enough problems lingering from the script RfC without going off on our own again. If a RfC does not gain consensus then it does not gain consensus, simple as that. It is one of our core policies and cannot just be swept under the carpet because of some nationalist tendencies or whatever.

Wrt to Russia, my point was that I have no idea whether there is a project consensus for naming geographic stuff but neither does it matter because that would carry no weight. Something written up in WP:MOS or another central guideline will carry more weight than anything said in a project, and something written up as a policy will carry more weight still.--2.219.218.79 (talk) 18:33, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

Can't we limit the RfC just to the question "whether the term "Odisha" or "Orissa" should be used for historical reference?" I can see this discussion can move towards no-consensus without inputs from other non-involved editors. Amartyabag ^TALK2ME 18:46, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

In theory, you can get consensus at the Odisha article for referring to it as Odisha or Orissa within that article. But any such consensus does not apply to any mentions of those names in any other article. That, and the potential for unintended "consensus creep" across all other placenames that is already apparent in comments on this thread, is why something big is needed. I'm sorry to wikilawyer here and I may not even be doing it correctly, but it is my understanding. If the original RM proposal had merely been to rename the article as Odisha then there would have been no difficulty. Introducing the historical bit is the problem.--2.219.218.79 (talk) 19:01, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

If it's any help, I did find something in the Manual of Style before I nipped out (though, of course, I can't find it now), which says that we may refer to a place by its historical name in an article about the historical context provided that we explain the modern name, at the first instance of the old name being used. I suppose that means we are supposed to use terminology such as Bombay (now known as Mumbai)... or The Romans invaded Gaul (present-day France)... It went on, however, to state that in the majority of placenames we would use the modern name because that's what modern English sources use. I'll have another look and see if I can stumble across it again. As an aside, I do wonder if whoever wrote that particular wording into the manual considered the massive amount of work entailed everytime an article title gets changed under the Requested moves process (or by unilateral moves, come to that), just to comply with that direction. It's also hard to see how you could get that into the birthplace slot in an infobox (hopefully there would be a reference to the birthplace in the text of the article, but that often isn't the case) Skinsmoke (talk) 19:30, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

If the birthplace is not noted & sourced in the body of the article then it should not be in the infobox.--2.219.218.79 (talk) 19:46, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

DYK reviewer for Gurudas Banerjee

A Did You Know (DYK) reviewer is needed for the article about actor Gurudas Banerjee, who frequently played Sri Ramakrishna. We've suggested that the proposed hook appear in the main page Did You Know section on February 18, Sri Ramakrishna's birthday. In order for that to happen, someone should review the nomination at least a few days before then, preferably earlier. The nomination can be found here: Template:Did you know nominations/Gurudas Banerjee. Instructions for DYK reviewing are HERE, and anyone can do it. Thank you in advance -- Presearch (talk) 05:33, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

Update: Review still needed:
     Template:Did you know nominations/Gurudas Banerjee
Thanks -- Presearch (talk) 04:37, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

Further update: a "Did You Know" review (link above) is needed immediately if the item is to run on Feb 18 for Sri Ramakrishna's birthday, as proposed. -- Presearch (talk) 14:39, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

 Done - reviewed by User:CorrectKnowledge. Thank you! -- Presearch (talk) 18:19, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

Higher education controversy in Odisha

A discussion for whether the event is an ongoing event and whether the tense need to be changed to convey proper situation is taking place here. Thoughts and comments will be appreciated. Amartyabag ^TALK2ME 04:34, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

Mica Kings

I somehow feel that article, Mica Kings is somekind of Hoax or very close to it. --sarvajna (talk) 11:09, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

At the bottom of the article, there is a link to a Deccan Herald article which supports the existence of such business units in early 1900s. Bhadani has made significant contribution in this article.--GDibyendu (talk) 19:18, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

There does not or never did exist any house by name of Mica Kings. It is just a title name given or name given by media to Chhattu Ram Bhadani and Horil Ram Bhadani, who controlled major portion of mica mining and trading at one point of time in India. The Deccan Herald article also states same At one time, these “Mica Kings” controlled most of mining... If you go by article title Mica Kings it can be termed as hoax. Further I find major portion of story is unreferenced. Either we should change the Article name rather than delete it. Have added maint tags and some cleanup. Jethwarp (talk) 06:26, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

A google search by name Mica Kings [1] gives Zero results except for one book which says it is based on Wikipedia article and another google search of mica jhumari telaiya [2] gives names of may mica mining companies existing like Chrestien Mica Industries Ltd., Domchanch, Hazaribagh. Chatturam Horilram Ltd., Jhumri-Telaiya, Hazaribagh. S. K. Sahana & Sons Ltd., Kodarma, Hazaribagh. R. K. Sahana & Sons Ltd. Kodarma, Hazaribagh. Nund & Samont Co., Ltd...Calcutta Mica Corporation. Muktaram Babu St. Calcutta Chrestian Mica Industries Ltd. 4, Lynos Range, Calcutta The Carnatic Mica Export Co. Gudur S. India ...

Perhaps, the proper name would be Chatturam & Horilram Bhadani [3] and rewrite of article accordingly.Jethwarp (talk) 07:14, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

It might be better to rename it as Mica industry in India or Mica mining in India. However, that really isn't a discussion for this page, and should be discussed at Wikipedia:Requested moves. Skinsmoke (talk) 12:48, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

List of current Indian chief ministers at FLC

I've nominated a thoroughly revamped List of current Indian chief ministers as a featured-list candidate here. I look forward to your comments and criticisms.—indopug (talk) 20:37, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

I think some more contents can be added in the article as in List of Governors of Bombay. Ssriram mt (talk) 00:01, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

regarding deletion of reviews from indian movies

hai, this guy http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:TheRedPenOfDoom is deleting all the reviews from different articles . he is saying that nowrunning.com, indiaglitz.com etc are not proffessional reviewers and he is keeping only reviews which suites him. hopefully he is not an indian that may be the reason why he dont know nowrunning,indiglitz etc. what shall be done?? Vinayachandranlovedr (talk) 13:49, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

He seems to be correct. Neither of those appear to be reliable sources. Basically, we should only be looking at newspapers (those already established as RS), some television shows (again, with a history of credible reviewing), and an extremely narrow list of well established movie websites. Truth be told, if you go to WP:WikiProject Film, you'll see that Review sections aren't just supposed to be a big list of reviews any way. They should be a brief summary of the overall feel of major reviews along with explanation of the types of comments given in many reviews. For US films, this means we (are supposed to) rely mostly on review aggregators like Rotten Tomatoes; I'm not sure if there is a similarly reputable aggregator for Indian films. Qwyrxian (talk) 14:05, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

User:TheRedPenOfDoom seems correct. We can add those review which appears in RS, that includes most national/regional level newspapers, certain TV shows, etc. For aggregators we may use ReviewGang. Amartyabag ^TALK2ME 16:03, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

For Malayalam films, NowRunning, Metromatinee,IndiaGlitz, OneIndia, BalconyBeats etc. are the best available and reliable sites currently and the information there is mostly correct and up-to-date. So we should accept these sites as reliable sources. Bollywood sites will not cover Malayalam cinema.
Anish Viswa 03:40, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

How about reviews published in English newspapers or even in Malayalam newspapers? They are RS.--GDibyendu (talk) 04:16, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

Problem is, it is difficult to get those reviews in soft-copy on the Internet, moreover in English.
Anish Viswa 04:32, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

It's not necessary that sources are in English. For example, if you can access such movie-reviews on internet archives of Malayala Manorama (it should be there, I guess), you can use such links.--GDibyendu (talk) 06:27, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

all these are right in the case of bollywood/hollywood movies where there may be many reviews coming out but for malayalam movies we rely on many sites obnly and it is too hard to get the newspaper reviews. actually when these site reviews are getting deleted for no reasons malayali's are not getting any help out of malayalam movie wiki.Vinayachandranlovedr (talk) 04:37, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

the claim that "for X type of movies it is hard to get professional reviews on line so we should use non professional reivews" is a non-starter argument. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 12:49, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

TRPoD is, of course, correct. Sources must meet WP:RS. If the source is offline, that's fine—if someone doubts what the review says, it's the responsibility of the person who added it to provide some sort of explanation on the talk page. Please note that this is not anything special to Malayam movies; there are all sorts of topics that are discussed more commonly on blogs than in reliable sources...and we don't cover those topics. Qwyrxian (talk) 04:16, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

Thiruvananthapuram Public Library books

The Kerala State Central Library has made available a collection of rare old books online. There are 644 English books, many about the history of India and the Tranvancore State -- may be of use to us. utcursch | talk 13:49, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

That sounds good. Thanks for noticing and pointing it out here. Many books in it are dated quite old, 1700s-1900s. Before their link collapses or disappears, which won't be surprising, do you think we can get them on WikiSource or something? I have no experience with WikiSource and it would b good if you can tell us more, in case you know. I can help in getting them there. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 04:44, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

Well... it sounds impossible. Cant even save them on PC. :( Guess we will only have to hope it doesn't crash. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 04:47, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Trivandrum Central

Greetings! I have recently relisted a requested move discussion at Talk:Trivandrum Central#Suggested move, regarding a page relating to this WikiProject. Discussion and opinions are invited. Thanks, Tyrol5 [Talk] 03:31, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

 Done Now moved to Thiruvananthapuram Central following Requested move discussion. Skinsmoke (talk) 18:00, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

anyone knows?

Anyone remembers/knows the name of the village in the film Mother India?--Dwaipayan (talk) 16:07, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

• page 6/7/8 of this link gives the storyline, which can be used as a ref, but not name of the village. Will check if video of this movie is now available in stores (these days videos of many old movies are available).--GDibyendu (talk) 08:59, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

Man

The etymology for the word man should include India since the root of the word has its origin in India (Manu). I believe this topic is of utmost importance. There have been white racists who wish to erase India's contribution and say that it is a proto indo-european root. However the belief in manu predates all european cutlure let alone the english language. The word man is probably the most significant word in the english language as it is included in human and woman as well. Please work together and make sure that India's contribution to the word is not removed entirely due to the desires of a few white racists. If the countries of England and Germany can be included in the etymology than surely India can as well.--Velocityflux (talk) 22:15, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

Nope, the word does not have its origin in India. Both Manu and man have common origin through a Proto-Indo-European root, which is mentioned in the Etymology section. utcursch | talk 02:53, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

• Please cite some WP:Sources. Might be an interesting information! --Tito Dutta (contact) 17:08, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

onefivenine

I'm seeing http://www.onefivenine.com used as a reference more and more in India-related articles. What do you think of it? Anna Frodesiak (talk) 00:45, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

does not look reliable. Some information is quite good and usable though, such as intra-city bus routes. Can you give some examples where this has been used as a reference ? --Dwaipayan (talk) 01:22, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

It bothers me that the about page contains no information whatsoever. I'd be inclined to say that we remove it as non-RS unless someone can provide more info on the owning company. If the only thing it's verifying is bus routes...I'm usually fine letting bus routes stay in without sources, unless it appears to be promotional...or the info is excessive, because it's questionable as to whether lots of bus info is really encyclopedic. But definitely I think the source should go. Qwyrxian (talk) 04:27, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

Onefivenine is full of bot-generated pages based on the data from the National Panchayat Directory (now Local Government Directory), weather sites, PIN code directory and other sources. It's borderline spam, and should be removed.

Wikipedia articles cite it as a source merely to provide the evidence that the village actually exists. A better option is to perform a Google search for "site:nic.in <village name>" or "site:gov.in <village name>" -- you'll find an alternative reference. utcursch | talk 13:26, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

I disagree. Its not a WP:RS. AshLin (talk) 13:37, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

Not at all reliable and in the past I've seen what appeared to be mirroring of aspects of our content. - Sitush (talk) 20:40, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

So what's our approach to content supported by it? Should we remove the source and content or leave the content and add {{fact}}? Anna Frodesiak (talk) 22:11, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

Pondicherry

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Pondicherry (city) which relates to this project. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 08:15, 23 February 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.92.180.137 (talk)

• Thanks for the heads up! --Tito Dutta (contact) 17:06, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

Scarlett Keeling

Scarlett Keeling is up for deletion. Should it be added to this project? Regulars here may wish some input as well.--Canoe1967 (talk) 14:23, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

• Welcome to WikiProject India. I have added my own opinion in the deletion discussion and I can see someone has added the article in WikiProject India already! --Tito Dutta (contact) 17:03, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

The need of the hour is...

...an article on Kolkata Surya Sen Street market fire accident where at least 20 people died ^{ToI, LiveMint, The Hindu)} Could someone go ahead and create a page on this mishap? I anticipate, in the course of time, will become a collaborative task! --Tito Dutta (contact) 16:53, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

Kolkata Surya Sen Street market fire accident initiated.Ssriram mt (talk) 20:33, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

• Bravo! They should take it to DYK! --Tito Dutta (contact) 21:43, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

GA review

I have nominated the following articles for GA - can some reviewers please take up the review.

• Sivakasi
• Virudhunagar
• Tirunelveli
• Tiruvannamalai
• Sirkazhi
• Vedaranyam
• Thanjavur
• Nagore Dargah
• Erumbeeswarar Temple, Thiruverumbur

Reassessment

• Madras Presidency
• Kumbakonam

Some of the town articles are related and can be taken up in parallel. Thanks a lot in advance. Ssriram mt (talk) 02:55, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

Check out WP:GAR. Reassessment is meant for reassessing GA-criteria for GA-class articles, it does not mean re-assessment for failed nominations. I find it awkward to see Kumbakonam listed there. Anyway, someone is responding there.--GDibyendu (talk) 06:15, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

It would be far better if someone unconnected with this project and with India undertook to assess these GA nominations. There have recently been several "passes" of similar articles that really, really do not warrant the status and which at least in one case resulted in a large amount of post-GA work having to be done in order to attempt to bring it up to standard. Those articles were reviewed by people involved here. I suggest letting the GA nom listing process take its own course. - Sitush (talk) 20:38, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

It's a bit too late for this. I've already started a GAR of Vedaranyam here. Comments by other editors are welcome, in fact one non–WT:INdian editor has already got involved. I wasn't aware that several recent GARs had been botched by editors here, but letting GA candidates stagnate in long queues at WP:GA doesn't help this project either. Maybe all India related reviews should be supervised by experienced reviewers so that both the reviewer and the nominator can get a better grip on the process. Btw, it's nice to see you editing from your account again. Correct Knowledge^«৳alk» 21:58, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

The reassessment of Kumbakonam is for community reassessment and it is not a failed nomination. The GA nom listing has to be followed whoever the reviewer may be. I posted a request here preferring a subjective review, which can be otherwise be provided by folks related to the subject. My personal experience has been folks unrelated to the subject merely look for format and not the content - this has resulted in major contents being missed/diluted. Also there is no guideline that prevents anyone from reviewing as they belong to the same community or an expert in a subject. I don't understand what is wrong in requesting a review in the community forum - is not one of the targets of the project? Sorry to say this - ultimately the content should naturally take course rather than the endless discussions preferred by some users here. Also there has not been a blind "pass" anywhere, just that the reviewer had other expectations. Ssriram mt (talk) 00:00, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

I consider seeking a subjective reviewer to be a form of canvassing, sorry, although I know it goes on elsewhere also. In the articles that I looked at, there were numerous people who commented on how poor the things were: lack of refs, poor phrasing, copyvios, inconsistencies and, yes, omissions. Here's a heads-up: Sirkazhi contains at least one oddity in the lead due to an omission that is blindingly obvious even to someone involved in this project like myself. Such things happen - no big deal - but in the recently passed articles this type of issue was common. The problem relates to Sirkazhi was a part of Thanjavur district until 1991 and has been part of Nagapattinam district since 1997 - did it not exist between 1991 and 1997? Presumably, it did. - Sitush (talk) 07:15, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

If this is canvassing, what about wikicup/GA newsletters, WP:INAA or your own request seeking renaming below? Sirkazhi has been subject to GOCE and the user had mistyped the entry(1991,1997). As again, this is a classic case of people unrelated to the subject editing/reviewing it. Tevaram has been considered a place, rather than a book. I can quote numerous examples like this where lack of knowledge of the subject has proven fatal. If only perfect articles can be nominated to GA, then we need not have a review process at all. Just by requesting review here, all articles are not going to move to GA right away. Also your discussion is in a tone demeaning review of folks belonging to the project - if one review is bad, it doesn't mean the reviewer/others in the forum should not review at all. What are the numerous comments you are talking about - and if so, isn't there a chance to fix it? It is rather strange that while some the top contributors of the articles were unresponsive to a request to help out those articles to GA, but came out strongly post GA - another string on personal bias, which is even more unhealthy. Anyone is free to review/provide second opinion in the review - so if you feel any of these articles are promoted by bias, feel free to pull it down. As again, i dont prefer endless discussions on this. Article edit/review can be a fruitful exercise. Ssriram mt (talk) 13:25, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Also check such reviewer comments/edits in articles like Madurai and Kanchipuram, where the subject coverage has been highly comprehensive. There can be genuine MOS issues that might have went off the eyes, but the subject coverage, which IMO is prime, has been achieved. It is much satisfactory over the "pass" that is achieved. Do you mind listing out the common points missed by some of the reviewers in the project. That can definitely be a takeaway and a guiding point for the new reviewers from this discussion. It is always a learning curve everywhere and there can be one here too. If you feel this discussion still causes superlatives (bias!, personal favour!!!! etc.), you can remove it.Ssriram mt (talk) 17:46, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

What was missed in the Madurai GAN was pretty bad also - circular and broken references, for example. It is fine and well having a reviewer who knows the subject but that can also lead to "familiarity breeding contempt". I'm not blaming the reviewer but I'd still query statements such as "Madurai is an important industrial and educational hub". I mean, I do not doubt that it probably is but all we have in the detail is basically a list of colleges etc in prose form with nothing to support importance or that it is a hub - that is a subjective interpretation of the prose-list. The article was full of stuff like this, although I have not reviewed it in any detail recently and I note that there has been a lot of to-ing and fro-ing in the interval. - Sitush (talk) 18:05, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

The argument, i feel is extended just for the sake of it. The education/economy sections cover more points for the lead - or atleast the 3 reviewers felt that way. In a collabrative environment, these sort of variance bound to happen - but that shouldn't amount to demeaning/discouraging others from doing valid things within the guideline. The quote is out of place here - if familiarity breeds, no one can edit the same article/subject again. Also regular GA reviewers can also get familiar after some time with the review process? We need to encourage more reviewers and they should be assisted by experienced folks. There is a better quote - "Rome was not built in a day and not by a single person". Peace again and let us not waste more time here.Ssriram mt (talk) 18:14, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

One suggestion for Sitush: if you think that some article should not have got GA-status, then you can go ahead and file a WP:GAR, rather than complaining here.--GDibyendu (talk) 17:09, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

I'd rather try to knock the article into shape, collaboratively. My point here is not with regard to Madurai in particular but rather that this canvassing of the project is inappropriate when there is a mechanism in place for requesting review. And that having a project-related GAN reviewer is no guarantee that an article would be any better than if some non-related person assumed the role. - Sitush (talk) 17:22, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

A recent article move - Jatav

Jatav has recently been boldly moved to Jatava. This may be a controversial action requiring use of WP:RM procedures. Discussion at Talk:Jatava#Recent_move_of_article. - Sitush (talk) 20:31, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

This was moved back! Thanks for reporting! --Tito Dutta (contact) 16:04, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

Chach Nama

If you are interested in the history of India circa 600 AD (chronicled most extensively in the Arab/Persian Chach Nama), you may be interested in helping improve Wikipedia's coverage of the subject. I have created a table at User:DCI2026/Chach Nama table that contains descriptive cells about articles of interest to this improvement project. dci | TALK 18:13, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

I've added Lalitaditya to the table though he is not directly mentioned in Chah Nama. Correct Knowledge^«৳alk» 19:21, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

Contacting Department of Post, Indian government

Could someone from Wikimedia India contact Indian postal department and request the permit for Wikimedia to use image of their postal stamps? They have a gold mine. Feasible? --Tito Dutta (contact) 21:29, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

File:John Murdoch, LL.D.jpg

File:John Murdoch, LL.D.jpg has been nominated for deletion -- 65.92.180.137 (talk) 04:34, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

Importance of women in agriculture

I would like to write an article about women's role in India's massive agricultural sector. My preliminary research on Wikipedia revealed a very minimal discussion on this topic despite two substantive articles "Agriculture in India" and "Women in India." In the discussion of agriculture in India, it is necessary to recognize the importance of women farmers and agricultural laborers. According to 2011 statistics, women comprise about 33% of cultivators and about 47% percent of agricultural laborers <E. Krishna Rao></E. Krishna Rao>. Although men still make up most of the labor force, the share of women in the sector is growing rapidly, as the appeal of a commodity economy encourages migration of men to urban areas to work as rickshaw drivers, or take jobs in manufacturing, textiles and the like. As men leave, the responsibilities of family care, sustenance and often times, income generation, fall on women. About 70% of Indian women depend on agricultural work for their livelihood, according to 2010 statistics. Among more rural populations it is as high as 84% <C. Tara Satyavathi, Ch. Bharadwaj and P.S. Brahmanand></C. Tara Satyavathi, Ch. Bharadwaj and P.S. Brahmanand>. The disproportionately high number of women who depend on agricultural activity reveals a large and very vulnerable population, creating a social problem in India that must be discussed. I believe that the article "Agriculture in India" could be edited to include more information on women in the country's agricultural sector. However, considering the body of information I think it better to create a separate article. The new article will include a historical perspective, an overview of family structure and gender roles in India's more rural and sustenance based populations. I will use Boserup's study of women in agriculture as one perspective on the feminization of agriculture in India and would like to determine whether this is due to larger economic trends or a cultural shift to gendered agricultural work. I would like to research the sharecropping system and land ownership in India and how that influences access to land. I will study the extraneous factors such as the limitations of agricultural growth in India, how global climate change will impact the nation's weather patterns, and the impacts trade liberalization and the India-EU Free Trade Agreement on women. The article will conclude with examples and methodologies for grass roots female empowerment in India's agricultural sector. I plan on including women's cooperatives and educational programs, the All India Federation of Women Working in Agriculture (AIFWWA) and the Youth for Action and Socio Economic Development Trust. On a larger scale I would like to understand how government and state institutions are recognizing the feminization of labor and what, if any, support structures are created for women agricultural laborers? Additionally, what types of rural local governments or organizations provide resources for women to organize? I would greatly appreciate recommendations on how I may expand my perspectives. What are some other factors, authors or research I should explore? Thank you Alev.bilginsoy

Microfinancing in India, has made the women self-sufficient and empowering them. There has been instances where the women of a self-help group has taken collective cultivation/fishery. You may research on this aspect for more details. There is a government scheme titled "Mahila Kisan Sashaktikaran Pariyojana" (Women Farmer Empowerment Scheme) providing technical assistance and subsidy on agricultural implements, seeds, etc. You can research on Central Government (Federal Govt.) sponsored schemes here [4]. All the best for the article. Go ahead and create a separate article on Women and agriculture in India. Amartyabag ^TALK2ME 05:36, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

Expansion of female health issues

The current discussion of female health issues lacks sufficient detail and could use further explanation. Under the Healthcare in India page there is only a small subsection devoted to the discussion on the unique aspects of female health in India. A change in the current title from "Female health issues" to "Women's health in India" would also help to broaden the discussion on the unique aspects that should be covered under the subtopic. As part of a classroom assignment, I propose additional discussion on nutritional, cardiovascular, and reproductive health. Furthermore, the expanded discussion would include statistics on current disparities and give reason--cultural, biological, and economical--for differences in healthcare outcomes between men and women. The expansion of this page will help to broaden the discussion on health care within India and also point out key differences on the healthcare attainment of men and women. Are there any other forms of healthcare outcomes that should be included in the expanded discussion? Should subtopics of reproductive health (sexual health, abortions, maternal health and breast health) be given individual sub-sections or grouped together under the umbrella term of sexual health? What are the relevant governmental programs that have been implemented in the last few years that directly pertain to women's health? Any feedback is much appreciated.Jasdeepsgill (talk) 06:50, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

Plan of revisions and contributions to Domestic violence in India article

Hi everyone, ny name is Reilly Solis and I'm a student at Rice University planning to revise and add sections to the article Domestic violence in India as part of a Poverty, Justice, and Human Capabilities class assignment. As gender violence has become one of the world’s most common human rights abuses – and as India has become one of the most visible countries in the world for such abuses – I believe that improving upon the existing Domestic Violence in India Wikipedia page is both justified and necessary. An important aspect of my revision to the existing article, just to predicate my revisions, will be focusing on differences in domestic violence across regions (for example, Kerala is a much more progressive state with significantly lower rates of domestic violence than most northern states such as Uttar Pradesh), religions, culture, caste, education attainment level and socioeconomic status. My revisions to this article would focus on and somewhat combine the subcategories of violence (physical and emotional) against women and sexual harassment, as these are important aspects of domestic violence that certainly deserve more attention than the existing article on such an issue. Additionally, issues of domestic violence itself (including differences across several regional, cultural, social, and economic backgrounds) warrant greater attention as an important facet of sexism and gender discrimination in a country with 17% of the world’s population. I plan to first and foremost provide a more comprehensive picture of the history of domestic violence in India in the context of more general gender discrimination, as well as resulting effects on women’s agency and health throughout the country. I would also, as mentioned earlier, place high importance on addressing differences throughout the country in types and rates of domestic violence, which existing articles on the issue fail to do. After all, India is an incredibly diverse nation with important differences between regions, cultures, religions, and socioeconomic statuses. Another way I’d improve upon the Domestic Violence in India article to bring it to an improved status would be to provide a much more comprehensive overview of efforts to realistically combat domestic violence in India from an unbiased point of view. These efforts include social movements, legislation and actions from NGOs. I believe their inclusion would definitely add much more substance to the article. An important part of this – as well as of all parts of my revisions and contributions – is the fact that my work must be unbiased. This is certainly a controversial subject even among women in India, as according to a recent report by Unicef found that about 50% of Indian women believe that wife beating is justified. It was also found that girls between the ages of 15-19 generally held the same views as women in the 45-49 age group, a particularly disturbing statistic that demonstrates the need for change in a country where the prevalence of domestic violence seems to be perpetual and its continuance indefinite. To reiterate, though, my work must be unbiased. I will approach the article in an objective, comprehensive manner that, coupled obviously with substantive information on the various aspects of and differences in domestic violence throughout India, will hopefully raise the article up from but a Start-Class Wikipedia article to at least a C- or B-Class, Good, or Featured one. The sources I plan to use for these revisions and contributions will all be scholarly works, many of which I have already read through as assignments for my Poverty, Justice, and Human Capabilities class. They will come from a variety of organizations, including governmental, academic, and non-governmental institutions (such as think-tanks, etc.). I plan to draw from a range of sources in order to keep my contributions unbiased and objective in my endeavor to further explore this topic and to provide a comprehensive background of it. One of the most effective ways to confront an issue such as domestic violence (in this case, in India) is to simply provide information the public with comprehensive, sufficiently detailed information on the issue. This, simply put, is what I hope to do.

Reillysolis (talk) 20:00, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

Wharton India Economic Forum

Please keep Wharton India Economic Forum on your watchlist for the next few days. The article has seen several POV edits after the decision to drop Narendra Modi as the keynote speaker. A PTI news report mentioning these edits has been published by several media outlets including The Hindu Business Line, Economic times, Outlook, Zee News, Indian Express and Deccan Chronicle.

“ Meanwhile, in a related development, the Wikipedia page of the Wharton India Economic Forum today appeared to have been compromised as the language written explaining it and the annual event was far below its standard, one-sided and seen to be “angry” at the Wharton’s decision on Modi. Wikipedia’s press office did not respond to an email seeking clarification on its content. ”

utcursch | talk 20:40, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

get the page protected?—indopug (talk) 03:57, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

I've semi-protected the article for one week, and added it to my watchlist. If the problem resumes, try WP:RFPP (or ask me, if I'm around). Qwyrxian (talk) 13:39, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Pearl Academy of Fashion

Can the article Pearl Academy of Fashion be improved, or would euthanasia be the kindest approach? -- Hoary (talk) 05:33, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Factual Information Vandalization On Multiple Pages

This post is regarding the deliberate edit war started by user "PremKudva" sometime back on "Indian Rupee Sign" and "Indian Rupee" pages in controversy section.

User deliberately removing the authentic factual information including Delhi High Court judgment link from the pages.

Down below are the authentic news links:

http://www.hindustantimes.com/business-news/WorldEconomy/Rs-selection-process-challenged-in-High-Cout/Article1-630123.aspx

http://www.indianexpress.com/news/hc-seeks-mha-reply-on-selection-of-logos/941570/

http://www.jagran.com/delhi/new-delhi-city-9915655.html

http://delhihighcourt.nic.in/dhcqrydisp_o.asp?pn=19132&yr=2013 [Delhi High Court Judgement]

http://www.saveindianrupeesymbol.org/2012/10/rupee-symbol-delhi-high-court-granted.html

http://www.saveindianrupeesymbol.org/2011/06/delhi-high-court-allows-rti-activist-to.html

In good-faith effort to improve the encyclopedia my request is to please take necessary action so that truth can be protected. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Info2012 (talk • contribs) 12:25, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

The removal appears to me to be correct per WP:UNDUE. Just because something can be verified in reliable sources does not necessarily mean it belongs in a Wikipedia article. We need to judge what has lasting encyclopedic value. It certainly doesn't belong in Indian rupee, because that article is not about the sign itself. But I don't think it even belongs in Indian rupee sign, because all of those court cases don't actually have anything to do with the sign itself—they didn't seem to effect the final adoption of the sign. As such, they don't belong. Also, please never attempt to add links to advocacy sites in Wikipedia, as they are almost never reliable sources. Qwyrxian (talk) 13:34, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

I can't believe you just said "Just because something can be verified in reliable sources does not necessarily mean it belongs in a Wikipedia article". I have strong objection here as in other words you are saying we have to be selective and politically correct here on Wikipedia. Secondly you said "all of those court cases don't actually have anything to do with the sign itself" please read the news report which clearly talks about rupee sign http://www.hindustantimes.com/business-news/WorldEconomy/Rs-selection-process-challenged-in-High-Cout/Article1-630123.aspx — Preceding unsigned comment added by Info2012 (talk • contribs) 10:36, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

Info2012 (talk) 10:43, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

The Hindustan Times link that you provide above is for the actual case against the sign, and the same has been incorporated into the article. This case was quashed by the HC stating "no justifiable ground for the stated allegations". The subsequent case that you are trying to paste into this article is a PIL asking the Govt to have "clear cut" guidelines when formulating rules for competitions asking for symbols. In the case the following competitions were mentioned Symbol of Indian Rupee, logo for UIDAI, new logo for Indian Railways, logo for Indian Designs held by Indian council of Design, National Institute of Designs and logo for RTI Act. The judgement directs the Govt of India to frame clear guidelines for all future competitions. All your edits prior to the clarity appearing in the judgement looked that the case was against the Indian rupee sign, meaning a judgement against the sign would result in the sign itself being rejected by the Delhi HC. That was a wrong impression conveyed across by you, threatening contempt of court in the edit summaries. The judgement was only to create guidelines for future such competitions. Why should the Indian rupee, and Indian rupee sign articles be defaced when the articles of the other organisations mentioned have been left unmarked of this case? --PremKudva^Talk 05:34, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

Delhi High Court judgement direct link :

http://delhihighcourt.nic.in/dhcqrydisp_o.asp?pn=19132&yr=2013 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Info2012 (talk • contribs) 16:15, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

Info2012 (talk) 16:22, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

There is an enormous amount of referenced information that could be added to almost any article and we have to make a judgement as to what is relevant. You have added this information to both the currency article and to the symbol's article, the former is definitely unnecessary, while there might be some argument for inclusion in the latter. Assuming you don't get blocked for edit warring, you should raise a discussion at the relevant talk page, which is that for the symbol. Imc (talk) 16:56, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

Need a review of edits by a possible problem editor

Will someone review 115.248.12.18 (talk · contribs)'s edits and let me know on my talk page if there's a problem with them. Thanks. Dougweller (talk) 13:44, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Done, for those articles where they had not already been reverted. They were mostly removing unsourced content without providing an explanation. - Sitush (talk) 17:20, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Notability of Durga Prasad Kachroo

I am requesting a review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Durga Prasad Kachroo (new submission) from a notability perspective and from a reliable-source perspective. Please add {{afc comment|1=your comments}} below the last "afc comment" and above the article text, or just reply here if that's easier for you. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail) 02:29, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

Welcome to WikiProject India noticeboard! I can not see in-depth discussion on the subject or his works, though he was a co-author of this book --Tito Dutta (contact) 03:06, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

Assamese script help!

Can someone write the name Birendra Nath Dutta in Assamese script or better help to find out 2-3 reliable sources from Assamese language newspapers? --Tito Dutta (contact) 02:58, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

• Solved more or less! --Tito Dutta (contact) 19:11, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Volunteer coordinator required for "Women & gender issues" Task Force

Hi,

The "Women & gender issues" Task Force needs someone to provide leadership, coordination and tender loving care! Looking for a volunteer! AshLin (talk) 14:39, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Good work! Joined it! --Tito Dutta (contact) 19:10, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Nargis image for Mother India FAC

Does any one have a Nargis image (by self, or the author has released in wiki acceptable licenses) or painting (by self) that can added to Mother India, currently at FAC? All currently uploaded images of Nargis can not be used due to URAA. See Wikipedia:Non-U.S._copyrights#endnote_tab_india. --Redtigerxyz ^Talk 05:14, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Wow, that is a very useful link. That clarifies lots of doubt. And one reason I don't like Visva Bharati -- the had that 50 years thing extended to 60 years.--Dwaipayan (talk) 06:03, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Category:1865 establishments in Pakistan

I have made a proposal to merge Category:1865 establishments in Pakistan to Category:1865 establishments in India. I have set out the arguments, from usage at the time to the fact that even the word Pakistan was not coined for another 68 years in the nomination. Comments on the issue would be greatly appreciated.John Pack Lambert (talk) 01:04, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

Logical. I support. AshLin (talk) 15:24, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Indian spaceflight wikiproject

FYI, there's a notice at WT:SPACEFLIGHT for someone proposing a WikiProject to cover Indian space. -- 65.92.180.137 (talk) 02:04, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

The Space WikiProject opines that a fork at this point is counterproductive as the WikiProject has not enough members. It is much more desirable for the members to sign up on the Space WikiProject itself rather than create yet another thinly manned, largely low-activity fork (our own WikiProject India has too many daughter WikiProjects of this kind! Personally, I agree with this POV. AshLin (talk) 15:09, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Swiss tourist rape in India

Do we have an article on the Swiss tourist rape in India? -- 65.92.180.137 (talk) 23:46, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

See WP:NOT#NEWS. The Delhi case is different because of the widespread demonstrations and protests. utcursch | talk 14:08, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Request: Indian version of India is Bharata not Bharat.

Could someone please change that? Bharata is the Sanskrutam,original, name of India. Bharat is the Hindi (and a small group of other languages) version. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.147.224.225 (talk) 15:46, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Two websites

I just found two articles on websites, that are orphaned that may need help: Pepperfry.com and gozoop.com. Simply south...... catching SNOWballs for just 6 years 17:46, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Mount Elizabeth Hospital

Mount Elizabeth Hospital seems rather short article. Since several prominent people from outside of Singapore have died there (ie. President Zillur Rahman, 2012 Delhi gang rape victim), I assume this is a major medical center of advanced techniques in the region. As such, it should really have a longer article. -- 65.92.180.137 (talk) 01:02, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

• Welcome to India noticeboard! Are you posting it at every noticeboard? I just replied the same message at BD noticeboard. I feel, this is more a WP SP (Singapore) issue, though someone of us can try to expand the article a bit! --Tito Dutta (contact) 01:31, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

There must be a reason that the government of India chose this hospital, right? So I'd think someone from India may know about the hospital. -- 65.92.180.137 (talk) 01:47, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Authenticity of "52 Hukams of Guru Gobind Singh"

Are the "52 Hukams of Guru Gobind Singh" authentic? I couldn't find any authoritative source which states that these were given by the Guru himself. Google leads to some forum discussions which question the authenticity of these "52 hukams", pointing out that the language used is modern Punjabi which was not prevalent around 1700 CE. Can anyone please confirm the authenticity? utcursch | talk 02:27, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

This book appears to be the earliest modern compilation of Guru Gobind Singh's 52 Hukams purportedly written by Baba Ram Singh at Nanded in 1708 (a later edition/translation is available here). The author of this book claims that he came across these instructions in an old manuscript which, according to various internet forums, nobody has been able to find and was probably lost in 1984. I was hoping to find a claim about such an important historical discovery substantiated in independent works, but there is nothing about it on GBooks. It also seems unlikely that if such a work existed SGPC would ignore it in its compilation of Rehat Maryada published in 1945. To me this appears to be one of the many modern day myths that become a part of popular religion but have no historical or scriptural authenticity; a bit like new Upanishads or modern day Vedic mathematics (not to be confused with mathematics in Vedic period). Correct Knowledge^«৳alk» 06:54, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Thank you, that helps a lot. I've quoted you at Talk:Khalsa#Third_opinion_needed_on_following_points. utcursch | talk 18:44, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Naming people in articles

Is there any guidance on how to name Indian people in the body of articles? We have MOS:IDENTITY but I think I've also seen something somewhere about use of patronymics etc. Generally speaking, we seem to treat the last name of an Indian person as if it were a westerner's surname and to refer to them as such after the first mention in the body, unless to do so would cause confusion. - Sitush (talk) 20:55, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

• In few articles I have seen, editors linking this article Indian name as a note in superscript to clarify Indic naming convention! --Tito Dutta (contact) 23:18, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

Thangal Uppapa?

Nellikunnu Muhyaddin Juma Masjid needs some local sources. Probably a Malayali speaker is needed In ictu oculi (talk) 11:33, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Welcome to India noticeboard. Sorry to see you have not got any reply. Actually there are not too many users here in WP India noticeboard who are fluent in Malayali/Arabic. I have tried to search in Arabic, but have not found any good result. Here is a reliable source on the festival! --Tito Dutta (contact) 06:29, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Thank you TitoD. Helpful as always. In ictu oculi (talk) 07:16, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Copyedit required

Does anyone fancy copyediting Maithil Brahmin#Organisation. Like many articles concerning Brahmin communities, this is just gibberish to non-Indians. - Sitush (talk) 08:47, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

Neutrality issue: No mention of 1989 Insurgency and specific attacks against Hindu minority?

This page is transcluded to receive input simultaneously from various venues

Why is there not a single line in Kashmiri Pandit article about the eruption of armed rebellion ensuing Islamic insurgency of 1989 which has specifically targeted the Kashmiri Pandits minority in recent times and violated their human rights repeatedly?[5] Nothing whatsoever about the scores of onslaughts and human rights violations by Pakistan-backed militants, why? According to a resolution passed by the United States Congress in 2006, Islamic terrorists infiltrated the region in 1989 and since then nearly 400,000 Pandits were either murdered or forced to leave their ancestral homes.(ref: "Pallone introduces resolution condemning human rights violations against kashmiri pandits" if that doesn't work follow →[6])

They got "trained and armed" by the ISI. Ethnic cleansing continued till a vast majority of the Kashmiri Pandits were evicted out of the valley after having suffered many acts of violence, e.g. sexual assault on women, arson, torture, extortion of property etc.([7] & "Encyclopedia of human rights" p. 306)

"Many of the 250,000 refugee Kashmiri Pandits have been living in pitiable conditions in Jammu".[8]

Other sources

• Encyclopedia of human rights. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 2009. p. 306. ISBN 978-0195334029. {{cite book}}: |first= has generic name (help); |first= missing |last= (help)CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
• Catherwood, Christopher; Leslie Alan Horvitz. Encyclopedia of War Crimes and Genocide (1st ed.). Infobase. p. 260. ISBN 978-8130903637
• Kushner, Harvey W. (2003). Encyclopedia of terrorism. Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage Publications. pp. 171–172. ISBN 0761924086.

I am not sure whether we can add it in the article of Kashmiri Pandits but we can have a seperate article something like Kashmiri Pandit Exodus or something like that--sarvajna (talk) 15:27, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

I see that there is some mention in the page, but I still feel that the event is notable enough to have an article on its own --sarvajna (talk) 15:31, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

It talks about "1948 Muslim riots" and "1950 land reforms". Just to clarify, I am not asking the content to be included verbatim as I have written it. We may modify it of course. But the real issues are A. the way it downplays the general predicament of Pandits and B. the amount of space dedicated to it. Even that section needs balancing. Such as there is no mention of the fact that only 3,445 pandits were still living in the Valley as of 2010 [9]. I am talking about the impact of the exponential rise of Islamic militancy since 1989 [10], [11]. Mr T^{(Talk?) (New thread?)} 17:14, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

I agree with all your points and I do not see any reason why someone should object--sarvajna (talk) 07:49, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

I think you'll find that it was removed some time in the last two years because it was so POV-y and it unbalanced the article - the usual Hindu vs Muslim rubbish. Of course, the article is now unbalanced in the other direction. - Sitush (talk) 14:29, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

S6001271.JPG

file:S6001271.JPG has been nominated for deletion -- 65.92.180.137 (talk) 05:24, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

That seems to be their own work! --Tito Dutta (contact) 06:11, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Since it is used to illustrate a WPINDIA article, a replacement image would something that might be good to obtain. (just because it's up for deletion, doesn't mean that we need to keep this particular image, replacing it with a different one is also a possibility) -- 65.92.180.137 (talk) 12:20, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Indian cinema centenary celebrations

It will be 100 years since Raja Harishchandra released on 3 May this year. There have been discussions what the TFA (Today's featured article) on that day. Since Mother India passed FAC today, I, along with behalf of my fellow nominators User:Dwaipayanc and User:Dr. Blofeld propose to have it as TFA on this day. Thoughts... --Redtigerxyz ^Talk 17:08, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

Good idea. Definite support! --regentspark (comment) 17:13, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

Mother India is nominated at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests. --Redtigerxyz ^Talk 06:05, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

In light of the 2014 general elections

Hi all. I've been thinking; next year is the 16th general elections, and I reckon a lot of people will be going online to figure out who they want to vote. Considering how simplistic, partisan and/or non-comprehensive most online sources are about our national leaders and parties, I feel Wikipedia can be an excellent, NPOV resource for provide prospective voters to make an informed decision.

With this in mind, a few questions/discussion-items:

1. Would you be interested in forming a sort of informal taskforce to build these articles, as well as tackle inevitable vandalism, propaganda insertion as D-day approaches?
2. What do you think are articles that will witness high traffic come election season? Obvious ones are various leaders such as Narendra Modi, Rahul Gandhi, Sonia Gandhi; parties such as Indian National Congress and Bharatiya Janata Party. Less obvious are things like Indian general election, 2014 (which will be linked from the main page news-section as well) and any number of smaller parties and candidates.
3. Should we aim at getting a few articles to GA/FA levels or bring several articles to a just decent level to comprehensiveness?
4. Can you think of appropriate article(s) we can work to feature on the main page on election day? For eg: if I can get hold of sources, I've been thinking of getting Indian general election, 1951 to the main page on the first day. Other options include 1st Lok Sabha on the day the 16th Lok Sabha commences.

Looking forward to hear what you think, and further ideas and suggestions as well.—indopug (talk) 16:23, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

• rather than trying for FA, improving many articles to a decent level would be a better idea. The first general election or the first Lok Sabha, both will be very difficult to get to FA level.--Dwaipayan (talk) 17:51, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

files up for deletion

• file:Jawahar Lal Nehru, PM of India, in Dalhousie, 1954.jpg
• file:Cover of 4GR Officers Association Newsletter,2011.jpg

have been nominated for deletion -- 65.92.180.137 (talk) 00:20, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Reviving INCOTM

The Indian collaboration of the month project is lying idle for the last 5-6 months. The interested editors who are willing to take up collaborative improvement of articles related to India are requested to give their consent/support below. Amartyabag ^TALK2ME 09:08, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Very good idea! We need a volunteer coordinator to manage it! Once the INCOTM starts, its our experience the collaborators will come, :)! AshLin (talk) 14:58, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

• I agree with Aslin. T4B (talk) 15:03, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
• Yes, essentially we need the coordinator. There was a discussion in the Indian mailing list after BPositive stopped working as the coordinator. Someone wanted to be the coordinator (I forgot who) but did not have a lot of experience. But that seems ok now, I mean even without less experience, we need one coordinator. Any one? Or, we can enforce someone :P --Dwaipayan (talk) 17:32, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

Who wanted to be the co-ordinator? Remind him! --Tito Dutta (contact) 06:16, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

• whoever it was ( I forgot the name) s/he is not much active in Wikipedia at present. I propose the name of Tito Dutta as the new coordinator. If Tito accepts that, it would be great. He is currently very active ( not that the coordinator needs to be very active, moderate activity is sufficient).--Dwaipayan (talk) 06:26, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

• Support Tito's nomination. Today looks like an auspicious day to restart INCOTM. I also support going back to one collaboration per month with a properly defined goal such as FA/GA status. The experiment with two collaborations wasn't very fruitful. Correct Knowledge^«৳alk» 08:36, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Support for Tito's nomination as coordinator. I also feel handling one article would be more fruitful. Amartyabag ^TALK2ME 14:55, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

• Support Support Tito's nomination as the new coordinator. BengaliHindu (talk) 12:27, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
• Support i too support the nomination.  Mrwikidor ←track 16:15, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

• I am worried about my Wiki future. Eexpecting a long WikiBreak soon! Sitush or Ekabhishek might be a good co-ordinator!

Tito, Please consider helping out in INCOTM even if it is for a short period only! How about for just one month to begin with! Then we can request someone else whenever you would like to discontinue! AshLin (talk) 12:18, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

Okay, I'll start the work in next few days! --Tito Dutta (contact) 08:13, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

Disruptive editing

Once again facing disruptive edits, this time by User:Mrwikidor. The user is serially nominating articles one after one for deletion, without initiating any discussion in the talk pages. Further, the user is blanking out properly referenced portions of articles without any discussion. Most importantly the user has resorted to personal attacks. Please take cognizance. BengaliHindu (talk) 12:36, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

Would you mind to show us please? And, please stop making such accusation against me without showing where i did! Why didn't you messaged me or warned me before accusing here? By the way, why AfD creating problems to you? You've edited and improved the 2013 Canning riots article and removed the {{Wikiproject-Islam}} from its talk page[12] yet you didn't remove the template Template:Islamism in South Asia from the article where non-Islamic topics (according to you) are being added by a possible sockpuppet to the template[13]. You don't even bother to notify me before accusing me here! Again, this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Bengali_Hindus shows your disrupting edits. But, i'm optimistic about the other Indian editors that they will understand the issue of Communalism and its curse that the India is still suffering and neutrally take decisions based on the sources provided in the articles. Best Regards,  Mrwikidor ←track 16:11, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

Greetings,

PLEASE stop canvassing! Answering one by one:

#1

Mrwikidor has canvassed here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here etc.

BengaliHindu has posted here and might have posted somewhere else too. He should remember, his this posting type was criticized previously (though I didn't fully agree that time too). BengaliHindu, there is no reason to think you are right and they are wrong and if you feel you are being personally attacked, seek help in better noticeboards like ANI etc. You are a senior editor, I personally know you for quote some time now. I can understand you are frustrated a bit (most probably)... relax. (also read next paragraph, section #2)

#2

Seeing the recent AFD flooding at BengaliHindus talk page, I have a hunch EITHER he is being "targeted" (which might a form of WikiBullying) OR there is some misunderstanding. Trying to explain-

This part contains my opinion, some of those might be incorrect too.

1) The rationales given at AFD of Dainik Prantajyoti are meaningless. It is a notable newspaper of an Indian state, and a simple google search proves that it deserves a page in Wikipedia as a secondary newspaper.

2) The same issue with Hindusthan Standard AFD Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hindusthan Standard

3) Another one is Dainik Yugashankha with similar issue Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dainik Yugashankha

4) I have not fully studied the Canning riot article, but, it seemed to me a WikiNews content!

5) Folkloristic Education and Research Institute should pass as a Government sponsored education institution. But, it'll be highly helpful if editors can add few secondary reliable sources

6) Very poor rationale has been given at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Protection Forum for Bengalee Hindus of Assam. They should write in details. Google web search shows multiple mentions of that ORG. They needed to mention if they followed WP:BEFORE.

That's all for now! --Tito Dutta (contact) 17:35, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

• In addition, Mrwikidor, where is the talk page link in your signature? --Tito Dutta (contact) 17:39, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

• As you can see i didn't include that in my signature and this follows WP:SIGLINK. By the way, that is out of context here too. Mrwikidor ←track

Tito, the user is not being targeted and i've no intentions of that but i'm frustrated with articles where titles are based on Original Research. For instance, take 2008 Murshidabad beheading. Murshidabad is a vast district and an event of a remote village doesn't have to be referred like this. And for the deletion discussions, kangaroo courts aren't like high courts. Suppose, if i create an article like "2007 Kolkata Murder case" exaggerating Rizwanur Rahman's murder case and portraying Hindus behind this? Please, tell me honestly will you accept that or any Bengali people (irrespective of Hindus or Muslims)? .  Mrwikidor ←track 20:51, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

I strongly support deeper investigation into the editing patterns and disruptive behavior of User:Mrwikidor. I have made a detailed post on his talk page here requesting that he cease his current pattern of editing and follow established wikipedia rules, policies and guidelines.Handyunits (talk) 06:07, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

That implies to you actually. The 2013 Canning riots contains excessive Original Research by you which will be taken care soon and Wikipedia is not the place to promote Anti-Islamic propaganda with your views. No wonder you were a previous candidate for disruptive editing. =)  Mrwikidor ←track 20:36, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

IMO, this is not the most appropriate noticeboard to discuss this. Probably it should be taken to Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard or related "User" noticeboards. Redtigerxyz ^Talk 14:47, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

Sorry for posting in the wrong place, agree with Tito Dutta. BengaliHindu (talk) 10:22, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

Registration of mahabsabhas

Is there any requirement that a mahasabha claiming to represent a community has to register itself with regional or union government? There is a long-running series of discussions at Talk:Ezhava, among which was this comment. The mahabsabha in question - details of which were added to the article by someone else who is on the same "side" in the discussion as the poster of that message - has been reported in newspapers, including The Hindu. I am aware that there is some sort of system for registering political parties, although I am vague about whether mahasabhas are always the same as political parties and also regarding the extent to which registering such parties matters anyway. - Sitush (talk) 07:39, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

AFAIK mahasabhas are social organizations, they need to register like any other organizations (at local registrar I guess). Their can be more than one mahasabha which claims to represent one community. --sarvajna (talk) 08:24, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. I have tended to loosely translate the word as "caste association" (with the emphasis on "loosely"). I wasn't aware that social organisations had to register, although I've long been aware that saying you represent a group does not make it true - that applies everywhere, not just in India. Any idea why they have to register? What is the significance of registration? - Sitush (talk) 10:39, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

If the organizations are not registered they do not become legal organization, non registration would mean just some loose bunch of people, I am not very much aware of all the legal things associated. However one thing I know is that if any Mahasabha or anyother organization intends to use public money or say government funds, they need to be registered or else there is no legal value to what they do/say. Say there is a NGO (non government organization) and I donate money to that organization, I get tax benifits, for that to happen that NGO needs to be registered under some law. Perfect example would be Ramakrishna Mission . --sarvajna (talk) 11:07, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

Got it, thank you. It is not the same as in the UK but there similarities. It raises the further question of (a) how do we check whether a mahasabha is registered and (b) does it really matter from our perspective. I mean, if some vocal group of people get their name mentioned in national newspapers regarding some controversy then is their opinion worthy of note in an article even if their body is not officially recognised. An extreme parallel would be some dissident group in a dictatorship, I guess, since the govt would not recognise the dissidents but their views might still be significant. We certainly do have stuff concerning such groups but whether the same notability/weight etc can be attached to an unregistered mahasabha is something to ponder. - Sitush (talk) 16:53, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

(a)One way is to check the website of those Mahasabha(if there is one) there are other ways too like checking their office or may be a RTI something that would be possible if you are in India. (b) Answer to this question would be bit complex, govt recognition is different from registration. Example if there are some Computer training institutes, only few of the registered once will be recognized by the Govt (the govt would set some standards) but that is not the case with Mahasabhas, I have never heard govt officially recognizing any Mahasabha, (not because they cannot do it but because it would be political suicide to do so). I would not give a lot of importance to the opinions of any Mahasabha that are not notable enough. Not sure if this will be of any help --sarvajna (talk) 15:02, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

Report on the Settlement of the Bareilly District By S M Moens, North-Western Provinces Government 1874.pdf

file:Report on the Settlement of the Bareilly District By S M Moens, North-Western Provinces Government 1874.pdf has been nominated for deletion -- 65.92.180.137 (talk) 15:57, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

• Welcome to WikiProject India noticeboard! Could you add the deletion nomination here, that's the place where editors look for recent deletion nominations! About this nomination, it looks fair (should be deleted)! --Tito Dutta (contact) 16:50, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

done. -- 65.92.180.137 (talk) 16:56, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

Nimpith

I've started the new article Nimpith. Sources are difficult to find, and I welcome members of this project to help improve the article, if anyone is interested. Cheers, Northamerica1000^(talk) 01:17, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

• Welcome to WikiProject India noticeboard! Thanks a lot for starting the article. I have searched in Google Bengali. And results are not discussion in details and mostly criticism. I'll see if something can be added from those sources! --Tito Dutta (contact) 07:02, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks Titto Dutta, I'm glad I posted here! Cheers, Northamerica1000^(talk) 07:18, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

• There are some information on local roads and transports here (mainly criticism). But, it is a 2011 news (surely RS). Do you think that should be added in the article? In addition, I think the website is a personal/individual's website, the main website of the district is s24pgs.gov.in. --Tito Dutta (contact) 07:59, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the links. I don't speak Bengali, so I used Google Translate to read this (that you provided above). Perhaps information from this source could somehow be used in a new infrastructure section of the Nimpith article about roads. Also, I've added this to the article in External links:

• South 24 Parganas, West Bengal. Government of India.

Regarding the message you left on my talk page about requesting donations of images from this person, I don't use email much using Wikipedia, so I'm not the best person to attempt to accomplish this. Northamerica1000^(talk) 19:43, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

IRC or Revive IRC

Is this our IRC #wikimedia-in channel? Seems mostly inactive! Is it for editors only or Wikimedia In workers too? --Tito Dutta (contact) 08:19, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

Infrastructure section in India

An attempt to create a section on Infrastructure is under way for India article. A draft is being made in this sandbox. Please participate there, edit, and also suggest changes. Since it is a sandbox, you can add whatever you want in whatever way. One does not need to maintain sfn reference style, just add references. At the end, when consensus develops, we'll make references consistent in style.--Dwaipayan (talk) 13:33, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

Request Assessment

Is there any way of requesting an assessment of quality of an article.--Vigyani (talk) 16:43, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

• Greetings, if there is 1-2 or few articles, make a list here, someone or I'll assess those articles. If there are bunch of articles, we need another assessment drive. If those articles are part of other WikiProjects, you can inform/ask there too! --Tito Dutta (contact) 17:40, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. The article is Lachhman Singh Gill, it was one liner till yesterday and I have expanded it. I am not sure, weather it should be still called a stub. --Vigyani (talk) 22:34, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

We have an assessment department where you can submit articles you want reassessed. If it takes too long for someone to pick up your article, contact any active editor listed here. Correct Knowledge^«৳alk» 23:00, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

GrizzlyGrisly scenes at Ezhava

There is quite a racket going on at Ezhava, can someone step in to prevent a slaughter of the dummies? Yogesh Khandke (talk) 10:34, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

"Slaughter of the innocents", surely? A reference to the various new-ish contributors. There are loads of admins watching that discussion. - Sitush (talk) 10:37, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

I request uninvolved editors to explain to the new editors that Wikipedia policy is sacrosanct, there is an edit dispute and these new editors perceive that Wikipedia rules are thrown at them to browbeat them into submission. Yogesh Khandke (talk) 11:06, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

Let them contribute in other areas of Wikipedia unrelated to the topic. They'll understand for themselves why Wikipedia's policies are sacrosanct. Right now they are on a merry-go-round and more advice won't miraculously change their perspective. Correct Knowledge^«৳alk» 11:13, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

Wouldn't hurt trying. Yogesh Khandke (talk) 11:59, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

YK, if you are using words like "sacrosanct" and "browbeat" coupled with links to huge essays, good luck with your trials. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 18:25, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

Wouldn't, a small list of very important facts or warning be appropriate as a pop-up page, whenever a new user tries to do any edit --Vigyani (talk) 03:04, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

Sorry Dharma for the drama, wouldn't you step there please? Yogesh Khandke (talk) 08:00, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

By no means! §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 12:08, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

Sorry §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ Please consider involving in the discussion, as you are a veteran with more experience in wikipedia.irajeevwiki talk 04:29, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

Technical Problem with 1984 anti-Sikh riots

someone moved page 1984 anti-Sikh riots to 1984 Sikh genocide, but has not moved associated talk page. A new talk page is created at new article, so the old talk page can not be moved without deleting new talk page. Can any admin fix this problem. --Vigyani (talk) 01:17, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

(Non-administrator comment) I moved it back. This move obviously needs to be discussed. Correct Knowledge^«৳alk» 01:44, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

Even the text has been changed to "genocide", I think the usage of the term in the article need to be discussed as well. Amartyabag ^TALK2ME 03:44, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

Native name in the infobox

What's the convention. There were a bunch of these. Let me know how it should be and I'll fix them up and advise the editor. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 01:51, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

• Welcome to WikiProject India noticeboard. Since infobox is a part of lead and gives a summary of the article, the current consensus is not to add Indic script unless an article is covered by another country' WikiProject (for example see Surya Sen, which is a part of WikiProject Bangladesh too). You can see more details including the discussions here. I have reverted the edit fro the article. --Tito Dutta (contact) 05:10, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

Okay, thanks. So I guess these need to be fixed, right? Anna Frodesiak (talk) 07:03, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

The info that you link to is slightly out of date. There was a more recent discussion concerning script in relation to placenames. While that petered out, there was a vague consensus that some sort of native name could be present (just no agreement on how to determine which one(s)!). Since that time if I have seen a native name is present for an article about a place, I leave it there because I can't make my mind up what to do! The exception is when people are edit warring about it, in which case I remove the thing in the (often vain) hope of getting some peace and quiet. I need to dig out the link for that discussion from the archives. There is also WP:INDICSCRIPT, which I guess is the formalised version of that which TitoDutta linked. - Sitush (talk) 07:16, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

But the clarification given by DQ, is "The consensus is to remove the scripts and replace them with IPA to clarify the pronunciation." Is there any other Rfc which supersedes this decision? Amartyabag ^TALK2ME 07:30, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

No. The one I refer to fizzled out. I'll support you if you choose to remove from placenames (just yell) - I just have so much on my plate at the moment that I duck the issue myself. - Sitush (talk) 07:41, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

• And that creates the problem too. We can't remove Indic scripts from all articles AND WikiProject Pakistan Bangladesh allow (read "encourage") native scripts, and some new editors go ahead and add Indic scripts in other WP India articles too! --Tito Dutta (contact) 16:56, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

Yes, it has been acknowledged previously that the RfC was imperfectly formed in that it should have involved the various related projects even though their variations of languages are much fewer. However, the issue certainly does not affect places/people etc who are solely within the scope of India as we now know it. Nor is the newbie issue relevant: newbies make lots of mistakes, others fix them. Hopefully. - Sitush (talk) 17:03, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

I'm still confused. What's the bottom line now? Should I remove these and let the editor know, or what should I do? Anna Frodesiak (talk) 00:56, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

If it isn't an eyesore, don't do anything about it. The rough consensus was that indic scripts are ok for geographical names but nothing was decided about how many or which scripts. The Vishakapatnam one you link to above seems fine to me (caveat: I assume the indic text translates to Vishakapatnam). --regentspark (comment) 14:10, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

Fair enough. Thanks all for the feedback. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 02:17, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Kurauni

Kurauni is a new article about a village in India (created by another user). Posting here if anyone is interested in improving it, adding sources, etc. Cheers, Northamerica1000^(talk) 15:40, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

Ezhava Article

Hi All. It is very unfortunate that no admins from wiki india patrolling Ezhava, Nair and Sikh articles in wikipedia as they are getting vandalised by western editors. They referring old and untrustworthy books and changing the articles content. There are many issues with articles neutrality. Happened to see these articles a few months ago and as per Wiki rules tried to talk in the talk page but a stubborn editor is reluctant to make any changes even though reliable source books have been produced to prove that article's content having serious issues.

POV Tag has been taken off from the article without even a consensus in the talk page

Nair has been categorised as "Shudra" caste which is wrong and many contributors brought up this issue, but no use. Ezhava having so much other issues.

I think indians have got right than anyone else to protect our castes and culture as wikipedia is the primary source of knowledge for many people. I request to all admins in this talk board to have a look the communication in Ezhava Nair and Sikh. Nair, Sikh, Ezhava wiki pages are India/Kerala/Punjab related and we should involve and do something now.

Above mentioned editor is a veteran and no other admins are ready to take any action. We must action now or it will be too late to do something. Admins who are only ready to listen above mentioned editors words and these admins blocking all the other contributors who have a different opinion in the talk page.

My account was blocked for 3 days recently for questioning an admins actions. Its controversial for western admins because they dont know anything about indian castes and cultures, I believe it is not at all controversial for indian editors or admins who know the culture and system here. If you look my talk page or ezhava / nair talk page, you can understand the situation.

Sources i have supplied and recognised by WP:RSN [[14]] but its been rejected by other admins. This is one of many reliable sources supplied.

My complaint against admin but they taken action against me. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents&oldid=548546907#Boing.21_said_Zebedee

Since these article contents closely related to India, I wonder why they been controlled / patrolled by western admins. Why admins from (Kerala / India) cant involve in this. Hopeless here and dont know what to do. I DONT KNOW I WILL GET BLOCKED / BANNED FOR TALKING THIS HERE irajeevwiki talk 04:25, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

You are misrepresenting things - especially with your claims regarding the pro- and con- sources - and I suggest (not for the first time) that you consider WP:CONSENSUS. I would also suggest that you lay off the accusations: not naming me directly does not alter the fact that it is blindingly obvious from Talk:Ezhava that you are referring to me. - Sitush (talk) 20:32, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

• irajeevwiki, a few years ago, before the people you are attacking spent a lot of time and effort rewriting them using reliable sources, most of our caste articles were indeed written by people belonging to the castes themselves - writing from personal and from accepted social knowledge. The problem was, if we were to believe everything that had been written, everyone in India would have to have been a king or a warrior, and every caste the most glorious that ever existed - with nobody left to work the fields, build the roads, sew the clothes, etc. So the approach you are proposing has already been tried, and it has been found badly wanting. What was needed instead was some serious research into reliable secondary sources (itself difficult, as there are so many conflicting biases and much misinformation). That's what has been happening since, and much of the old unreliable claims (with much puffery and glorification) have gone, and much work has been done to provide proper sourcing - and that is the *only* approach that is acceptable on Wikipedia. We'd love to have more Indian contributors - and Indian admins - but they have to follow the same policies as everyone else. Nobody gets to write from personal knowledge and personal analysis of primary sources - on any topic. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 12:44, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
  • It isn't an India v/s others issue here. It is more of the lack of understanding of Wikipedia procedures that Rajeev demonstrates. Having said that Rajeev should be given enough time and opportunities to figure out how this system works. Yogesh Khandke (talk) 15:30, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
    • How many times has he already had it all explained to him? And how many times has he ignored the explanations and just continued his battle at another forum? It's not lack of understanding he demonstrates, it's unwillingness to listen. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 15:49, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

rangan-datta.info

rangan-datta.info: Linksearch en (insource) - meta - de - fr - simple - wikt:en - wikt:fr • MER-C X-wiki • gs • Reports: Links on en - COIBot - COIBot-Local • Discussions: tracked - advanced - RSN • COIBot-Link, Local, & XWiki Reports - Wikipedia: en - fr - de • Google: search • meta • Domain: domaintools • AboutUs.com Does anyone know who is Rangan Datta (I don't, don't ponder on my surname)? A bunch of external links from his site is added in Wikipedia. I feel, this is just a personal site and such EL should not be added! Any opinion? --Tito Dutta (contact) 20:46, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

As the website says, he is a free-lancer. Unless notable as a freelancer (such as his works being printed/published in notable newspaper/magazine etc), this website is almost like a blog. Is this same as the wikipedia editor User:Rangan Datta Wiki?--Dwaipayan (talk) 21:00, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

• Might be! The worst thing might be he is a WikiKolkata meetup co-ordinator! Yes, I agree, that looks more like a blog and all the links of that website in Wikipedia should be reviewed! --Tito Dutta (contact) 21:14, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

• In case he is a published freelancer, the website may be acceptable as a source. Not sure. A better place for discussion may be WP:RSN.--Dwaipayan (talk) 21:20, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

• Was talking about "External links"! Multiple travelogues in one article like this is unacceptable! --Tito Dutta (contact) 21:33, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

Though he is very much attached with the Offline-Wiki meetups in Kolkata, I guess he is not thorough with the guidelines. I would suggest we should point out the guidelines, and ask him that his contributions are more suitable for Wikivoyage and not the English Wikipedia. However, I don't think its harmful to add non-controversial info about remote locations from an established Freelancer who is a regular contributor to The Telegraph. Amartyabag ^TALK2ME 01:59, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

I agree with Amartya that keeping non-controversial info sourced from the website would be ok.--Dwaipayan (talk) 18:17, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Punjab Janata Morcha

The article Punjab Janata Morcha has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

lack notability, may be a splinter group which existed only for a very limited time, no reference provided in the article and google search does not provide any proper reference

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Vigyani (talk) 09:17, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Dnyanesh Maharao

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Dnyanesh Maharao is ready for review but I need help. As many of the references are not in English and I am not familiar with the person, I do not know if he meets Wikipedia's notability requirements. Also, the non-English references need to have snippets translated to back up what is said in the text of the submission. Please help. You can add {{afc comment|your comment here}} below the existing AFC comments to let the reviewers know if this person is notable or to offer suggestions to the author to improve the article. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail) 01:15, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Religious harmony in India

Hi,

Reuesting content contribution to article User:Mahitgar/Religious harmony in India. Thanks you.

Mahitgar (talk) 06:08, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

LM&S - anyone here with knowledge of medical degrees?

None of our articles that refer to the Licentiate in Medicine and Surgery seem quite to fit the bill when it comes to describing what the LMS qualification was (is?) in the context of India. Can anyone fill this gap and perhaps add it to the LMS disambig article? I'm doing some reading to develop an article and a link for this would be handy. In case of regional differences, the article concerns the award as given by Madras Medical College. - Sitush (talk) 10:09, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Oh, this source might help anyone willing to dip their toe into the waters. - Sitush (talk) 10:11, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Hmmm... I will try to have a look at the source you provided. I remember that there were still some very old doctors who held LMS degree in 1980s. Was this given only in India ?--Dwaipayan (talk) 12:38, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Started a stub.--Dwaipayan (talk) 13:54, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. There certainly were bodies outside India that issued Licentiates, eg: the [[London Society of Apothecaries, whose award is abbbreviated LMSSA). I did wonder whether the version in India was some sort of outreach award (not the right term but hopefully you understand what I mean), whereby examinations were set and awarded by a UK-based institution but sat in India. I've not been able to verify this and my gut feeling about it is probably wrong. - Sitush (talk) 16:20, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Well, the medical institutions in India that awarded the licentiate were certainly run largely by British administrators, and had a large number of British doctors/teachers. However, they probably were run by authorities physically located in India (such as Calcutta University for Calcutta Medical College), and not in England, although obviously the government was British, and so the institutions were technically British as well. So, I also don't think LMS was like an outreach award.

However, from personal experience, LMS was looked upon as a inferior degree to MB (later MBBS).--Dwaipayan (talk) 16:29, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

I see, thanks. That it potentially very useful information. I'm not good on education-related stuff and, despite my tendency to spend a lot of time in hospitals etc, I'm not good on medical stuff either! I very much appreciate both your stub and your comments here. - Sitush (talk) 23:43, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Nirmal Baba

There is constant vandalism and blanking of sections...etc......done at Nirmal Baba article. Page protection was denied. There are several single purpose accounts,( which may be socks ) created to keep the vandalism alive. See Nirmal Baba - History - someone even blanked the page once and none of them have been blocked or given final warnings.

Can someone look over the page, please?? Jethwarp (talk) 09:15, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of current Indian chief ministers/archive1

Hi, the above FLC is in danger of being archived due to a lack of response. Comments, bouquets and brickbats are all welcome there. Thanks!—indopug (talk) 19:13, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Religion of A. P. J. Abdul Kalam

Hi, With all reliable sources and Neutrality, Kinldy arrive at conclusion on the Religion of A. P. J. Abdul Kalam taking into consideration his birth, brought up, confessions, speeches and every other possibilities. or if possible, someone please post this question to Dr.Kalam himself through his site to have more concrete answer. But arriving at actual fact is much important here. Wasif (talk) 11:04, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

Any discussion of what to do with the categories and infobox on that page should bear in mind the requirements of WP:BLPCAT. Nomoskedasticity (talk) 11:34, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

• (Comment from uninvolved editor) - Sources here are unreliable as per WP:IRS, dubious at best. The latimes link is a letter/comment by a reader, Muslim500 is a WP:SPS. Certainly not suitable for WP:BLPCAT, did the subject "publicly self-identified with the belief or orientation in question"? It doesn't seem so here. Mr T^{(Talk?) (New thread?)} 13:14, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

Anil Kumble

Please check out this article, may be there is an edit war in the making or about to start.--Vyom25 (talk) 11:32, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

Please take a look at a draft at Articles for Creation

A draft is being discussed at WT:Articles for creation#A probably notable subject but the writing is not up to standard. It appears to probably be notable, but because of the language of most of the cited sources, the reviewers who have looked at it so far are unable to determine if it does pass WP:Notability. Another issue is the quality of the English of the draft article itself. It would be apreciated if someone who can read the language of the references, and if it is worth keeping, could help the draft writer improve the article text. Thanks Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 17:42, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

Buddhist Jat

Can someone take a look at this new article Buddhist Jat, I don't know much about Buddhism, but since there is already an article about Buddhism, I am not sure this new article Buddhist Jat makes any sense. --Vigyani (talk) 00:57, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

wow! Now, Buddhist jat!,--Dwaipayan (talk) 01:05, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

was there any earlier similar problem?--Vigyani (talk) 01:09, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

There has been many problems regarding Jat-related articles. I don't know those much though. Sitush is an experienced editor in that field!--Dwaipayan (talk) 01:12, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

Let me second that wow, amazing! Correct Knowledge^«৳alk» 01:16, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

Avakasam

Do we have an article concerning avakasam but under some different transliteration? I've just seen a source that refers to it as a "caste-specific right" but need to read around the idea a bit more. It sounds as if it may be referring to the notion of castes having traditional occupations. - Sitush (talk) 14:38, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

Avakasam in Malayalam means privilege or right. It's a generic word. Salih (talk) 10:16, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

Colonial English Racism

Is there an article dedicated to Colonial English Racism practiced , such as for example upon the Anglo Indians . I would like to contribute some content which I found on this subject for instance in the book Marginality and Identity: Anglo-Indians as a Racially-mixed Minority in India By Gist, Noel Pitts, Roy Dean Wright .This is a vast subject but woefully neglected and deserves its own article Intothefire (talk) 12:16, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

If not then it is likely to be a very contentious/subjective area and will need a lot of reading prior to creating the article if it is to be balanced. You might want to follow through the links at, say, Racism_in_Asia#India and also note that racism as a concept changes over time: what can seem racist now was not so then. You'll need to understand the motives of people such as Herbert Hope Risley, you should consider whether "English" is the correct term, whether to treat "colonial India" as including non-British colonialism and/or the pre-Raj British (East India Company) period. If you do cover the pre-Raj period then you will need to take into account the position of people such as James Tod. Be careful to look at the subject using the right lenses ... and be careful to keep your own POV out of it. It is a vast, complex subject and I am slightly concerned regarding whether you have the capability to deal with it ... but I can't stop you, obviously. - Sitush (talk) 12:35, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

The Anglo-Indian stuff could, of course, just go in the Anglo-Indian article. Do the same for any other categories of people and then try to pull the various articles together with a separate, new article that acts as an overview. Or something like that. - Sitush (talk) 12:54, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Sitush , I invite you and your supporters to write this article , .....you have great capabilities to write it . :) Intothefire (talk) 13:41, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

I have "supporters"? I don't think so, although I do try to contribute in a collaborative spirit and that is often reciprocated as it should be. - Sitush (talk) 15:00, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Yikes good luck, doing so in a neutral fashion might be difficult!♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 14:22, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Precisely. Regardless of the rather iffy proposed title, writing this would be a considerable challenge to anyone and they would need to be in it for the long haul. - Sitush (talk) 15:00, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

May be you should go for a more neutral title like, Discrimination of Anglo-Indians in post independent India. What ever you add must meet the strictest form of WP:RS; like, established academic journals, government reports, books by leading authors in the field, etc. 15:32, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

The racist practices against the Anglo Indians by the colonial British is one example , racist legislation ,policy and practices in multifarious facets by the English colonialists were rampant throughout the geographical contours of the British Empire ,of which the Sub Continent was a part . The proposed article is not about the practice of racism upon Anglo Indians alone . Intothefire (talk) 17:03, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

The lexicon of Cast related articles and categories Main , Sub and Related , could provide a good model for a host of similar and multiple article structures . The dedicated editors and admins including Sitush , who have been ceaselessly working on Indian Caste ( and related British colonial issues) are best and ideally suited to bring their enthusiasm , skills , scholarship , also to to such a project .Intothefire (talk) 17:28, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Something like Racism in British India perhaps? Not a bad idea but it won't be easy. In all probability the sources are going to be scattered all over the place. --regentspark (comment) 17:40, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

An alternate would be British Empire and Racism .Intothefire (talk) 03:30, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

What? Now you really are pushing it. Surely you know how many countries fall under the scope of "British Empire" - walk before you run. - Sitush (talk) 06:24, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

The number of countries in the Erstwhile British empire are not even a trifle compared to the number of castes,and caste articles we have on Wikipedia you have ardently contributed to with help from other admin and able supporting editors . A mother article on British Empire and Racism ,and sub articles on the lines of what Reagentspark suggested ...British Empire and racism in India , British Empire and Racism in Barbados ...and so on ....these could be individually developed specially with the able help of able English editors with scholastic skills in History ,Wikipedia rules , categories and Non POV contributions . You certainly have the capability to do it , and no dearth of contributions from other editors as we go along .Intothefire (talk) 08:06, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

I am not sure that I do have the capability. The task is a massive, multi-disciplinary affair and really needs to be broken into smaller chunks. Maybe in a couple of years time, there would be enough of those smaller chunks to create an overview article. I do not think that you really appreciate the scale of this proposal: converting an idea into reality can sometimes be a significant challenge. - Sitush (talk) 10:00, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

The way this could work is if there were an academic text that discussed racism in British India. I did a cursory search for articles on jstor but nothing leaped out as a central text but will take a deeper look a little later. Intothefire, I think it better to start with something like racism in British India, you're more likely to find material on that than on racism in the British Empire. Build one article and the rest may follow.--regentspark (comment) 13:13, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

There are plenty of sources that discuss aspects of racism in British India. Whether there are any sources that attempt to cover the entire gamut of the subject in that country seems less clear. - Sitush (talk) 16:16, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Regentspark your suggestion is interesting .The specific issue I raised was Colonial English Racism .Not Racism specific to India . Now Sitush you are really being too modest about your capability's . You have all the attributes , to engage in this article/articles , abundant time devoted to Wikipedia ,deep interest and articles related to racial theories by British authors . Ability to engage in a huge number of articles , procuring scholarly journals ,assistance from admin and ed dedicated supporters. After all with your deep and abiding interest in the hierarchy's of Hindu caste I am sure there is no reason for squeamishness on your part with regard to English Colonial racism . Why after all are you then interested to see this topic be put off for years then ? Intothefire (talk) 16:57, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

That's not fair Intothefire. Just because someone writes about caste doesn't mean they have to have an interest in writing about colonial racism. And, expecting someone to take the lead in digging up sources for something that you're interested in is an unrealistic expectation. Especially when you're unlikely to find a comprehensive source that will pre-provide a structure for the article. My suggestion: you look for sources and frame an article on a contained article like Racism in British India and that will provide a peg for the rest of us to hang our coats on (assuming I haven't mixed multiple metaphors there!). I personally think it is a good idea, racism from colonial times tends to have a long shadow (the Hagen Daz imbroglio in Delhi a few years ago illustrates that quite well), and it is well worth collecting information and writing something on that. But, it's your idea and you're going to have to do the work--regentspark (comment) 20:36, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

As Intothefire intimates, I've already written about it and have no problem doing so where it is appropriate to whatever article I might be working on. The proposal, however, is for something much more wide-ranging than I've previously dealt with. Time is a factor, while "assistance from "admin and ed dedicated supporters" (sic) just seems like an irrelevant point-y comment: what have admins got to do with creating an article, for example? - Sitush (talk) 20:53, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

OTOH, if you really are aiming at a "Colonial English Racism" article (that title will need modification) then you perhaps need to float the idea at, or at least inform, WP:DISCR and all the related Wikipedia Projects, ie: all the projects that cover areas formerly considered a part of the British Empire. Then you have a multi-disciplinary article - law, sociology, anthropology, history etc - that is also a multi-disciplinary article in the Wikipedia Project sense. As much as I realise this does in fact tend to be how core articles end up, I for one would not like to be the person trying to keep track of all of that from the outset. Best to start small and build: if nothing else, you could then hold up an article about India and say to the other projects, "This is where I've got to with India, is there any scope for you doing the same for X?". - Sitush (talk) 23:39, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Even I feel, we should start from country related topics, starting with India may be. Later on we can create an overarching article on English Colonial racism from the info on those articles. Lets start small, but think big. Amartyabag ^TALK2ME 04:51, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

I doubt the success you will achieve in creating such an article. Given the way articles on British Raj and British Empire are written and even glorified, you will have a difficult time finding non-POV contributors on Wikipedia for such an article. Yet you can start by expanding the existing article on Racism in the United Kingdom, section "Racism in the days of empire." Susesisa (talk) 05:36, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

Can you give me a couple of examples of glorifying articles, please. Preferably ones relating to India. - Sitush (talk) 09:37, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

Sitush ,There is off course no dearth of books and scholarship on the subject of English/British colonial Racism , here are just two interesting books featuring Ireland- (1)Race and other misadventures: essays in honor of Ashley Montagu in his ninetieth year edited by Larry T. Reynolds, Leonard Lieberman and South Africa-The making of a racist state: British imperialism and the Union of South Africa By Bernard Magubane. I work in a multi-disciplinary area ... rules to ease can be made rules to stone wall if you have any experience with bureaucracyes world-wide . In your last edit you mentioned multi disciplines , what you dident add was perhaps the most important discipline on Wikipedia ...the magic of group dynamics , to present a version of a page that a pack working together can accomplish . I see terms , NO POV , Neutral , thrown all the time ....my friend all edits on social issues can have ideologically driven versions , subtle or gross . When you give advice ...you are free to give it , but keep in mind that the person the advice given to may have an equally if not higher developed ability than you to appreciate a textured perception than yours . No the way you suggest to build what you call a complex project is only one way , sorry I dont have a monolithic conception of the world ...or building knowledge . I believe there is a pantheistic way , others know and bring much to the table ,perhaps more than me .And that is the beauty of wikipedia , it evolves and will evolve .I only asked if there was an article on English Colonial Racism , where I could add content on Anglo Indians frankly I am surprised by your vehement dissuasion s . One of the ways to move ahead is to start the categorization process . This will speed up the process . Will you assist with this process ? Afterall you are good at this , why you even had a category I started deleted viz [British_Underclass] . This was possible because you are good at this I mean the process of understanding Wikipedia rules on Categorization .Let me assure you that the way you see caste , you will find much in common . Off course I cannot press if you do not wish to work on English Colonial Racism if Hindu caste is what engages you . :) Intothefire (talk) 14:16, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

To much talk Intothefire - time to leap in and get moving! I think there is general agreement that an article on Racism in British India is a workable proposition so I suggest throwing something together and worrying about what terms will get thrown around later. --regentspark (comment) 14:31, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

RegentsPark - Recall , its your suggestion [7 April 2013] , so boldly go ahead , you could include the ice cream company incident as well (reliably sourced) . Intothefire (talk) 17:09, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

OK, this seems to be where we are at. Intothefire does not want to create an article called something like Racism in British India. We do not have an article for racism throughout the British Empire (neither that which might be ascribed to the colonial authorities etc nor that which might have appeared during the time but was not down to them). Intothefire seemingly does not want to create that article either, but even if they did then this is not the best forum to discuss it - WP:DISCR would be more appropriate. People are aware that there is an opportunity to create a useful article or two and they will do so if they choose/have the time/have the resources etc. Prolonging this thread is now pointless and it is becoming increasingly slanted towards unproductive, even snide, comments. Let's end it now. - Sitush (talk) 17:35, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

Oh, and in the interval Intothefire can add the content that they wanted to add to one of the above non-existent articles to Anglo-Indian. - Sitush (talk) 17:37, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

: ) Intothefire (talk) 17:55, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

: Look, Intothefire, you have a history of trolling even with cryptic use of emoticons. Don't add this to the list of forums where you have tried it and find yourself blocked yet again. People have been patient and constructive, they have acknowledged that there is a germ of a good idea in your thoughts and, I suspect, there is no coincidence that you have been trying to personalise this thread with references to me throughout. I've ignored it for now but enough is enough. Be pro-active, as RegentsPark has suggested: it is obvious that you are not going to get what you claim to want here, for the reasons already stated. You need to make a bit of effort yourself. - Sitush (talk) 18:05, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

Sitush , no you have a history of trolling my edits .. my edit history will clearly illustrate who is trolling whom since long. Recall my message posted to you on [13th Febs 2013] and edit thereafter . I have studiously stayed away from engaging with any interactions with you from articles and areas normally of my interest. Even when you have deleted my edit [[15]] I let it pass .[Then you persisted here in engaging me here].When I posted the message on this page [Colonial_English_Racism] you again followed me here . Apparently your understanding of trolling means when you follow someone incessantly .My posts here are replies to your posts to me ....If you dont want answers from me dont post to me . Get off your high horse and stop threatening me .Make an effort to contribute without wanting to get people blocked and banned . Intothefire (talk) 19:00, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

Give it a rest guys. Intothefire, if you want to write an article, stop talking and go ahead and do it. I think it a good idea to write a Racism in British India article but have no intention of doing it myself. Sitush has other stuff to do so stop needling him needlessly. Sitush, my suggestion is that you ignore intothefire. If he really wants to write an article, he'll go ahead and do it. If all this is mere trolling, then no sense in feeding it. --regentspark (comment) 19:07, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

If I have to set the ball rolling then British Empire and Racism is the appropriate article . Ill probably need to miss utilize my un-paid leave :) , would you assist on setting up the category structure ?,....because that will certainly speed the process of aggregating articles with this common theme , I dont fancy a back and forth category deletion process .Suggesting trolling is hurtful , if you do ,then substantiate it .Intothefire (talk) 01:26, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

For what will be a core subject such as this, you need to create the article first. This was the big problem with the "underclass" category: no-one could (or can) define it. You can then create a category, which would be a subcat of several others - British Empire, Racism, etc - and spread that around other articles but you would need to be careful not to spray it around as if using a machine-gun: keep it tight and relevant. For example, adding a category to almost any every caste article would be plain wrong but adding it to certain biographies of British India ethnographers would be ok provided that those articles actually discuss racism. You need to be careful when adding categories that it does not appear to be point-y, and you can discuss categorisation issues in general with the people who frequent WP:CFD (there is a talk page, somewhere). You would need to consider, for example, whether the religious-based racism that existed between Hindus and Muslims in British India & led to partition has a place, not merely the racism exhibited by British authorities. You can expect to receive some criticism and probably a fair few personal attacks in relation to the latter. - Sitush (talk) 06:43, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

There is clear consensus to create "Racism in British India". That's a great step forward. I will create the article, a stub to start with. If the article survives and expands, it will be a great leap forward. Susesisa (talk) 08:50, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

Kabaddi

The article about this sport needs more active and interested/knowledgeable editors keeping an eye on it. This vandalism to the page lasted for over a month. I would help out, but my watchlist is already overflowing, and I don't know anything at all about this topic. Graham87 11:55, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

Indian film centenary main page appearances

Mother India in all likelihood is going to be featured on the main page on 3 May 2013. Do we have any featured list that may be featured on that day? National Film Award for Best Actress received featured status recently. Any other contenders? The main contributor can request for main page appearance, this is the place for specific date request for FLs. Also, some articles are being readied for DYK appearance (by Redtigerxyz, Nvvchar and others). Please provide some update here, if available.--Dwaipayan (talk) 02:01, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

3 May is a Friday, FLs are featured only on Monday. We may have to a special request or drop the FL. For DYK: we are done with

• Sant Tukaram (film) (almost done in my userpage)
• Mohini Bhasmasur: done.

We are planning at least 2 more DYKs. Raja Harishchandra in Wikipedia:Selected anniversaries/May 3. Any featured picture? --Redtigerxyz ^Talk 16:33, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

• I have nominated Satyawadi Raja Harishchandra for DYK and working on Satyavadi Raja Harishchandra. (Yes. Two different films.)
• Satyajit Ray filmography is currently at FLC. Awaiting delegate comments.
• File:SatyajitRay.jpg can be nominated for FP, I believe. Article is already FA. - Vivvt (Talk) 20:08, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

File:SatyajitRay.jpg is not eligible (size issue). (updated comment) FL will not be featured on 3 May. Confirmed with FL director. User_talk:The_Rambling_Man#FL_on_main_page_on_a_Friday.3F --Redtigerxyz ^Talk 11:44, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

Then book it for the Monday, we can celebrate in over a week, isn't it? And can feature other film related FAs in that week. Amartyabag ^TALK2ME 13:25, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

There are no worthy images here or even at Commons which could feature on main page and are connected to cinema. There isn't any in the Quality Images category either. (For non-Commons editors, QI is a step below FP; like GA is before FA.) In a way its good. Out of 5 sections, we will already be having FA, DYK and OTD. Lets not scare other non-Indian, non-filmi readers. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 06:45, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

The latest FLC Satyajit Ray filmography has been nominated for the main page appearance on 6th May here. Please put your comments. - Vivvt (Talk) 18:18, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

Satyajit Ray filmography

Please put your comments at the FLC. Though there are 4 supports, the final decision is yet to be made. If the list gets promoted, I am looking forward to put this for centenary celebration on 3rd May as Ray is internationally known figure from India. With less time in hand, I would appreciate any kind of feedback. - Vivvt (Talk) 16:29, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks everybody for their support and comments for FLC. The list has been promoted to FL. - Vivvt (Talk) 14:09, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

Pran

Pran wins the Dadasaheb Phalke Award for 2012. In the news nomination for your support. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 12:47, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

TOI paywall

Anyone know how I can get a copy of an article from behind the paywall of the Times of India epaper? --regentspark (comment) 21:46, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

Perhaps, what is the article. Darkness Shines (talk) 21:53, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

In addition, ToI paywall is confusing! Search with a pragraph in Google, you may find it in The Times of India website too! --Tito Dutta (contact) 21:55, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

Ha! Another reason, perhaps, why it is sometimes known as the Toiletpaper (SpacemanSpiff, for one, used to call it that). The TOI really does seem to be disorganised and rapidly losing the credibility it once had. RP, is the same or similar info not available from the much more classy The Hindu? Or is that a chicken/egg situation because you do not know what the article says? - Sitush (talk) 22:54, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

Searching the text doesn't help. The article title is "500 tea-pots, 1 cockroach: A good average" and the first sentence is "A portrait of Arathoon Stephen,the realtor who built Grand Hotel & Stephen Court The slim stern man raised his". --regentspark (comment) 23:06, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

Try going to the article and hitting the browser "stop" icon before it forwards on to the subscription page. Then click on the article and, again, hit the stop icon sharp-ish to see the text. It has just worked for me. - Sitush (talk) 23:20, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

Emailed it to you. What a bunch of amateurs. - Sitush (talk) 23:24, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

I found this. Is it a complete article? — Bill william compton^Talk 01:22, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

• As we are talking on The Times of India, in case you have got today's The Times of India, Kolkata edition, there is an advertisement of Big Bazaar Calcutta Times lower part of page 1, where they added a scratch card with the advertisement. By scratching the card you may win several exciting offers. Now the problem is, the local newspaper vendors had already scratched the coupons before delivering those to the houses (including mine and I believe they have reserved the papers with exciting prizes)! Undoubtedly sticking a scratch card with a newspaper advertisement is an interesting way to get attention towards the ad, but, how The Times of India/Bi Bazaar forgot those prizes vendors will be pre-occupied by vendors! ToI paywall is another error of there site! In a DYK review I mentioned, refresh the page twice if you are stopped by the paywall! --Tito Dutta (contact) 02:55, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

Guys, stay ahead of the times.—indopug (talk) 04:06, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

LOL! That is incorrect! The people shown in the ad mainly concentrate on the entertainment supplimentary of The Times of India, not the whole newspaper! The questions are easy if you follow ToI regularly!

About The Hindu, see this --Tito Dutta (contact) 04:23, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

Comunidade

The article on the Comunidades of Goa, Comunidade, was formerly a controversial article, and ended up being undeveloped. I have made a stab at a partial rewrite with citations to reliable sources, and tried to keep it neutral. The article was formerly tagged as having a non-encyclopedic tone, I hope my rewrite is adequately encyclopedic in tone. Anyway, if any of you could give it a look and, where improvement is necessary, either do it or request it on its talk page, I'd appreciate it. I've also suggested a move to Comunidades of Goa on that talk page. Thanks. --Bejnar (talk) 03:01, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

FYI

The article Tripura is a featured article candidate. The FAC is here. All comments are welcome. Thanks.--Dwaipayan (talk) 15:45, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

Another FYI

Sholay is in peer review.--Dwaipayan (talk) 06:58, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

Indic scripts in lead

Abhishek191288 tells me that the prohibition at WP:INDICSCRIPT should apply not only to the lead sentence but also to infoboxes. I disagree. There is a place in the settlement infobox for native names, and it seems appropriate to place the native script there. Comments pro or con? --Bejnar (talk) 07:16, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Such special place is also in Template:Infobox person and many more templates. But i don't understand why this topic keeps coming here again and again. Decisions have already been made on this and if you don't like, don't follow it. Add/remove indic names per your wish. In a special case when you are challenged, talk on that article's talk page, sort it out there or take to WP:DR or WP:ANI or even WP:ARB. Don't bring this here again and again. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 08:21, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

I asked DeltaQuad for about a month ago regarding the indic scripts on the infobox and he stated: "The RfC only covers the lead, not the infobox, in my opinion. Other than that, existing policies in place would cover it. If there are no existing policies, well then your free to do as you wish until someone disagrees, you take it to a talkpage and establish a consensus. I don't primarily work in that topic area, so I wouldn't know where the relevant policies are". Tolly4bolly 08:44, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Oh, not again. My take: User:Sitush/Common#Scripts. Experienced contributors seem generally to have been following this. The idea of someone going round starting umpteen article talk page discussions beggars belief - it will make the situation even more difficult to handle. - Sitush (talk) 09:25, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

You are correct, the infobox is not part of the lede, and |native_name= was added to (and is used in) this and other infoboxes specifically for this purpose. further, WP:INDICSCRIPT is a project guideline and thus has the status of an essay, not a policy. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 09:33, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Indeed, Andy. Now please can you go back through the rationale of the RfC and explain how the problems highlighted in there can be avoided without applying MOS-tyoe guidelines. Unless you are going to do that, your comment is correct but rather impractical. - Sitush (talk) 09:45, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

• As noted above the consensus embodied at WP:INDICSCRIPT does not apply to infoboxes, and as noted in the original RFC it does not apply to geographical articles. Is it possible to change the language of WP:INDICSCRIPT so that other editors are not deceived about the consensus actually reached? Abhishek191288 was not the only one, see also Dendrite1 who in this edit at the Belgaum article went so far as to remove the native_name parameter in the infobox template and add a WP:INDICSCRIPT comment to discourage its re-addition. --Bejnar (talk) 19:42, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

• As noted in this very thread, how do you plan to resolve the issues raised in the RfC and which it attempts to resolve? Do you even know any Indic scripts and, if so, are you aware how many different versions of a name etc might exist, how much edit warring and pov pushing has gone on in the past, how much vandalism etc? I suspect not: there is sometimes more to Wikipedia than merely applying the rulebook which is why we have WP:IAR, I guess. There are plenty of problems regarding India-related articles that people could assist in resolving without repeatedly raising this issue, often seemingly from ignorance of the consequences etc. Scripts really are a pretty minor part of the whole, and especially so when many of the articles haven't even got decent English phrasing even though this is English Wikipedia. Every bit helps, of course, but the priorities may seem a little skewed sometimes. - Sitush (talk) 20:04, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
• Since I was mentioned here, I should clarify that my edit was intended to express to other editors what appeared to be an existing consensus on that page, in which at least three different editors had used WP:INDICSCRIPT as justification for removing scripts from infoboxes. Indeed, it was triggered by the fact that other constructive additions, unrelated to scripts, in Bejnar's edit were also reverted, whereas if the script hadn't been added those other changes would likely have remained. Myself, I don't have an opinion either way on the matter, and now that a discussion is taking place, I won't be doing any more script-related edits until a consensus is reached. Dendrite1 (talk) 02:09, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

Okay now Belgaum has two contenders, Kannada and Marathi, right? Write these both and finish the topic. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 03:11, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

Actual, since we're using sources and not transcription, we're done, absent another source. --Bejnar (talk) 03:50, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

Sorry for the delay in commenting here since I happen to be the main focus of this discussion. Coming to WP:INDICSCRIPT, the discussion was initiated and the conclusion to remove scripts was mainly due to the non-sensical edit wars that keep happening over which language scripts to be included in the article. I agree that the discussion was open for the lead, but to say that the infobox is not part of the lead and that the RfC does not apply to it makes no sense as scripts in the infobox also happen to be the centre of the same problem as the lead. — Abhishek  ^Talk 12:35, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

You are right over there — it started where there were non-sensical edit wars. Thats why i advocate taking this issue case by case. In this case, Belgaum has considerable population of both Kannada and Marathi speakers. Hence it won't be non-sensical to have both texts. Does anyone here object to this particular case? If not, lets archieve this discussion. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 13:50, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

Why are you bringing the issue of Belgaum alone here if you are so concerned and neutral about including scripts from two languages? There are many other articles where there is a significant population speaking one language, but scripts of only the official language of the state were included. Why not include Kannada scripts in Solapur as there is a significant Kannada population there? This was the main reason why we debated and decided not to include scripts. — Abhishek  ^Talk 14:05, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

Go ahead! I agree with Solapur. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 19:34, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

Fine, if you have a source for local geographic names other than the official. If you don't have a source, don't do it. --Bejnar (talk) 22:55, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

Source for what? Source for "Belgaum" is written as "ಬೆಳಗಾವಿ" in Kannada? Or source for Belgaum is pronounced as ಬೆಳಗಾವಿ? §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 03:33, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

Dharmadhyaksha, trying to implement this sort of thing at article level - ie: consensus for inclusion/exclusion at each article - is never going to be workable and the default will always be "include" without any consideration for why the RfC resulted as it did. This in turn will inevitably put us back where we started with the wars, vandalism and so on. You really cannot expect people to check up in article talk page archives etc for some decision made 18 months ago, which is precisely what will be needed in due course. I know plenty of India-based, India-born contributors who cannot even fathom many of these scripts, and then there are the other 4 or 5 billion people who speak none of them. Patrolling the problems will be a nightmare, as it was in the past. We've recently had a discussion about the placename issue and RegentsPark pretty much summed that one up but already we are seeing problems, eg: in this very discussion. In the scale of things, the cost/benefit favours sticking to one simple decision.

Abhishek is spot on with their analysis of the infobox situation: nice to see someone who understands the bigger picture — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sitush (talk • contribs) 04:19, 16 April 2013 (IST)

(Firstly, who is this?) The bigger and permanent picture is that indic scripts keep coming again and again, by IPs, new editors, socks, etc. We can't stop them and i find it useless to do same thing again and again. So there is no point in removing them. What we can do is to just give it a place where it's less annoying. And infoboxes are much helpful in that way. And why are we caring for those who can't read it? We don't care about that on other projects. SAMPLE: "John the Baptist (Hebrew: יוחנן המטביל, Yoḥanan ha-mmaṭbil, Arabic: يوحنا المعمدان‎ Yuhanna Al-Ma'madan,[6] Aramaic: ܝܘܚܢܢ Ioḥanan, Greek: Ὁ Ἅγιος/Τίμιος Ἐνδοξος Προφήτης, Πρόδρομος καὶ Βαπτιστής Ἰωάννης Ho Hágios/Tímios Endoxos, Prophḗtēs, Pródromos, kaì Baptistḗs Ioánnes)" Nor should we care here. By writing those scripts, we cater to people who understand them. Just the way we cater to those who understand what Hyphomonas is in that article. Doesn't mean i find 10 people who don't care about this bacteria and then get it deleted. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 03:21, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

Forgot to sign, sorry. My point regarding comprehension was with reference to fixing the inevitable problems, Comparison with other articles in other areas of Wikipedia is largely irrelevant because they may not have those problems. The fact the newcomers etc might continue to add scripts is also irrelevant because a simple rule can be applied simply. The latter only becomes an issue if someone then has to first check for local consensus before determining whether the script should exist. Prior to the RfC, I for one was seeing some articles with 5 or 6 different scripts in the lead/infobox and that was clearly a nonsense ... but determining which might be valid, which might not be was well-nigh impossible without raising the issue with a wide group of trusted contributors. - Sitush (talk) 06:21, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

Just the way you put other areas of Wikipedia on side, non-controversial articles should be put on side too. There is no reason to remove any scripts from such articles where there are no issues. (You have heard it from me but others probably haven't. Hence saying it again.) I have been asked for indic scripts at times by other editors so that they can find local sources. I myself use many non-English sources in creating articles. These scripts are helpful at that time. I agree on removal of such scripts from lead, if they are to be maintained in infobox/footnote or something else. For articles with 5-6 or more scripts, simply put a note <!---No indic scripts, refer blah blah. --> so that one doesnt have to keep referring talk pages as you say.§§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 09:39, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

dump the indic scripts to the talk page. easy availability to the one group at English Wikipedia, the editing community looking for local language sources. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 02:32, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

Talk:Hindi#New_section_-_Demographics

There is a discussion on the number of Hindi speakers at Talk:Hindi#New_section_-_Demographics that needs a fresh look. --regentspark (comment) 14:13, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

Patna Marathon

There was a lot of hype about the Patna Marathon in late 2011/early 2012 - just Google it for evidence. The event was postponed from 19 February 2012 to 26 February, and then cancelled with a vague promise that it would take place in the second half of the year. As far as I can make out, it never did take place in 2012, the event website was not updated and there are accusations on (unreliable) web forums/blogs etc that the whole thing was some sort of scam. However, I've found a video that seems to come from last month and refers to a "ruckus" at the Patna marathon - see here. I've no idea what language the video uses, nor could I hear it even if I could understand it. Can anyone make sense of this situation? If not then it would seem that we may have a classic instance of why WP:CRYSTAL exists and the article should be deleted. - Sitush (talk) 17:07, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Legislative titles

A discussion related to legislative title (in relation with Indian statutes) is taking place at Wikipedia_talk:Article_titles#Legislative_acts. Interested persons are requested to join the discussion there. Amartyabag ^TALK2ME 02:59, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

Request to clarify WP:INDICSCRIPT

Now that we've had another discussion Wikipedia talk:Noticeboard for India-related topics#Indic scripts in lead, can we have WP:INDICSCRIPT updated? Should WP:INDICSCRIPT mention infoboxes? Maybe it should just say no more than one indic script in the lead. Right now the text of WP:INDICSCRIPT seems to have misled people, and becausee of the disparate opinions, the reference to the discussion is not all that helpful. My proposal is for it to read:

• There is community consensus that editors should avoid placing excessive regional or indic language script in the lead section of an article. Where more than one language is applicable, such text should be placed in its own section, and not in the lead. Where indic script is employed, it is suggested that IPA be used for help with pronunciation. Language sections may be entitled "Languages and etymology".

How does that sound? I'd appreciate it if comments could be limited to the merits and demerits of the proposal and not return to the previous discussions. --Bejnar (talk) 23:26, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

... but the problem is that you are referring to the previous discussions, and this is another proposal to change the consensus by someone who seemingly doesn't like it.

• Despite your introduction, your proposal makes no mention of infoboxes at all;

True. I didn't believe it to be necessary, but I wanted to keep the window open if someone thought that it should. --Bejnar (talk) 07:01, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

• scripts cause problems anywhere where they appear in such articles, although such problems are more commonly found in the lead/infobox;

The current suggestion is only about the lead sentence. This is slightly broader. --Bejnar (talk) 07:01, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

• you do not address which language;

It doesn't matter which language, just if there is more than one. --Bejnar (talk) 07:01, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

• not all articles have a "Languages and etymology" section, nor is one always desirable (eg: a personal name);

If it is not appropriate, then look at the word may. --Bejnar (talk) 07:01, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

• define "excessive"

It is defined in the proposal as "more than one". --Bejnar (talk) 07:01, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

• IPA seems to be the only standardised method for pronunciation assistance, the proposal would need to say something like "IPA or nothing".

I only included the IPA language because it is in the existing policy. If it does not related to indic scripts, it can be eliminated. --Bejnar (talk) 07:01, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

• you are missing the elephant in the room, ie: how this affects articles that are of interest to multiple Wikiprojects.

Actually, that is why I am bringing the proposal. The previous discussions clearly exempted geographic articles, but that was not codified in the so-called consensus. I believe that this proposal is more workable because it allows a single usage, which is what most geographical articles have. For projects where multiple indic scripts are a problem, the limit is one. So this proposal is slightly more flexiable than the existing one. --Bejnar (talk) 07:01, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

I probably could go on, but hth. - Sitush (talk) 06:03, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, I don't text. --Bejnar (talk) 07:01, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

• Disagree that we should allow indic scripts back in the lead through the door of - QUOTE: "There is community consensus that editors should avoid placing excessive regional or indic language script in the lead section of an article". Consensus is that we wont allow any such script and only IPA for pronunciation. Case closed on proposal. VasuVR (talk, contribs) 06:58, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

I'm of the opinion that unless the subject relates to a movie, or music, literary work or a piece of art, it NEED NOT include indic texts anywhere in the article. This includes, the lead, and infoboxes. I'm tired of people turning the English Wikipedia into a local language version and then arguing that it s being done to benefit the locals who view it. In case of pronunciations, there can be IPA and if available a file on the Commons. That should be more than enough. Barring this, there should be no indic scripts anywhere else in the article. --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 08:19, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

File on commons? As in Audio file or image with scripts written on them? §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 10:59, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

Courtalam vs. Courtallam, is splitting required ?

A discussion about possibly splitting the Courtallam article about a place or places in Tenkasi taluk, Tirunelveli district, Tamil Nadu has been initiated on its talk page. Also, the article itself is possibly in need of a rewrite due to WP:NOTTRAVEL. --Bejnar (talk) 20:00, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

"Indian English" template

What is the situation with this template? Does it have equal status with "This article uses British English" template and American Australian templates? Any reason why it doesn't seem to be being used much? In ictu oculi (talk) 00:43, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

Whats "much" for you? I see 386 transclusions. That's "way too much" for me. And whats your objective here? Do you want more articles to use it or do you want it deleted? §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 03:26, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

Since "Indian English" is not a well defined language, I don't see what purpose the template serves. Other than trying to force Puducherry on an unwilling population and that sort of thing. British and American English are well defined entities (you can look up spelling and usage in dictionaries) and the situation there is different. --regentspark (comment) 13:16, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

I've never seen the point of it. - Sitush (talk) 16:54, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

Mullanchery M Velaian

Can someone please take time to look at Mullanchery M Velaian and, in particular, check that the statements made there are in fact supported by the Dinamani sources. Ta. - Sitush (talk) 16:53, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

Chaudhary

Hi..All.. Should title Chaudhary be used in the title in biographies according to WP:COMMONNAME or should it not be used due to MOS:HONORIFIC, e.g. Chaudhary Lal Singh's official name is Lal Singh--Vigyani (talk) 07:04, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

Unless the Chaudhary is a part of the individual's name, treat it as an honorific and don't use it in the title. (cf. Charan Singh) --regentspark (comment) 13:09, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

Indian Armed Forces

I would like to draw the attention of the regular users of this board to the 'criticism' section of this article. I have filed an RfC regarding this section that aims to gain consensus on the validity of this section, particularly in the light of wikipedia policies concerning criticism sections. Generous commentary on that page is invited.Handyunits (talk) 09:39, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

Saradha scandal for ITN

Hi all, a debate is going on at Wikipedia:In_the_news/Candidates#Saradha_Group_financial_scandal to decide if the article on Saradha Group financial scandal should be featured at ITN. Pls have a look and if you want pls do participate in the discussion. LegalEagle (talk) 08:28, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Peths of Pune

A very new Wikipedia editor Coolgama (talk · contribs) has:

• Moved Shaniwar Peth to Shaniwar Peth,Pune (yes, missing out the space)
• Created a new article about "Shaniwar Peth" as a generic term, at Shaniwar Peth (this version with a "see also" link (not a hatnote) to point to Shaniwar Peth,Pune
• Changed all the links in Peths in Pune
• Not amended the many incoming links for "Shaniwar Peth"

I've moved this one article, and fixed a hatnote for it, but the same has been done for many other "xxx Peth" articles.

I came across some of the "xxx Peth,Pune" articles while stub-sorting, and sorted them.

Not all the Peths had existing articles - for some, like Sadashiv Peth,Pune, a new stub article has been created but with nothing at Sadashiv Peth (neither a redirect nor an article with a hatnote).

There are a lot of links from {{Pune topics}} which will need to be fixed to point to the various articles - now either redlinks or pointing to the generic articles.

I don't know whether these localities are notable, whether the places in Pune are primary topics, etc, but some cleaning up seems needed. I've left a note on the editor's talkpage. PamD 13:14, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

The article Peths in Pune should be moved to Peth (locality), and the Pune-specific content should be a subsection within that article. The pages Shaniwar Peth, Budhwar Peth etc. should redirect to this page. 99.230.200.112 (talk) 03:54, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Help needed from Bengali Wikipedians

Could anyone help to expand this table User:Titodutta/sandbox1? You can find the list of the stories in the article Feluda. And I can help with resources too! --Tito Dutta (contact) 06:14, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

Notifying once more

Hi all! This is a re-notification that the article Tripura is a current featured article candidate. All comments, criticism, suggestion are greatly welcome. Thanks,--Dwaipayan (talk) 15:17, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

Source warning

I have no idea if Pearson Education India is connected to Routledge but this, published in 2007, is a direct copy of this, which was originally published in 1995. I've often had doubts about PEI stuff but this is the first time I have found clear evidence of apparent copyright violation (I've never had time to dig into it but various passages in various books "rang bells" and I just happened on this example). We need perhaps to be careful. - Sitush (talk) 17:21, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Indian Major English Newspapers Search

For a long time now, I have been facing trouble to find Indian newspaper articles in news.google.com. I have just created this specially customized search page. Tests not done still! --Tito Dutta (contact) 15:45, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

I like it. Please add it to the project page. — Ganeshk (talk) 16:44, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

How to add more newspaper. I am interested in adding The Tribune--Vigyani_talk^{ਯੋਗਦਾਨ} 16:48, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

Tribune was already added. --Tito Dutta (contact) 16:56, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

Please add Orissa Post] which has a wide coverage of news from Odisha. Though it is a recent launch, I prefer it over TOI and The Telegraph. Amartyabag ^TALK2ME 17:00, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

Orissa Post added! --Tito Dutta (contact) 17:18, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

Added this to the tools section in Wikipedia:WikiProject India.--Dwaipayan (talk) 20:25, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

Super useful Tito - thanks! --regentspark (comment) 19:18, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Yay. Another reason to give Tito a t-shirt! - Sitush (talk) 17:25, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

• Made some minor changes in the URL, removed spaces from it. so that direct URL of every search pages can be given easily (Wikipedia does not recognize space in URL). Updating the here. Though the previous URL should automatically redirect to new URL too! --Tito Dutta (contact) 11:29, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

It would be of great help to me. Thanks. - Chandan Guha (talk) 14:47, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

RFC on Neutrality at Narendra Modi

Asking about whether the article on the prominent and controversial Indian Hindu nationalist politican Narendra is currently neutral.·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 21:41, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

Anyone else got email from Kegsapter on biased Wikipedians?

I have got an email accusing few editors of Wikipedia and how Wikipedia is biased towards India. The email contained a link of a Google Group. I have a doubt he has sent emails to other Indian Wikipedians too! Anyone else got such email? User:Jalexander is handling it! --Tito Dutta (contact) 16:49, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

See here. - Sitush (talk) 18:09, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

Google Group link here §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 05:46, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

They have been blocked. The GG link is actually a mirror of a Usenet forum - alt.wikipedia - and the three posts seem to have been made by the same person some time ago. Seems to be someone with a chip on their shoulder, especially since they concentrate on a few names. Probably best to ignore. - Sitush (talk) 07:43, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, I never considered that the "chip" phrase might be unfamiliar. Thanks to Dharmadhyaksha for linking, and for those who cannot be bothered clicking through please substitute "a bone to pick" "grudge" ;) - Sitush (talk) 08:46, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Clever to strike off "A bone to pick". We actually had a blue link there and on A Bone to Pick too, but both irrelevant here. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 09:16, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

"Clever" is not a description that is often associated with me on-Wiki! Lots of swear words, attacks etc but not "clever". The pendulum may have swung too far here ;) I'm not looking it up but am surprised that we do not have an article about the phrase. Probably, Wiktionary does. - Sitush (talk) 23:14, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Wiktionary actually has two articles; bone to pick and have a bone to pick. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 03:58, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

New article Gurdwaras Act of 1925

New article I wrote, having noted that we had no single article covering this important piece of legislation which legally defined Sikhism and turned control of historic gurudwaras over to mainline Sikhs. Also Delhi Sikh Gurdwaras Act of 1971. MatthewVanitas (talk) 21:38, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Welcome back to WikiProject India noticeboard! Thanks for writing the article on the important act. To cite Google Books, you can use this tool. In web, there are som good government documents on the act and in addition it is regularly covered in Indian newspapers. This might be a good DYK candidate! --21:55, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, I use that same gBooks automator, but just have to go back and catch up. I'm having a little confusion, as sources seem to indicate it was national legislation yet I also see it as the Punjab Sikh Gurdwaras Act of 1925, so I might end up making Gurdwaras Act a disambig since there are at least two such acts. I'm definitely open to any input with folks more familiar with the Indian legal system. MatthewVanitas (talk) 22:03, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Huh, there is also apparently an All-India Gurdwaras Act which has been proposed and declined off and on for a half-century; there's probably some story behind that. Incidentally though not the same, we're lacking an article for the Punjab Reorganization Act of 1966 if any legal-beagles are inclined. MatthewVanitas (talk) 22:06, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Good move, well done. Alas, although I know of a lot of wikilawyers here, I've only ever found one lawyer with detailed experience of Indian law. Salvio guiliano once did a course or similar on Hindu law, but it is not him whom I am thinking of ... and I am darned if I can remember who it is. The only one I can recall off the top of my head is in fact a serial block-evading SPA with COI, so that is not much use! We have all sorts of "Wikipedian" categories - it might be worth trawling through those or simply dumping a note at the Law project page (which, I assume, exists). Something like Category:Wikipedian lawyers from India would do it, although it doesn't :(

BTW, I'd be surprised if the Punjab Reorganization Act was spelled thus. I'm fairly sure that Indian legal terminology of that period would have used Brit English spelling. But I know nowt. - Sitush (talk) 23:27, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

It uses British English spelling. In India, the name of the Act is written without "of", rather a comma is used. For eg it should be Punjab Reorganisation Act, 1966. Amartyabag ^TALK2ME 11:32, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Ah, we do have a wiki lawyer member of the project. This is by default a pro bono environment, too ;) - Sitush (talk) 12:19, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Ah, the refs I first ran across on gBooks were from US publishers, who (oddly) "translate" the name to the -z- spelling. But good catch. For anyone else keen on India legal articles, I did also recently write Murderous Outrages Regulation. Catchy name, and refers to a series of interesting legal acts in the late-19th C. MatthewVanitas (talk) 20:33, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Sanjay Dutt's illegal possession of arms

Do you think Sanjay_Dutt#Illegal_possession_of_arms needs a separate article? There are too many event to sum up in one article. Although I am a regular WikiReader, I am facing trouble to follow that section— first arrest, imprisonment, release, trial, again arrest, bail, recent judgement, mercy plea, rejection — all in one section. --Tito Dutta (contact) 09:13, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

How many of the events are really required to be there? A lot of our articles dealing with legal charges etc tend to become overly-detailed timelines and can be pruned. For example, it is common but usually unnecessary to name judges and the various laws that have allegedly been breached. - Sitush (talk) 09:28, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

The article as of now has no huge content (size wise) to split it. Plus he already has filmography and awards subpages. Trimming should be possible. Sitush, judge's names would hardly be available. And they are not important enough to mention even if found. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 09:42, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Social/religious group terminology

Consider varna, kur, kula, gotra, kootam, tribe, clan and other group-defining terms found in India. I worry that we do not seem to have an article that really presents the distinctions and/or similarities between all of these various social/religious units and also that we may be spreading confusion at individual article level. For example, there is an unsourced claim in Gotra that there are 49 such things in Hinduism, but I am pretty sure that we have far more articles claiming this or that name to be a gotra. And I'm now not even sure whether a tribe is a clan in anthropology: if not, then it opens a whole can of worms, in particular with regard to categories.

I've found this chapter in a book that might go some way towards resolving some of the issues but I'd appreciate it if anyone could point me to an existing article that deals with all these terms or to potential sources that might enable me to create one. My suspicion is that this is a big project but if such an article does not already exist then I really do think that we need it. Thanks. - Sitush (talk) 06:46, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

49 looks a too small number. I think I can count more gotra names on fingers. Yes, such a suggested article is good idea. I will try to find some sources with the help of my non-WP friends and see if there are some good books available. --Vigyani_talk^{ਯੋਗਦਾਨ} 06:58, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

80 words as gotra are listed on Brahmin gotra system, then add 18 of Agrawal plus there will be more of other Vaishya's and of course numerous Arora's. --Vigyani_talk^{ਯੋਗਦਾਨ} 07:03, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

That's a pretty extreme case of polydactylism you have there - 50 fingers or more ;) I'm sure that you are right and, yes, please do ask around regarding sources. It is complicated stuff and the chances of me even making a decent start on such an article without a few people chipping in are pretty remote. If someone wants to start without me then please do! - Sitush (talk) 19:30, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

This book might be very useful. It has slowly focused on the topic of our interest. Btw Sitush, when did I say my fingers? I think you are not Indian yourself, am I right? We can count up to 12 on four fingers (of one hand) and thumb is used as pointer :).--Vigyani_talk^{ਯੋਗਦਾਨ} 00:46, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

HEy, Vigyani, the problem with that book is its age. Sherring was a Raj "gentleman scholar" and we are all (hopefully) aware of the accusations levelled against the Raj and its misunderstandings of the society of India. Generally, when it comes to such subjects, it is best to use something more recent. No, I am not Indian and, wow, I didn't realise there was a system that could count to 12 on one hand. Your comment about using the thumb has just made me wonder whether anyone uses the binary system for counting with fingers: with suitable digit(al) flexibility, one could count to 16 using four fingers ... and 256 using both hands! - Sitush (talk) 10:21, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

Well rest of your reply I will analyse latter (bit busy right now), but the 12 is made by 4 fingers into 3 division of each finger (metacarpals, proximal phalanges and intermediate phalanges) due to two lines on each finger when seen palmer side. --Vigyani_talk^{ਯੋਗਦਾਨ} 10:54, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

Of course! I can be pretty thick sometimes. Or perhaps even always! - Sitush (talk) 20:19, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

Merging discussion

There is a discussion regarding merging List of songs sung by Shreya Ghoshal into Shreya Ghoshal discography, you can take part in the discussion here. Thanks. Tolly4bolly 18:06, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

Welcome back to WikiProject India noticeboard! An AFD could be more handy for merging difficulties! In addition, AFD works faster! --Tito Dutta (contact) 19:55, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

RfC at Narendra Modi

There is a Request for Comment on the Narendra Modi article, relating to coverage of the 2002 Gujarat violence. The RfC can be found at Talk:Narendra_Modi#RFC:_.282002_violence.29_What_would_the_section_ideally_contain.3F and is not the one mentioned here a few days ago. - Sitush (talk) 18:46, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

In my opinion, B is oversimplifying, uses unclear words "many" ^{How many?} A is too dramatic! A gives too much details. As a reader I have faced other problems too like the prose portion itself does not mention why this is important in the article! If this linking is not needed in the article, they should mention in the intro in the RFC! I want to see some changes, comments in superscript!

Changes: In 2002, when Modi was the Chief Minister of Gujarat,^{relevance in the article} a widespread communal violence occurred in the state killing more than 1000 people.^{In my opinion, since this was one of the worst Indian ritos in recent few decades total number is important, no other details} This riot was followed by the Godhra Train Massacre of 27 February where 58 Hindu pilgrims ^{only 58, children woman statistics not necessary, the linked main article will do the work} were burnt to death in a fire inside the Sabarmati Express train? (mentioned BBC ref)! Tito Dutta (contact) 19:43, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

You will need to comment in the RfC discussion, Tito. - Sitush (talk) 19:45, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

I may do after thinking for some more time! --Tito Dutta (contact) 19:57, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

Well, if you do, you might want to reverse the chronology. I think that the train incident preceded the more general violence ;) - Sitush (talk) 20:17, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

Good idea! --Tito Dutta (contact) 20:19, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

Jindhagada peak

Jindhagada Peak is listed as the highest peak of the Eastern Ghats and Andhra Pradesh. The reliable sources (such as various books and government websites[16][17]) state that the highest peak in the Andhra is Mahendragiri, which lies on the border of Andhra Pradesh and Orissa. The highest peak in the Eastern Ghats is Deomali. This version of the article states that the Jindhagada peak was discovered in 2011. But I can't find any reliable source (news report from 2011, book or journal) that supports this claim.

The claim was added to the article List of Indian states and territories by highest point by Venkatananta (talk · contribs) in April 2011. Subsequently, User:Tatiraju.rishabh, apparently in an attempt to convert all the red links into articles, created an article on the peak in May 2011 without any reliable sources. User:Venkatananta then went on to claim that the peak was discovered by him in 2011.

A Google search for this peak results in sites affiliated to Venkatananta's treeking group, Wikipedia mirror sites or other sites that crawl Wikipedia categories to build SEO-optimized pages. I could find only one decent source that mentions the name of this peak (Deccan Herald) -- it merely says "The peaks of Jindhagada and Galikonda are in the vicinity of Araku". There is a good chance that this 2013 article is based on information from Wikipedia (journalists often do that).

Any thoughts? Is there any evidence that this is the highest peak in Andhra/Eastern Ghats? Or that this isn't made up? utcursch | talk 01:33, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Agreed, there is no evidence to conclude that Jindhagada is the highest peak. But yes, Google Maps terrain data shows that the location of so called Jindhagada peak in the Coordinates 18.229311, 82.722666 represent a peak higher than 1640 mts. Deomali, located closeby at 18.674829, 82.981532 coordinates, is also roughly of the same elevation. I would rather say Deomali to be higher, as it is more referenced. And i also wish to say that Wikipedia is not a place for people to claim something. I would try and find more references, and since im traveling to Araku coming August, i will try and get local references, and get to know if the peak truly is there or not.

Whatever it may be, Mahendragiri isn't the highest peak in the Eastern Ghats. Rishabh Tatiraju (talk) 07:00, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Nothing at JSTOR about Jindhagada, nor GBooks or GScholar in their UK & US versions. - Sitush (talk) 07:10, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Google Maps isn't really a reliable source for the name unless other sources confirm it: Google organizes Mapathons, and Venkatananta might have added it.

Can any Telugu Wikipedian confirm if any local newspapers mention such a peak. Alternative transliterations? Just want to ensure that Jindhagadha isn't a name made up by Venkatananta.

Note that there are several Google results for the name, but that's simply because a thousand other sites use Wikipedia content. One past example is Talinsfadasporia (copy) - the article was created as a hoax about a town in Assam. The article was deleted 3 years ago, but thanks to SEO experts, you can still find hundreds of results on Google - there are books on the topic, there are yellow pages, there is weather information about the town, there are car rental services and what not. The search results about Jindhagada are similar (ignoring the ones from trekking groups/photos/blogs affiliated to Venkatananta and friends.

utcursch | talk 14:21, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Then i say we delete Jindhagada article if we do not find any reliable source. And about local newspapers, i am Telugu, but i only can verbally communicate or translate. I cannot read or write telugu. However, i have asked my father for assistance, and have asked him to try searching Jindhagada Peak in newspapers. Lets see what the result comes. Rishabh Tatiraju (talk) 17:01, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

My father has checked all newspapers and Telugu online news he can, we could not find any information about Jindhagada at all. I guess it is just a hoax. Rishabh Tatiraju (talk) 13:34, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for that, and thank your father! Certainly seems to be unverifiable, even if we cannot definitely prove a hoax. It should go to AfD. Good sleuthing, all. - Sitush (talk) 13:54, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

I have marked this for deletion. Notifying you all here. Rishabh Tatiraju (talk) 14:06, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

Nomination of Jindhagada Peak for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Jindhagada Peak is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jindhagada Peak until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

Query re: Devangari-based article move

Our article concerning what the title called Hada Chauhan has been moved to Hara Chauhan on the basis that the former title was a mistransliteration. I queried this with WQUlrich, who made the move. The outcome is this thread, the gist of which is that the "mistransliteration" rationale was based on a reading of our article concerning Devangari script. I'm lost here and it looks like WQUlrich may also be no entirely certain. Basically, there are two issues:

• Is the script currently shown in the article a correct rendition or one of several possibilities (the whole WP:INDICSCRIPT palaver, yet again)?; and
• How does this work in relation to WP:COMMONNAME, which a brief Google search seems to suggest should be the pre-move title?

Can someone confirm what the title should be, please? THe script should be removed, obviously, but right now it is a part of the crux of the problem, - Sitush (talk) 00:43, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Ban on use of Hindi etc. in lead brackets

I've just been made aware by good Tito D of the WP:India ban on giving Hindi etc. script. Here etc. preventing a lead such as normal with Chinese, Arabic, Russian, Japanese, Korean, Thai, articles.

• Akio Morita - Akio Morita (盛田 昭夫 Morita Akio, January 26, 1921 in Nagoya, Aichi – October 3, 1999 in Tokyo) was a Japanese businessman...

This would seem to me to be out of line with WP:RS. Not having the local spelling of BLP for example is a guaranteed way to decrease quality of sources. I regularly de-PROD new BLPs, but usually let the Indian BLPs die, simply because without clear Telugu, Tamil, Malayalam, Bengali or Hindi names it is usually impossible to even find sources, let alone assess then. Is everybody happy that the ban has resulted in an improvement in article reliablity and sourcing since it was implemented in Jan 2012? In ictu oculi (talk) 07:00, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

I regularly de-PROD new BLPs, but usually let the Indian BLPs die, simply because without clear Telugu, Tamil, Malayalam, Bengali or Hindi names it is usually impossible to even find sources

—Good point! I also often can not check Tamil, Telugu etc sources! --Tito Dutta (contact) 07:31, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

I can usually guess the Hindi, sometimes guess the Bengali or Telugu. But it's mainly too much effort, better to let the article die. In ictu oculi (talk) 08:19, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

WP:India is in no position to ban anything. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:50, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

In ictu oculi, the consensus is to avoid using indic scripts in the lead. There was a long discussion on this but part of the problem with Indian articles is that there are many candidate scripts for the same title. For example, take someone like Surjit Singh Barnala. As the former governor of Andhra Pradesh and Tamil Nadu, and as a former Union Minister, one could easily argue that his name should be rendered in Telegu, Tamil, Devanagari and Gurmukhi. In fact, there are plenty of reliable sources for the rendering of his name in all those scripts. That, obviously, is a bit different from the case of Akio Morita who has only his Japanese script to deal with. For this reason, as well as for many other reasons the consensus was that it is better not to clutter the lead with a plethora of scripts. Though I don't see it in Mr. Barnala's case, I believe that the consensus was that it was ok to use indic scripts in an info box. In which case, you would have no problem finding sources. --regentspark (comment) 21:14, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

RegentsPark, I see what the consensus is and yesterday self-reverted a Bengali film name addition I made before Tito bhai alerted me. Evidently the example Surjit Singh Barnala is an example of where multiple indic names would be possible and therefore the existing guideline is appropriate and useful. But doesn't preclude infobox.

In contrast Thangal Uppapa is an example where only 2 indic names (Urdu and possibly Malayalam) would be natural, and Sillunu Oru Sandhippu is an example where only 1 indic name would be natural.

I would have thought there was a case for an exception e.g. "if there is only 1 clear relevant indic name, and the article has no infobox, then a maximum of 1 indic name, with preferably IPA or temporarily romanization, may be added in brackets. If there is any dispute or attempt to add a second name, then both should be removed". etc.

Does the guideline consensus extend to Nepal, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh and Pakistan? In ictu oculi (talk) 04:04, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

No. The consensus only applies to India. I have a vague recollection that the whole thing started with Tamil speaking villages in Kerala (or was it Malayalam speaking villages in Tamil Nadu?) or something like that. With Indian articles it is not always clear what language or languages apply and it does make sense to not have to deal with that in the lead. But, the scripts are in the info box (or you can add them in if not), so I don't really see this as a big problem. --regentspark (comment) 19:17, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

RegentsPark, Thanks, I'm glad to hear it doesn't affect Nepal, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh and Pakistan too. I didn't see this until just now and have followed your suggestion here In ictu oculi (talk) 09:21, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Population and demographics

Please consider when adding 2011 census figures to an article, the preservation of the historical 2001 demographic data. They are of historical interest, and the 2001 data can even be integrated into the text to show the demographic changes over the decade. So, before you erase the 2001 population and demographic numbers on an article, give it a thought. Several editors have done a nice job with such integration. --Bejnar (talk) 21:56, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Isn't most of the population data for 2011 still provisional? We should be really careful if it is. - Sitush (talk) 23:37, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Yup! they are provisional figures. We should wait till the final results are fully published. —Vensatry _{(Ping me)} 04:25, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Well, we should definitely add 2011 provisional data, but adding that they are provisional. Final results won't change drastically. One should use phrase such as, " according to provisional data of 2011 census". And, as Bejnar stated. 2001 data should be preserved, too.--Dwaipayan (talk) 04:37, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

INCOTM restarting

I've been asked to take on co-ordination of the project's Collaboration of the Month, which is more commonly referred to as INCOTM. Anyone can join in but for the purposes of notifying on individual's talk pages etc we have Wikipedia:INCOTM/Members, where you can add your name if you are interested. Similarly, if your name is there but you are no longer interested then you can remove it.

I'll give it a week or so for people to add or amend their details and then we'll open the doors for nominating articles that people want to propose for the next collaboration. - Sitush (talk) 16:20, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Alright! Thanks for the information! --Tito Dutta (contact) 16:34, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Possibly inappropriate page moves

Please see User talk:Nagarjuna198#Vishakhapatnam and please see his contribs for previous page moves. Thanks, Anna Frodesiak (talk) 05:41, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

That editor has given his rationale at the article talk page [18]. That might be a good place to carry on the discussion. Imc (talk) 07:19, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for moving that back. Actually, playing whack-a-mole with his page moves after the fact may not be the best plan. The best plan ought to be for him to seek conensus before any further moves.

This editor has a long history of inappropriate edits including controversial page moves without consensus, and he's been warned for it before. His contribs show many, many page moves, which should be spot checked. I strongly suggest a final warning to him regarding further page moves.

• Nagarjuna198 (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)

Anna Frodesiak (talk) 09:47, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Spot checks

I just spot checked three at random:

• He moved Premaku Swagatham to Premaku Swagatam with triple the google hits for the former.

• He moved Sommokadidhi Sokokadidhi to Sommokadidi Sokokadidi with almost double the google hits for the former.

• He moved Vasantham to Vasantam with 18 times the google hits for the former.

I may be mistaken here, but this matter needs checking by people other than me. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 09:55, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for checking. I am just trying to make the articles better. There is no other agenda. Hope you understand. Nagarjuna198 (talk)

Also please check the references. Nagarjuna198 (talk)

I know you are trying to make articles better, but the issue is whether the names are appropriate. We basically go by what most sources say most of the time, and that usually equals google hits. You've moved over 100 pages and with 4 out of 4 spot-checks going against google, that worries me. So, please stop moving pages until the community weighs-in, okay? Yes? Anna Frodesiak (talk) 10:27, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Sure Nagarjuna198 (talk)

(edit conflict) Stop moving articles! I personally feel you are not doing the required studies too before moving articles. While moving Premaku Swagatham to Premaku Swagatam you wrote to see references. But a quick Google search shows the other spelling is accepted too. Same with Vasantham to Vasantam move. Did you check spelling uses in reliable newspapers? Did you check spelling in CBFC certificates?

And the move of Vishakhapatnam was completely unacceptable.

Follow WP:RM and request moves at talk page! --Tito Dutta (contact) 10:38, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

I agree with Vishakhapatnam but for others, I did check newspapers. However, I only changed the ones which are not spelled correctly(Even though google shows hits). As a native speaker of the language, I know how transliteration of the spelling works but I am only moving the ones which I have references. But like you said we find both the spellings. Nagarjuna198 (talk)

From here on I will follow WP:RM and request moves at talk page.Nagarjuna198 (talk)

I put together User:Anna Frodesiak/Yellow sandbox. It's not pretty but should be good for spot-checking items that don't have "(film)" at the end of the article name. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 10:50, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

I request you to evaluate the news articles by the year of release of the movie. Since these spelling are in the wikipedia from long time, people tend to use the same spellings. Nagarjuna198 (talk)

Which news articles you are talking about? Why didn't you mention that (few URLs) in move rationale or talk page? Actually all these moves are related to Telugu/South Indian pronunciation! To explain, in Telugu/South Indian languages 't' sometimes can be written as 'th' too. "Vaijayanti" and "Vaijayanthi" both are correct there! But if you are writing it in Hindi/Sanskrit then "Vaijayanthi" is incorrect! Its is similar in "Sitush", I won't be surprised if someone writes "Sithush" there! Stop moving articles and request at RM! --Tito Dutta (contact) 11:10, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Telugu pronunciation is different For example అ(a)తి(ti)థి(thi) = atithi (guest). If such name is there and I get hits for both Athithi and Atithi shouldnt I use my judgement? Nagarjuna198 (talk)

That's what I was talking about! You are moving these on your judgement and not Google's or CBFC's opinion! The answer is "no"! You can't move on your judgement of Telugu pronunciation. Since the other spellings are accepted too, you have to follow WP:RM and in talk page while requesting move, provide your opinion/judgement. I won't be surprised if a good number of RMs go in your favour, but, don't move directly! --Tito Dutta (contact) 11:17, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Sure will do. Nagarjuna198 (talk)

• Notify User:Strike_Eagle, see if these are 100% uncontroversial moves! (relevance: Native Telugu speaker) --Tito Dutta (contact) 11:21, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

<invited> Many moves of Nagarjuna seem to be done with speaker knowledge in mind..I mean naming the article by the way we speak it...this is not always true... All the 3 moves mentioned by Anna are wrong in my opinion. the h is necessary in all of the three... Thanks, Strike Σagle 12:39, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the comment! --Tito Dutta (contact) 13:26, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Also most articles dont mention valid sources. I can tell you Strike is not a native Telugu speaker. Strike must be a native Tamil speaker. well, I tried to make the articles better. I can try to add valid references to prove that my moves are valid. I take lot of time to make articles better and all my effort has gone in vain. Nagarjuna198 (talk) 22:18, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

I think people like Kekamohan should come forward and look in to it. Nagarjuna198 (talk) 22:39, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Propose move back

After comment of StrikeEagle we can think of moving back all/selected articles those User:Nagarjuna198 has recently moved! If they are interested they can start WP:RM. --Tito Dutta (contact) 13:26, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

• Support ...and considering this user's history and the fact that he's been warned before and persisted, I would support him agreeing to future page moves he wishes to perform going via WP:RM. Let's stop this from continuing. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 13:45, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
• Support He moved the pages without any consensus whatsoever. As per Tito, they could start a RM if they still insist in the move. Strike Σagle 13:55, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
• Support - per StrikeEagle. Tolly4bolly 14:13, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
• Support - Same sound is written as tha is south and ta in north. So as earlier has been commented CFBC, google hits should be used to decide the best word.--Vigyani_talk^{ਯੋਗਦਾਨ} 14:40, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Seeing the votes and comments above, I feel the consensus is going to be to move back. In case if someone wants to to oppose it, it is requested to present their arguments as soon as possible. --Tito Dutta (contact) 21:30, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

@Titodutta: Not sure why are you hellbent on deliberately misspelling Telugu names. There should be more discussions Nagarjuna198 (talk) 23:45, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

..There should be more discussions — are we doing Scuba diving here? This is the section where we are discussing and you are not joining the discussion, you named/asked someone to join the discussion, they have not appeared still and it is still not clear why you moved so many articles on personal opinion and knowledge when it was clear other spelling variants were acceptable (per Google search) too! --Tito Dutta (contact) 23:57, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Yes, The discussion are just one way. There is no assumption of faith in my edits. Everyone puts a note: "this user has long history of controversial edits" where in my say is just being dismissed. Nagarjuna198 (talk) 00:05, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

This discussion is more like a deil's advocate.Nagarjuna198 (talk) 00:08, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Control your tongue! If we hadn't assumed good faith, we had moved back these articles already! --Tito Dutta (contact) 00:14, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

I am not pointing at you. Just see how many time "Strike Eagle" mentioned that in his note.Nagarjuna198 (talk) 00:21, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

I apologize Mr. Tito Dutta. I take lot of time to make changes to make articles better. I am sorry to show the frustration.Nagarjuna198 (talk) 00:27, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

• Hold on - WP:BRD should and can be applied by anyone on a case by case basis to any recent move anywhere on en.wp. And I don't know the background here to all the moves, but please explain to me Rachcha. From the move history it looks like it was sitting quite happily at the correct and accurate title and then StrikeEagle moved it to an incorrect spelling. So WP:BRD should apply there too. What am I missing? In ictu oculi (talk) 22:42, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Racha is not included in this discussion, see the list of affected articles here User:Anna Frodesiak/Yellow sandbox (stable version) --Tito Dutta (contact) 23:17, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Yes I see that Rachcha/Racha isn't included in this discussion, but why's that? What's the difference between StrikeEagle making undiscussed moves in one direction and User:Nagarjuna198 doing it?

It would be helpful if someone could link to the relevant guideline WP:TELUGU or WP:ANDHRA about romanization of Telugu, rather than (as both sides seem to be doing, not you Tito) personalizing this. In ictu oculi (talk) 23:34, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

You can see those pages don't exist... In addition this proposal does not state that they were incorrect but it says those move were based on "personal opinion and not studies or reliable sources", hence suggests to move back, they surely can start RM after that! --Tito Dutta (contact) 23:45, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Hi Tito, I can see WP:TELUGU or WP:ANDHRA don't exist, but just because shortcuts are redlinks doesn't mean the page doesn't exist. Is there no WP India guideline or MOS page for Telugu/Andhra MOS? (caveat, I suspect there isn't because when I started a stub on romanization of Telugu article stub yesterday I searched for 2-3 minutes but couldn't find anything). My point is that rather than moving, unmoving, WP:BRD, WP:RM etc. having an overall MOS discussion is a better way forward. In ictu oculi (talk) 00:16, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

All the pages that I moved dont have reliable sources earlier either to state that its spelled that way. How about people who oppose start RM. Nagarjuna198 (talk) 23:51, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Telugu Consonants: Telugu Consonants: ka (క), kha (ఖ), ga (గ), gha (ఘ),ṅa (ఙ), ca (చ) (ITRANS (cha)), cha (ఛ)(ITRANS (chha)), ja (జ), jha (ఝ), ña (ఞ), ṭa (ట), ṭha (ఠ), ḍa (డ), ḍha (ఢ), ṇa (ణ), ta (త), tha (థ), da (ద), dha (ధ), na (న), pa (ప), pha (ఫ), ba (బ), bha (భ), ma (మ), ya (య), ra (ర), la (ల), va (వ), śa (శ) (ITRANS (Sha)), ṣa (ష) (ITRANS (Sha)), sa (స), ha (హ). Irregular Consonant Clusters: kṣa(క్ష), tra (త్ర), jña (జ్ఞ), śra (శ్ర) Nagarjuna198 (talk) 23:53, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

why Racha ->Rachcha is still being opposed? Nagarjuna198 (talk) 00:13, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Nagarjuna, is this ISO romanization? Does it have support of AP government? In ictu oculi (talk) 00:17, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Telugu Script uses ISO. ISO 15919 Transliteration of Devanagari and related Indic scripts into Latin characters. Nagarjuna198 (talk) 00:40, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

ISO	k	kh	g	gh	ṅ	c	ch	j	jh	ñ	ṭ	ṭh	ḍ	ḍh	ṇ	t	th	d	dh	n	ṉ	p	ph	b	bh	m	y	r	ṟ	l	ḷ	ḻ	v	ś	ṣ	s	h
IPA	k	kʰ	ɡ	ɡʱ	ŋ	tʃ	tʃʰ	dʒ	dʒʱ	ɲ	ʈ	ʈʰ	ɖ	ɖʱ	ɳ	t̪	t̪ʰ	d̪	d̪ʱ	n	n̪	p	pʰ	b	bʱ	m	j	ɾ	r	l	ɭ	ɻ	ʋ	ʃ	ʂ	s	ɦ
Telugu	క	ఖ	గ	ఘ	ఙ	చ	ఛ	జ	ఝ	ఞ	ట	ఠ	డ	ఢ	ణ	త	థ	ద	ధ	న		ప	ఫ	బ	భ	మ	య	ర	ఱ	ల	ళ		వ	శ	ష	స	హ

What is this? Citation needed for this table. In addition it does not clarify why we should ignore the other spelling variations! --Tito Dutta (contact) 00:51, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Citation and Comment, this table s/he has taken from Romanization of Telugu and the correct reference is this. But I think question here is not how to write Telugu movie name into Roman alphabets, but which name is more popular. It is not that, we are using non-English sources and we need to transliterate it. What if for example a certain movie maker does not follow ISO guidelines, makes a movie in Telugu, using some other non-ISO method to transliterate into english and promote it by that name. Most of the newspapers, magazine etc use this non-ISO english word. So do we on WP impose the ISO certified name? --Vigyani_talk^{ਯੋਗਦਾਨ} 09:06, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Vigyani, according to our naming policy (see WP:UE), the first choice is whatever is commonly used in English (whether it is correctly transliterated or not). If there isn't any common English name, then we try to follow whatever guideline is available. If ISO is the only one, we might as well use that. If there are competing guidelines, we need a language level consensus. If 'most of the newspapers, magazines etc" use a non-ISO English word, then that's what we should be using as well. But, you'll need to make the case on an article by article basis which is why we should move these articles back and then discuss the moves. --regentspark (comment) 11:08, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Most of the movie pages that I moved were old movies. Some of them had many different names in the sources. So, I changed it to well known spelling which is close to the Transliteration. Nagarjuna198 (talk) 11:24, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

yeah yeah RegentsPark, I know it :p. My question was just to demonstrate Nagarjuna that this table was not required here as the discussion is not about the the correct transliteration. And even if he wanted he could have just link the reference or the source WP page :).--Vigyani_talk^{ਯੋਗਦਾਨ} 12:47, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks Vigyani. Looks like you didnt read discussions above. Like I said, most of my earlier moves were the articles which dont have any citations/references or bad sources which fails WP:IRS. Each article should be moved based on its merits and after considering edit summaries.Nagarjuna198 (talk) 13:40, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

I read the entire discussion above and below. I understand what you mean. But by showing the table you mean to indicate that your transliteration is correct (tell me if it is something else). As I mentioned, that is correct let us say. But we need to go by references. So if you say that that they didn't had reference or had bad reference, then we need to find and put reference rather using our own judgment.--Vigyani_talk^{ਯੋਗਦਾਨ} 15:54, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

• Support Generally, if a move is contested, then it should be moved back and an RM discussion initiated (See WP:RM/TR). Since this set of moves is contested, the entire set should be moved back. Discussion on guidelines etc. should take place after that. --regentspark (comment) 00:42, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Good point! --Tito Dutta (contact) 00:45, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

I said it first. :). That WP:BRD includes Rachcha, RegentsPark can you revert and close that too please. In ictu oculi (talk) 00:48, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Why are you mentioning Racha so many times? :) Please create a new section on it and discuss if it should be moved back too! --Tito Dutta (contact) 00:54, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Evenhandedness. In ictu oculi (talk) 00:58, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

• Partially Support: Each article should be moved based on its merits and after considering edit summaries.Nagarjuna198 (talk) 02:12, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

• Racha (film) → Rachcha (film): Rachcha. Talk:Racha (film)#Requested move. Can anybody give me rationale why still people are are opposing move of Racha (film) → Rachcha (film)?Nagarjuna198 (talk) 13:32, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

• It was requested to create a new section on "Racha" if needed since that is not the topic of this discussion! --Tito Dutta (contact) 15:28, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

• Need consensus/conclusion: We should attempt to reach to conclusion now! --Tito Dutta (contact) 18:46, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Indic Script added on editor's comment

Nagarjuna 198 has been adding Indic scripts in articles (example), anyway, I want to draw your attention towards this edit where his edit summary was ''((adding {{lang|te|సీతమ్మ వాకిట్లో సిరిమల్లె చెట్టు }} (''{{unicode|Sītamma Vākiṭlō'') as per RegentsPark suggestion on Wikipedia_talk:Noticeboard_for_India-related_topics 19:17, 6 May 2013)) --Tito Dutta (contact) 15:55, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Since we cant add in the article, adding it in info-box is not prohibitted.Nagarjuna198 (talk) 16:03, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

If we're going to add indic scripts in infoboxes, I wonder if there is an appropriate field for doing so. Perhaps the native name field? --regentspark (comment) 16:14, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

There is no consensus to add Indic script in lead or infobox or article. See the most used summary here User:Sitush/Common#Scripts. --Tito Dutta (contact) 16:17, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

I know there is no consensus and personally I don't think we should include them. But this seems to be a perennial battle so my guess is that we can't avoid their inclusion. Best to manage the process. --regentspark (comment) 17:27, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

A consensus needed! --Tito Dutta (contact) 17:59, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

The native name field would be correct, if we must have these things at all. I'm still not happy about it and I know that some others have expressed similar sentiments: the main infobox for an article is at least as prominent as the lead and it effectively forms a part of it due to the location. It is as likely to be warred-over, vandalised etc as the lead itself. BTW, I think we should refer to WP:INDICSCRIPT rather than my userspace effort, which pre-dated that item being included in MOS. Treat my userspace version as a short essay. - Sitush (talk) 16:20, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Consensus for adding Indic Script in Infobox

• Support : It would be nice because if there are ambiguous, it would help resolve issues without having to request page moves and discussions. Nagarjuna198 (talk) 19:16, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

You are trying to run too fast! --Tito Dutta (contact) 19:24, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Indeed. I think you need to go up to the main section and explain "if there are ambiguous, it would help to resolve issues". It seems to be a contradiction. - Sitush (talk) 19:27, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Here I asked them to write edit summary (and asked them to use Twinkle, since I saw he was adding {{Talkback}} manually). As usual, he paid no attention. Again, I reminded him to write edit summaries and he promised to write edit summaries (diff). Still he is continuing without edit summaries!

In case if he is really seeking consensus, why did he add Indic script before discussing? --Tito Dutta (contact) 19:36, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

I added because - "I believe that the consensus was that it was ok to use indic scripts in an info box. In which case, you would have no problem finding sources. --regentspark (comment) 21:14, 3 May 2013 (UTC)Nagarjuna198 (talk) 20:19, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Carving out Malappuram district to secure Muslim votes

Can anyone provide a citation of the fact that in 1956 the communist government in Kerala under E. M. S. Namboodiripad created the Malappuram district to secure Muslim votes. Solomon7968 (talk) 22:35, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

• In my opinion, it is difficult to collect citation for this. Page 1123 of this book may have some information. You can request content at WP:RX! I did not find any information at HighBeam, Jstor, Questia! --Tito Dutta (contact) 04:09, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

Interested editors can consult the book Muslim Politics In India by Srikanta Ghosh where he quotes What do you think of a Muslim MLA from the Andhra Pradesh, publicly suggesting that there should be a separate Muslim State within each State of India. My god t=yet another Pakistan! Solomon7968 (talk) 06:02, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

Review

A vast majority of [19] this article's submissions are in an Indian language. If someone would be able to check them, it'd be appreciated :)

gwickwire^talk_editing 02:08, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

Afzal Guru

Could someone check and see if the recent edits to this article make sense. Thanks. --regentspark (comment) 20:20, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Excellent catch RegentsPark. I am not saying their edits are incorrect, but, it is PoV pushing (i.e. anti India PoV) and their edits attempt to convert the descriptor "terrorist" to "militant" (see removal of the word,category "Terrorist", changing from "died" to "executed (secretly)" etc. --Tito Dutta (contact) 03:54, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

I have removed obvious POV's. But article need more careful examination of recent changes.--Vigyani_talk^{ਯੋਗਦਾਨ} 07:03, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

Seriously tired! Anyone knows proper channel?

Last January someone tried to add some negative comment in Bhagavad Gita article with some Wikiversity source. At that time we found some anti-India Wikiversity content. Mostly defamatory content against India without explanation

Examples

• "The Devil has taken the shape of Asia and His heart is India."
• "Freedom for India is freedom for evil."
• "India is a cancer." etc.
• "A developing India is a developing cancer."
• "India’s advancement will give the world wrong ideals and bad influence – A Better India: A Worse World." etc

I requested for deletion at Wikiversity. I also nominated the biographical article for deletion at Hindi Wikipedia (the English Wikipedia article has been deleted for notability reason and they have created articles in a bunch of other Wikipedias.

It is almost five months and nothing has been done yet, neither in Wikiversity, nor in Hindi Wikipedia. I asked an editor at Wikiversity, he somehow sent me to vote at his "request for custodianship".

Anyone knows proper channel? --Tito Dutta (contact) 19:05, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

Dear Titto Dutta, Good Morning! I think you are referring to this http://www.webcitation.org/6DvYmztOX link. Please note that it is not the information about 'Bhagavad Gita' per say but about Bhagavad Gita/The 'Satanic Verses of Bhagavad-gita'. Now it is a book and they are writing about the content given in the book. So if one wants to take objection, they will have to take on the book.

I have read Bhagvat Gita and I find many verses very useful. Some people may have objection about some verses. What is the proper way if they have objections? I think writing is the best way to show your disagreement, which some people are doing. Now we can ignore it as there are many people in the world and they have right to express their opinions. I think that if we dont like some opinions, we should igore it. If we oppose it too much, we are in fact making the other opinion more popular! Thanks. --Abhijeet Safai (talk) 03:49, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

• Wikiversity stores educational resources, not craps! They can post those in their website or blogs! Thankfully Wikiversity articles are finally deleted! Now, the other languages Wikipedia articles remain! --Tito Dutta (contact) 04:45, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

• Dear Titto Dutta, can you give the link where objectionable content has been added? Thanks. --Abhijeet Safai (talk) 08:21, 27 May 2013 (UTC)
• What do you mean by "objectionable content"? The edit made at Bhagavad Gita article was: Diff --Tito Dutta (contact) 08:30, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

• Dear Titto Dutta, Thanks. The reference page in the Wikiversity has been deleted. Hence the content is removed. You say in your earlier post that the vandalized articles in other languages remain. Can you give link to these articles which needs cleanup? I am an editor at Marathi Wikipedia. I would like to mention that I have not seen any vandalism regarding this point in Marathi Wikipedia. Thanks. -- Abhijeet Safai (talk) 06:36, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

• I did not say "vandalism", I use the word "vandalism" very rarely! :-) Anyway, hi:केदार_जोशी, mr:केदार_जोशी, bh:केदार_जोशी, ne:केदार_जोशी and there are more. Go to any of these pages and you'll get interwiki links at right side bar! I'll post Marathi page's link at your Marathi Wikipedia talk page. The point is since the English Wikipedia has been deleted for non-notability or some other reasons, other Wikipedia articles need to be checked too. Requesting review of so many articles one by one might be time-taking. One can head to Meta and request to review all— the main post requested suggestion on that! --Tito Dutta (contact) 06:44, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

• I have removed the quotes form Marathi Wikipedia. Thanks. --Abhijeet Safai (talk) 07:39, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

• WP:GNG is the issue! I may go to Meta or somewhere sometime and request checking notability of all articles! --Tito Dutta (contact) 07:44, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

• Some of the other links are - 1, 2, 3, 4 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Abhijeet Safai (talk • contribs) 09:32, 29 May 2013‎

• Ya, these are added in interwiki! --Tito Dutta (contact) 10:02, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

Kahaani FAC

The article Kahaani is in FAC. Any comments will be highly valued.--Dwaipayan (talk) 19:14, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

Mischievous rename

There is a move to rename Liberation of Dadra and Nagar Haveli to improperly as Indian annexation of Dadra and Nagar Haveli, as if India can "annex" its own territory, which is laughable but a requested move has been opened and I hope some of you guys can take a look at it and leave their comments. Thanks --Neelkamala (talk) 05:21, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

Edit, link to discussion page Talk:Liberation of Dadra and Nagar Haveli.--Neelkamala (talk) 05:22, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

Important images need attention

The following images of the article need attention. According to Wikimedia policy, an image should be free in both US and the image's own country. The following images don't have US tempolate. Please help adding relevant templates. Tito Dutta  (talk • contributions • email) 06:11, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

Mahatma Gandhi

• File:God is Truth.jpg
• File:Young Gandhi.jpg
• File:Gandhi and Kasturbhai 1902.jpg
• File:Gandhi South-Africa.jpg
• File:Gandhi suit.jpg
• File:Gandhi spinning.jpg
• File:Gandhi and Nehru 1942.jpg
• File:Gandhi Jinnah 1944.jpg
• File:Mountbattens with Gandhi (IND 5298).jpg
• File:Funeral Procession of Mahatma Gandhi.jpg
• File:Gandhi and Indira 1924.jpg

Rabindranath Tagore

• File:Tagore-THU.jpg
• File:Tagore Iran.jpg
• File:Valmiki Pratibha Indira Devi & Rabindranath Tagore.jpg

There is an RM at Talk:Godhra train burning

RM is to move Godhra train burning to a more suitable name, something like Godhra train carnage, Godhra train massacre, Godhra train violence. At present it seems as though the train was the main target, that's why the RM was proposed for clarity issues (Per WP:COMMONNAME "Ambiguous or inaccurate names for the article subject, as determined in reliable sources, are often avoided even though they may be more frequently used by reliable sources."). Mr T^{(Talk?) (New thread?)} 11:07, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

RM closed as "no consensus". I don't think mentioning here the opinion that the proposed alternates titles were "more suitable" quite agrees with WP:CANVAS but, hey, it is done with now. - Sitush (talk) 23:09, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia Ambassador Program course assignment

This article is the subject of an educational assignment at University of Utah supported by the Wikipedia Ambassador Program during the 2013 Spring term. Further details are available on the course page.

The above message was substituted from {{WAP assignment}} by PrimeBOT (talk) on 17:00, 2 January 2023 (UTC)