Talk:Velim, Goa

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Velim, Goa article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

India: Goa / Geography Low‑importance

	India portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Goa (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by the Indian geography workgroup (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article was last assessed in May 2024.

Geography Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Geography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of geography on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.GeographyWikipedia:WikiProject GeographyTemplate:WikiProject Geographygeography articles

Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Geography To-do list:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : See Requested articles/Social sciences/Geography, cities, regions and named places and Missing articles about Locations
Assess : Tag related article talk pages with {{WikiProject Geography}}. To help assess the quality and importance of geography articles, please see: Unassessed geography articles and Unknown-importance geography articles.
Cleanup : See Geography articles needing attention
Deletion sorting : Listed at Geographic related deletion discussions
Geographical coordinates : See Articles missing geocoordinate data by country
Infobox : See Geography articles needing infoboxes
Map : See Wikipedia requested maps
Notability : See Geography articles with topics of unclear notability
Photo : See Wikipedia requested photographs of places
Stubs : See Geography stubs

Villages (defunct)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Villages, a project which is currently considered to be defunct.VillagesWikipedia:WikiProject VillagesTemplate:WikiProject VillagesVillages articles

Cities

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cities, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of cities, towns and various other settlements on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CitiesWikipedia:WikiProject CitiesTemplate:WikiProject CitiesWikiProject Cities articles

Daily pageviews of this article

A graph should have been displayed here but graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at pageviews.wmcloud.org

Merge proposal

Merge stub Naik-Caiero, Silvas and Ubdando into this article with separate redirects. They are parts of this village and do not appear to need or justify separate articles. · · · Peter Southwood ^(talk): 09:48, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Here's my reply User talk:Pbsouthwood#Regarding your merge tag at Naik-Caiero, Silvas and Ubdando. ✠ Rejoy2003 ✠ (contact) 11:43, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Rejoy2003, Please keep discussions on article content on the article talk page where the discussion was started, so that other interested parties can contribute in the proper place. I will move your response to here where it should have been posted in the first place, and will respond to it here. · · · Peter Southwood ^(talk): 10:40, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding your merge tag at Naik-Caiero, Silvas and Ubdando

Hello, I'm quite taken away by your placement of the merge tag on article Naik-Caiero, Silvas and Ubdando. Firstly, I'm against it. Why? Because there are similar articles that have already been reviewed and are "village subdivisions" of Velim village. See Tollecanto, Cutbona & Baradi, Goa. I think this article should not be merged but stay as it is as an independent article.

If the problem is mention of three subdivisions as the article name, we can have them made independent articles for each subdivision for eg. Naik-Caiero article etc, which I think might be appropriate given the current circumstances. ✠ Rejoy2003 ✠ (contact) 09:54, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Rejoy2003 The correct place to discuss a proposed merge is at the article talk page where the merge is proposed. To get my attention, you can simply ping me from your comments there. My talk page is not the proper place for this discussion. Cheers, · · · Peter Southwood ^(talk): 09:55, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Rejoy2003 If you are against the proposed merge, you are free to contest it by explaining why it would be better for Wikipedia to keep the articles separate. Please take into account the relevant Wikipedia content policies, which may be referred to when assessing the merger. At present Naik-Caiero, Silvas and Ubdando is a stub, it is about three subdivisions of a village, which it would appear is made up of quite a large number of subdivisions, there is currently no content in the main article about the subdivisions other than links, and there is no obvious reason why is should not be merged into the article on the village, which is currently quite small, and would be improved by having more content. It is not necessarily relevant that other subdivisions have been reviewed and not tagged for merging. This could happen at any time if in the considered opinion of one or more editors, the encyclopedia would be improved by merging them. As I have not looked at the other subdivision articles I cannot comment further on them at this stage. Bear in mind also that a merge is not necessarily permanent, and the article can be split again if and when it becomes too big, or some other legitimate reason to split arises. Personal preferences do not carry any weight in this decision if they conflict with policy.· · · Peter Southwood ^(talk): 12:31, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Merge - zero rationale for a separate article. Makes much more sense to include in target.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:18, 24 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Merge no reason for separate article with the small amount of info about a specific ward of a village, better included in main ariticle. MB 16:55, 24 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]