Talk:Govind Ballabh Pant

The following Wikipedia contributors may be personally or professionally connected to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include conflict of interest, autobiography, and neutral point of view. Shadowfinder (talk · contribs) This user has declared a connection. Sureshpandey (talk · contribs) This user has declared a connection.

This article is written in Indian English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, analysed, defence) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

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

Biography: Politics and Government This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles This article is supported by the politics and government work group. India: History / Politics Mid‑importance 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 Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by the Indian history workgroup (assessed as Mid-importance). This article is supported by the Indian politics workgroup (assessed as High-importance).

Pant is a Nepali caste. How come GB Pant has Indian roots? Pant/Panta is classified in Khas Bahun (Nepali Brahmin) family. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.63.247.150 (talk) 09:03, 3 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please see

WP:NOTFORUM. Indian and Nepali cultures share a lot of features. - Kautilya3 (talk) 09:36, 3 October 2015 (UTC)[reply

]

There is large amount of unsourced stuff in this article.. I Can also see some POV Pushing .. image insertion/formatting is also not in line with standard articles.. they stink of fancruft.. Article should be properly sourced and referenced.. Or else, I will start clean up drive at once.. Adamstraw99 (talk) 14:06, 18 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. I just removed them again. KoshVorlon 19:10, 31 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia pages of Bharat Ratna Govind Ballabh Pant, Former Defence Minister of India, K.C. Pant and Ila Pant Member of Parliament -12th lok Sabha

The Images are “Historic” and the question is not of the webpage looking cluttered – The Issue is that we have shared the wiki pages with atleast 100 odd readers and their view was that the content and the photographs/ visuals /images have a “great flow” and makes the reading “very interesting” for the wikipedia readers – This by the way our feedback from the readers form Uttarakhand, Uttra Pradesh, Mumbai, Lucknow, Boston, New-York, Tel-Aviv, London and Toronto. Sureshpandey (talk) 07:39, 1 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Sureshpandey, I will tell you about all three articles and what I Think is wrong with them :--

in GB Pant article --> There is no question of this politician's notability or significance. statements and Images are notable/relevant but problem is your reckless excessive stuffing of them at inappropriate places and making the article look ugly and not a good reading experience for Wikipedia users. if you can post these photos in compliance with Wikipedia guidelines then i don't think anybody will remove them.

in KC Pant article--> here, in addition to excessive image stuffing and inappropriate placements, some statements truly look like fan-work (or paid promotions) which neither meet the recognition of this politician nor Wikipedia guidelines.. that's why you are being asked, time and again, to provide the sources for your statements in this article. well sourced, relevant, notable/significant and reliable text will not be removed.

in Ila pant --> many issues in this article.. in addition to issues raised for KC article, this article has many additional issues.This article looks nothing more than a personal blog filled with nothing except Original Research... you are posting things under "political life" section which are not even political. you are desperately pushing her other work (which i don't think is either significant enough, or political enough to post under political work section) and go on silence-mode when these sections/ statements are tagged with certain issues.. instead of addressing these issues/sourcing article properly, you go on reckless random reverts logged-in and logged-out.. This is not going to help unless you address and resolve issues on article's talk page... Please keep in mind any editor is free to remove statements which fall under "Original Research"...

Thanks for understanding --Adamstraw99 (talk) 08:45, 1 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Adamstraw99, Thanks for your input- will be responding soon to satisfy your concerns. Sureshpandey (talk) 09:27, 1 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Adamstraw99 Thank you for your comments on 1/4/2016.

We wish to reiterate that we have received innumerable appreciative comments from readers on our recent updated version of the 125 years cumulative 3 Wikipedia pages , and therefore hope for your understanding instead.

@ Suresh / Akash / Neeraj / Govinda / Gaurika.Sureshpandey (talk), I have embbed my responses below --Adamstraw99 (talk) 08:48, 4 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

However considering positively some of the key issues raised we appreciate your comments and have some queries . In G B Pant Wikipedia page :

• “Who ( which reader/editor ) determines the parameters of what looks beautiful or ugly,

-- here looking beautiful or ugly is in context with how biographies of politicians are maintained in Wikipedia articles. If images are inserted randomly and at inappropriate places, Article looks cluttered.. and ANY editor/Administrator can determine the parameters of article layout/formatting. in your articles some of the guidelines here were not followed -->>

--"A luminary who for 40 years held the highest Indian Cabinet and Constitutional positions involving strategic and critical and sensitive decision making across political divides" should also have the "third party, reliable and neutral sources to support his political work or achievements and well sourced content will not be removed Adamstraw99 (talk) 08:48, 4 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Adamstraw99 thank you .all reliable , neutral and third parties will bear testimony to the authenticity of these works and achievements whenever an editor requires any specific authentication these can be sourced from Indian government records.Sureshpandey (talk) 09:57, 5 April 2016 (UTC) ––––––––––––––––[reply]

Could it be clarified who determines “Well Sourced, relevant , notable/significant and reliable” .From those who have visited and accessed this page the feedback has been that it has all the qualities of being authentic data.

Our sources are first hand , well researched and backed by and through 40 years of government documentations from PIB (Official Press Information Bureau , Government of India), accredited India News Agency, PTI and UNI along with official visual proofs ( in your own words images which are notable/relevant.)

--Surly it can be clarified, and is already clarified... These guidelines determines Well Sourced, relevant , notable/significant and reliable content -->>

Sureshpandey (talk) 09:57, 5 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

In Ila Pant Wikipedia page:

We will recheck “Original research” issue as per Wikipedia guidelines.

--Thanks for that --Adamstraw99 (talk) 08:48, 4 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This while , keeping in mind the issue specifically raised to separate the

1) “political life” as the first woman Parliamentarian , the relevance in the establishment and formation of the 27th State of India - Uttarakhand and

2) Social service activities relating to her civil society contributions spanning thirty years, publishing of the 18 volumes , establishment of the Best Parliamentarian Award of India .

All authenticated , documented and published within Government sources.

--1)You are factually incorrect here. Ila pant is NOT the first woman Parliamentarian From uttarakhand. How can she be???, when she won election in the year 1998 AND Uttarakhand came into existence in the year 2000????????????????????????????????????. --Adamstraw99 (talk) 08:48, 4 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

.... Facts to be stated indeed , She is the first woman Parliamentarian from Nainital, Uttar  Pradesh  ( now Uttarakhand ) and a major force behind the creation of the 27th NewState UTTARAKHAND.Sureshpandey (talk) 09:57, 5 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

--2) Social services are not political activities. You can create separate section for that. But you will still need to source the statements from a non-neutral, third party, reliable source. Adamstraw99 (talk) 08:48, 4 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

--Indeed this will be created as a subsection, all of the activities are documented , widely circulated and registered in the Registrar of Societies, should any need third party confirmation they are in the public domain.Sureshpandey (talk) 09:57, 5 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It is our team's wish for the Wikipedia page to be factual, neutral ,authentic and informative .

Suresh / Akash / Neeraj / Govinda / Gaurika.

Sureshpandey (talk) 05:51, 4 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

--Thanks for that.. All what community expect from you is source your content with third party reliable sources and follow the Wikipedia Biography guidelines listed here -->>

--thanks --Adamstraw99 (talk) 08:48, 4 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

   ::As researchers and IT experts we have attempted a informative narrative , we are now more aware of wiki biography guidelines and should be able to bring it in line with wiki policies.your constructive approach has assisted. Hopefully our uploads will not need so much time and intervention.

Regards, Sureshpandey (talk) 09:57, 5 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Adamstraw99 we are waiting for your response.Sureshpandey (talk) 11:50, 6 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Sureshpandey, Hi, I'M sorry for being late in replying.. just another busy day with cleaning up spam in several city articles..

Adamstraw99

No apologies necessary , in fact we were so positive and relieved hoping that surely (!!) finally some acceptance levels may have been reached vis a vis at least the GBP and KCP wiki pages.

Although I P remains wip – ( work in progress)

Sureshpandey (talk) 04:29, 30 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it is always good for Wikipedia if people are in agreement with following the wiki biography guidelines as you say you will.. Just two things... 1) it does not really matter whether people of various countries read your article or not, praise it or condemn it, appreciate it or criticise it. What matters is, Wikipedia biography articles MUST comply with the several guidelines you were told in previous comments..

NOTED !

Sureshpandey (talk) 04:29, 30 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

and 2) It also does not really matter whether an editor is a "researcher" or "IT Expert"..For anybody who is literate enough to read and write can use Wikipedia. But if somebody is working on biographical articles, then it would be good for the community if he/she is capable enough to read, understand and follow certain given guidelines in the article's subject area(in your case, this is Biography)

ABSOLUTELY IN AGREEMENT

..Also,just like you say you are now aware of guidelines.. I was wondering whether you have read some more important things which may concern you? Here they are -->> 1)

THANK YOU FOR YOUR GUIDANCE. All are noted and will be kept in mind

Sureshpandey (talk) 04:29, 30 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

-- Thanks Adamstraw99 (talk) 14:06, 6 April 2016 (UTC) @Adamstraw99[reply]

WE WOULD SEEK YOUR OR WHICHEVER AUTHORITY/READER/EDITOR/COLLABORATOR works so intensely with WIKIPEDIA to 1) go through the pages we would finally put on Wiki ( and share with you directly as well ) , and to kindly NOT ARBITRARILY DELETE /DISTORT its formatting. There ARE very valid reasons and a method in the intenseness we have been going through perseveringly and persistently with Wiki during the last few weeks . 2) The data we are updating needs must match , and be factual . You will appreciate that Wiki pages need to be with the data we have been currently working on . This is backed by a tremendous large cache of corroborative evidence – published and well circulated material. 3) Any disputed issue could and please be identified and sent to us , we shall immediately verify and if required as you have seen so far , incorporate. It is extremely unfair when unknown, unidentified deletions or additions are made, especially since we are not aware by whom , on what basis , with what knowledge of insights, judgements are passed , comments made, and contentious issues raised . Surely in the ocean of data that Wiki have these three pages are but a speck . It is extremely appreciated that so much detailing and attention is devoted, however the use of certain objectionable terms belie professionalism. A biography of a living person or of those that has passed on depends upon data and research , this is what we did, and continue to do. We hope this will conclude our dialogue in the spirit that it was taken up in the best interests of the protagonists.

Sureshpandey (talk) 04:29, 30 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]