Wikipedia talk:Noticeboard for India-related topics/Archive 7
This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Infoboxes
- Gujarat used another box [1] - I reverted to the standard box.
- I moved some infoboxes. The name should allways be like "Infobox Foo" with capital F.
- I used Infobox State IN, Infobox District IN, Infobox City IN. Maybe town is more apropriate? I used the two letter country code as I have seen it for some other subdivision templates. I used the subdivision term before the "IN", so in Infobox listings all state/city/disrict templates would be grouped together. One could also argue it is better to have all India templates together and thus use "Infobox IN state". - But than all the subdivision boxes will be very much dispersed. (Talk)07:19, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
- Some minor adjustments have to be made: Some districts are classified as 100% urban, so we would have to have an extra template. Also union territories use another infobox. =Nichalp «Talk»= 05:25, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
Srinagar (city)
Could any of the admins please do the following,
- Delete Srinagar. It is a disambiguation page.
- Move Srinagar (city)to Srinagar.
This is the convention we follow when creating city and district articles with a similar name. See WikiProject Indian districts.
I have updated the Srinagar (city) article with a link to the district one. Thanks, Ganeshk (talk) 23:22, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
Indian district project
I'm launching an ambitious project to populate and disambiguate all Indian districts. See:
- Part 1 -- If a district and its district headquarters share the same name, then split it into two articles. The town gets the name (eg: Mysore) and the district will have the word district appended to it (eg Mysore district). Note that the word district is in small case.
- Part 2 -- Populate all red links
- Part 3 -- Add infoboxes to all districts. (A bot probably will be needed)
Any volunteers? =Nichalp «Talk»= 05:39, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
- Done:
- Andaman and Nicobar, Andhra Pradesh, Goa, Chandigarh, Sikkim, Daman and Diu, Dadra and Nagar Haveli, Meghalaya, Tripura. =Nichalp «Talk»= 06:13, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
- +Arunachal Pradesh
- + Maharashtra
Tom and me and some others allready did a lot of these splittings. Actually you reverted Tirap and Lohit. One should not only look for whether the town and district have the same name, but there can also be other things in the world having the district's name. In most cases better add the word "District" now, than to fix lots of links later.
- Yeah, I'm aware of the Tirap and Lohit dab pages. I had created a 12:43, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
But you changed links that referred to Lohit District to Lohit. Why? BTW I moved your "River X" to "X River" as this is the naming used for other articles in
- Having the uppercase title "District" is against 13:10, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
- WRONG. Please read Names of Wikipedia articles should be optimized for readers over editors; and for a general audience over specialists. (Talk)09:06, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
- WRONG. Please read Names of Wikipedia articles should be optimized for readers over editors; and for a general audience over specialists.
- Anantapur district (NDTV), Anantnag district (ToI), Kinnaur district (Hindustan times). As I've pointed by these three examples, the word district is in small case.
- Names of Wikipedia articles should be optimized for readers over editors: I don't see why this is a conflict between readers and editors. It has to do with the correct capitalisation of a word. Hardly something a reader would misunderstand.
- See Wikipedia:WikiProject Rivers : River articles may be named "X", "X River", or "River X", depending on location and most common usage. River X is more prevalent in British English and since Indian English follows BE, there's nothing wrong with having "River X".
Regards, =Nichalp «Talk»= 09:24, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
- For rivers I would prefer using X River.--Raghu 16:45, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
- Done:
Assam - Ganeshk (talk) 07:06, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
Vote
Let's put this through a vote:
what nonsense is this? to vote ont the notice board? you can also vote on your userpage and invite your friends. Tobias Conradi 23:19, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
- And why do you have problems with the vote being placed here? This notice board is meant to discuss India-related topics, the ideal place for such a vote. Secondly, I don't need to set my userpage or invite friends over. Please note that we are seeking a larger mandate, and are following all wikipedia procedures of fair resolution. As the opposing party, I though it would be fair to invite you over here to share your opinion, and so have messaged only you. I don't see the need for you to be so obstinate and defensive. Regards, =Nichalp «Talk»= 04:43, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
- It makes lot of sense to have the vote here; else, people would turn back and say, "you held the vote on your user page and invited your friends - it should be in a more public place etc." ;) Anyways, polls without discussion are evil; not polls per se. People who vote here would obviously have a look at the discussion above, before voting. Or may be, should we call it a straw poll? --Gurubrahma 04:43, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
X district
- =Nichalp «Talk»= 09:30, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
- --Gurubrahma 12:05, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
- Ganeshk (talk) 15:37, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
- --Raghu 16:45, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
- Taxman Talk 19:27, 10 February 2006 (UTC) This makes sense, but is assuming "district" is not part of the proper name, is that a correct assumption? Either way, it will be nice to have standardization on the district names and separate articles for the district and the HQ.
X District
Portal:India
We must get portal:India up to featured status. =Nichalp «Talk»= 10:17, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
- Yes, this is certainly a good idea. We all should plan to achieve this status for our portal:India. --Bhadani 12:46, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
Some suggestions and comments:
- Remove Hinduism template.
- Somehow make the world map showing India link fit into the box (expanding the lead text is the easiest way.)
- Why does the quote section have so much empty space?
- There are other empty spaces that can be avoided by "horizontalizing" lists.
- The left and right columns should be roughly equal length.
I'll be making some of these changes. deeptrivia (talk) 04:58, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
- Something needs to be done for the Life in India section. The title is repeated, and it's looking a bit weird even otherwise. deeptrivia (talk) 05:08, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
I propose making it a COTW. deeptrivia (talk) 20:41, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
Featured picture
I'm thinking of nominating this picture for FP. Is it a good idea? Does anybody know when this might have been painted. The Ajanta article isn't very helpful. It just gives a date between 200 BCE and 600 CE for all paintings. deeptrivia (talk) 03:27, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
- Good one for FA. No idea about the dates though. -- Sundar \talk \contribs 04:57, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
- The image description on the image page gives it as 6th Century and I'd go with it. --Gurubrahma 10:42, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
Indian Cabinet, Ministers and politicians
There are a lot of missing articles on Indian politicians, especially ministers currently in the Manmohan Singh cabinet. Also the list of the ministers on the following pages is quite out-dated -
- You can put them in a seperate article and link to it. All of the ministers are important. It would be a good idea to start WikiProjects, ) 18:18, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
- While you are at it, it would be better to start a DYK. btw, I have been updating DYK regularly for the last 45 days or so and if some one needs tips, I am game. --Gurubrahma13:40, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
- While you are at it, it would be better to start a
- I don't understand your logic of not starting single-line stubs. After all, stubs are meant to be short articles with the most basic stuff. I have been working on trying to populate the red links of atleast the cabinet ministers of India. Once I have the basic things ready in all articles, I will try to try and increase the length of those articles with more information. But there are very few ministers for whom I could write 600 word articles. - Aksi great 20:09, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
- I agree with Aksi. It is better to have a single line article than not to have an article at all. These articles won't show up as red links when they are linked from other articles. The shorter articles need to be properly categorized and marked as appropriate stubs. My 2 cents - Ganeshk (talk) 20:23, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
It is ok as long as it is not a line which reads "so and so is a cabinet minister," because I would already know that from the list of cabinet ministers. Also, as a reader, I would be disappointed with WP if all it returns is a single line stub stating the obvious. --Gurubrahma 17:28, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
- I see your point. The stub should state date of birth, a external link to the parliament website and a infobox. That would give little more information than the "is a cabinet minister line". All this will ensure it not be ) 17:40, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
Gandhi PR
Hi all - I've opened a peer review of the Gandhi article Wikipedia:Peer review/Mahatma Gandhi/archive1 in hopes of getting the community to solve some long-standing problems that are threatening its FA quality and status. Please participate in preserving this article's integrity. Jai Sri Rama! Rama's Arrow 16:20, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
Wikipedia:WikiProject Politics of India
I started this project to create and expand articles related to the Indian politics. That includes biographies, portfolios, ministries etc. For a start, we should have biography articles for all current ministers at the national and state levels. Please join and contribute. Thanks, Ganeshk (talk) 07:00, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
Trolling?
User:Anwar saadat (same as User:212.32.80.19) has been putting about 14 templates all at once (such as "POV", "Sensationalism", etc) on many articles related to History of India. He doesn't explain much, except claiming that these articles are "Islamophobic" and picked up from Hindutva websites. Can someone address his concerns? deeptrivia (talk) 23:16, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
Khalistan
If anyone has got a bit of time on their hands, please read and comment on
List of Indian state and union territory capitals
I added comments about the inconsistent dates used in
I was wondering if anyone wants to make this an FA. I wrote
- I'm actually getting Rabindranath Tagore (who wrote it) ready for FAC — if I find anything germane, I'll be sure to add it to Jana Gana Mana also. Saravask 21:46, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
- Alright, that sounds good. Perhaps some recordings could be good too. Fair use policy22:00, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
- Alright, that sounds good. Perhaps some recordings could be good too.
Indian admins
I'm sorry if this posting is inappropriate, but wanted to let people know that my views on the above can be found here. --Gurubrahma 19:34, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
- Also wanted to add that it comprises/ consists of my personal opinion alone. --Gurubrahma
07:46, 19 February 2006 (UTC)15:08, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
Admins please help
User
- Reverted. If he continues to create problems, warn him and have him banned. =Nichalp «Talk»= 09:05, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
- Thanx very much Nichalp -- lets hope not to have more problems. But hey, no danger of ever lacking for those: somehow, the talk-page did not get moved! Maybe because the fork had developed its own talkpage -- does it need cut-paste, deletion and another move? Happily, all the archives connect to the correct name. Sorry to come back with trouble. Regards, ImpuMozhi 18:48, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
Sakastan
According to my knowledge and google search, the article
- Deeptrivia's recent experiences in seeking citations bring to mind a matter I put forth to someone else in the "Rajput" context: citations need to be from acceptable sources. For instance, Hitler saying in Mein Kamph that "Jews are filth" does not make it acceptable for people to present "Jews are filth" as an established fact on WP, and smugly point out that book on being challenged. Deeptrivia, I urge you to "Be bold" and not remove your citation templates upon being shown disreputable websites. Maybe you can put up the NPOV template also -- is that inappropriate? I really would like to know what the options are in such cases. Also, can nothing be done about the page-move issue I brought up earlier? ImpuMozhi 02:41, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
- ImpuMozhi, I fully agree. Please see my discussion at Wikipedia_talk:Verifiability#Propaganda_websites_as_sources and Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Fact_and_Reference_Check#Propaganda_websites_as_sources. I am trying to find ways to prevent such POV insertions without creating hostility and ego clashes, which only results in waste of a lot of time that could be used for constructive purposes. No luck yet :) deeptrivia (talk) 03:22, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
Sorry for the delay, but the Ajanta painting photo is now nominated as an FP candidate. deeptrivia (talk) 04:11, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
possible featured pic?
I am considering nominating Image:Mangalore fishing.JPG as a featured picture candidate. Do other users agree with its potential? DJR (Talk) 12:08, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
- It's looking good to me, but I have no clue how will the nomination go. deeptrivia (talk) 02:31, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
List of postal codes
Such a list exists for so many countries. Time to create one for India? deeptrivia (talk) 02:31, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
- Sorry, it does exist. Wasn't categorized. deeptrivia (talk) 02:37, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
Historic revisionism?
A user has been replacing "British" in British rule with "United Kingdom" on several pages to do with
- Here is his reply. I am not very sure , though, because all books refer to it as the British rule and not as UK rule. Can someone throw more light?? --Gurubrahma 06:34, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
- He is not incorrect, except for the date -- In 1707, the Anglo-Welsh kingdom of "England" was formally united with Scotland to create Great Britain. It was in 1800 that Great Britain was formally united with Ireland to create "The United Kingdom of Great Britain & Ireland" (amended in 1922 to read "Northern Ireland" and colloquially referred to as UK). However, the colloquialisms of "England" and "Britain" persist and are in fact more common. The issue is not unlike the India/Indian Sub-continent/South Asia issue. Regards, ImpuMozhi 04:50, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
In this connection, note that nearly everywhere on WP, the term "Republic of India" is used. One may argue that this is not really incorrect, since India is a republic; however, the formal name adopted by the Indian constitution and used for all government purposes is "Union of India" (Indian languages: "Samyukta BhArata GaNarAjya", not just "BhArata GaNarAjya"). IMHO, both the English and the Hindi need to be changed in many, many pages including
Query regarding Ajanta paintings
Has anyone here actually been to the Ajanta caves? There are 3 versions of the same painting being discussed at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Ajanta Painting. The question is about whether the originals have a yellowish tinge or not. Please have a look at the 3 versions and comment on which one is closer to reality. deeptrivia (talk) 18:14, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
Great idea!!
Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2006-02-20/Wikimedia_UK - Can we do it in India? Legal eagles among Indian wikipedians, I'd like to hear from you. Also, I want some input on the historic revisionism post above from other users. --Gurubrahma 17:30, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
- HPN was already pushing for such a chapter from a long time. There is a mailing list somewhere for that. Just leave a message/mail him for more info. --Pamri • Talk 00:11, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
- You (especially those staying in Bangalore) may be interested in the Wikimedia meet being organised by the Kannada wikipedia team. See http://kn.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E0%B2%B5%E0%B2%BF%E0%B2%95%E0%B2%BF%E0%B2%AA%E0%B3%80%E0%B2%A1%E0%B2%BF%E0%B2%AF:%E0%B2%95%E0%B2%A8%E0%B3%8D%E0%B2%A8%E0%B2%A1_%E0%B2%B5%E0%B2%BF%E0%B2%95%E0%B2%BF%E0%B2%AA%E0%B3%80%E0%B2%A1%E0%B2%BF%E0%B2%AF_meet_and_press_conference (Sorry, its partially in Kannada. will put up more details soon.
--Pamri • Talk 03:05, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
Pakistan
Pakistan is currently going through a peer review. It would be much appreciated if anyone here looked it over for any inconsistencies and/or helpful hints. Pepsidrinka 22:00, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
State of the Union
Folks, the article on India has been heavily edited of late and this is just the diff since the new year. Though, a lot of that adds value to the article, there've been some edits that are not unencyclopedic. Also, the article is bloated, particularly the section on government. It's no longer using summary style. Can we look for them and remedy? I've made some fixes. -- Sundar \talk \contribs 10:30, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
LOTHAL IS FAC
Hi All - please vote up-or-down for Lothal at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Lothal. Thank you. Rama's Arrow 05:57, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
Cleanup needed
Hey everyone; there's a recent article
Yadav
Hi, strange happenings on Yadav - lots of non-yadavs, including a Reddy being added to the section titled famous Yadavs by several anons. Can someone knowledgeable watchlist it and keep a close watch?? TIA, --Gurubrahma 14:12, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
Rqst to move Kochi, India to Kochi
Could a sysop consider moving
- Requested moves would be better suited to stave off future controversy. =Nichalp «Talk»= 08:15, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
Indian Collaboration of the week
) 02:03, 4 March 2006 (UTC)