User talk:Aurorion: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 04:47, 24 February 2012

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, Aurorion, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

The five pillars of Wikipedia
Tutorial
How to edit a page and How to develop articles
How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! MuffledThud (talk) 09:52, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Alumni of Indian Institute of Management Calcutta

Hello. Please note that there's already a Category:Indian Institute of Management Calcutta alumni, which is consistent with the other subcategories of Category:Indian Institutes of Management alumni, and with alumni categories generally on Wikipedia. Would you mind if I marked the surplus (and now empty) category Category:Alumni of Indian Institute of Management Calcutta for deletion? Thanks, MuffledThud (talk) 10:05, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

February 2010

Your addition to Fellow Programme in Management has been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of article content such as sentences or images. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. Copied from http://www.iimcal.ac.in/programs/FPM/index.asp Whpq (talk) 14:07, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Whpq: Yes, I copied the information from the website. I am a student of the concerned institution, and though I am not a member of the Internet Solutions Group (which manages the website, referred to in the credits page of the website), I am pretty sure they would not mind me using this information for this purpose, which I assume can be considered to be fair use. So, I do not think there is any issue in retaining the information that I had added. If you would like, I could get one of my friends in the ISG to copy and paste the information, but really, is all that trouble worth it? Oh, and the information really does not contain any top secret material, it's just information material regarding an educational programme.--Aurorion (talk) 14:13, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Neither Wikipedia, nor you are are the copyright owner of the material. You cannot merely assume that they would give permission to release this material under a CC-BY-SA. The website very clearly states "(c) 2008 Indian Institute of Management Calcutta. All rights reserved." You could ask then to donate the copyrighted text to Wikipedia, but quite frankly, it is unlikely to be acceptable material for an encyclopedia article. -- Whpq (talk) 14:20, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Leena Chatterjee

The article Leena Chatterjee has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable per WP:ACADEMIC, no significant coverage online from WP:Reliable sources, sole secondary source cited is a business magazine listing her as part of a profile of several academics.

While all 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 {{dated prod}} 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 {{dated prod}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. MuffledThud (talk) 15:41, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Articles for deletion nomination of Leena Chatterjee

I have nominated Leena Chatterjee, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Leena Chatterjee. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. MuffledThud (talk) 17:14, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

March 2010

Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit that you made to the page Indian Institutes of Management has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Please use the sandbox for testing any edits; if you believe the edit was constructive, please ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing for further information. Thank you. Alansohn (talk) 17:56, 8 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

An Invite to join the WikiProject Education in India

- - - - - - - - - - - - WikiProject Education in India - - - - - - - - - - - -

Hi, Aurorion, you are graciously extended an invitation to join the Indian Education ! The WikiProject Indian Education is an evolving and expanding WikiProject. We are a group of editors who are dedicated to creating, revising, and expanding articles, lists, categories and Wikiprojects, to do with anything related to Indian Education System(Schools,Colleges and Universities).
As you have shown an interest in article related to Education in India we thought you might like to take an interest in this growing WikiProject.Thank you for your contributions.
We look forward to welcoming you to the project!

naveenpf (talk) 14:58, 26 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Mukesh moved

Hello! I would like to know why the article Mukesh was moved from its title Mukesh to Mukesh Mathur without any discussion with other editors? -Animeshkulkarni (talk) 23:26, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I reached that article when searching for another Mukesh. The article itself says that the person's name is Mukesh Mathur, and it's not mentioned that he is called mononymously as "Mukesh" - so isn't it standard practice to have the article's title as the first+last names of the subject? Why would the article be titled just "Mukesh"? Aurorion (talk) 07:58, 15 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

We go by WP:COMMONNAME. The singer is known by his single name alone. I doubt anyone knows he is Mathur. I myself didnt realize it untill you moved. All his movies credit him by his single name. Hence adding his surname is quite confusing. When we search Mukesh, we now reach a disambiguation page. Most people searching Mukesh would want to read about this singer. Thats the reason no one had moved it till now. Btw, which Mukesh were you looking for? The South-indian actor? -Animeshkulkarni (talk) 09:39, 15 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Best option is Mukesh (singer). The dab page does not list out any other person with the profession. But it would be better if you followed WP:RM#Requesting a single page move. X.One ^SOS 10:04, 15 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support: That's more logical. Please discuss on the talk page for the reference than here. Thanks. - Vivvt^Talk 10:24, 15 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support. The WP article does not mention that the person is known by his single name alone - it just mentions the full name. Articles of people who are known by only one name usually mentions this in the opening itself (examples: 1, 2, 3). So I thought this article was erroneously named as "Mukesh", hence changed it. In retrospect, I should have followed WP:RM#Requesting a single page move so I apologize. In light of this new info, I agree with the view above that the best option is "Mukesh (singer)". Will add the first-name info of the singer to the opening line of the article and use WP:RM to propose the move. Aurorion (talk) 12:02, 15 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Make further comments here. BollyJeff || talk 12:57, 15 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Mukesh (singer) is definitely the best option. Shahid • ^Talk2me 16:45, 15 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Kindly discuss this topic here: Talk:Mukesh Mathur#Requested_move. - Aurorion (talk) 16:58, 15 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

your recent edit to Godhra train burning

Hi Aurorion,

You very recently introduced a POV tag to the above article saying there are "controversies" about the incident which must be honored before the matter is fully resolved by law. I would like to bring to your notice that the same (court verdicts) has already happened, most notably the Feb-March 2011 Gujarat HC rulings on the matter last year. The courts have decisively ruled that:

1. The incident was a preplanned conspiracy hatched a few days in advance by local radical Muslims of the Signal Fadia area near Godhra railway station, and specifically a conspiracy to target karsevaks. The court has mentioned in its case closure judgment statements that the train burning incident was NOT either (1) an accident or (2) provoked by any act of the passengers in that train when passing through Godhra. See:

[1]
[2]

2. Furthermore, the court convicted 31 persons 11 of whom were given capital punishment. See:

3. The Gujarat HC had earlier already termed the Banerjee one-man committee (started by Lalu Prasad Yadav as railway minister just after UPA came to power in 2004 and just before elections in his home state Bihar) as illegal, unconstitutional and politically motivated and also ruled that the findings of the Banerjee committee (which said it could have been accident instead of conspiracy) were null and void.

This is pretty decisive by all respects. BTW, the article does give lots of space to the alternative controversies and Banerjee committee and its findings etc in the article content and text anyway ... the lead and intro section, obviously, must be short and stick to facts. 202.3.77.183 (talk) 12:48, 18 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello - please see my reply on the Talk page of the article. Aurorion (talk) 18:45, 18 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Indian Institutes of Management

I am not going to keep watching Indian Institutes of Management, it seems in rather good hand. However, one edit you made seems counter policy to me. Per WP:LEAD, the lead should define the topic and summarize the body of the article. Since the IIMs are not defined by the courses, moving this material is quite against what the lead is supposed to be. The material should remain in an academics section, and only summarized in the lead. Best regards. --Muhandes (talk) 19:33, 18 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello - thanks for your message. I added the Programmes info to the intro because this section was quite short, and I felt the intro also was too brief. I plan to expand the Academics into a larger section with more information when I get the time, so will see about removing/shortening the current Acads info from the lead. Please feel free to improve the article in the meanwhile. Thanks. Aurorion (talk) 16:34, 19 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry but I don't have much time these days so I try to focus on articles which don't have the attention of other editors. My first improvement to the article would have been to revert the edit in which you moved the academics to the lead, but I find that sometimes reverting leads to antagonism, while discussion leads to improvement. Best regards. --Muhandes (talk) 19:28, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

With regards to 12:28, 23 February 2012 (diff | hist) Indian Institutes of Management ‎ (→Institutes: The regular executive PGP programme has already been mentioned earlier, no need to specify it again. the Public management programme is unique to IIMA and hence is especially notable.)

Please note that the PMP programme is no longer existing at IIM Ahmedabad since the 2009-10 batch

My edits on the Narendra Modi page

Hello - I see that you have repeatedly removed two edits I made to the page. Can you please explain why, when I had provided 4 high-quality sources to support that edit? Please discuss on the Talk page of the article. Thanks. Aurorion (talk) 21:19, 18 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please read WP:BLP, WP:LEAD and WP:UNDUE before making such edits on a biographical article. The lead section is not a place for speculation and allegations. Modi was also recently cleared by a committee appointed by the Supreme Court. Suggest you take this to the talk page of the article, where this can be discussed and addressed by other editors too. I also recommend that you do not take editing biographical articles lightly and understand policies and guidelines adequately before re-adding contentious material about a living person. Thank you. — Nearly Headless Nick {C} 21:23, 18 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Nearly Headless Nick, the lead section is clearly not for info about controversies, it can be added in the body carefully, if there are similar sources available. --07:22, 19 February 2012 (UTC)--kondi ^{talk/contribs} 07:22, 19 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 100: / Line 100: @@
 :* Hello - thanks for your message. I added the Programmes info to the intro because this section was quite short, and I felt the intro also was too brief. I plan to expand the Academics into a larger section with more information when I get the time, so will see about removing/shortening the current Acads info from the lead. Please feel free to improve the article in the meanwhile. Thanks. [[User:Aurorion|Aurorion]] ([[User talk:Aurorion#top|talk]]) 16:34, 19 February 2012 (UTC)
 ::: I'm sorry but I don't have much time these days so I try to focus on articles which don't have the attention of other editors. My first improvement to the article would have been to revert the edit in which you moved the academics to the lead, but I find that sometimes reverting leads to antagonism, while discussion leads to improvement. Best regards. --[[User:Muhandes|Muhandes]] ([[User talk:Muhandes|talk]]) 19:28, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
+With regards to
+:28, 23 February 2012 (diff | hist) Indian Institutes of Management ‎ (→Institutes: The regular executive PGP programme has already been mentioned earlier, no need to specify it again. the Public management programme is unique to IIMA and hence is especially notable.)
+Please note that the PMP programme is no longer existing at IIM Ahmedabad since the 2009-10 batch
 == My edits on the Narendra Modi page ==