Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Education in India: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively

← Previous edit Next edit →

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Inline

Revision as of 04:18, 21 July 2017

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the WikiProject Education in India page.

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

Archives: 1, 2

Please add {{WikiProject banner shell}} to this page and add the quality rating to that template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

India: Education Project‑class

	India portal This page 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
Project	This page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
	This page is supported by the Education in India workgroup.

Please add {{WikiProject banner shell}} to this page and add the quality rating to that template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Education Project‑class

	Education portal This page is within the scope of WikiProject Education, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of education and education-related topics 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.EducationWikipedia:WikiProject EducationTemplate:WikiProject Educationeducation articles
Project	This page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Plan of Action

Have anyone has any plans or priorities ? I think first we will start with proper categorization and will add template education template to talk pages -- naveenpf (talk) 15:24, 25 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have already created several new categories to organise the articles in the parent category. Are there any specific suggestions for creation of further categories. Shyamsunder (talk) 22:35, 25 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Let me propose some priority which can be openly edited. Education-Importance (I hope this is available)

Institutions of Excellence (IIT IIM NIT IISc AIMS Kendriya Vidhalaya Navodhaya V. ) please fill up. Imp - High
Central univs and Nationally renowned colleges / school chains Imp - Med Ex:- Pondicherry Univs, XLRI, IIIT, DPS
State univs and Regionally renowned collegs/schools Imp - Med
Deemed Univs,Colleges Schools and left overs Imp - Low

Tasks

First task would be to tag all of them, so that we can identify article issues and then start fixing them.
Categorization. I hope this is available and we need to add articles which are not having them properly.
Templates for each category. Univ / Instituitions / Schools. I understand there are templates but are they india specific and uniform across articles?
Navboxes, Standard Content style? More Discussion on this required.
Update Tasks, Recruit People.

Thats all i can think for now. Srikanth (ping me) 16:36, 11 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

+1 ..Agree with logicwiki, let us start with tagging the articles--naveenpf (talk) 17:40, 11 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Education stub

There should be a stub for Indian education. That will be useful for non school and college and university artciles relating to indian education but. A few countries already have one. like Category:Japanese education stubs.Can someone please create one for India. Thanks Shyamsunder (talk) 07:42, 27 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Check this Wikipedia:WikiProject_Education_in_India#Stubs --naveenpf (talk) 12:45, 12 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Done

Unreferenced living people articles bot

User:DASHBot/Wikiprojects provides a list, updated daily, of unreferenced living people articles (BLPs) related to your project. There has been a lot of discussion recently about deleting these unreferenced articles, so it is important that these articles are referenced.

The unreferenced articles related to your project can be found at >>>Wikipedia:WikiProject Education in India/Unreferenced BLPs<<<

If you do not want this wikiproject to participate, please add your project name to this list.

Thank you. Okip 02:47, 28 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please peer review Institute of Chartered Accountants of India

I have recently nominated Institute of Chartered Accountants of India for peer review. I humbly request you to peer review the article. R.Sivanesh ✆ 09:04, 20 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello and invitation to help

Hi there. I didn't know about this WikiProject, and as it seems I edit much about the subject, and I was invited, I though I'll join. So, hello fellow editors. My current "big" project is to redo List of universities in India. I added a lead listing the types of universities, and I am going one by one according to UGC lists and other official lists and adding/correcting. My intention is to get this list to FL. It's much work, and everyone is invited to help. --Muhandes (talk) 07:00, 26 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nice article to start with. I am in --naveenpf (talk) 07:11, 26 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nice plan, i am in too. - abhi (talk) 08:47, 26 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest you pick a state and go over the lists of central, state, deemed and private universities (all linked at the top) and make sure they are all listed. Also remember to replace the external link with a proper source. You can see what I started to do for Andhra Pradesh and Sikkim.

Done --naveenpf (talk) 02:21, 9 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

List of Indian institutions of higher education

Muhandes, our long-term goal should undoubtedly be to cover all the notable Indian institutions of higher education, shouldn't it? We are not far away from doing that. We already have the lists of institutions of higher education in many states/cities. I've mentioned some of them that I found through search below.

Like List of American institutions of higher education, the lead list will have:

Link to List of universities in India which will include only the universities.
Links to Lists of Institutions of higher education in each States, union territories The shorter city lists can be merged into the state lists.
Links to special lists

According to subject areas

Indian Institutes of Technology or we could start a separate List of Indian Institutes of Technology or Comparison of Indian Institutes of Technology which will have and compare the vital statistics of all the IITs. Statistics like number of research papers published in some renowned journals
List of NITs
List of IISERs
List of IIMs
List of Business schools in India This is a category but deserves a separate list article.
Category:Economics schools in India perhaps deserves a separate list article or links to categories too are fine
List of law schools in India
List of agricultural institutions in India
List of medical colleges in India may also include institutions in Category:Schools of medicine in India
List of Ayurvedic Colleges in India
Category:Drama schools in India
Category:Journalism schools in India perhaps deserves a separate list article or links to categories too are fine
Category:Hospitality schools in India perhaps deserves a separate list article or links to categories too are fine
List of optometry schools in India
List of colleges of music in India
List of dental colleges in India
Film schools in India
Fashion schools in India
List of maritime colleges in India
List of aerospace engineering schools in India
Many other lists from Category:Universities and colleges in India and Category:Universities and colleges in India by type

General

Link to Institutes of National Importance
Any very important list/statistics/information regarding all the higher institutions of India combined.
What else?

The major work will be in setting up the state lists like List of educational institutions in Himachal Pradesh (actually it should be List of institutions of higher education in Himachal Pradesh because we are not considering primary schools!). Here is how we can do this
1. Start the state lists.

1. Transfer the state tables we have at Colleges and institutes in India and List of universities in India‎ to the respective state lists.

2. Transfer existing shorter city/district lists to the state lists

3. Put links to longer city/district lists

2. Start the special lists if they don't exist already

1. Use the categories mentioned above to fill these special lists

3. Start the lead list at List of Indian institutions of higher education

1. Put the links to all the lists mentioned above

4. Start a navbox at Template:List of Indian institutions of higher education

Here are some of the lists that we will link to, from the lead article. The shorter city lists can be merged into the state lists.

And there are many other lists waiting to get classified. Folks, let's overdo this. – ∃ Aditya 7 ¦ 16:39, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Noble cause, but one at a time.

Also, I think the discussion of broader article should be moved to the Wikiproject, this talk page is supposed to be for the page List of universities in India. --Muhandes (talk) 17:30, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Aaditya, you have defined the mission of WP:INEI here :-) .. we will move this to talk page of WP:INEI if you agree --naveenpf (talk) 18:01, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, you can copy it to Wikipedia:WikiProject Education in India. :-) – ∃ Aditya 7 ¦ 18:13, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Aditya, the Gazette you have mentioned is only about reservation, and it just defines which all institutes it is applicable to and which all institutes are an exception to it. On page two it defines a broad category "Central educational institutions" which includes all deemed universities, all institutes of nations importance, all universities under UGC etc. And 'Institutes of Excellence' listed in the schedule are exempted from reservation. IMHO, we cannot relate it to equivalence to university.

As for statuses, I think any institute which awards a bachelor or masters degree can be regarded as (or equivalent to) a university. By this definition IITs, NITs and also IISERs can be considered as universities but IIMs, which award Post Graduate Diplomas, are not. Let me know what you guys think. - abhi (talk) 03:33, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Having said this, its also a fact that internationally IIM PGP programs are compared with other MBA programs from other B-Schools. Uptill last year Financial times listed IIMA on its Master in Management programs (FT Ranking 2010), but this year it has listed IIMA under MBA programs (FT Ranking 2011). So the status can be debated. - abhi (talk) 03:48, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Have a look at the article: Colleges and institutes in India. The list is absurd. I agree that we should have a listing of all the institutes, but trying to get it to fit into a single article is stupid when we can have sevaral smaller easily managable lists as said above. The single article to list all institutes should have links to all these articles and not the entire list in itself. This article should either be deleted or converted to something managable. Discussion on the same is welcome on its Talk Page.--Siddhartha Ghai (talk) 21:18, 3 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

State Lists Format

I propose standardising the format for the state lists in order to avoid further duplication for lists.

List name:List of educational institutions in statename(This is the current format being followed)

Sections:

==Universities==(List of universities in statename redirects to this section)

===Central===(List of Central universities in statename redirects here)

===State===(List of state universities in statename redirects here)

===Private===(List of private universities in statename redirects here)

===Deemed===(List of deemed universities in statename redirects here)

==Colleges==(List of colleges in statename redirects here)

===Engineering===(List of engineering colleges in statename redirects here)

This subsection may link to the list of engineering colleges affiliated to the state technical university/other universities and list only those that aren't listed elsewhere

===Business===(List of business schools in statename and List of management colleges in statename redirect here)

This section may be named "Management" instead

===Academic===(List of academic colleges in statename redirects here)

This section can contain the colleges offering BA/MA/B.Com/M.Com/B.Sc/M.Sc etc. If possible, it should give link to the university-wise list of such colleges and list only those that aren't listed elsewhere

===Teacher Training===(List of Teacher Training Institutes in statename redirects here)

==Autonomous Institutes==(List of autonomous educational institutes in statename redirects here)

This section contains all such institutes that award their own degrees but aren't listed by the ugc as universities. This would include IITs, IIMs, IIITs, NITs, IISERs, IISC, AIIMS etc.

==See Also==

This section should contain links to List of universities in India, List of Indian institutions of higher education, any city-wise lists of cities in the state, and List of Schools in statename(If it exists)

Overall, I think the article should list all UGC-listed universities, but since college listings might become too long, they should be links to university-wise lists as far as possible to keep the state-article small and readable, and to avoid duplication of huge lists.--Siddhartha Ghai (talk) 09:01, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Obvious suggestion: "List of higher educational institutions in <state>", or you need to list every single school.

Since we already have a complete (and hopefully well maintained) List of universities in India, isn't listing the universities again a bit redundant? How about something like this instead:

In Uttar Pradesh there are four Central universities, 23 state universities ten deemed universities and 15 private universities.

--Muhandes (talk) 12:18, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Agree with obvious suggestion. As for universities, wouldn't such linking convert the state lists to mostly links like List of Indian institutions of higher education? Also, I've suggested a separate section for the autonomous institutes, but these may/may not be listed at List of universities in India. So what do you suggest we do for the overlapping ones? Also, where do we redirect List of autonomous educational institutes in statename?--Siddhartha Ghai (talk) 15:10, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You have a point. Giving it a second thought I think my idea wasn't that good. On one hand I don't like doing the same work twice, yet on the other hand I see how listing all institutes in the state articles serves the reader better. Also, probably "List of higher education institutions in <state>", I'm not sure what I meant by "higher educational institutions" --Muhandes (talk) 15:17, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Siddhartha, that's a nice format; but it would be better if we better subclassify in the "Colleges" section, according to university, instead of a random listing. Lynch 7 08:53, 6 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thats a good idea. We can go something like:

==Colleges==

*[[List of colleges affiliated to xyz university]] - This article lists all colleges affiliated to xyz university. These colleges specialize in fields a,b,c.

...

And then if any colleges are left:

Apart from these, the state also has:

list of colleges(maybe with their specializations and universities mentioned)

I don't think there are universities in India that give affiliation across states, so we should have no problem linking to the university-wise lists.

But where will we redirect List of engineering colleges in statename, List of business schools in statename etc, since there may be more than one university affiliating a particular type of colleges in a state.--Siddhartha Ghai (talk) 10:58, 6 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nice proposal siddhartha...i think we shoould also seperate the technical universities and other universities. because this year some more universities are added..and we also should add some pages regarding profiles of universities... (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 15:41, 6 August 2011 (UTC).[reply]

I'm sorry, what do you mean by separating the technical ones? If you mean that it be specified that the university is a technical one, then that can easily be achieved by adding a tiny description of the university. After all, WP:Featured List Criteria does recommend adding prose to the lists. As for university articles, its a lot of work ahead for us writing the lists and the articles. I think if we do the lists first, at least we'll have a clear view of our work and progress done.--Siddhartha Ghai (talk) 16:16, 6 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Guys, let me know if I got this right - The state lists will have list of universities located in the state and the universities will actually link to list of colleges affiliated to that university? or if the current plan is to put all colleges in the main article of state list? - abhi (talk) 02:54, 7 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Half right. Yes, The state lists will have list of universities located in the state but the university names will link to the university articles themselves. The colleges section in the state lists will link to the university-wise lists.

So basically, universities are listed on the state lists, but colleges on university-wise lists.--Siddhartha Ghai (talk) 07:04, 7 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I do not think listing all colleges in a single list is feasible, there are so many colleges under every university. if we make a single list it will grow very big and it will be difficult to maintain it. Consider this - In Madhya Pradesh's Barkatullah University alone there are 273 colleges (see private and state lists). Now consider other universities, all major universities will have a similar number of colleges so easily this figure for Madhya Pradesh will cross 1000 (Compare this with list of university article, they were 592). Now this was just Madhya Pradesh, we have at least 6-7 other large states. Another problem will be that many university website are not updated so finding list of all colleges will become very difficult. So we will end up with many incomplete lists.

I suggest that we should create separate lists for colleges (affiliated to a given university) and then link them in main article. so in state list table we will just have columns 'Number of private colleges affiliated', 'Number of government colleges' and link to list of colleges. - abhi (talk) 19:53, 7 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Totally agree that we should create separate lists for colleges (affiliated to a given university) and then link them in main article. As for the tabling and the columns, I think the presentation may be varied across the lists to suit specific cases. I think the purpose of standardisation should be to stop any further state-level list-duplication by creating appropriate redirects, and making a single state-level list. The presentation(not sectioning) can be left to the editors, so that we may have creativity, and the lists do not seem mechanically-made.--Siddhartha Ghai (talk) 16:13, 8 August 2011 (UTC). The format of list is quite ok but need a little revision - by Aditya joardar[reply]

List of educational institutions in Kerala can you please check this ? --naveenpf (talk) 11:11, 9 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand what you mean. If you intend to suggest that this article be standardised, that will be done once the standard format is decided. And if you intend to ask if it conforms to the present proposal, the answer would be no. Even so, I don't think any edits should be made yet just for the sake of conforming to this format, until the proposal is finalised.--Siddhartha Ghai (talk) 15:44, 9 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It seems we have consensus on the following points. If discussing, please use the Consensus Point Number:

Only one state-level list per state
List of Universities in statename to be redirected to Universities section of above-named list
List of colleges in statename to be redirected to Colleges section of above-named list
List of autonomous educational institutes in statename to be redirected to Autonomous Institutes section of above-named list

Consensus needed for:

Subsectioning of the college section
Redirects for List of Engineering colleges in statename, List of pharmacy colleges in statename etc. field-based college lists
State-level list name List of educational institutions in state or List of higher education institutions in state

We currently have two options for the colleges section. Please use Option Number while discussing these:

Field-wise subsectioning as given in the original proposal redirecting List of engineering colleges in statename, List of pharmacy colleges in statename etc. to appropriate subsections of the Colleges section.
University-wise listing redirecting List of engineering colleges in statename, List of pharmacy colleges in statename etc. to the colleges section itself.--Siddhartha Ghai (talk) 12:14, 12 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

To point 1, I propose "List of higher education institutions in state".
For colleges, I think I don't understand the plan. Are we going to have a huge list of all colleges in a state (seems impossible to me, but good luck), or is this going to be mainly a list of lists? --Muhandes (talk) 12:55, 12 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, for colleges, it'd be inconvenient to make a huge list of all colleges; its best if its a list of lists. In Karnataka for instance, there are some 400-500 colleges in total. Listing them all in one list is not efficient. What we can do is, divide the statewise list into three (as I see it, these are the only three distinctions): National Universities (Institutes of National Importance) like IITs, NITs, IISc, IIMs; State Universities like Bangalore University, Uttar Pradesh Technical University; and Deemed Universities like Christ University, Jain University etc. Lynch 7 13:24, 12 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, the current format is to list colleges as per university(See above links to lists for examples); and I think it is best we follow this. The college-lists can be linked to as explained below.

I don't think there's a need to have more than 1 state-level list. The whole point of starting this discussion was to have single state-level lists, and if we don't have consensus for that, we've gotten nowhere yet. Do we still have objections to having single state-level lists(after the explanation given below)?--Siddhartha Ghai (talk) 14:29, 12 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

List of higher education institutions in state now up for consensus.

Explanation of college plan: List of engineering colleges in statename, List of pharmacy colleges in statename etc. all redirect to state-list only to avoid these lists being formed in the future as orphaned stubs and increasing our workload. Colleges section to be a list of lists. Ultimately college lists to be university-wise, i.e List of colleges under xyz University, List of colleges under abc University and so on. Only difference in Option 1 and Option 2 for college section is the organisation of wikilinks of the university-wise lists.

Option 1 : We organise the wikilinks to university-wise lists as per the fields, like engineering, pharmacy etc.

Pro: List of engineering colleges in statename, List of pharmacy colleges in statename etc. redirect directly to the subsections

Con: A single university may offer courses in various fields, leading to wikilink duplication.

Example:

==Colleges==(List of colleges in statename redirects here)

===Engineering===(List of engineering colleges in statename redirects here)

[[List of colleges affiliated with Mahamaya Technical University]]

===Pharmacy===(List of pharmacy colleges in statename redirects here)

[[List of colleges affiliated with Mahamaya Technical University]]

(Since MTU offers engineering, pharmacy and more)

Option 2 : We just list wikilinks to university-wise lists mentioning the fields the colleges in the lists will pertain to.

Pro: No list wikilink duplication

Con: List of engineering colleges in statename, List of pharmacy colleges in statename etc have to be redirected to colleges section(Since there are no field-wise subsections), hence reader has to find for himself which list contains engineering colleges, which pharmacy colleges and so on.

Example:

==Colleges==(List of colleges in statename, List of Engineering colleges in statename, List of pharmacy colleges in statename all redirect here)

[[List of colleges under Mahamaya Technical University]] - This list includes colleges offering engineering, pharmacy and management.

[[List of colleges under Chaudhary Charan Singh University]] - This list includes colleges offering arts, science, commerce, law and education.

I hope that the college section and its options are now clear.--Siddhartha Ghai (talk) 14:03, 12 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the clarification, I started below a section for a survey of what people think, and added my opinion. --Muhandes (talk) 14:34, 12 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for my late entrance but can anyone entertain me by answering whats wrong with current format and why do you guys think we should change the format; in a brief please so that I might help you a bit too. Thank You Nitish.game (talk) 07:25, 20 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Nitish.game. If you follow the state links at List of institutions of higher education in India, you will find that currently, there is no format. Every list has its own inclusion criteria and listing format(In other words, the lists are in a mess). The proposal here is to fix one standard format for state and Union Territory-wise lists so that the lists can be improved with a fixed inclusion criteria and sectioning format. The proposal also includes having a single state-level list to avoid duplication. Please see the discussion for details and express your opinion in the survey below.--Siddhartha Ghai (talk) 08:04, 20 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Survey

Option 2 Someone who is looking for "List of engineering colleges in statename" is not going to be well served by either option. As such, I prefer not to duplicate the links. --Muhandes (talk) 14:34, 12 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Option 2 Some universities have very unique kind of colleges like physical education, now it will not make sense to put a list of colleges of physical education which just has 1 college. Also it will be easier to maintain university wise list. - abhi (talk) 15:58, 12 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Option 2 I guess the colleges can have a sortable table that could inform the user regarding the type of college or university.
RahulG (talk) 17:55, 12 August 2011 (UTC) (UTC)[reply]
Option 2 should be the best option, since it will also eliminate the possible problem that Abhinav mentions. Lynch 7 13:25, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Finalisation

If there are no objections to the format with article name "List of higher education institutions in statename" and option 2 for colleges section, I will begin work on the same.--Siddhartha Ghai (talk) 07:23, 23 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Considering the size of the task, any and all help is welcome and appreciated.--Siddhartha Ghai (talk) 11:39, 27 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Great! Will extend any help needed. Do ping me on my talk page. Lynch 7 12:11, 27 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm busy pushing List of universities in India and another list I am working on to FL, will try to assist when these projects are over. I suggest you start a page under this project with the current status and devise some plan, then other editors can take chunks on themselves. Good luck. --Muhandes (talk) 18:01, 27 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Siddhartha, which article we are starting with ?--naveenpf (talk) 18:28, 27 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Siddhartha, can you tell me if this is sort of what you had in mind? : List of institutions of higher education in Karnataka. Do tell me if I'm way off track. Thanks, Lynch 7 15:22, 28 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Mostly correct. But I seriously think List of educational institutions in Karnataka should've been moved there, instead of creating another article. Still, now worries :), you're on the right track. I'll be starting work with the Uttar Pradesh list, and then making a subpage on this project. For the university section only(I haven't done the other sections yet, and the university section itself is under construction, you may see List of educational institutions in Uttar Pradesh).--Siddhartha Ghai (talk) 15:50, 28 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

MikeLynch - great start. Infact I like List of institutions of higher education in Karnataka over List of educational institutions in Karnataka since 'educational institution' could mean any school (even primary level), college or training center and that is certainly not what we are putting in the list.

I will start with Madhya Pradesh. - abhi (talk) 06:43, 29 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Started project subpage for co-ordination at Wikipedia:WikiProject Education in India/Lists of institutions of higher education in States. Feel free to add information to/correct the page.--Siddhartha Ghai (talk) 08:47, 30 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Is a bulleted list better or would a table be better? In a table, we can include other info also, like place and year of establishment. Lynch 7 10:06, 30 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Most lists at Wikipedia:Featured Lists#Education seem to use the table form. I think the table form would be better for the university section and bulleted list for colleges, autonomous institutes section.--Siddhartha Ghai (talk) 10:18, 30 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, another thing; Most autonomous colleges are affiliated to a state university (for example: List of colleges affiliated to Visvesvaraya Technological University) so do we need to list them again? Lynch 7 10:49, 30 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If the colleges are affiliated to a university, in what sense are they autonomous? The autonomous institutes I meant here were institutes like the IITs, NITs, IIITs etc which are listed as autonomous at List of universities in India, and other colleges not listed there, that grant their own degrees(and not those of a university). Hope this answers your question.

Also, everyone please add your name to whatever you're doing at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Education_in_India/Lists_of_institutions_of_higher_education_in_States#Current_Status.--Siddhartha Ghai (talk) 19:52, 30 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think Lynch was asking about autonomous colleges and not institutes, autonomous institutes is a higher degree of autonomy ie they can design their own degree programs, curriculum etc whereas autonomous colleges are only autonomous financially and they do not decide curriculum for a degree program but follow the university they are affiliated to, similarly they do not award degrees.

So, colleges whether autonomous or not will go into university page and not the main state list. - abhi (talk) 07:17, 31 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, Very well. I understand. A small correction there abhi, autonomous colleges (though affiliated to a university) design their own curriculum, and manage their own pay scales. Only the degree granting is done by the University. (That's how it is in Karnataka at least).

But then, we get another problem: What then, is a Central University? Lynch 7 06:31, 2 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Probably you are right about the autonomous colleges, not sure. Central university is directly setup and funded by central govt (state univ are setup by a state legislation and are funded by state govt) - abhi (talk) 06:58, 2 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A simpler answer - a central university is any institute listed here. The list is complete and consistent with the Act of 2009, except that AFAIK Central University of Jammu was not established yet. --Muhandes (talk) 07:35, 2 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Found it too :) Thanks. Lynch 7 07:44, 2 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Lists too specific?

List of hospitals recognized by the Kerala Nurses and Midwives Council which was a spin-off from List of institutions of higher education in Kerala per the current format decided by this discussion, has been nominated for deletion. Does the current format create lists that are too specific to be encyclopedic content? Any views and suggestions would be appreciated. Thanks--Siddhartha Ghai (talk) 22:34, 2 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It is quite specific, and I don't see where it sits in the general scheme. Wouldn't it be equivalent to "List of nursing colleges in Kerala", which the format we agreed upon say should be a redirect? Frankly, I don't think it is worth the argument even if it did fit the scheme. If editors don't like it, move on, there is plenty to do. --Muhandes (talk) 07:38, 3 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Just a doubt: Isn't the article generally about hospitals rather than colleges? Anyway, I agree with Muhandes, I don't think there are any notable unrecognized colleges running about, so it could redir to list of nursing colleges. Lynch 7 09:42, 3 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Just to clarify, the current format is to list colleges according to the affiliating universities; not per the fields they are in. The field articles are to be redirects to the state-lists per the current format, since the colleges are to be listed university-wise. So, having a List of nursing colleges in Kerala(which is the proposed alternative at the AfD) will be a break from the format(which, frankly, I don't mind considering the case). But, if this has happened in the Kerala list now; I'm afraid such a situation may arise in other state lists too regarding nursing colleges or something alike. It does seem to fit in the current scheme being an equivalent of List of colleges affiliated to xyz university with the colleges replaced with hospitals(which provide courses in nursing, and can be effectively considered nursing colleges) and xyz university replaced with Kerala Nurses and Midwives Council, which seems to have the power to grant affiliation for a particular degree. So, the basic problem that I wish to discuss here isn't whether this particular list is too specific or not; but whether the current format will eventually lead to several such lists which will then go through AfD. I think it is worth discussion if we can avoid several such possible AfDs caused due to a fallacy in our current format.--Siddhartha Ghai (talk) 16:30, 3 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Let me see if I understand this correctly. Are you saying that the Kerala Nurses and Midwives Council affiliates colleges without a university? Do the hospitals actually give degrees? If so, than the naming is totally incorrect. It should be, "List of colleges under the Kerala Nurses and Midwives Council", or something like that. --Muhandes (talk) 10:26, 4 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Afik nursing colleges in kerala comes under new university .. Kerala University of Health Sciences .. colleges under KUHS [1] --naveenpf (talk) 00:15, 5 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If that is true then the list discussed is indeed too specific and should not exist. --Muhandes (talk) 08:57, 6 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

List of colleges.... is a lot less likely to crop up at AfD as opposed to something like List of hospitals.... It would be good if we could mention colleges in the name. Lynch 7 19:19, 6 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly my point above. If this is a list of colleges, it should be named so. --Muhandes (talk) 14:30, 7 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the list has been deleted now, and we do have a List of colleges affiliated to Kerala University of Health Sciences; so if the colleges do come under the university; it wouldn't be difficult getting the list again from the history of List of institutions of higher education in Kerala. I think the problem's pretty much solved. Thanks for all the helpful comments.--Siddhartha Ghai (talk) 17:03, 7 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

its quite OK - User:Adityajoardar9 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.199.45.122 (talk) 13:51, 15 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:WikiProject Education in India#Structure

The abovenamed section on the project page remains empty. I think the section should give a basic outline for sections to be made on education in India related articles, or it should at least give a link to a page giving such information. This would be very helpful in standerdizing the look and feel of the articles under the project.

For Example: A college article could have sections on academics, infrastructure etc. But academics may be replaced by Programs/Programs Offered/Courses/Courses Offered Infrastructure may be replaced by Facilities or be divided into entire sections on hostels, entertainment facilities and what not.

The same can be thought for schools, universities etc. Although we probably need consensus for doing this, but it would greatly decrease the task at hand as at least the new articles would be standardized. --Siddhartha Ghai (talk) 20:52, 4 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

User:WolterBot Cleanup Logs are Outdated

It is rather shocking that clean-up listings are a year old. I read here that we need such a template put on the main page. I am not very sure how this works, but would like to consult others regarding this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rahulghose (talk • contribs) 06:54, 23 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Reliable source?

I was wondering, would you say http://www.highereducationinindia.com is a reliable source? I could not easily understand what sources they use and how up-to-date they are. There are other websites like this, and I seldom use any as I don't know how reliable they are. --Muhandes (talk) 21:02, 8 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think I got my answer. I had a look at their listing of College of Engineering, Guindy, here. As Anna University does not award many of the courses listed, (B Tech (Civil Engineering), B Tech (Mining Engineering) etc.) see here and the college didn't award them in the past either, see here I doubt it is a reliable source. What do you think of my analysis? --Muhandes (talk) 21:13, 8 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it is not reliable, they even have a disclaimer saying "There is no guarantee that the material in this website is comprehensive, complete, accurate, sufficient, timely, or up to date for any specific purpose or use.", besides their list of universities not even lists 25% of what we have compiled. - abhi (talk) 09:32, 13 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Proposal for WikiProject Education in Karnataka

Hi all, User:Souravmohanty2005 and I have discussed about working on Colleges in Karnataka (Education in Karnataka in general). Many articles about colleges do not exist at all (as will be evident when we start working on the lists of colleges, and as is evident at List of colleges affiliated to Visvesvaraya Technological University). Do let me know if we can go ahead and create the WikiProject Education in Karnataka, with WP:INEI being the parent WikiProject. I await your comments :) Lynch 7 07:55, 21 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

MikeLynch, do you need wait for some time... we will make few WP:MOS for WP:INEI--naveenpf (talk) 18:31, 27 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, sure. Lynch 7 01:57, 28 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A Suggestion

Hello all, don't you think that you will get a lot of information from the CBSE website? Knowledge Vampire (talk) 12:57, 24 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, Knowlege Vampire we need to expand MHRD#Department_of_School_Education_and_Literacy , and if possible create new article for Department of School Education and Literacy --naveenpf (talk) 16:00, 24 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Expanision of Educational organisations in India

Hello all, I was going through the category Educational organisations in India and I was surprised to find very few articles under this category. There are still many article that needs to be created and the existing ones need to be expanded. The article in this category are all written as an advertisment format, hence stubs. I guess that there is an urgent need to have a cleanup under this category.Indwar (talk) 03:36, 30 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Schools Notability

List of schools in India needs to be overhauled, but I think a system like List of universities in India would suit it better than List of institutions of higher education in India, since if we follow the latter, there are going to be many articles made out of this one. But, the problem then would be maintaining Notability in all of them; however, if the former is followed, notability guidelines will be easier to follow, inclusion criteria easier to decide.

Since all schools aren't notable, I propose the following inclusion criteria:

The school must offer classes till 12th(relaxable to 10th if criteria 2 is met)
We list only those with third-party verifiable sources

--Siddhartha Ghai (talk) 10:22, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

We might want to build upon this failed proposal. Lynch 7 12:26, 30 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The second criteria listed is usually the main reason why articles about secondary schools get deleted. The failed proposal listed has an additional criteria - that the curriculum of the school should get independently covered - and that would put us in a soup. In India a school's curriculum is dictated by CBSE or ICSE and no school makes any noteworthy exception to that. In summary, give it a try if you want to but as I said, meeting even the second criteria is usually tough for most schools.Wikishagnik (talk) 20:47, 24 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think having a separate criteria for schools and other educational institutions in India is a good idea as this may be looked upon as a backdoor to protect Indian schools from the notability guidelines. Given that, I do agree that we should keep all educational institutes exempt from being speedy deleted under WP:CSD#A7. — Nearly Headless Nick {C} 09:08, 25 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note:To put my original comments in perspective, the inclusion criteria I proposed was not a wikipedia or project-wide criteria for articles. It was a proposed inclusion criteria for List of schools in India originally posted at its talkpage. The comments were copy-pasted here later as a means to spur discussion about that list, not about notability criteria for school articles.--Siddhartha Ghai (talk) 23:55, 25 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Half century for WP:INEI

Wow .. we have reached half century in members... -- naveenpf (talk) 20:49, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Great job in publicising INEI Naveen :) Lynch 7 10:20, 4 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Lynch, I am planning to create small outreach team to invite the new editors to WP:INEI ; Can you co-ordinate the peer review efforts of WP:INEI ? -- naveenpf (talk) 01:20, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oops, I'm seeing this only after 3 months, sorry for that. I'd be happy to. Lynch 7 09:20, 3 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Category discussion:Former pupils by secondary school in India

Category:Former pupils by secondary school in India and its various sub-categories have been nominated for renaming to a consistent form. The discussion is here. Timrollpickering (talk) 01:27, 7 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

List of hospitals recognized by the Kerala Nurses and Midwives Council

This is contested for deletion. Should we delete this or not.

List of hospitals recognized by the Kerala Nurses and Midwives Council
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of hospitals recognized by the Kerala Nurses and Midwives Council — Preceding unsigned comment added by Subin.a.mathew (talk • contribs) 07:09, 30 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Moving forward with List of universities in India

Input is appreciated here. Best regards. --Muhandes (talk) 14:22, 7 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

With very little feedback on the above, I went where I though consensus is and split List of autonomous higher education institutes in India out of List of universities in India. I am going to attempt FL again soon. --Muhandes (talk) 14:44, 30 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

University rating infobox

Following my frustration at the common boosterism with rankings sections, and a suggestion by User:MikeLynch, I give you: Infobox India university ranking. Before going live I'd like to hear what you think. I'm sure I missed some major rankings for instance. --Muhandes (talk) 09:05, 22 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Seems fine to me. We can start implementing it in articles I guess. Also, a question: Except IISc and a couple of IITs, the ARWU and QS rankings sections are redundant for a majority of Indian colleges, since they are not ranked. Should we leave them blank, or should we not mention them at all? Lynch 7 04:54, 24 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the above comment; I just tested the infobox and found out the working myself. Now, if a university is not ranked, should we mark it "Unranked", or should we just omit it; or in other words, should the absence of a ranking automatically mean that it was not ranked? Lynch 7 05:05, 24 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That's for us to decide, and I think it depends on the ranking. What I was thinking is that if one uses any of the engineering rankings then at least the top notable three (IT, Outlook, DQ) will always display, while the rest will display only if ranked. International rankings, as you said, will only display if ranked. Law and B, IT will always display (again, if any of them are displayed, e.g. if someone ranks Mint Law, then IT will also display). Does that sound right? --Muhandes (talk) 08:40, 24 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, that should be okay. So shall we move this into mainspace? (I don't think this needs a huge consensus as it is just a routine table matter). Lynch 7 12:45, 24 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It's here for exactly the kind of feedback you just gave, what to display and when. I'll leave it in user space until the end of the week, which will give me the time to implement some other niceties like proper table scopes (which incidentally the US ones don't have). --Muhandes (talk) 13:25, 24 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Went live, {{Infobox India university ranking}}. I used it in Indian Institute of Technology Bombay and also redid ICFAI University, Dehradun and Nirma University of Science and Technology. As always, feedback is very welcome, preferably at the talk page. --Muhandes (talk) 21:46, 27 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

College festivals notability

This is not the first time that this issue has been raised; there have been many instances where Indian college festival articles have gone to AfD. I think this is the right place to discuss: Are college fests inherently notable? If not (as WP:UNIGUIDE says), then what is the criteria for notability of a fest? Are just a couple of press reports enough, or does it need more media coverage to be notable? Lynch 7 05:00, 24 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think college festivals are inherently notable. That means the criteria is WP:GNG, i.e. the existence of significant coverage by reliable sources that are independent of the subject. It's up to the editors to decide whether "a couple of press reports" are enough to satisfy GNG (which is why this often goes to AfD). --Muhandes (talk) 08:34, 24 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

GNG is okay, but often it so happens that people insert detailed fest information, about its events, timings, etc etc; most in violation of WP:NOT. When all such material is removed, it is just a stub, and its probably better off merged into the main article. Of course, there is always the odd exception to what I said. Lynch 7 13:00, 24 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I totally agree. Having a subject notable enough for GNG is far away from having even a decent article. Tell that to all the WP:SPAs. --Muhandes (talk) 13:22, 24 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Definition of "University"

I feel (and many have felt) we urgently need to define a "university" in an Indian concept, as it differs significantly from the US definition. As per the accepted list format, we have these types of universities: Central, State, Private and Deemed. To confuse things further, I think there is a doubt about the status of IITs, NITs and IIMs. So the million dollar question: How to define a "university"? Lynch 7 12:14, 29 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Previous discussion

copy pasted from User talk:Muhandes#List_of_Indian_University_rankings

We can list the rankings of Indian Universities on the lines of List of Indian engineering college rankings. Very reliable sources for the rankings are 4icu.org rankings and Webometrics rankings, as these agencies have enlisted all the universities of India. What do you feel about it ? Sourav Mohanty (talk) 10:13, 29 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't remember when, but I think there was consensus that 4icu and Webometrics should not be included anywhere in Wikipedia. I can try to dig these discussions out. --Muhandes (talk) 10:20, 29 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

here is the one for 4icu. --Muhandes (talk) 10:22, 29 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I could not easily fine the discussion about webomaterics. Anyway, how about something like Rankings of universities in South Africa? --Muhandes (talk) 11:36, 29 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have serious doubts about the reliability of 4icu. Webometrics can be included, though I don't know how to do that, since the List is for college rankings; All colleges under state universities have been clubbed in Webometrics. Lynch 7 11:48, 29 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think what Sourav Mohanty was proposing is to create List the rankings of Indian universities, based on Webometrics and 4icu. I may add that to do this one would first need to define "University", which is List of universities in India all over again (yes, I should find the time to split that one as discussed). --Muhandes (talk) 11:53, 29 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, well, such a list wouldn't really be indicative of anything. These international ranking organizations don't really get the Indian state university system I guess; A "university" in India is very different from the ones in the US. We really should define it. Lynch 7 11:58, 29 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe the best is to create Rankings of universities and colleges in India, which rather than listing universities, discusses the different ranking systems and gives the top X for each, much like Rankings of universities in the United Kingdom. It can include an "International rankings" section which will list the top Y on the different international rankings, much like Rankings of universities in South Africa does. I really see a need for this as something to accompany the new template, but I don't have time for it right now (went back to work, yay). --Muhandes (talk) 12:07, 29 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That would be acceptable I guess. In any case, I've started a section regarding this in WT:INEI. Probably naveenpf and the others can come up with a suitable solution. Lynch 7 12:19, 29 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That would probably have been the best place to start the discussion anyway. Feel free to copypaste my part above :) --Muhandes (talk) 12:20, 29 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Updates

Up untill now, it seemed that UGC was the only body with the right to declare universities. But the links given at http://www.ugc.ac.in/inside/supremecourt.html , especially this supreme court judgement seem to suggest that state governments too have the right to declare universities. The judgement itself contains discussion on the question of the definition of a university. This could be very helpful in defining it here.--Siddhartha Ghai (talk) 06:50, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think there was ever a real question whether state governments can declare universities. The UGC act is very clear on that universities are "established or incorporated by or under a Central Act, Provincial Act or State Act". The question was if this is enough, and while I only read the highlights, the UC ruled that "the whole gamut of the University which will include... will not come within the purview of the State legislature", but instead is a matter of union recognition, i.e. among other things, being listed by the UGC. Am I reading it wrong? --Muhandes (talk) 07:13, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

After reading through the judgement, it seems that the state legislatures have the right to declare universities, but these must adhere to norms set by the union government and its statutory bodies (including UGC, MCI, AICTE etc). (Read para 20 on page 30). So, basically, as far as I understand it (and I am not a lawyer), this just gives backing to the definition we currently use (UGC recognition).

This could be a good reference for relevant articles (for defining university in an Indian context).--Siddhartha Ghai (talk) 07:41, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, I may add it as reference to the list articles about state and private universities. --Muhandes (talk) 15:37, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Individual articles

The question was raised re:Amity University whether individual articles should be open for the Guragon, Gwalior and Jaipur institutes, which are currently listed as campuses, but are listed by the UGC as separate universities. I expect the same question applies for Maharishi Markandeshwar University, Mullana campuses at Ambala and Solan and to some lesser extent to the many ICFAI universities. My inclination is that UGC listing makes an institute inherently notable, but I can't say I feel very strongly about it. What do you think? --Muhandes (talk) 09:44, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well, this is sort of like the case with IITs and NITs isn't it? Only the IITs and NITs are much more notable independently. I think we should have a look case by case; if there exists enough material to fill in articles of each campus on its own (i.e. Its notable on its own), then there is no reason why we should stop it. If all we have is material enough for one small stub, merging everything into a single page makes more sense. Lynch 7 19:33, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The reason this was raised is that it is not at all like the case with IITs and NITs. IITs and NITs are autonomously institutes. The examples given, especially the MMUs and Amity, started out as campuses of one university and may be seen as not totally separate. In the case of MMU I believe they even share some managerial functions. As in some cases it is hard to satisfy WP:GNG, I was inclining towards intrinsic notability. However, I do not oppose the practical criterion you proposed. I believe each institute has its own website which will provide, together with the UGC listing, enough material for an article. --Muhandes (talk) 07:04, 15 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Although I do feel that Amity has a supremely centralized mode of functioning, I'm quite ambivalent to whichever way the articles are developed. Muhandes is a trusted editor and I've seen Muhandes make extremely intelligent editing changes; therefore, would more or less completely accept whatever Muhandes believes may be appropriate. Wifione ^Message 17:41, 22 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the compliment. As I said, I do not feel strongly about this, so since there is no rush and plenty of other Indian universities still lack an article, I am going to keep these to last. That is, when I start creating these articles, which is at a yet unspecified date... still some other projects to do before that. --Muhandes (talk) 12:43, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Schools in India

Hi. I'm just dropping in here to mention that we are getting an increasing number of articles about schools in India. Unfortunately, the majority of these articles are of very poor quality and need a lot of clean up, while others may have to be deleted. We prefer to keep as many as we can in order to increase India articles in the encyclopedia - but we need your help.

For detailed information on how to write and maintain school articles, please visit us at WP:WPSCH and our guidelines at WP:SCH/AG. We also have a dedicated help page at WP:WPSCH/H.

--Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 08:42, 12 December 2011 (UTC)--[reply]

Thanks Kudpung, will take note. Lynch 7 19:28, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Notability

I've noticed that there was a discussion further up about notability of schools. School notability is a WP:PEREN, but is split between primary schools and high schools. Careful reading of WP:WPSCH/AG and following any links will explain the established precedents that are generally practiced. I do not believe that we can allow a two-tier Wikipedia with rules for Indian schools, and rules for schools in the rest of the world. That said, I would hesitate before applying stricter criteria for Indian schools than we use for the rest of the world. In a nutshell, generally, mainstream secondary schools that provide education to legal school leaving age with a school leaving certificate are considered notable if proven to exist, while primary schools must assert notablity per WP:ORG, and if they don't, they are usually redirected to the article about their locality. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 05:20, 15 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of universities in India/archive2

This is a second attempt to get this list to featured list. The first attempt failed not due to any problem with the list but due to lack of support. If someone wishes to comment, go here. --Muhandes (talk) 17:34, 17 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

B-school rankings

Opinions about what B-school rankings to add to {{Infobox India university ranking}} are appreciated in this page. Also, if anyone can supply the full top 50/100 list of CNBC-TV18's book. --Muhandes (talk) 15:59, 26 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Seems like getting input is rather difficult, is this project alive at all? Input about ET is still required, I see it mentioned above, but its validity is unclear. Regarding CNBC-TV18, they published the 2012 edition online which makes the above request irrelevant. --Muhandes (talk) 10:20, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The B school rankings arena is not mature and reliable in India. I have heard of B schools that bribe publishers. Lets include only those which have high reliability and participation. Some rankings that I think are reliable:

*Career Launcher Rankings

*T.I.M.E Institute Rankings

*Pagalguy Rankings (This is a ranking based on aspirants' perceptions)

Comments Welcome --Anbu121 (talk me) 12:02, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm happy at least someone pays attention to this page, thanks for the input. I presume you mean to add these to the obvious ones already used by the template, to which I believe there is consensus to use. If you want to discuss removing those, lets start a separate discussion.

Regarding the ones you suggested, I'll start by strongly opposing Pagalguy on the grounds that it is based singularly on aspirants' perceptions, and I simply don't see how this can be the single parameter for a ranking. Does what the industry or the academic world think mean nothing? Do actual placements or academic excellence stand for nothing? Just as an example, aspirants' perceptions are 10% of the Hindustan Times rankings, and about 15% in the Business Today one. As a matter of fact, I would go as far as to support a complete project ban on using this ranking.

Moving to the other two, I'm rather against them, though not as strongly. First, technically, they both don't seem to be rankings, more like categorizations. I don't think it is wise to mix rankings with categorizations. Second, I'm not convinced of their notability. If you look at Career Launcher's home page you'll see their business (on the banner) is "Online CAT Preparation CAT Online MBA Coaching, CAT Preparation, IIM-CAT, MBA Entrance, CAT IIM, CAT Papers, CAT Coaching", not a very reassuring sight. T.I.M.E. is also quite the same, with "Best Coaching for Online CAT-2012, IIM MBA entrance, IIT-JEE, GRE & GMAT". I don't see any of the other signs of notability either. For sure, I'm not local, so maybe I'm wrong and they are notable institutes. Third, their methodology isn't very clear. Compare the cryptic description they supply with this.

Perhaps we should have started the discussion by setting some ground rules for what to include, and then checking which rankings fit. I'd go with something like these:

Notable source. The ranking must be by a source which has notability demonstrated by having an article. This would exclude quite a few, but they can be included if an article is created on the institute or the ranking.
Full ranking. The ranking must list all institutes in one list ~~and give a numerical positions for each institute~~. Having one list excludes Career360 which only has lists by regions. ~~Having numerical positions excludes T.I.M.E. and CL.~~
Methodology disclosed, and includes multiple parameters. This excludes rankings which only go by internet visibility, or aspirant perception, but maybe also ET which does not list the methodology.

This is of course just a proposal. What do people thing of these? --Muhandes (talk) 16:30, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I completely agree with your comments. These three rankings came to my mind because all these three are extremely popular among aspirants as well as B school students. TIME and Career launcher are the top 2 institutes for MBA coaching in India and Pagalguy is India's top online MBA forum. (I am not promoting these institutes, just stating the facts). These rankings are not notable, but in my opinion these are much more reliable than ET and career360. I don't have any evidence to defend their notability to the general public, but these are highly notable among students.

Options available to us:

Pagalguy- one possible option is explicitly stating in the info box that it is aspirants' perception. If it is not possible, we can leave out this.

TIME and CL - I am not sure if there would be any problems if we convert the categorization into rankings. For example, in Career Launcher, all the institutes in the cluster 1 can be ranked as 1-6 and all the institutions in the cluster 2 can be ranked as 7-19. I found this featured article Georgetown University having categorized ranking.

I cant see anything wrong with the criteria proposed, but there are no reliable ranking publishers in India meeting the criteria other than those already in the template. --Anbu121 (talk me) 17:47, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I see I am very late into this discussion. To Muhandes' first comment a month ago, I don't think there are many reliable rankings around. TIME and CL are definitely not reliable, though, yes, as Anbu121 says, they are quite popular. Lynch 7 17:59, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You are not late, the discussion started today.

It's always better to get the local perspective, I had no idea these websites are popular (which of course may say little about notability or reliability). I think we agree non-notable rankings should not be used. I agree we could have found a solution to the categorization problem, so I stroke it out of the criteria I proposed. This leaves The Economic Times as the only possible notable addition, but the methodology is unclear. So unless we have objections, at this point we don't add anything to the template, and we'll use the above guidelines to decide in the future. --Muhandes (talk) 18:43, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Some more possibilities

Mint Mint - CoolAvenues.com B-School Annual Placements Survey 2011 – Does not include multiple parameters, only placement, so fails criteria 3.
Business Standard How we did it – does anyone have access to the actual rankings? Maybe a scanned page? It seems promising.
Businessworld maybe here – link does not work for me right now so I can't say.

Comments? --Muhandes (talk) 22:20, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think Mint must not be included in the rankings box, but I think we should not prevent it from being mentioned in the prose. I am not able to access the other two. --Anbu121 (talk me) 11:30, 10 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please explain why? While I did begin this as criteria for the infobox, of the three criteria I think #1 and #3 apply just as well for prose. We don't want to list rankings which are not notable (#1) and that are not reliable (#3). I'm saying if the methodology is not fully disclosed, or if it is based on a single parameter, it is not reliable, at least in comparison with the other rankings. #2 is a technical issue, so it might not apply to prose. --Muhandes (talk) 21:11, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I will address #3 first. A disclosed methodology gives us some confidence that the rankings might be reliable. Even if the methodology is disclosed, it is impossible to verify that the rankings have indeed been given in a fair and unbiased manner, which is beyond the ambit of Wikipedia. In the prose, We are just going to mention that xyz newspaper in its placement survey 2011, ranked abc institute in # position based on placement statistics. This statement is very much valid as per the core policies of Wikipedia as long as proper reference is provided and the reference is a reliable secondary source. Coming to #1, I agree that this applies to prose as well and Mint being a newspaper is notable. --Anbu121 (talk me) 04:41, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Of course, being valid per core policies is a requirement. But the entire point of have specific guidelines is that we decide what of the many reliable sources should be added to articles. We have the prerogative to decide that a ranking, though listed by a reliable source, will not be listed since it is unreliable. This is especially true since rankings are by nature comparative (the institute was ranked #1 here but #25 there). We can therefore require that they have some basic starting point. reliability seems to me to be like a good starting point. --Muhandes (talk) 13:37, 20 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I am not inclined to think that just because a ranking discloses the methodology, it becomes more reliable than another ranking that has not. By the way, I think Mint has disclosed the methodology to some extent. --Anbu121 (talk me) 21:05, 24 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Of course it is not a proof of reliability, but as we do not have access to the data, the best we can do is set a threshold. The threshold I proposed is "methodology disclosed, and includes multiple parameters", which seems to me to be a very minimal and acceptable requirement. --Muhandes (talk) 18:49, 25 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Input required

Again, input is required and appreciated about technical problems with List of universities in India.--Muhandes (talk) 14:55, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

New discussions

I've left a few basic notes regarding improvement of articles at the following places. Members are requested to comment and help improve these articles:

Talk:Education in India#Overhaul: Top-level article for our project. Top priority! (I hope we can find the level of co-operation we found while working on List of universities in India for pushing this to FA)
Template_talk:Education_in_India#Overhaul: High priority. This should ideally be the top-level template for our project.
Then I've left some comments at Talk:List of universities in India#Lead language, Talk:List of autonomous higher education institutes in India#Other institutions and Talk:List of deemed universities#Comments for moving forward after the List of universities in India split.

Feel free to comment here or on the respective talk pages. Regards--Siddhartha Ghai (talk) 22:12, 26 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Portal

I found a languishing Portal:Indian Education which was made back in 2009 and has been the same since. Incidentally, it has been listed at the project page for over 6 months and we haven't had a single improvement in it in this time. Any help in improving it is welcome. Please provide ideas, comments, suggestions at Portal talk:Indian Education.--Siddhartha Ghai (talk) 19:47, 12 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

List of National Institutes in India?

Can anyone explain this? Is there such an entity? --Muhandes (talk) 20:51, 6 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Since the editor removed the template I added asking for sources to the existence of this group, I had no choice but to go AfD. You are all welcome to join the discussion. --Muhandes (talk) 10:17, 7 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Have you added this text in the talk page of that article there was no need of this ruffle. I'm seeing this now only. Anyway since none responded to this query here I will put the same in Wikipedia:WikiProject India. Hope more people, with an understanding of India get involved in the discussion. Aravind V R (talk) 04:20, 8 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ruffle? I'm not sure why you think there is a ruffle, except maybe on your side. WT:IN may be a place to get more input, since the relevant institutes seem to be research institutes, not just education. Having no definition or criteria, I could not figure out where it belongs, so here is the place I looked first. --Muhandes (talk) 05:08, 8 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Let us stop accusing each other. But I certainly think the talk page of an article is the first place where one should raise concerns regarding that article.

Yes this is the place where the discussion should have took place but since none responded I think it is better to discuss it in Noticeboard for India-related topics Aravind V R (talk) 05:31, 8 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Tamil Nadu National Law School

What do you think of this? an article about a law school which does not even exist yet? Should we have them? --Muhandes (talk) 18:05, 11 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Kuvempu University

Please correct some information and add information with relevant sources. I'm waiting for your reply.--(talk→ Kkm010 ←track) 04:51, 12 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Notable alumni

In some Indian school college related articles we face regular problems that people include non-notable, unsourced entries. I have to fight regularly to clean up "notable people" lists. I requested an RFC here: Talk:Ballygunge_Government_High_School#Notable_alumni_section.21. But, I am interested to use this RFC for all similar disputes (that means in many articles). Can you suggest me how shall I use it? Shall I move a copy of it to somewhere else (eg. talk/RFC)? In addition can you add your opinion in talk please? --Tito Dutta ✉ 15:49, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Bangalore Medical College and Research Institute

Hey..Im new to editing and have taken up Bangalore Medical College and Research Institute ,my alma mater, as my first project..Initially a very disorganised article i have tried to give it some structure and depth. It would be great if some of the other editors from this project could contribute and enhance the article. Thanks! User:Nishantgopal (talk) NishantGopal 07:25, 1 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nalanda University

There's duplicated content between Nalanda and Nalanda University; both describe the ancient university, while the former also describes the settlement and the latter also describes the modern university. The historical information about the old university should be removed from one of these articles, or perhaps the information should be split from them both to create a new article on the old university. --BDD (talk) 17:51, 29 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

State higher educational institutions list names

Hello.

User:Intelligentguy89 recently moved List of institutions of higher education in Maharashtra to List of higher education institutions in Maharashtra. The reason given in the move log is New title is more concise and unambiguous (earlier title could be interpreted as List of institutions of "higher education in Maharashtra").

I'm starting this discussion so that a consensus on the naming scheme may be obtained. The previous naming scheme List of institutions of higher education in statename was arrived at after discussion in #State_Lists_Format above, and per WP:INEI/HELIST, it is the format being followed for the current (30) lists.

I personally agree that the new title is more concise, but I think we should arrive at a consensus about this before moving the lists.

Pinging everyone involved in the earlier discussion: @Aaditya 7, Naveenpf, Muhandes, Abhinay.leo, MikeLynch, Nitish.game, and Rahulghose:

Best regards--Siddhartha Ghai (talk) 07:53, 2 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

PS:We also have List of institutions of higher education in India.--Siddhartha Ghai (talk) 08:04, 2 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I do not agree on the ambiguous part. I may be wrong but I think first way is older British way and the later is newer American way of writing. I do agree it will be more concise to just say List of higher education institution in xyz. Grammatically both are correct so we should not move to the new format unless there is a strong reason to do so. - abhi (talk) 22:15, 2 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I think the title "List of higher education institutions in statename" is better than "List of institutions of higher education in statename". It is definitely more concise. If other articles like this are not yet having titles in the concise format, then their titles should also be changed. --EngineeringGuy (talk) 01:25, 1 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The second options seems more apt. --Eiennotoso (talk) 20:13, 24 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Importance tagging query

I have been participating in WikiProject India Tag & Assess 2014 drive. Many of the new pages are for educational institutions. I have been following the principles that Universities are of "high" importance, colleges are of "mid" importance, and isolated schools are of "low" importance. Am I right in these ratings? Cheers, Kautilya3 (talk) 14:31, 20 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Its not so simple. All universities are not high importance. many will be mid or low. Ditto with Colleges & Schools. AshLin (talk) 01:35, 21 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

List of Schools in Mumbai

Have started updating the list of schools in Mumbai and have also attached the website link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_schools_in_Mumbai

Have added 20 schools and will add more shortly Dsouzaronald (talk) 05:43, 1 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject X is live!

Hello everyone!

You may have received a message from me earlier asking you to comment on my WikiProject X proposal. The good news is that WikiProject X is now live! In our first phase, we are focusing on research. At this time, we are looking for people to share their experiences with WikiProjects: good, bad, or neutral. We are also looking for WikiProjects that may be interested in trying out new tools and layouts that will make participating easier and projects easier to maintain. If you or your WikiProject are interested, check us out! Note that this is an opt-in program; no WikiProject will be required to change anything against its wishes. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you!

Note: To receive additional notifications about WikiProject X on this talk page, please add this page to Wikipedia:WikiProject X/Newsletter. Otherwise, this will be the last notification sent about WikiProject X.

Harej (talk) 16:57, 14 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Kendriya Vidyalaya school articles

Articles about individual Kendriya Vidyalaya schools have been nominated for deletion. The discussion is taking place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kendriya Vidyalaya school articles. Comments would be welcome. 103.6.159.65 (talk) 10:16, 3 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of references

IP 202.142.107.240 has removed references from several articles about education in India. I'm not sure whether or not these are reliable sources that should be restored. Please can a subject expert review the edits? Thanks, Certes (talk) 01:07, 1 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Move proposal

It has been proposed at Talk:Indian Institute of Technology Joint Entrance Examination#Requested move 8 January 2017 that the articles on IIT-JEE and AIEEE be renamedto match their current names. Please comment there. 103.6.159.93 (talk) 09:08, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Bansal learning AfD

Bansal Learning is upmfor deletion. See Wp:Articles for deletion/Bansal Learning. 103.6.159.81 (talk) 05:35, 13 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

List of educational institutions in Meerut district

Does this edit seem right?--Siddhartha Ghai (talk) 15:04, 28 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The reasoning does not seem valid, because WP:LISTN does not require each element in a list to be notable. However, I'm not sure the notability of the list can be shown, and beside, this seems like WP:LISTCRUFT. Why do we need this list of schools where none of them is notable and none will ever be. --Muhandes (talk) 11:15, 7 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Careers360 ranking

I've been very active within this WikiProject in 2012, and now having taken a long wikibreak I am back, trying to adjust to the new consensus. One think I found there is quite a number of edit wars is Careers360 ranking. Back in 2012 the consensus I remember was that it should not be used at all. So I thought I'll start discussion and check if it really changed.

Let me reiterate the consensus reached in 2012 for B-school ranking, which I propose be adopted for all ranking:

There are three requirements for including a ranking:

Notable source. The ranking must be by a source which has notability demonstrated by having an article. (Note that this has nothing to do with the verifiability of the source, and does not necessarily depend on things such as fame, importance, or popularity.)
Full ranking. The ranking must list all institutes in one list and give a numerical positions for each institute.
Methodology disclosed, and includes multiple parameters.

So this leads me to the questions:

Question 1: Should Careers360 be allowed as a source of ranking? It fails requirement #1, and looking at here I see there were several attempts to establish notability which all failed.

Question 2: Assuming the answer to Question 1 is "Yes", Should Careers360's Top Engineering Colleges in India 2017 be used? It fails requirement #2 since it does not rank, instead grouping into seven groups. Note that the "S. No." column is not ranking, per the methodology it is just a way of listing.

Question 3: Assuming the answer to Question 1 is "Yes", how should Careers360's Top Universities in India 2017, Top Medical Colleges in India 2017, Top Law Colleges in India 2017 and Top MBA Colleges in India 2017 be handled? They all have an "Overall Score" column, which translates directly to a single ranking per Requirement #2. However, they also have a "Rank" column which gives separate ranking for government and private institutes. I tried to use text like :

It was ranked 3rd in India by Careers360 in 2017, second among government institutes.^[1]

But another editor thinks it is better to ignore the overall rank and use

It was ranked 2nd among top government medical colleges in India in 2017 by Careers360.^[1]

References

^ ^a ^b Cite error: The named reference Rankings_CAREER_M was invoked but never defined (see the help page).

I think my way is clearer and avoids all misunderstandings, but if the second option is preferable, I suggest we treat it as two rankings, "Top Government Medical Colleges in India 2017" and "Top Private Medical Colleges in India 2017" and I will edit {{Infobox India university ranking}} to reflect this.

Your comments are very welcome. --Muhandes (talk) 11:01, 7 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Careers360 provides ranking separately for Government & Private Colleges

Ranking by MoHRD named NIRF has certain advantages like official in nature, sub rankings on individual parameters, historical data will be available due to continuity, and more and more recognition. I think reliability, awareness and fairness are key to ranking and NIRF provides that. I don't know whether Career 360 rankings provides so. Please do compare them along with other rankings available like India Today, Outlook, THE(by Time) etc JPskylight (talk) 13:05, 15 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@JPskylight: The use of National Institutional Ranking Framework rankings is currently undisputed, as is the use of ratings from India Today, Outlook India and The Week. To make it easy I even created {{Infobox India university ranking}} (which is of course non-mandatory, but became the de-facto standard). I was looking for input about the use of Careers360 (which may not be notable), and specifically, if we agree it can be used, then how. See the three questions I raised. --Muhandes (talk) 14:38, 18 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Selection criteria for List of agricultural universities in India

I started discussion on this subject, comments very welcome. --Muhandes (talk) 17:45, 19 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[Rankings_CAREER_M-1] Cite error: The named reference Rankings_CAREER_M was invoked but never defined (see the help page).

[1]

@@ Line 722: / Line 722: @@
 Your comments are very welcome. --[[User:Muhandes|Muhandes]] ([[User talk:Muhandes|talk]]) 11:01, 7 July 2017 (UTC)
+Careers360 provides ranking separately for Government & Private Colleges
 ::Ranking by MoHRD named NIRF has certain advantages like official in nature, sub rankings on individual parameters, historical data will be available due to continuity, and more and more recognition. I think reliability, awareness and fairness are key to ranking and NIRF provides that. I don't know whether  Career 360 rankings provides so. Please do compare them along with other rankings available like India Today, Outlook, THE(by Time) etc <span style="background:#87CEFA">[[User:JPskylight|JPskylight]] ([[user talk:JPskylight|talk]])</span> 13:05, 15 July 2017 (UTC)