Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:Noticeboard for India-related topics: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Mukt (talk | contribs)
283 edits
Line 109: Line 109:


::Is there a reason green is preferable to saffron? The current colour seems quite complementary to the images in these articles. The most fitting venue for a discussion on this would be [[Wikipedia talk:WikiProject India/Infoboxes]], with a notification placed here on the central discussion. Regards, [[User:Zindor|Zindor]] ([[User talk:Zindor|talk]]) 15:03, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
::Is there a reason green is preferable to saffron? The current colour seems quite complementary to the images in these articles. The most fitting venue for a discussion on this would be [[Wikipedia talk:WikiProject India/Infoboxes]], with a notification placed here on the central discussion. Regards, [[User:Zindor|Zindor]] ([[User talk:Zindor|talk]]) 15:03, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
:::The orange color matches the 'Hindu philosophy' series colors [[User:Apollo1203|Apollo1203]] ([[User talk:Apollo1203|talk]]) 02:22, 17 August 2020 (UTC)


== Suggestions ==
== Suggestions ==

Revision as of 02:22, 17 August 2020

WikiProject iconIndia Project‑class
WikiProject iconThis 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
ProjectThis page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/WikiProject used Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/WikiProject used

This page is a notice board for things particularly relevant to Wikipedians working on articles on India.
Click here to add a new section
Article alerts for WikiProject India

Did you know

Articles for deletion

(64 more...)

Proposed deletions

(7 more...)

Categories for discussion

Templates for discussion

Redirects for discussion

Files for discussion

Featured article candidates

Featured list candidates

Good article nominees

(8 more...)

Featured list removal candidates

Requests for comments

Peer reviews

Requested moves

(7 more...)

Articles to be merged

(38 more...)

Articles to be split

(17 more...)

Articles for creation

(97 more...)

This table is updated daily by a bot
Shortcuts

Wikipedia Meetups edit
Upcoming
none
Recent
Outside India
Past meetups

Self claims of descent — castes/clans of India and Pakistan

Hello! In several articles on castes/clans of the India and Pakistan, there are mentions of that particular caste/clan claiming descent from "X" (self claim) (X = another race/tribe/caste/clan), though, with citations/sources. Still, is that not compromising the quality of the content? Can we discuss removing that from the articles? Thanks, Мастер Шторм (talk) 14:03, 28 July 2020 (UTC) Мастер Шторм (talk) 14:12, 28 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Мастер Шторм We generally allow the mention if it is reliably sourced, ie: not sourced to publications produced by caste associations etc but rather to independent academics. That is because independent academics usually do go to the trouble to debunk the claims where appropriate, or support them in the (admittedly rare) event that the claims are reasonable. Obviously, if the claim is of ancestry involving some deity then that is myth/legend. - Sitush (talk) 17:34, 2 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

EB1911

Occasionally, someone goes on a burst of adding {{EB1911 Poster}} to various articles, as has just happened at Mahar. The template links to the article's equivalent entry in the 1911 edition of Encyclopaedia Britannica on Wikisource. Ok, Wikisource does have a generic disclaimer - see here - regarding the accuracy or otherwise of EB1911, particularly for certain subjects such as ethnography. Nonetheless, I really don't see the point in linking to what is often nonsense, vastly superseded by more recent research and often enough demonstrating precisely the sort of colonial misunderstandings, such as scientific racism, that led to us deciding generally not to use Raj era publications as sources. As far as I am concerned, the use of these templates is more to do with spamming Wikisource on Wikipedia than with intelligently informing our readers. Does anyone else agree that including them is a poor idea in these circumstances? - Sitush (talk) 17:31, 2 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I thought we avoided citing tertiary sources, as normal practice, but then i just looked at WP:TERTIARY which makes no attempt at discouraging their use. There's always the inherent risk that a tertiary source can be a bias synthesis of cherry-picked secondary sources. How do we fix this EB problem, local policy like we did with indicscript? Zindor (talk) 20:00, 2 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
EB1911 as a tertiary source is pretty much already covered for India stuff by long-standing consensus regarding avoidance of Raj era sources. Obviously, there are exceptions where a Raj era source might have a valid use but they're rare in my experience. However, this does not cover sticking the template I mentioned into articles - it's basically another form of external link but to a WMF project, similar to {{Commonscat}}. I just don't see the point in doing it and I'm not at all convinced that any reader who did click on it would notice or take heed of the disclaimer that Wikisource has put in place for their EB1911 pages. - Sitush (talk) 20:13, 2 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I see what you mean now. What a headbanger. The EB1911 template utilizes the 'sister project' template, so it comes under interwiki links, which have no policy for linking. External link policy wouldn't explicitly bar the inclusion either. MOS INDIA would cover the inclusion of templates in India-related articles, so if consensus is gained there then problem solved. Cheers, Zindor (talk) 20:56, 2 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, that is what I am thinking of - some sort of project-specific guidance. - Sitush (talk) 10:29, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Do we really need project-specific guidelines? The EB1911 content on most Indian topics is vastly outdated, but so it is on many other topics, like particle physics or African archaeology. Surely we should be able to rely on editors using their common sense? – Uanfala (talk) 11:30, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia and Wikipedia editors "Biased, anti-Hindu"

After Wikipedia urged donations from Indian users some Twitter users (including David Frawley) claimed Wikipedia was anti-Hindu, which ThePrint has reported on (2 Aug). Pages commented on include 2020 Delhi riots and Jai Shree Ram. David Frawley also tweeted "Wikipedia has published many questionable statements about Hindu writers, leaders, causes and historical issues... Hindus should protest its anti-Hindu views". If true or even partly, this bias needs to be identified. DTM (talk) 10:29, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I wish someone would give a long list of the bias or anti-Hindu views they are talking about rather than just mention two examples. What are the other "unpleasant facts"? DTM (talk) 10:48, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I reported this campaign at WP:AN prior to The Print. As for Frawley, we really shouldn't be using him as a source for anything ... and I do hope we are not. He's as bad as Koenraad Elst. - Sitush (talk) 11:05, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
That is your ideological bias speaking. - Mukt (talk) 14:00, 16 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
And, don't forget that Rajiv Malhotra complained about the anti-Hindu bias of Wikipedia in 1990! -- Kautilya3 (talk) 12:29, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
1990s, not 1990, and he didn't specifically say what he criticized the website for. Technically it was possible to criticize Nupedia project in 1999 which later became Wikipedia. - Mukt (talk) 13:54, 16 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Even in 2001, there is no mention of either Nupedia or Wikipedia. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 17:44, 16 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
But he hasn't said that he wrote any article on the subject, refer to the link in my previous comment. Also, kindly don't mistake me for someone arguing the case for RM. In my assessment, there is no accessible way to confirm or deny the truth of what he has said. I found the discussion here absurdly one-sided and merely stated some facts that point to a more neutral view. - Mukt (talk) 18:38, 16 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Religious fundamentalists everywhere have a well-known allergy to factual information. We've been accused of denigrating Hinduism, Islam, Christianity, and most other religious denominations; and often it's the same articles and the same editors they find fault with. If, in the course of a day's editing, I'm accused of being both anti-Islam and anti-Hindu, I have a fair degree of confidence that I'm doing something right. When these criticisms come from mainstream scholars, we should take them seriously; this campaign is just something to be wary of when patrolling for disruptive edits. Vanamonde (Talk) 14:50, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I'd like to see some WP:RS compliant source accusing wikipedia of bias against say Islam, Christianty, etc. - Mukt (talk) 14:02, 16 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Why's that? Have you seen any assertions in articles that Wikipedia is biased against Islam and Christianity? I didn't say we were biased; I said we've been accused by fundamentalists of being biased. I'm not proposing to add or remove content anywhere, so I'm not going to do your homework for you here; evidence of accusations is easy to find. Vanamonde (Talk) 19:09, 16 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The issue here is Wikipedia's anti-Hindu bias, and the claims documented have not been made by Hindu fundamentalists. Why do claims of denigration of any other religion come into discussion at all is beyond my understanding. But, if they are relevant, maybe one should get a good understanding of what those claims are rather than reading idle gossip about them. - Mukt (talk) 01:19, 17 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Joshua Jonathan When did the AIT/AMT/Indigenous Aryan debate End/Conclude? That's news. And what's with this Obviously, Wikipedia is a threat for some people, who believe in indigenous Aryans and 10,000 years of Hinduism.?? Are other diverse scholarly debates/interpretations friendlies to Wikipedia? Does the Friendly Wikipedia treat the Content or the Author as reliable source?? Just asking. Santoshdts [TalkToMe] 18:06, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
In the past couple of years, though the Hindutva-propagation of the indigenous Aryans position has never been taken serious by mainstream scholarship. As for your other questions, I'm unable to give an answer; it's not clear to me what you are asking. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 18:57, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
That was not a too complicated query related to the topic of your expertise.But, nevermind. Santoshdts [TalkToMe] 19:12, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Can someone read Tamil?

Can someone please read the Tamil text (on the board and on the wall in red) from Vishalakshi temple. The caption in the article is "Kashi Vishalakshi Temple Tamil Inscription which shows Temple Consecrated held in 1908AD". On the board, I can read 1971, which tallies with a ref saying that the temple was renovated in the year.--Redtigerxyz Talk 16:30, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sure someone will have a translation for you. But i was interested so i desaturated the photo and read the English. I can see "Shri Visalakshi Mandip Varanasi renovated(?) new #### installed and consecrated on November 1 1971 #### ############ Nagarathars". Cheers, Zindor (talk) 17:36, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Can't read Tamil but that part has a year in modern(?) numerals as 1971. Tayi Arajakate Talk 18:39, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Zindor, this matches with the secondary ref already in place. Someone has added the image with caption "Kashi Vishalakshi Temple Tamil Inscription which shows Temple Consecrated held in 1908AD". Also, the ref added "சோமலெ (1963). காசி நாட்டுக்கோட்டை நகரச் சத்திர வரலாறு. தமிழ் நாடு. p. 43." is added. Can someone please read it. --Redtigerxyz Talk 13:39, 9 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Iramuthusamy: would you be able to help us out please? Thanks, Zindor (talk) 14:10, 9 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Mahesh Babu filmography/archive1

I have worked on Mahesh Babu filmography along with Ab207, and could use some more feedback on its nomination. MSG17 (talk) 21:46, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Kameshwar Choupal/Kameshwar Chaupal

Ram Mandir, Ayodhya says "Kameshwar Chaupal (a Dalit leader from Bihar) became one of the first people to lay the stone" in a 1989 incident at the site. Is this person the same as Kameshwar Choupal, a politician from Bihar, or are they different people? Click here for information about Choupal. 64.203.187.71 (talk) 20:13, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion on 2020 Bangalore riots

There is an active discussion regarding the article title of 2020 Bangalore riots. If you are interested, please participate at {{Section link}}: required section parameter(s) missing Tayi Arajakate Talk 16:14, 12 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hinduism in India - can someone check recent edits?

Hinduism in India (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) besides being badly written I'm not sure about the sources. Thanks. Doug Weller talk 17:19, 12 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Aditi Rao Hydari - quick question

Hey does anyone know how to properly refer to Aditi Rao Hydari with respect to WP:SURNAME? Would it be Rao Hydari, as though it were hyphenated, as her parents have Rao and Hydari as surnames, or would we just use Hydari? Thanks, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 00:43, 15 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Rao Hydari would likely be more appropiate since both are a part of her surname. There's a similar example in Aishwarya Rai Bachchan. Tayi Arajakate Talk 00:57, 15 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Swaminarayan

There's too much Swaminarayan pov-pushing at too many Wikipedia articles at the moment, exaggerating the importance of Swaminarayan. This may be the most stunning one, but see also Hinduism and Vedanta. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 04:56, 15 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Surname problem for Keezhpattillam Viswajyothi

Hey, India specialist. In Wikispecies we have problem, which is surname for "Keezhpattillam Viswajyothi/Viswajyothi Keezhpattillam"? Thread is here: wikispecies:Wikispecies:Village_Pump#Name_order_confusion--Estopedist1 (talk) 06:30, 15 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Saffron infoboxes

Where would be the best place to talk about the usage of saffron in infoboxes related to India? Yesterday I went ahead and changed the colour of some of these to green (like the bottom part of the Indian tri-colour is green or the leaves of a lotus).

DTM (talk) 13:28, 15 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a reason green is preferable to saffron? The current colour seems quite complementary to the images in these articles. The most fitting venue for a discussion on this would be Wikipedia talk:WikiProject India/Infoboxes, with a notification placed here on the central discussion. Regards, Zindor (talk) 15:03, 15 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The orange color matches the 'Hindu philosophy' series colors Apollo1203 (talk) 02:22, 17 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Suggestions

Please suggest some speeches for this article Speeches of Narendra Modi. The suggestions can go on the talk page of course—Talk:Speeches of Narendra Modi. DTM (talk) 13:31, 15 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Requesting images of splendid wall paintings from Dehradun

Oh well, just thought I'd give this a shot. If anyone reading this stays in Dehradun, would you please be so kind as to visit Guru Ram Rai Darbar Sahib some day (not urgent), and take some images for Wiki Commons of the profoundly beautiful wall paintings there - some belong to the Garhwali School, 17th century? And also the main structure and the Mughal-style gardens? Not a single modern-day image exists on Wiki of this culturally and architecturally important monument, or one documenting the historic wall paintings -- could only find a historic image to use in the article. I would have very much loved to be able to drive there (from Delhi) just to take these images myself, but am not sure if people are being stopped at the state border or if we need a Covid negative report. Apparently, some wall paintings are in bad shape and it would be nice to include a gallery in the article highlighting this relatively little known treasure in Dehradun. Fingers crossed! CallMeByYourMane (talk) 15:05, 15 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

PS: Gawd, just look at those mural beauties at the entrance itself! CallMeByYourMane (talk) 15:10, 15 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

RS for election results?

I'm trying to verify that Ashok Kumar Dogra was indeed an MLA for Ramban, but I'm having difficulty finding an RS for election returns. [1] says he won in 2008, but the official results posted by the Election Commission ([2]) seem to go back only to 2009. Anyone know where I could find a good source? (Article's been tagged for notability since 2017 and I'm trying to establish that its subject meets WP:NPOL.) Thanks! AleatoryPonderings (talk) 00:53, 16 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I had a look into this for you. I found an RS source (ECI) here. If you download the file and scroll down to page 6 you'll find the info. Thanks, Zindor (talk) 11:37, 16 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you so much Zindor! AleatoryPonderings (talk) 13:06, 16 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Notability and sourcing for Chetan Gawande

Yesterday I stumbled on the article for Chetan Gawande and cleaned it up a bit. All of the citations are in Marathi, which I don't speak. From what I can work out using Google Translate, the subject is indeed an elected official, but that in itself isn't enough to satisfy WP:NPOL or WP:GNG. I'm also unsure if sources like this one are RS at all—I don't want to discount the page just because it's not professionally formatted or designed, but I can't work out what I'm looking at apart from some kind of report of election results. Could someone who reads Marathi check on the sources and determine whether this person is actually notable? Armadillopteryx 20:32, 16 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Noticeboard_for_India-related_topics&oldid=973412200"