Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:Noticeboard for India-related topics

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Hari7478 (talk | contribs) at 09:12, 4 March 2014 (→‎Shady/Coat-rack articles (of dubious merit) that i intend to nominate for deletion). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

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
Shortcuts
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 Meetups edit
Upcoming
none
Recent
Outside India
Past meetups

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Professor Gautam Chatterjee

Hello, India experts. The references in this old Afc submission are not on line. Is this a notable person, and should the article be kept? It will soon be deleted as a stale draft. —Anne Delong (talk) 06:23, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Anne, I think the person is notable. Works of this person has been published in multiple regional newspapers in India. Including The Hindu, Pioneer, and more. Antara is a famous play in urban areas of WestBengal. No doubt the article need some work. But if you ask me then my answer will be Keep. Jim Cartar (talk) 12:31, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I see that you have been fixing up the article. By editing it you have postponed its deletion for six months, which should be plenty of time to add some more inline citations and remove some promotional language. Thanks for your help. —Anne Delong (talk) 12:43, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Welcome. Jim Cartar (talk) 13:07, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Notable, no idea why it is taking long. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.87.80.86 (talk) 04:14, 1 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Because this is a biography, it has to have inline citations for facts about the person himself and about any awards that he may have won. Feel free to add these yourself - that will speed things up! —Anne Delong (talk) 14:28, 1 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Request on Reward Board

I'm soliciting ribbon alternatives for both the India Star and the India Barnstar of National Merit. I'd be glad to see input from WikiProject India on the design. Chris Troutman (talk) 06:59, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It could just use the flag without a star. The National Merit one could be differentiated by a gold fringe or something, instead. The modest barnstar ribbons are simple examples of the texture involved. —PC-XT+ 03:39, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Weblokam reliability

Is Weblokam likely to be a reliable source? It isn't even rendering properly on my PC, despite having the correct fonts installed. - Sitush (talk) 13:09, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Why does clicking on http://www.weblokam.com lead to http://malayalam.webdunia.com/ ? And is the webdunia club blacklisted/spam? §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 14:48, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@Dharmadhyaksha:, No idea but it doesn't look great, does it? I could take the issue to WP:RSN but I'm dubious about getting much input there because of it being a non-English source. - Sitush (talk) 17:37, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This draft needs Review

Is there any AfC reviewer who can review this draft which is related to Indian History The Early Nationalists of India (Moderates).

Note to the Reviewer: Please review if you have good knowledge of Indian History. And please notify me before you start reviewing. Jim Cartar (talk) 17:11, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There are big problems with it. This is not a reliable source, nor is this or this. I've got doubts about the source published by Morning Star Publishers also. I'm even struggling to find that many decent sources that refer to them as "Early Nationalist" rather than "early nationalist", which have very different meanings; similarly for "Moderates" vs "moderates".
There are numerous other issues but my bet is most of those could be resolved if only the sourcing was up to scratch. It is pointless listing them when removing the above sources will results in an incoherent shell anyway.
I can review on the AfC itself if you want but you won't like the outcome, sorry. - Sitush (talk) 17:49, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@Sitush: please add your comments to the submission for the benefit of future reviewers. Thanks. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 19:32, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@Davidwr:, I've no idea why but the {{afc comment}} is barfing. I've tried umpteen times, tweaking various things through Preview. Might it be unhappy about links in the rationale? I've just saved it complete with the error for now, hoping someone can fix it. - Sitush (talk) 23:59, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@Sitush I need some time to fix the problems. Jim Cartar (talk) 06:17, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Seemandhra seriously could do would some more watchers and a quick-cleanup amid this current fiasco. -Ugog Nizdast (talk) 20:52, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

On second thought, it's just like any of our other typical badly-written pages on Indian local places and regions. But in any case, more eyes are needed, judging by the flurry of activity of IPs and new accounts since this place isn't even officially formed yet. Sincerely, Ugog Nizdast (talk) 19:18, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

History of Hinduism

Could someone interfere here? I'm at two reverts for today; one strike in my whole career is enough. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 11:25, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Namaste and welcome back to WikiProject India noticeboard. I have reverted the edit (yes you have noticed it already ), if they add back again, edit warring noticeboard should be the destination. I'll watch the article. Tito☸Dutta 11:34, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I've been watching it also and am concerned about that editor. Dougweller (talk) 12:37, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks to both of you. I've posted a message on his (I guess "it" is a male) talkpage; looks like this editor is a Tamil, who wants a broader perspective on the history of Hinduism included at this page. Interesting. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 08:28, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Kush/Mountain articles

Members of this WikiProject may be interested in a discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Geography#Kush/Mountain articles. Cnilep (talk) 07:40, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/K Ravindra

Dear India experts: Here's another if those abandoned Afc submissions. The article has a list of sources, but they are not on line. Is this a notable artist, and should the article be kept? —Anne Delong (talk) 13:15, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

As of January, the popular pages tool has moved from the Toolserver to Wikimedia Tool Labs. The code has changed significantly from the Toolserver version, but users should notice few differences. Please take a moment to look over your project's list for any anomalies, such as pages that you expect to see that are missing or pages that seem to have more views than expected. Note that unlike other tools, this tool aggregates all views from redirects, which means it will typically have higher numbers. (For January 2014 specifically, 35 hours of data is missing from the WMF data, which was approximated from other dates. For most articles, this should yield a more accurate number. However, a few articles, like ones featured on the Main Page, may be off).

Web tools, to replace the ones at tools:~alexz/pop, will become available over the next few weeks at toollabs:popularpages. All of the historical data (back to July 2009 for some projects) has been copied over. The tool to view historical data is currently partially available (assessment data and a few projects may not be available at the moment). The tool to add new projects to the bot's list is also available now (editing the configuration of current projects coming soon). Unlike the previous tool, all changes will be effective immediately. OAuth is used to authenticate users, allowing only regular users to make changes to prevent abuse. A visible history of configuration additions and changes is coming soon. Once tools become fully available, their toolserver versions will redirect to Labs.

If you have any questions, want to report any bugs, or there are any features you would like to see that aren't currently available on the Toolserver tools, see the updated FAQ or contact me on my talk page. Mr.Z-bot (talk) (for Mr.Z-man) 05:10, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

AfC submission

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/The Early Nationalists of India (Moderates). FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 13:22, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Luso-Indian

Category:Luso-Indian, which is within the scope of this WikiProject, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 05:41, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Maharashtriya Jnanakosha

Maharashtriya Jnanakosha was apparently compiled from 1920 with the aim of being a Marathi equivalent to Encyclopaedia Britannica. I hate tertiary sources such as this at the best of times, and I'm always very wary of Raj era sources, but the MJ also appears to have very few mentions in other scholarly works. Is it reliable for caste-related subject matter, including the history of such communities? - Sitush (talk) 19:06, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Whats wrong with "Raj era" sources? I will dig out some stuff on MJ if available in Marathi. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 17:13, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Pseudo-history, overly influenced by Brahmins, mixing of folklore with fact, amateur (though probably not this guy) and so on. Dammit, there are huge chunks of people even in India who think the Raj era produced bad reference works (although I'll admit that they tend to change their mind selectively, depending on whether it makes them/their community etc look good or not). The general rule is that we do not use this sort of stuff because it is mostly crap. I'm asking whether this might be an exception to that rule. A couple of key things regarding MJ are (a) whether peer-reviewed sources cite it and (b) whether it cites sources itself. - Sitush (talk) 17:18, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Okay! The books have been referenced in some other books. But i couldn't find any criticism yet on the actual volume as such, pro or against. So i have no answer for your point a above. For the point b; the volume does cite sources at the end of every article, although they are not inline as we do here. (Did the then versions of Encyclopædia Britannica use inline citations? I read around that EB was the only encyclopedia for Ketkar to actually base his version on. Other volumes in other Indian languages were being worked on independently and remotely but there was no way he could have used those, if they at all they existed in usable form. Thats just for the "format" he presented.) Coming back to citing sources, for example, this entry of "Egypt" has at the end listed some references, which are translated and stated below.
And there are 50 something more references listed there. But not all entries have references listed at the bottom. For example this small entry of Eton has none. (Our article is at Eton, Berkshire.) In your search, do try looking for alternate spellings like "Maharashtriya Dnyanakosha". §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 04:48, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the digging. I'm not too concerned about inline sourcing but if tertiary sources do refer to secondary sources then we really should be citing the secondaries. That said, in this instance the secondary sources are likely to be unreliable themselves! The alternate spellings is a good point - are you aware of any others? - Sitush (talk) 15:38, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Edits for Dowry system in India

I’m a student revising the Dowry system in India page. I have a few suggestions for improving the article. First, I will revise and organize the "Introduction" and "Prevalence" sections. I'm hoping that this will bring these sections up to Wikipedia standards and clarify the direction the article will take. Second, I will add sections on "History", "Social factors", and "Economic factors". This will ensure that the issue is covered in a holistic view. These sections are relevant to how the dowry system has evolved and become a traditional part of marriage in some parts of India. Last, I will rewrite the "Domestic violence" section into specific subsections including "Murder", "Violence and abuse", "Suicide", and "Mental health". I believe this covers important information regarding women's rights and capabilities. These sections are also important for realizing the implications for women, and ultimately India's future.

I am not sure if these are the best way to divide the information on the page, and am looking for advice on how to organize the material needed to make this article better. I am especially conflicted regarding organization on the "Domestic violence" section. Please let me know if you have comments or suggestions that would aid in this article being better represented on Wikipedia. Thanks!


AllyBremer (talk) 02:39, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@AllyBremer: Namaste and welcome to WikiProject India noticeboard. Your plan on format looks good. Carry on with it. For further discussions on the topic or the presentation or the content or anything, lets everyone take it to Talk:Dowry system in India where the same post is present. Its just easy for further references to keep discussions there. You can always return back here if you need more audience. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 04:57, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The above reply is +1-ed by Tito☸Dutta 05:37, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Kumbha of Mewar

What should the title of Kumbha of Mewar actually be? The first paragraph reads: "Maharana Kumbha ("Hindu Surrtran" & "Abhinav Bharta Charya" or Kumbhakarna Singh, died 1468 AD) was the ruler of Mewar, a state in western India, between 1433 and 1468 AD, and belonging to the Sisodia clan. Kumbha was a son of Rana Mokal of Mewar by his wife Sobhagya Devi, a daughter of Jaitmal Sankhla, the Parmara fief-holder of Runkot in the state of Marwar." It isn't until the 2nd paragraph we find the name "Rana Kumbha", which seems to be his most common name in English. Was he really 7 feet tall by the way? Article really needs sources. Dougweller (talk) 15:34, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Gujarat dams

Are you looking for creating new articles? There is good Data bank here on Gujarat Government website which has detailed info/statistics about each dam in Gujarat. I have added infobox in Dharoi dam and Ukai Dam. Have a look. If you are interested, create new start class articles on each remained and fill infobox from available databank. Regards -Nizil (talk) 21:05, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Nizil Shah: Namaste and welcome to WikiProject India noticeboard. The weblink you have provided is really nice and easy to use. Also, try out this link. It is a wiki created from joint venture of Ministry of Water Resources (India) and Indian Space Research Organisation. Added advantage of this is that it has info of all states & UTs of India. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 04:16, 28 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Dwivedi

I'm querying G. C. Dwivedi's history of the Jats in the WP:RSN thread here. - Sitush (talk) 02:16, 28 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Bump. It could do with some input at the RSN thread. - Sitush (talk) 04:02, 4 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

RFC: Inviting Quiddity (WMF) or Okeyes (WMF) to implement Flow at WikiProject India Noticeboard

I am requesting comments from the regular editors of this noticeboard. As you know WP:FLOW was implemented in two WikiProject noticeboards. Yesterday Fram posted at Flow talk page that one of those WikiProject noticeboards get one to two messages per month. Our this noticeboard gets new message almost everyday.

I am personally very much interested to invite Quiddity (WMF) or Okeyes (WMF) to implement Flow in our noticeboard. Frankly speaking, I think—

  1. It'll bring some more highlight to our works and our noticeboard. I am very much interested to get this attention. Hopefully we;'ll get few more volunteers too (okay, our noticeboard is already very popular, but still it'll get some more attention).
  2. We'll be one of the first WikiProjects to work with flow and most probably the first WikiProject to invite them to test flow in our noticeboard.
Note
  • I have not talked to Quiddity (WMF) or Okeyes (WMF) yet. I am talking to you first. I'll have nothing to do if they reject our invitation or if they feel Flow can not be implemented here.
  • Flow reportedly has some disadvantages. Check reports against Flow at WT:FLOW. But, believe me, I have been following Flow from the very first day. Flow may be in a bad condition, but, it is now unworkable.

Please let me know if you want to get Flow. If we do, someone of us can go ahead and invite them. Tito☸Dutta 12:56, 28 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

  • I understand that FLOW will be able to notify editors if someone replies to their posts. Do you know if it only notifies the original poster, or all of the people who post in a certain section? Either way, this could be handy. —Anne Delong (talk) 09:31, 2 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Votes

  • Support: as proposer. Tito☸Dutta 12:56, 28 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose: there have been various discussions about problems arising from Flow (some at Jimbo's page, IIRC) and from reading some of those over the last few weeks I got the impression that this is yet another too-rapid rollout by WMF, as Visual Editor was. I realise that they have to test somewhere but I'd rather it wasn't anywhere near where I am. - Sitush (talk) 13:01, 28 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Support I have always tried to steer clear of the stunts that those at WMF pull off here in en wp but whats wrong in giving them a chance? —Soham 13:11, 28 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Some of the disadvantages were there in WT:FLOW . Maybe still improvements require. But after seeing this, I would like to support. Jim Cartar (talk) 15:44, 28 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support This would be a really good noticeboard to test FLOW. Well, it's a test run, if this fails, we can revert back to original format. I have no knowledge as such about this, but I am all for anything new and experimental :)--Dwaipayan (talk) 01:26, 1 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Not Yet! Let FLOW mature some more. WikiProject India's resources are few. Imho we should not risk squandering valuable manhours to restore the sit should flow not work out. In the meantime, some editors may like to completely understand FLOW and its nitty gritty so that when the time comes, we can avoid as many mistakes/bad decisions as possible while implementing it. My take - dont adopt technology blindly, let it be done deliberately after due scrutiny and after consensus is reached that FLOW is now reasonably mature. AshLin (talk) 01:58, 1 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per Sitush and AshLin. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 08:18, 2 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. Although I post here often, I am not a member of this project, so I will just comment rather than !vote. I can see that this would be a good talk page to test FLOW because it is neither so busy that there would be many posts to fix if something went wrong, nor so inactive that problems would not be noticed. Certainly AshLin has a valid concern; in any test things are bound to go wrong, and it would be important to know if the developers are prepared to restore posted items to pre-FLOW format if the test didn't prove satisfactory, or if it would be left to the project members to do it. —Anne Delong (talk) 09:25, 2 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per Sitush and AshLin and per my reluctance, at my age, to learn anything new, unless my life depends on it. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 14:34, 2 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support lets test it...--Vigyanitalkਯੋਗਦਾਨ 05:12, 4 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Possible fringe at Dwarkadhish Temple

I just moved and cleaned up a bit Dwarkadhish Temple (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) and some of the fringe stuff about it being 2500 years old was immediately replaced. I can't comment on all the sources (and one link doesn't work), but Archaeology of India: retrospect and prospect - page 159, Amar Nath Khanna was written before the research I used to date the temple to the 15th century. And even that source seems to say something different.[1] I think that there is a structure there about 2000 years old but haven't yet firmly sourced it. Thanks. Dougweller (talk) 17:14, 28 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

K. N. Srinivasan AfD

Hi, I'm Supernerd11, and I was just letting you know that I nominated K. N. Srinivasan for deletion. Feel free to share your thoughts here. Cheers! Supernerd11 :D Firemind ^_^ Pokedex 05:03, 2 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Chalo Delhi

I have just noticed we do not have an article on Chalo Delhi (redirect Delhi Chalo), it was war cry during Sepoy Mutiny and Subhas Bose's army march to Delhi. Please see "Chalo+Delhi" this. Due to heavy work pressure I may not be able to start the article. I am requesting senior editors like Sitush, FowlerandFowler, Dharmadhakshya to start this article if they have some time in hand. But I'll definitely be there to expand the article. It might be an excellent DYK candidate. Tito☸Dutta 12:18, 2 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds like a good idea, but I'm flat out of time myself. Care will need to be exercised to prevent overlap with Indian rebellion of 1857, Subhas Chandra Bose, and Indian National Army pages. As I see it, such a page should be chiefly about the expression and its history of use, not about the more general context of its use (which is already well covered in those articles). Fowler&fowler«Talk» 14:42, 2 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Exactly. I totally agree. I do not know if this film had any relation with the call Chalo Dilli (the plot is different, but did they mock the call?), but unfortunately when I was searching in Google for "Chalo Delhi", I got this film article as number one result, which I don't want to see. --Tito☸Dutta 15:04, 2 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Shady/Coat-rack articles (of dubious merit) that i intend to nominate for deletion

I thought of raising this issue here before nominating a "few dodgy articles of questionable importance" for deletion. The articles that i intend to report are Tamil American, Tamil Australian, Kannada American and Bengali American. These terminologies are unheard of. Neither of these countries (United States & Australia) have used these terminologies for "census, immigration & other govt" purposes nor have their media used them in their articles & reports. These people have always been called/listed/reported as "Indian American/Australian" or "Sri Lankan American/Australian" based on their country of origin. The sources cited in these articles "have not mentioned them as official terms", but they simply contain some statistical data regarding the number of tamil speakers. The articles look like they maybe based on flimsy sourcing and be another coat-rack/POV fork. I was told that the usage of these terms in some community websites don't really count. I haven't come across a "Gujarati/Malayali/Sindhi American" wiki article and i wonder what's the need for editors to create such pages. You're all probably aware that there is a lot of coatracking of tamil subjects. Are we going to allow such frenzied creations? Though i personally feel the articles qualify for "no indication of importance deletion criteria" in Afd, i would like to hear some of your opinions and probably call for a vote. Thank you. Hari7478 (talk) 08:57, 3 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

AfC submission - 03/03

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Manalikkara. FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 15:36, 3 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Noticeboard_for_India-related_topics&oldid=598083891"