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
Line 220: Line 220:
:{{re|Fowler&fowler}} I guess there is one big question, which is what do you or we want from this? Only the author of the text has any official standing as they are the copyright holder. I don't think the WMF would want to get involved and if the publisher admitted wrongdoing, that would leave them open to a copyright suit. I think you should template the relevant articles with the backwards template at [[Wikipedia:Copyright problems]]. You could ask for more advice at [[Wikipedia talk:Copyright problems]]. I've just emailed a university and said I was emailing them just so that they knew that one of their students had, several years ago, copied from one of our articles. If I were in your shoes I think I'd do something like that. Let ABC-CLIO know that there was a problem (saying that you thought you should know but not suggesting any action to take) and maybe emailing Dando saying your were surprised/disappointed/whatever to discover that your work had ended up in his work. Ditto Paul. If it was something online we could expect them to do something about that, but books? Unless you want to sue, I don't think there's much more we can do other than what I've suggested, but of course someone at Talk:Copyright problems might have other ideas. [[User:Doug Weller|<span style="color:#070">Doug Weller</span>]] [[User talk:Doug Weller|talk]] 15:41, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
:{{re|Fowler&fowler}} I guess there is one big question, which is what do you or we want from this? Only the author of the text has any official standing as they are the copyright holder. I don't think the WMF would want to get involved and if the publisher admitted wrongdoing, that would leave them open to a copyright suit. I think you should template the relevant articles with the backwards template at [[Wikipedia:Copyright problems]]. You could ask for more advice at [[Wikipedia talk:Copyright problems]]. I've just emailed a university and said I was emailing them just so that they knew that one of their students had, several years ago, copied from one of our articles. If I were in your shoes I think I'd do something like that. Let ABC-CLIO know that there was a problem (saying that you thought you should know but not suggesting any action to take) and maybe emailing Dando saying your were surprised/disappointed/whatever to discover that your work had ended up in his work. Ditto Paul. If it was something online we could expect them to do something about that, but books? Unless you want to sue, I don't think there's much more we can do other than what I've suggested, but of course someone at Talk:Copyright problems might have other ideas. [[User:Doug Weller|<span style="color:#070">Doug Weller</span>]] [[User talk:Doug Weller|talk]] 15:41, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
::It isn't about damages but rather acknowledgement and integrity. Paul is in a very tight spot because it casts a bad light on everything he has ever done. But, in my opinion, that doesn't mean we should brush it under the carpet. And we most certainly should avoid using Paul as a source ''anywhere'' on Wikipedia - we don't use plagiarists, regardless of whether we describe them with precisely that term or with some fudged version. - [[User:Sitush|Sitush]] ([[User talk:Sitush|talk]]) 16:04, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
::It isn't about damages but rather acknowledgement and integrity. Paul is in a very tight spot because it casts a bad light on everything he has ever done. But, in my opinion, that doesn't mean we should brush it under the carpet. And we most certainly should avoid using Paul as a source ''anywhere'' on Wikipedia - we don't use plagiarists, regardless of whether we describe them with precisely that term or with some fudged version. - [[User:Sitush|Sitush]] ([[User talk:Sitush|talk]]) 16:04, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

Wikipedia is copied and pasted without attribution by 100s / 1000s of academics or sources. Typically these are not high quality sources or notable publishers. "ABC-CLIO" is not a serious publisher.

When the [[Oxford University Press]] copied and pasted from Wikipedia in one of their medical textbooks that turned out to be news worthy.[https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2015/08/wikipedia-editors-for-pay/393926/][[User:Doc James|<span style="color:#0000f1">'''Doc James'''</span>]] ([[User talk:Doc James|talk]] · [[Special:Contributions/Doc James|contribs]] · [[Special:EmailUser/Doc James|email]]) 16:47, 25 January 2019 (UTC)


== Draft:Souvik Mandal ==
== Draft:Souvik Mandal ==

Revision as of 16:47, 25 January 2019

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

Today's featured article requests

Did you know

Articles for deletion

(87 more...)

Proposed deletions

(8 more...)

Categories for discussion

(25 more...)

Templates for discussion

Redirects for discussion

Files for discussion

Featured list candidates

Good article nominees

(18 more...)

Featured list removal candidates

Good article reassessments

Peer reviews

Requested moves

(9 more...)

Articles to be merged

(28 more...)

Articles to be split

(15 more...)

Articles for creation

(79 more...)

This table is updated daily by a bot
Shortcuts
Wikipedia Meetups edit
Upcoming
none
Recent
Outside India
Past meetups

Racism in British India

The article Racism in British India was redirected to Presidencies and provinces of British India in 2013 (due at least in part to serious NPOV concerns), but I have just reverted that as the topic is not discussed at the target. Please leave comments at Talk:Racism in British India#Redirected if you wish to discus this. Thryduulf (talk) 16:56, 7 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Now draftified per talk page consensus. - Sitush (talk) 22:14, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Criteria for promotion from {India-railstation-stub}

I'm not personally convinced that the mere existence of a railway station makes it notable, but I don't argue it here. I would like some objective standards for removal of the {India-railstation-stub} tag. These articles are often short because there is nothing to say. I think the stub tag should be removed when the following criteria are met:

  1. The article has two references that are not from an official timetable site. A newspaper, for example.
  2. The lede is well written,
  3. The town or nearest town is wikilinked
  4. Indic script is removed in accord with WP:INDICSCRIPT
  5. The article has coordinates. A map is a nice-to-have
  6. Timetables are removed. The trains that pass do not confer notability.

What do you think? Rhadow (talk) 16:29, 13 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Why not just use a new tag {{India Railway cleanup needed}} (or whatever), with application based on your criteria above. The worst articles would then populate that maintenance category. Problem solved. Cesdeva (talk) 16:11, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I opened an RfC on the topic at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Trains#RfC_India_railway_stations. Rhadow (talk) 15:43, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

"Please use Indian English"

This discussion is about the use of Template:Indian English and Template:Use Indian English.

When I come upon a page with a template that entreats us to use {Indian English}, I am stumped. The article Indian English describes it as a dialect of English. It goes on to describe a series of spellings that, to me, are indistinguishable to from British English. If someone could point me to a definitive source for spelling that differs from British English -- or conjugation or syntax -- that would be great. Otherwise, the template is nigh-on meaningless, unless it is to use numbering that violates MOS:DIGITS. MOS:COMMONALITY tells us not to use crore or lakh. Any help is appreciated. Rhadow (talk) 19:33, 14 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Written Indian English (IE) is probably not that different syntactically from standard British English. There are lexical differences here and there: batch mate (for class mate), common use of "fortnight" and "thrice," "back" to mean "ago" (I met him three years back), "out of station" (for out of town), "accomplish" (v) to mean equip ("accomplished him with the best tools"), "post" to mean after (I will do this post your arrival), and so forth. Traditional IE had many more, but with the advent of the internet some Indians have abandoned their uniquely Indian constructions, and with that are dying linguists' hopes of seeing a dictionary of Indian English. Spelling: IE scrupulously avoids Oxford spelling (-ize, -ization). For a Wikipedia user all that the "use Indian English" injunction means is that he or she should respect the constructions that are standard in Indian English but that are not shared with other varieties of English. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 03:13, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Fowler&fowler, yeah, you're mostly right about what you wrote, including the stuff about the usage of 'fortnight', 'back' and -ise and -isation word endings ('realise', 'democratisation' et al.), but, I have to admit that I haven't ever encountered a person using 'accomplish' in the way you described, but, that's about it. Regards, SshibumXZ (talk · contribs). 08:50, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the interesting details but are you suggesting that once {{Use Indian English}} appears on an article (and assuming it is a relevant topic), then "three years back" should not be changed to "three years earlier", for example? I would argue that "Use X English" refers mainly to spelling and date formats. MOS:COMMONALITY suggests that changing text to a form common to all varieties is best. That is rather vague, like many other guidelines. Johnuniq (talk) 08:52, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@SshibumXZ: "Accomplish" does seem to be less common. It was legitimate usage in other Englishes not that long ago. e.g. "keep him from all power of evil, accomplish him with all good, and bring him up before Thy holy sanctuary ..." Many Indianisms do exist in other Englishes but are rare or archaic. "Needful" for "needed" would be such a word. @Johnuniq: "Three years back" is probably more common in spoken IE than written; so, yes, what you have suggested would be appropriate. But would I change "the ten accused were chargesheeted on the basis of electronic evidence?" Would I wikilink it to Chargesheet? I am not sure. What about "passed away" for died, also used in spoken Am E, but less often in written? Would I change "X passed away in 1928" in a WP article? I probably would. Would I change "fast unto death" to "hunger strike?" Probably not, in part because those two are not the same, the former not referencing a prison within the confines of which food is being refused. I do agree with WP:COMMONALITY, but also sometimes balk at making interventions of only minor rephrasing. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 10:45, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This has been discussed here before. The template is, more than anything else, a product of Indian nationalists (anyone remember Zuggernaut, MangoWong etc?) and the Kumbaya singers. Fowler is correct in the analysis of differences between Indian and British English, which fundamentally relates to the fact that the Brits introduced English to India and then the language as spoken there got stuck in something of a timewarp. Hence, the use of "thrice" etc which are now contextually archaic in British English. There are a few specific exceptions but, generally speaking, copyediting Indian English into British English loses nothing and actually tends to make the article more accessible. For example, we simply should not say cops in an encyclopaedia, although it is commonly used in Indian news media; I think the frequent omission of the will just seem ill-educated to most readers; and the fairly common lack of spacing between initials just makes things harder to read. So, I polish the stuff and don't worry too much about national sensitivities; I can't recall anyone ever objecting. - Sitush (talk) 11:49, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Sitush, if we claim that this encyclopedia is in English, then the use of the definite article the is obligatory, whether or not we are implored to use Indian English. In the rest of the English-speaking world, the is the most common word in the language, delivering precision to any assertion. You are right, forgetting to use the is the result of unclear thinking, not the use of an equivalent language. Rhadow (talk) 13:18, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Regarding passed away, we should not do it - see WP:DIED. Same with "met his maker", "attained moksha" and the umpteen other euphemisms for dying. - Sitush (talk) 11:53, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, WP:EUPHEMISM. - Sitush (talk) 12:13, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Fowler&fowler, please direct me to a definitive source of the constructions that are standard in Indian English, else I cannot distinguish occurrences of {Indian English} from errors in standard English. Otherwise the tag is as vague as {do better}. As to your specific observations, common use of fortnight and thrice are mutually intelligible uses of archaic, but not foreign, words. Substitution of back for ago is not an uncommon usage anywhere in the English-speaking world. Batch mates, out of station, and accomplish are new ones on me, but they are insufficient to define an Indian standard dialect. As editors, we are unconcerned with phonology. In Wikipedia, there is no similar recommendation to create articles in Caribbean English or African-American Vernacular English. In both of those cases, institutions employ a national standard for written work, British English for the the first, and American English for the second. Both of those lects have more speakers for whom they are a mother tongue than the 0.1% of Indians for whom English is a first language. Rhadow (talk) 12:32, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Rhadow: The evolution and course of Indian English has been driven by the speech of second language speakers who now number 300 million and counting, and among whom are writers such as Salman Rushdie, Arundhati Roy, Vikram Seth, R. K. Narayan, Anita Desai, Amitav Ghosh, Jawaharlal Nehru, and so forth. Whatever it is, a dialect or not, a regional variety or not, linguists take it seriously. The late Sidney Greenbaum had some prescient thoughts about it, which I unfortunately don't remember precisely right now. I said above that there are not too many syntactical differences with standard BE. I meant coarse or crude differences; there are, however, many fine or subtle differences, that I myself am not too expert on, but that are the subject of a spate of recent books:

  • Balasubramanian, Chandrika (2009), Register Variation in Indian English, John Benjamins Publishing, ISBN 90-272-2311-4
  • Baumgardner, Robert Jackson (editor) (1996), South Asian English: Structure, Use, and Users, University of Illinois Press, ISBN 978-0-252-06493-7 {{citation}}: |first= has generic name (help)
  • Lange, Claudia (2012), The Syntax of Spoken Indian English, John Benjamins Publishing, ISBN 90-272-4905-9
  • Mehrotra, Raja Ram (1998), Indian English: Texts and Interpretation, John Benjamins Publishing, ISBN 90-272-4716-1
  • Sailaja, Pingali (2009), Indian English, Series: Dialects of English, Edinburgh University Press, ISBN 978-0-7486-2595-6
  • Schilk, Marco (2011), Structural Nativization in Indian English Lexicogrammar, John Benjamins Publishing, ISBN 90-272-0351-2
  • Sedlatschek, Andreas (2009), Contemporary Indian English: Variation and Change, Series: Varieties of English Around the World, John Benjamins Publishing, ISBN 90-272-4898-2

I think to hope that the "Indian English" tag will be removed after ten or more years is to wander into a fraught landscape and history. I would not touch it. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 13:42, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Fowler&fowler, you make my point. Register and Spoken Indian English are irrelevant to the discussion of the written language of an encyclopedia. If "there are not too many syntactical differences with standard BE", then we are talking about a distinction without a difference. All the {Indian English} tag refers to are "fine or subtle differences". The result of the tag then will be that a small minority of WP editors will profess expertise, making an argument from authority likely to be a logical fallacy. Rhadow (talk) 14:17, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
PS The OED has some five hundred Indian English words, but half are of historical significance only, being part of the speech of Anglo-Indians, i,e the domiciled British in India (not in its later meaning of people of mixed British and Indian parentage who now comprise the 150,000 native speakers in India) and many are neologisms or portmanteau with English and vernacular parts. The best source of distinctive written Indian English would be Indian newspapers, especially The Statesman and The Telegraph of Calcutta, Times of India, Bombay, The Indian Express, and The Hindu. Best regards, Fowler&fowler«Talk» 13:59, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) Words like bungalow, you mean? Whilst I can pretty much always understand reports in The Hindu, the same is not true of The Times of India which, to be frank, often seems to contain a lot of ambiguity and contradiction even when it is intelligible - I'm not convinced that it is a good example of any form of English! All this said, I add {{use Indian English}} to articles and will continue to do so; if nothing else, it helps future contributors in understanding that, say, a quotation is indeed quoted accurately even if it looks a little odd to many of them. But I still generally polish the garbage in a British English way, sorry. And you're right: there is little chance of getting consensus to deprecate the template, if that is the ultimate point of this thread. - Sitush (talk) 14:19, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Rhadow: Well, register is an important difference even in written English. What might be informal or casual in AmE or BE might be normal in IE. Or what might be normal in IE might be archaic in BE. Sitush has given the example of "cops" being used in newspapers. There are many others I have come across. I have seen mixing of formal and informal registers in the same sentence, e.g. in this made up example "I saw at once the bloodied body below and the cops' helicopter above." This a common in newspaper columns. I am not disagreeing with you, but IE is being documented (see the corpora of Indian English: ICE-IND corpus and the Kohlapur corpus and the numbers of IE speakers is increasing with increased literacy in India. I expect the difference will grow as well. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 14:39, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
So Fowler&fowler, at your suggestion, I looked at the front page of today's Times of India. The article on Brexit was sourced in London and might have been edited at Reuters. Another article, "1.4 crore people take dip as Kumbh Mela begins". [[1]]. The lede reads, "The sacred baths began at break of dawn as the sun rose over the horizon and went on through the day till the last rays set over the Sangam, the chants of "Har Har Gange" reaching a crescendo as lakhs of people took a dip to mark the beginning of the beginning of the Kumbh Mela on Tuesday." This is the voice, tone, and attitude I should adopt as I write about railway stations? It's a fine piece of prose, lyrical, even, but has no place in Wikipedia. Dropping the before "break of dawn" was poetic. It recalls Homer: "When rosy-fingered Dawn came bright and early." If this the style I am to adopt for railway stations and dams, fine. I just need to hear it from others. Rhadow (talk) 15:26, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Rhadow: When someone starts talking like an ass, they can't expect to receive cogent responses. That is not directed at you, only an example of mixed registers. Why don't you rail at the pages that have

or

 ? All three country articles carry them. Ask them how reading Naipaul, Robertson Davies, or Patrick White will will help you write articles on the railroads. All the very best. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 15:52, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Fowler&fowler, ask me dat nuh! It have only two articles marked {Trinidadian English}. [register changes here] The article Trinidadian and Tobagonian English has itself been marked for two years {Use American English}. There are no articles marked {Australian English} or {Canadian English}. An encyclopedia needs to be written in a style appropriate to the reader unfamiliar with the topic. Lakhs and crores are as familiar to most people as guineas and furlongs, colorful language, but not useful in expository writing.
I am not railing, nor do I intend to be an ass. I only hope to normalize Wikipedia to a universally useful and mutually intelligible source of information. There is no reason for the encyclopedia to use flowery local language when encyclopedic style is more appropriate. I am happy to accept Oxford spelling for those national articles where it is used. All the best. Rhadow (talk) 14:12, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Rhadow: There are 93 thousand articles that say up top, "Use Australian English" when you edit the articles. (See Category:All Wikipedia articles written in Australian English). Over 4,000 say, "Use Canadian English." See Category:All Wikipedia articles written in Canadian English. The Wikipedia articles for these two countries, both FAs, have "This article is written in ..." (as displayed above). See Talk:Australia, Talk:Canada. See also Talk:Trinidad and Tobago, Talk:Trinidad for the respective Trinidad English signs. Over 1,200 articles are written in Jamaican English; see Category:All Wikipedia articles written in Jamaican English. Over a hundred are written in Nigerian English: Category:Use Nigerian English. 154 are written in Singapore English; see Category:Use Singapore English; over 2,400 use Hong Kong English; see Category:Use Hong Kong English. 12,000 are written in New Zealand English; see Category:Use New Zealand English. Some 2,300 use Pakistani English; see Category:Use Pakistani English. Over 5,000 use South African English; see Category:Use South African English. Over 108,000 use Indian English; see Category:Use Indian English. Over 198,000 are written in British English; see Category:Use British English. The remaining, millions and millions, are written in the Wikipedia default, American English. So, really, why even have British spelling, considering its output constitutes a minuscule fraction of all WP output.
This general discussion doesn't really belong to this page, whose discussions have more limited, modest, purpose; it does to the MOS pages or at the Village Pump. As for flowery language, it is a feature of all Englishes. All have their encyclopedic styles as well. Any Wikipedia editor edits a WP article by employing the variety of English with which they are most comfortable. If there is a lack of fit with the advertised language of editing, then others, with more knowledge of it, will usually step in and fix it. That is the simplest way to edit. In any case, you will not learn Indian English by reading one article in the Times of India, and interpreting that to be the norm.
You are not the first one who has come by here, trolling these pages, professing high purpose, but in the end offering little but thinly disguised sneering at the very idea of Indian English.
This is as far as can I go in engaging you. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 17:46, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

In case anyone is not aware, this topic is now being discussed at Wikipedia:Village pump (miscellaneous) Cesdeva (talk) 14:52, 18 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • My two paise ("cents" ): Indian English preserves and uses some phrases/words of British English. For example (this many not be the best example, howver I can think of this only now) w. e. f "with effect from", see. --Titodutta (talk) 01:07, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The template {{use Lilliputian English}} makes sense only as a question of stylistic consistency, not as an exhortation to change vocabulary or syntax in a way that makes it more familiar to Lilliputians, but less comprehensible in other parts of the world. The point of any of the "use English" templates is stylistic only, they are about consistency and not comprehensibility. They are there to help willing editors who wish to observe a consistency previously determined by first use by early editors, or by strong ties to a national topic. They do not trump clarity and intelligibility to the reader, which always come first, before any stylistic consideration.

I'd rather read an article with a mishmash of Trinidadian, Canadian, Zimbabwean, South African, and Australian spelling curiosities that is restricted to terms completely understandable to everyone, than an article written in one, 100% pure, national variety of English that uses numerous terms peculiar to one country and that leaves readers in other parts of the world scratching their heads in confusion. Which is why, for example, you should never write, "the MP tabled the motion" in a Wikipedia article, because either everybody in the U.S. will misunderstand it, or everybody in Great Britain will, since the term is a regional contranym; instead, you find a workaround that everyone will understand.

That applies to Indian English, because it has a fair number of terms that won't be well-understood elsewhere, but it applies equally to others as well, and if terms used in articles are common in AE or BE but are opaque in Indian English, than it's equally fair to require them to be changed to an expression that would be understood in the subcontinent as well as everywhere else.

The main problem with the {{use Indian English}} template for those willing non-Indian editors (like yours truly) who want to do the right thing, and who know how to write in either AE or BE and follow those templates, is that we will have no idea what to do with {{use Indian English}} when we see it, and will probably just ignore it, or assume that BE is close enough, and use that instead. Worse, we might perhaps be scared away entirely by the template and not bother to edit the article at all, to the detriment of the encyclopedia. Really, every article should just have a {{use World English}} template on it, and then when they all have it, they can all be removed because it will be a de facto standard. Mathglot (talk) 11:00, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

On a separate, subtopic: I must respectfully disagree with Sitush where he said, "I add {{use Indian English}} to articles and will continue to do so; if nothing else, it helps future contributors in understanding that, say, a quotation is indeed quoted accurately even if it looks a little odd to many of them." This is not a good usage of the template. For one thing, the template is likely to be distant from the actual quotation and missed. For another, a long article, on poetry, say, might have quotations from writers of AE, BE, Irish, Scots, Indian, and Australian English; then what template do you use at the top of the article?
In a case like this, do not tag the article, tag the quotation directly with {{lang-en-GB}}, {{lang-en-US}} or one of the other English dialect multilingual support templates. If a language template is missing, {{as written}} can be pressed into service: "Mighty Bhishma, hath he fallen? quenched is archer Karna's pride? / Drupad monarch of Panchala sleeps by foeman Drona's side?". Mathglot (talk) 11:29, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Using Wiki-userbox : political parties

Hatting as OP blocked for socking (Skymhnty), pages/userboxes deleted, proposal didn't fly, nothing more to do here -- DBigXrayᗙ

Wikitext userbox where used
Political Party:
{{User:Tuwein/bjp_support}} Lua error: expandTemplate: template "User:Tuwein/bjp_support" does not exist. linked pages
{{User:Tuwein/modi_bjp}} Lua error: expandTemplate: template "User:Tuwein/modi_bjp" does not exist. linked pages
{{User:Tuwein/inc_support}} Lua error: expandTemplate: template "User:Tuwein/inc_support" does not exist. linked pages
{{User:Tuwein/inc_rahul}} Lua error: expandTemplate: template "User:Tuwein/inc_rahul" does not exist. linked pages

Can any one tell me if we need to have a consensus to get these Infoboxes at Wikipedia:WikiProject_India#WikiProject_India_userbox_templates — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tuwein (talk • contribs)

I doubt that you can have such a poll on a Wikiproject, consensus or not. It would go against the very grain of Wikipedia. How did you make the connection between such a blatantly political poll and an encyclopedia with strict guidelines about NPOV and neutrality?Fowler&fowler«Talk» 20:27, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, gosh. I know there is huge scope for people to do as they wish on their userpages but I dislike these just as much as I dislike those that appear for other countries. If I had my way, think anyone who posted one should be automatically disbarred from editing any political articles relating to the country involved. (That won't happen but it is what should happen.) And your SHOUTING in the section title doesn't help - I am fixing that now. - Sitush (talk) 20:48, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I'm actually amazed that someone who has had a registered account for two days can even grapple with creating such boxes! - Sitush (talk) 20:50, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
what about if i post these here at Wikipedia:Userboxes/Politics, I think that would be best. Where it will find friends, for example
This user is in favour of EU enlargement in a westerly direction.
EPP This user voted
EPP in 2014

User:S.Örvarr.S/Template:EU

This user hopes the UK
NEVER adopts the Euro.





Fowler&fowler as you said that It would go against the very grain of Wikipedia., just answer me what about friends at Wikipedia:Userboxes/Politics#Parties

One important thing to note is that any responsible citizen of any country would vote(the party that he/she supports), whether any one admits it on wikipedia or not we all support a political party. PROTIP: These info-boxes can help you guys determine if any editor has WP:CONFLICT to any of these parties. Tuwein (talk) 03:35, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I am a responsible person and I have never voted - every politician I have ever seen or heard has been unworthy of my support, as has every party. Don't make assumptions. "Clever" people would not badge their COI here. People who know just how many problems we have with COI and Indian political articles would not create such userboxes. Just because it can be done does not mean it should be done. - Sitush (talk) 07:12, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Sitush, I am really sorry you changed my heart. I will delete these now and will never ever think of creating such boxes. You are really an unbiased editor I am telling this on the basis of you contributions. Thanks Tuwein (talk) 16:45, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Admins need assistance

Hi, we have a report at WP:UAA that the username "land ka raja" is an offensive phrase in Hindi. English-speaking admins are unable to confirm that the term "land" is a Hindi term for "penis", finding only "lund" from online sources, but the reporting user insists that it is the same thing. We are unsure if the user is correct, or if this is a misunderstanding. Are there any Hindi speakers around who can assist? Thanks,  ~~Swarm~~  {talk}  07:43, 17 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Admins have been assisted--DBigXrayᗙ 08:16, 17 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Need help on wikimedia commons

Hello. With the efforts of User:Gazoth, now we have more than 114 thousand images uploaded from Press Information Bureau on Wikimedia Commons under the license GODL-India. Unfortunately, over thirty thousand of them are still not categorized. I'll be very grateful, if some users can lend a hand in helping me categorizing these images at Category:Images from Press Information Bureau needing categories. My apologies if this isn't the right place to ask for this. Thanks. —Sarvatra (talk, contribs) 13:25, 19 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If people didn't upload so much crap, there wouldn't be so much of a problem. I've just looked at that category and it is ridiculous. Why duplicate the PIB in such a way if the stuff is open for use anyway - should have been done selectively, as and when required. Just because some things can be done is not a reason to actually do them. This strikes me as another example of why Commons is such a terrible project. - Sitush (talk) 13:31, 19 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Umm, that wasn't very helpful, but thanks anyway :| —Sarvatra (talk, contribs) 13:37, 19 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Plus, there are some confusion that "images" don't come under "data". --Titodutta (talk) 01:00, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The most salient observations regarding these uploads which smack of bot-spamming. Commons' supposed 'scope' of inclusion has lost any rational meaning, way way back and hence, we are with a million images, half of which don't stand any chance of use. ∯WBGconverse 18:59, 21 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Winged Blades of Godric: I wasn't going to respond to Sitush's snap judgment, but since you have deliberately tagged me, I feel compelled to respond. Any batch upload on Commons would fail the criteria of achieving near-100% usability of images. I knew that most images that my bot would upload would not be used, but that wasn't the point. One of my aims for the PIB batch upload was to make them more accessible to others. Disk space is cheap, but making other volunteers' work easy is not. Sitush's suggestion of uploading images selectively assumes that most editors are aware that PIB images are available in a Commons-compatible license and that all PIB images are easily searchable. I would put the probability of the former to be very low, since it took me several months to find out about GODL-India license while being a fairly active editor on India-related topics in English Wikipedia. The probability of a Dutch editor using a PIB image while writing about a Dutch politician in nlwiki would be almost nil without my bot's uploads.
Even if you are aware that you can use PIB images, it is quite hard to find images as PIB's built-in custom search mixes text and image results. You'd have to be aware of "site:" parameter in Google search that restricts results to a particular domain, but the average Wikipedia editor wouldn't be aware of this. Also, it requires Google to have crawled almost all of PIB's images, which hasn't happened yet and probably never will. If you search for Ibrahim Solih on Google images, you don't get even a single image of him, but a similar search on Commons returns multiple images uploaded by my bot, including the one used in his article. Even if you do get images, the list is often incomplete. For example, the official photograph of Manohar Parrikar used in the infobox of his article does not appear in Google search and most images in the results are inferior to the one used in the article. Due to this issue, it took me a lot of time to manually add images to List of current Indian governors article and even after that most images were sub-par. After my bot completed uploading PIB's archive, the images had to be swapped out with better ones.
It's quite easy to label somebody's edits in a hasty manner, but it looks like it's quite hard to assume good faith and bother to find out the reasons behind the edits. —Gazoth (talk) 23:54, 21 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Doesn't alter a thing. It is a Commons problem, not a problem for this project. I think most people regularly involved with this project would say that they have enough on their plate as it is. - Sitush (talk) 21:41, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
You seem to be mistaken. I did not ask for your help and I was even going to completely ignore this thread until WBG decided to tag me in their unnecessarily rude comment. My comment wasn't an advertisement for this effort, it was solely meant to be a justification of my edits. —Gazoth (talk) 23:31, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I am not mistaken. This thread was an appeal for help, even if not by you. - Sitush (talk) 08:31, 25 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Alright, alright. I get it. Nobody was mistaken, but me. Once again, my apologies for starting this. I request the editors to please put this debate to rest now. Thank you. —Sarvatra (talk, contribs) 11:46, 25 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Is the FB page used as a source for Sathatha Sri Vaishnava‎ a reliable source?

Here's the link.[2] to the article. The FB page is at [3] Doug Weller talk 17:34, 19 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • User:Doug Weller, I have reverted the edit. They can claim whatever they want on that FB page, I feel, not a reliable source. Regards. --Titodutta (talk) 01:11, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Request to move Mustafabad, Haryana to Saraswati Nagar

There is a request to move the article Mustafabad, Haryana. The subject appears to have been officially renamed to Saraswati Nagar. The request was made on 2 January 2019, but so far has gained zero attention. It was relisted a first time to Wikipedia:Requested moves on 10 January. I have just relisted the discussion a second time, and made a note here, in the hope that someone from this WikiProject may be interested in participating. Renerpho (talk) 01:20, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Here, hold my beer. Cesdeva (talk) 01:38, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Holding and watching. Renerpho (talk) 22:42, 21 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Plagiarism in an India-related source, published by a reliable publisher, involving copying verbatim from a WP article.

I recently came across the source Bimal Kanti Paul (2012), "Indian Famines: 1707-1943", in William A. Dando (ed) (ed.), Food and Famine in the 21st Century, ABC-CLIO, pp. 39–57, ISBN 978-1-59884-730-7 {{citation}}: |editor= has generic name (help). This source was being cited in the article Great Famine of 1876–1878 which I had written in 2008. (See this talk page discussion). When I examined the source, I noticed that some paragraphs seemed familiar. They had my style of writing. Indeed after some rummaging, I found text that had been lifted (i.e. copied verbatim) from the same Wikipedia article to which it was now being cited. Who is the author of the source? He is Bimal Kanti Paul, a professor at Kansas State University. I offer below two example. (There might be others as well. I had written several Indian famine articles around that time.)

Example 1, from the source: "After the Great Famine, a large number of agricultural laborers and handloom weavers in South India immigrated (sic) to British tropical colonies to work as indentured laborers on plantations. The excessive deaths experienced in this famine also neutralized natural population growth in the Bombay and Madras presidencies between the first and second censuses of British India carried out in 1871 and 1881, respectively. The Great Famine was to have a lasting political impact on events in India. Among the British administrators in India who were unsettled by the official reactions to this famine and, in particular, by the stifling of the official debate about the best form of famine relief, were William Wedderbum and A. O. Hume. Less than a decade later, they would found the Indian National Congress and, in turn, influence a generation of nationalists such as Dadabhai Naoroji and Romesh Chunder Dutt, for whom the Great Famine would become a cornerstone to [sic] the economic critique of the British Raj." (Bimal Kanti Paul (2012), Indian Famines: 1707-1943, p.50, volume 2 (Classical Famines))

Contrast with my version at the end of my first edits of 23rd and 24th May 2008 (see here, and scroll to the top to view the date of edit):

After the famine, a large number of agricultural laborers and handloom weavers in South India emigrated to British tropical colonies to work as indentured laborers in plantations.[1] The excessive mortality in the famine also neutralized the natural population growth in the Bombay and Madras presidencies during the decade between the first and second censuses of British India in 1871 and 1881 respectively.[2] The Great Famine was to have a lasting political impact on events in India; among the British administrators in India who were unsettled by the official reactions to the famine and, in particular by the stifling of the official debate about the best form of famine relief, were William Wedderburn and A. O. Hume.[3] Less than a decade later, they would found the Indian National Congress and, in turn, influence a generation of nationalists such as Dadabhai Naoroji and Romesh Chunder Dutt for whom the Great Famine would become a cornerstone of the economic critique of the British Raj.[3]

(In those days, I favored the more formal "would" for future-in-the-past constructions, in contrast to "was to." )

Example 2, "The Great Famine was preceded by an intense drought on the Deccan Plateau. Earlier, after the Bihar famine of 1873-1874, Mr. Temple, who was now Famine Commissioner for the Indian government, insisted not only on a laissez-faire pol-icy with respect to the grain trade, but also on stricter qualification standards for relief and on more meager relief rations for those in need. Two kinds of relief were offered: "relief works" for able-bodied men, women, and working children, and Food and Famine in the 21st Century `gratuitous (or charitable) relief" for small children, the elderly, and the indigent." (Bimal Kanti Paul (2012), Indian Famines: 1707-1943, pp.49–50, volume 2 (Classical Famines))

My version of 24 May 2008 (see here, and scroll above for date of edit):

"The Great Famine was preceded by an intense drought (or "crop failure") in the Deccan Plateau.[4] Earlier, after the Bihar famine of 1873–74, in which mortality was avoided, the Government of Bengal and its Lieutenant-Governor, Sir Richard Temple, were criticized for excessive expenditure, which had included the costs of importing rice from Burma and providing generous charitable relief.[5] Sensitive to any renewed accusations of excess in 1876, Temple, who was now Famine Commissioner for the Government of India,[6] insisted not only on a policy of laissez faire with respect to the trade in grain,[7] but also on stricter standards of qualification for relief and on more meager relief rations.[6] Two kinds of relief were offered: "relief works" for able-bodied men, women, and working children, and gratuitous (or charitable) relief for small children, the elderly, and the indigent.[8]

We are all familiar with the Wikipedia injunction about discontinuing editing if you are uncomfortable with your words being mangled, stolen, sold, etc., though I can't seem to find the exact quote right now; still, it would have been nice of some attribution had been given to Wikipedia. The irony now is that the copied material is copyrighted in this source—anyone choosing to copy the words again will be violating their copyright not our original. I am used to my words being copied on various India-related websites; even OED copied part of the definition of the British Raj that I had contributed in 2009 or thereabouts. But that was two or three sentences of fine print. These are whole paragraphs of text; they have been published by a fairly reliable publisher. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 14:41, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

More examples from other Wikipedia Indian famine pages

Example 3. Plagiarism involving copying from the article Chalisa famine
Éxample 3,

(From: Bimal Kanti Paul (2012), Indian Famines: 1707-1943, p. 44, volume 2 (Classical Famines)) The Chalisa Famine 1783-1784
The Chalisa famine of 1783-1784 in India followed unusual El Niño events that began in 1780 and caused droughts throughout northern India, especially the Delhi territories, present-day Uttar Pradesh, Eastern Punjab, Rajputana, and Kashmir; at the time, these areas were controlled by different Indian rulers. Chalisa (literally, "of the fortieth" in Hindustani) refers to the Vikram Samvat calendar year 1840 (1783). The Chalisa famine was preceded by a famine in the previous year, 1782-1783, in southern India, including the city of Madras and surrounding areas under British East India Company rule and extending to the Kingdom of Mysore.

My edited version of 18 May 2008 (see: here)

The Chalisa famine of 1783-84 in South Asia followed unusual El Nino events that began in 1780 CE and caused droughts throughout the region.[9] Chalisa (literally, "of the fortieth" in Hindustani) refers to the Vikram Samvat calender year 1840 (1783 CE).[10] The famine affected many parts of North India, especially the Delhi territories, present-day Uttar Pradesh, Eastern Punjab, Rajputana, and Kashmir, then all ruled by different Indian rulers.[11] The Chalisa was preceded by a famine in the previous year, 1782-83, in South India, including Madras City and surrounding areas (under British East India Company rule) and in the extended Kingdom of Mysore (under the rule of Haider Ali and Tipu Sultan).

Example 4. Plagiarism involving copying from the article Doji bara famine
Example 4,

(From: Bimal Kanti Paul (2012), Indian Famines: 1707-1943, p. 44, volume 2 (Classical Famines)) Doji Bara Famine, 1791-1792 The Doji Bara famine, also known as the Skull famine, of 1791-1792 in India was brought on by a major El Niño event, lasting from 1789 to 1795, which produced prolonged droughts due to the failure of seasonal monsoon rains for four consecutive years beginning in 1789. This famine caused widespread fatalities in Hyderabad, Southern Maratha Kingdom, Deccan, Gujarat, and Marwar, all of which were governed by Indian rulers at that time. Even in regions such as the Madras Presidency (governed by the British East India Company), where this famine was less severe, half the population perished in some of its districts. In other areas, both the famine and the year 1791 came to be known in folklore as the Doji Bara (also Doĝi Bar) or the "Skull famine," because people died in such numbers that they could not be cremated or buried. As a consequence, skulls and bones of famine victims remained in open areas. As in the Chalisa famine of a decade earlier, many areas were depopulated, due to deaths or migration. It is thought that a total of 11 million people may have died during the years 1789–1792 as a result of starvation and the accompanying epidemics of diseases.

My edited version of 22 May 2008 of the WP article Doji bara famine

The Doji bara famine (or Skull famine) of 1791-92 in South Asia was brought on by a major El Niño event lasting from 1789 CE to 1795 CE and producing prolonged droughts.[12] The El Niño event, recorded by William Roxburgh, a surgeon with the British East India Company, in a series of pioneering meteorological observations, caused the failure of the South Asian monsoon for four consecutive years starting in 1789.[13] The resulting famine, which was severe, caused widespread mortality in Hyderabad, Southern Maratha Kingdom, Deccan, Gujarat, and Marwar (then all ruled by Indian rulers).[11] In regions like the Madras Presidency (governed by the East India Company), where the famine was less severe,[11] and where records were kept, half the population perished in some districts, such as in the Northern Circars.[14] In other areas, such as Bijapur, although no records were kept, both the famine and the year 1791 came to be known in folklore as the Doji bora or the "skull famine," on account, it was said, of the ground being "covered with the skulls of the unburied dead."[14] As in the Chalisa famine of a decade earlier, many areas were depopulated from death or migration. It is thought that a total of 11 million people may have died during the years 1789–1792 as a result of starvation or accompanying epidemics of disease.[15]

Example 5. Plagiarism involving copying from the article Rajputana famine of 1869
Example 5,

(From: Bimal Kanti Paul (2012), Indian Famines: 1707-1943, p. 48, Rajputana famine of 1869, volume 2 (Classical Famines)) "As a result, many inhabitants of famine-stricken regions in Rajputana—for example, two-thirds of the population of Marwar—fled the famine-stricken regions with their livestock. Unfortunately, they did not go to the British territory of Ajmer, where relief work had been arranged. Instead, many wandered in search of food until they died from starvation. Furthermore, late in 1868, epidemics of cholera broke out among vulnerable populations, so there was no harvest in the spring of 1869. In May 1869, many villagers who had fled earlier returned to their villages, believing that the monsoon that year would be early. However, the rains failed to start until mid-July; in the interim, many thousands more died of starvation. The autumn harvest promised to be abundant, but locusts attacked the ripening crops. As a consequence, the crop harvest was only one-eighth of the normal yield. In September and October 1869, heavy rains fell; although they were good for the following spring harvest, they caused an epidemic of malaria that killed many more people."

My edited version of 22 May 2008 of the WP article Rajputana famine of 1869:

"Many inhabitants of the famine-stricken regions of Rajputana (for example, two-thirds of the population of Marwar) emigrated with their livestock or herds.[16] Initially, they did not go to the British territory of Ajmer, where relief works had been arranged; many wandered in search of food until they died from starvation.[16] Late in 1868, epidemics of cholera broke out among the vulnerable population, and there was no harvest in the spring of 1869.[16] In May 1869, many villagers, who had emigrated earlier now returned to their villages believing that the rains would be early. However, the rains held off until mid-July and, in the interim, many thousands more died of starvation.[16] Even so, the autumn harvest promised to be abundant, but swarms of locusts descended upon the fields and destroyed the young crops.[16] In September and October 1869, there were heavy rains that, although good for the spring harvest, caused an epidemic of malaria and killed many more.[16]

Example 6. Plagiarism involving copying from the article Indian famine of 1896–97
Example 6,

(From: Bimal Kanti Paul (2012), Indian Famines: 1707-1943, pp. 50–51, Indian famine of 1896–1897, volume 2 (Classical Famines))

This famine began in four Bundelkhand districts of the Allahabad Division early in 1896, and then spread to many parts of the country, including the United Provinces, the Central Provinces and Berar, Bihar, parts of the Bombay and Madras presidencies, and the Hissar district of the Punjab. It also affected the princely states of Rajputana, Central India Agency, and Hyderabad. During the two years, this famine affected an area of 307,000 square miles with a population of 69.5 million. Although large-scale relief was available throughout the famine-stricken regions in accordance with the Provisional Famine Code of 1883, mortality—both from starvation and from accompanying epidemics—was very high. Approximately 5 million people in the British-ruled territory died. "

My edited version of 19 June 2008 of the WP article Indian famine of 1896–97:

"The Indian famine of 1896–97 was a famine that began in Bundelkhand, India, early in 1896 and spread to many parts of the country, including the United Provinces, the Central Provinces and Berar, Bihar, parts of the Bombay and Madras presidencies, and the Hissar district of the Punjab; in addition, the princely states of Rajputana, Central India Agency, and Hyderabad were affected by the famine.[17] All in all, during the two years, the famine affected an area of 307,000 square miles and a population of 69.5 million.[17] Although large-scale relief was offered throughout the famine-stricken regions in accordance with the Provisional Famine Code of 1883, the mortality, both from starvation and accompanying epidemics, was very high: approximately 1 million people are thought to have died as a result of the famine."[17]

Example 7. Plagiarism involving copying from the article Indian famine of 1899–1900
Example 7,

(From: Bimal Kanti Paul (2012), Indian Famines: 1707-1943, p. 51, Indian famine of 1899–1900, volume 2 (Classical Famines)) "Indian Famine of 1899-1900 This famine began with the failure of the summer monsoon rains in 1899 over a large part of western, central, and southern India. It affected an area of 476,000 square miles and a population estimated at 59.5 million. Nearly half of all famine-affected people resided in British India. This famine was especially severe in the Central Provinces and Berar, the Bombay Presidency, the minor province of Ajmer-Merwara, and the Hissar district of Punjab. It also caused great distress in the princely states of the Rajputana Agency, the Central India Agency, Hyderabad, and the Kathiawar Agency. Additionally, small areas of the Bengal Presidency, the Madras Presidency, and the North-Western Provinces were acutely impacted. The population in many areas had only barely recovered from the famine of 1896-1897 when the new famine struck; like the earlier famine, the 1899-1900 event was preceded by a drought. In 1899, there were also significant crop failures throughout India, so that inter-regional trade could not be relied upon to stabilize food prices."

My edited version of 16 November 2009 of the WP article Indian famine of 1899–1900:

"The Indian famine of 1899–1900 began with the failure of the summer monsoons in 1899 over west and Central India and, during the next year, affected an area of 476,000 square miles (1,230,000 km2) and a population of 59.5 million.[18] The famine was acute in the Central Provinces and Berar, the Bombay Presidency, the minor province of Ajmer-Merwara, and the Hissar District of the Punjab; it also caused great distress in the princely states of the Rajputana Agency, the Central India Agency, Hyderabad and the Kathiawar Agency.[18] In addition, small areas of the Bengal Presidency, the Madras Presidency and the North-Western Provinces were acutely afflicted by the famine.[18] The population in many areas had barely recovered from the famine of 1896–1897.[19] As in that famine, this one too was preceded by a drought.[19] The Meteorological Office of India in its report of 1900, stated, "The mean average rainfall of India is 45 inches (1,100 mm). In no previous famine year has it been in greater defect than 5 inches (130 mm). But in 1899 the defect exceeded 11 inches."[19] There were also large crop failures in the rest of India and, as a result, inter-regional trade could not be relied upon to stabilize food prices.[20]

References

  1. ^ Roy 2006, p. 362
  2. ^ Roy 2006, p. 363
  3. ^ a b Hall-Matthews 2008, p. 24
  4. ^ Roy 2006, p. 361
  5. ^ Imperial Gazetteer of India vol. III 1907, p. 488, Hall-Matthews 1996, pp. 217–219
  6. ^ a b Cite error: The named reference igi-III-488 was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  7. ^ Hall-Matthews 1996, p. 217
  8. ^ Imperial Gazetteer of India vol. III 1907, pp. 477–483
  9. ^ Grove 2007, p. 80
  10. ^ Bayly 2002, p. 503
  11. ^ a b c Imperial Gazetteer of India vol. III 1907, p. 502
  12. ^ Grove 2007, p. 80
  13. ^ Grove 2007, p. 81
  14. ^ a b Grove 2007, p. 82
  15. ^ Grove 2007, p. 83
  16. ^ a b c d e f Cite error: The named reference igi-III-487b was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  17. ^ a b c Imperial Gazetteer of India vol. III 1907, p. 490
  18. ^ a b c Imperial Gazetteer of India vol. III 1907, p. 491
  19. ^ a b c Imperial Gazetteer of India vol. III 1907, p. 492
  20. ^ Drèze 1995, p. 75

Discussion

  • We are releasing content under CC BY-SA 3.0 License and the GFDL. Send them a notice for copyright violation, if needed. --Titodutta (talk) 14:46, 20 January 2019 (UTC)
  • User:Fowler&fowler, please also add a Template:Backwards copy on the talk page, with appropriate version ID of the wikipedia article that was plagiarised. --DBigXrayᗙ 14:56, 20 January 2019 (UTC)
    • Sadly I've seen an article of ours, or much of it, turn up in an Indian peer-reviewed journal. I didn't know about notices and the template then I'm afraid. Doug Weller talk 15:24, 20 January 2019 (UTC)
      • I've seen this happen with supposedly respectable publishers in the past also. I would be tempted to kick up an almighty fuss with them and with Paul (perhaps even his university). I have a very poor list of dodgy India-related sources in my userspace (User:Sitush/Indic publications of dubious merit) and will add this one to it. To be honest, once an academic has been spotted to plagiarise, all of their works should be considered unreliable here. - Sitush (talk) 16:01, 20 January 2019 (UTC)
@Doug Weller:@Sitush: In this instance, the publisher ABC-CLIO is a fairly respect American publisher of educational material. The editor of the volume is: William A. Dando, whose biography at the end of the book (page 339) says: "Editor William A. Dando is Professor Emeritus, Department of Geography, Geology, and Anthropology, Indiana State University. He has taught courses on the geography of food and famine, as well as on climatology. His interests lie in agriculture, hunger/famine in Russia, climate and food, and application of geotechniques to food, famine, and agricultural problems. He is a member of the Association of American Geographers and the National Council for Geographic Education." The author of the chapter, "Indian famines 1707–1943" is Bimal Kanti Paul, whose biography on pages 339–340, says, "Bimal Kanti Paul is Professor of Geography at Kansas State University, Manhattan, Kansas. He is a hazards geography specialist with additional interests in health and population geography and quantitative analysis. His area specialty is in South Asia. Currently he is the Book Review Editor of the Professional Geographer and Editor of Special Publications of the National Council for Geographic Education. " Fowler&fowler«Talk» 16:08, 20 January 2019 (UTC)
Gobsmacked. Email Dando. Or I will if no one else wants to. Doug Weller talk 16:24, 20 January 2019 (UTC)
I would prefer that you do, as you are an admin. But there's more. Each one of the famine articles I wrote in 2008, half dozen or more, seem to have been copied. I'll make a collapsed set of examples of them. Btw, Dando was 54 on September 24, 1988 according to the Grand Forks Herald (North Dakota) on September 24, 1988 (see here and scroll down) That means he is 84 now. He might not be active academically. Writing to the publisher might be better. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 16:38, 20 January 2019 (UTC)
The various editorial boards of which Paul is a member, including in his role as a book reviewer, are going to have a fit of the vapours. - Sitush (talk) 17:04, 20 January 2019 (UTC)
@Fowler&fowler: do you still plan to add the examples? Ping me please so I don't miss your reply, I lost track of this. Doug Weller talk 08:50, 24 January 2019 (UTC)
@Doug Weller: Sorry for the delay. I will do so in the next few hours. Thanks for the reminder. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 13:52, 24 January 2019 (UTC)
@Doug Weller: I've added several more examples from WP India famines of the 19th century. I managed to find an email for Dando. I will send it to you by emai. I don't know if it is a working email, but it is worth a try. Thanks for doing this. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 22:09, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

@Doug Weller: "Plagiarism" might be too strong a word to level at someone, in the absence of their perspective. I am happy to change it to something like, "Possible infringement of Wikipedia CC BY-SA 3.0 License and the GFDL" or "Possible Wikipedia copyright violation" Fowler&fowler«Talk» 15:21, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

@Fowler&fowler: I guess there is one big question, which is what do you or we want from this? Only the author of the text has any official standing as they are the copyright holder. I don't think the WMF would want to get involved and if the publisher admitted wrongdoing, that would leave them open to a copyright suit. I think you should template the relevant articles with the backwards template at Wikipedia:Copyright problems. You could ask for more advice at Wikipedia talk:Copyright problems. I've just emailed a university and said I was emailing them just so that they knew that one of their students had, several years ago, copied from one of our articles. If I were in your shoes I think I'd do something like that. Let ABC-CLIO know that there was a problem (saying that you thought you should know but not suggesting any action to take) and maybe emailing Dando saying your were surprised/disappointed/whatever to discover that your work had ended up in his work. Ditto Paul. If it was something online we could expect them to do something about that, but books? Unless you want to sue, I don't think there's much more we can do other than what I've suggested, but of course someone at Talk:Copyright problems might have other ideas. Doug Weller talk 15:41, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
It isn't about damages but rather acknowledgement and integrity. Paul is in a very tight spot because it casts a bad light on everything he has ever done. But, in my opinion, that doesn't mean we should brush it under the carpet. And we most certainly should avoid using Paul as a source anywhere on Wikipedia - we don't use plagiarists, regardless of whether we describe them with precisely that term or with some fudged version. - Sitush (talk) 16:04, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

Wikipedia is copied and pasted without attribution by 100s / 1000s of academics or sources. Typically these are not high quality sources or notable publishers. "ABC-CLIO" is not a serious publisher.

When the Oxford University Press copied and pasted from Wikipedia in one of their medical textbooks that turned out to be news worthy.[4]Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 16:47, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

Draft:Souvik Mandal

Could somebody take a look at Draft:Souvik Mandal. It's a bit of a mess. I suspect there may be the germ of a good article in there, but it's quite badly written. Hopefully, somebody more familiar with the culture will be able to make more sense out of it than I can. Thanks. -- RoySmith (talk) 17:52, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

RoySmith, appears to me as a poor attempt to write an article about a temple located in a Mandal in Birbhum district. I cant see anything that makes it notable for an article in mainspace. It could have been a part of the village article where this temple is located, but without the name of the village, there isn't much to do in that article. I will drop a note asking the same to the uploader, if he can elaborate more. --DBigXrayᗙ 19:22, 23 January 2019 (UTC)
Shout out to @Titodutta: if he can add some value there. --DBigXrayᗙ 19:46, 23 January 2019 (UTC)
Despite the normal definition of mandal, do you not think the draft title might just be the name of the uploader? Compare 'Uploadsou14' with 'Souvik'. Cesdeva (talk) 20:41, 23 January 2019 (UTC)
User:Cesdeva Indeed, that is a possibility and it was my first hunch, but lets AGF. Lots of users have their username based on their hometown. --DBigXrayᗙ 20:53, 23 January 2019 (UTC)
AGF always. I just think the editor might have inadvertently put their personal name as the title. I've found a goverment document from Birbhum district which lists a person with said name. Not going to post a link for privacy reasons. Cesdeva (talk) 21:02, 23 January 2019 (UTC)
Yes, Sauvik is a common Bengali name, a quick google search is enough, no need for secret govt docs for that. --DBigXrayᗙ 21:06, 23 January 2019 (UTC)
Sorry I wasn't clear, i'm on about the full name: Souvik Mandal Cesdeva (talk) 21:09, 23 January 2019 (UTC)
Agreed that is also a possibility. Since Mandal is a common surname in India. That said what actually are you proposing here ? Please make a complete statement with your suggestions/proposal. Dropping one liners isn't really helpful. --DBigXrayᗙ 21:17, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

DBigXray. Clearly the draft uploader is enthusiastic, and we should do our very best to guide the editor and the draft through the AfC process. But if they've accidentally outed themselves, then we should act in their benefit. I guess I'm proposing that until we hear otherwise from the draft uploader, RoySmith or another admin move the draft to a new title, without a history merge, to protect the identify of the editor. I'll drop a note at AN. Cesdeva (talk) 21:36, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

First, as we just discussed, there is nothing concrete to suggest this authors name is what you claim it is. A possibility is far from conclusive evidence.
Second, There is nothing in the draft body that suggests the draft is for self promotion of this person.
Third, If indeed the person's name is what you suspect, the person has himself added it in full knowledge. Possibly to convert the article to a vanity BIO at a later point of time, but as I said, this is just a possibility, we cannot act on possibilities there is no hurry and no reason to not AGF on the new author. I would suggest you not to make any post on AN on this but keep an eye on this authors talk page. --DBigXrayᗙ 21:41, 23 January 2019 (UTC)
I was merely proposing a pre-emptive, non-destructive act to potentially protect the identity of an editor. At no point have I questioned the author's good faith. I'm sure plenty of new editors have honestly titled their draft after their personal name, not aware of any potential consequences. In case I'm not on the money, and in respect your judgement, I won't post at any Admin noticeboard. Cesdeva (talk) 21:58, 23 January 2019 (UTC)
Thanks, there is no reason to hurry. First let him respond to talk page Q that I asked.--DBigXrayᗙ 22:02, 23 January 2019 (UTC)
The author requested rename for the 2 drafts here. New drafts are at Draft:Bahira Kaalimaata and Draft:Bhandir Bon--DBigXrayᗙ 22:16, 23 January 2019 (UTC)
User:DBigXray Thanks for the update. Cesdeva (talk) 22:24, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

India Assessment bar

Hello, some time ago we discussed fixing YuviPanda's assessment bar. With the support of IndicTech-Com and specially User:Jayprakash12345, some changes are made and a temporary version of the fixed script may be seen at: User:Titodutta/scripts/AssessmentBar.js.
I am not confident that the script is fixed, because I almost never used this script (or I don't remember). Anyone who remembers all the features of this script, please comment. perhaps User:AshLin, User:BPositive?--Titodutta (talk) 06:45, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

What was this intended for? I vaguely remember some attempt to add project banners to a swathe of unassessed India-related articles but it is years ago. I think someone somehow worked out how many relevant articles lacked the India Project banner and came here asking could the situation be fixed. - Sitush (talk) 16:16, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Noticeboard_for_India-related_topics&oldid=880142267"