Talk:Luv Kush
 | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
Number of episodes
[edit]@Noobie anonymous: Why you removed information about number of episodes and reference of tweet by the official handle of channel? — GargAvinash talk 12:02, 23 April 2020 (UTC)
This reference: https://m.republicworld.com/entertainment-news/television-news/uttar-ramayan-doordarshan-dd-swapnil-joshi-luv-kush-serial-timings-pic.html has already covered those contents you mentioned. Thus, it is not necessary to over reference any content twice in the article. Also, social medias can not be considered as reliable sources for citations. Noobie anonymous (talk) 16:19, 23 April 2020 (UTC)
- @Noobie anonymous: Tweets should be minimized but they are not unreliable; have a look at WP:SELFSOURCE. I added the number of episodes and pointed to that Twitter post for variability but you removed both. How can you prove the number of episodes? — GargAvinash talk 16:51, 23 April 2020 (UTC)
The above mentioned reference of Republic World contains the following: "Uttar Ramayan had aired during 1988-89, for 44 episodes and was also directed by Ramayan director Ramanand Sagar." Is this not enough for providing number of episodes and year of release? Noobie anonymous (talk) 17:03, 23 April 2020 (UTC)
- @Noobie anonymous:I see the information for first ever telecast in that source, but they nowhere mentioned this "19 April 2020 to 11 May 2020". Apart from this, you are ignoring my question in your every reply. My primary concern was that why you removed the information about number of episodes. Sources for verifying the number of episodes only come into picture when there is the information; but you removed the information itself (I see it only in infobox). — GargAvinash talk 17:38, 23 April 2020 (UTC)
I felt that infobox would be sufficient for specifying the total episodes number for which I removed it. I do not say you wrong. If it is seen necessary, you could have added it back again without discussing this small thing as an issue in the talk page which could have been avoided. This discussion should have not been this long which is also due to my misunderstanding to your point initially. Anyways, you are free to add anything reliable. Noobie anonymous (talk) 18:00, 23 April 2020 (UTC)
- @Noobie anonymous: No. Infoboxes are not for that purpose. Please see MOS:INFOBOXPURPOSE. I'd be happy if you restore the information. — GargAvinash talk 18:10, 23 April 2020 (UTC)
I have considered it and restored it back. With regardsNoobie anonymous (talk)
A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion
[edit]The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:
You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 06:52, 10 May 2020 (UTC)