Talk:Tamil Nadu Legislative Council

more improvements[edit]

looks like we have another potentially good article. some improvements I can think of are

to include the political developments in India and Britain which were responsible for these various Acts. For example, Krishnaswamy says Indian Rebellion of 1857 was directly responsible for the 1861 Act.
List of Governors and Chief Ministers.
to clearly and explicitly state what extra powers Council members acquired with passing of every Act.
what the Council actually did, include some bills they passed in reasonable detail.--Car Tick 13:59, 24 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

2 and 3 we already have List of Chief Ministers of Tamil Nadu and List of Governors of Tamil Nadu. So it should be easy. 4, rajaraman has one detailed chapter to it (though fawning over justice govts). For 37-52 and 52-86, it gets a little iffy. 1, we can get material - since it is british raj certainly reams would have been written on. i will check with fowler written articles to see what sources are available.--Sodabottle (talk) 15:10, 24 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

DYK[edit]

well, to begin with, it should go into the DYK for sure. if u r not interested in nominating, i am going to have to do it. --Car Tick 14:09, 24 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

ok. go ahead. --Sodabottle (talk) 15:05, 24 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

emblem[edit]

, is this a suitable one? --Car Tick 16:05, 24 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

think so. it represents all wings of TN govt. usually indian legislatures dont have separate coat of arms and since MLC was one wing of TN govt for about 30 years i used it. it is used as the official seal for all TN govt stuff. similarly lok sabha, rajya sabha and vidhan sabha articles use the saranath pillar emblem.--Sodabottle (talk) 16:31, 24 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

list of chairmen[edit]

I am listing the chairmen of the council between 1935-86 here with sources. Once a full list can be sourced will add to the article

U. Ramarao (1937-45) [1][2]
RB Ramakrishna Raju 1946-52
Dr. P. V. Cherian ( 1952- 20 April 1964)[3][4]
M. A. Manikavelu Nayakkar (1964-70) [5]
C. P. Chitrarasu (23 April 1970 - 1976) [6]
M. P. Sivagnanam (1976-86) [7]--Sodabottle (talk) 15:09, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

When it is revived[edit]

When the council is revived, we need to do some reorganising. currently the Tamil Nadu Legislative Assembly redirects to Legislature of Tamil Nadu and Tamil Nadu Legislative Council redirects to Madras Legislative Council

The current content in LofT page needs to be shifted to the TNLA page and a new summary holder article to be created for LofT
MLC page should become a redirect to TNLC instead of the reverse situation now.

(This is a reminder in case i forget/am not around to do it)--Sodabottle (talk) 15:09, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

we could infact creat a new Tamil Nadu legislative council article. I am not yet sure if it is first going to pass Rajya Sabha and then Lok Sabha. --Car Tick 16:13, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The IPA floor managers will sneak it in during the last days of the session with a lot of empty benches and voice voting. A lot of stuff gets legislated that way.--Sodabottle (talk) 16:27, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See exactly as i said. It passed Rajya Sabha in a voice vote. current parliament session ends on Friday (7 may) and they are tabling it tomorrow (6 May) in Lok Sabha. There were very few members in RS today. Must be same tomorrow in LS.--Sodabottle (talk) 17:36, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Pranab Mukerjee when he said that this issue has not been well thought over. Some politicians choose to abolish and revive LCs at their whim. he cited the Andhra case as an example. --Car Tick 19:40, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Updation required[edit]

I request that someone takes up the issue of cleaning up and updating the article on the following issues:

There are many references that the council was in fact revived.
There are references to the new assembly complex which also requires removal
The term Diarchy is not explained
The article is so cluttered and is not so very interesting to read. Something must be done to change the overall look and appeal

-- R.Sivanesh ^{✆ ©} 19:00, 23 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ok i will start working on the first two, to bring it upto date. For no 3, the term "dyarcy" is wiklinked, and the main article is also wikilinked and an entire para is devoted to explain how dyarchy worked in madras presidency. As a summary sytle article, we cannot go into more detail about it here, thats the reason the main articles are linked. For no 4, the "clutter and not interesting to read" is a subjective judgement and cannot be used to tag it for cleanup. I am removing the tag - as i feel, the article meets wikipedia's quality standards as it stands now. I will work on the frist two.--Sodabottle (talk) 19:07, 23 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with you, I tagged the article only because I hoped that someone will come around to help. Also see my proposals at Talk:Tamil Nadu Legislature-- R.Sivanesh ^{✆ ©} 19:15, 23 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Working on the "cluttered" thing. I think its mostly because of the tables. I am trying to replace them with collapsible versions. Will take a look at your proposals once i finish these.--Sodabottle (talk) 19:19, 23 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have collapsed the smaller tables. Please take a look now and see if the readability has improved.--Sodabottle (talk) 19:45, 23 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The article looked better before collapse.Kindly revert the edit-- R.Sivanesh ^{✆ ©} 20:05, 23 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That bad? :-). i have reverted my edits. I took a look at your proposals. Interesting, but i am not sure what i think about them . Since i was heavily involved in developing these two, my mind is fixed on the current format and i am not able to view them with a fresh perspective. I have invited user CarTick to take a look and comment on your proposals - we both did the heavy lifting for both the articles and he has been here before me, so he should be able to give some pointers.--Sodabottle (talk) 20:16, 23 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

this is not the best article in wikipedia, but much better than thousands of others. it can be a bit difficult for uninformed readers. i recommend you read the article a few times and suggest actionable ideas to clarify the ambiguity. In my opinion, the root cause of any ambiguity is the timeline of the two houses, which can be clarified in the Tamil Nadu Legislature article. --CarTick (talk) 20:37, 23 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Fort St. George, Chennai 2.jpg Nominated for Deletion[edit]

An image used in this article, File:Fort St. George, Chennai 2.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Media without a source as of 21 August 2011

What should I do?

Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.

If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 19:12, 21 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]