Wikipedia talk:Noticeboard for India-related topics/Archive 54

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

Indian awards and their relationship to notability

A number of WP:BLPs of Indian citizens cite awards such as the Bharat Jyoti Award granted by the India International Friendship Society or the Best Citizen of India Award granted by the International Publishing House (or sometimes the India Publishing House) located in New Delhi.

I would like to reach out to the WikiProject India community for input regarding the notability of such awards. My own take on these awards is that they appear to be handed out rather liberally (and quite possibly, for sale) solely for the purpose of bolstering one's resume, but that they have little real legitimacy. However, as an American with little access to Indian media, I admit that I might be perceiving the situation entirely incorrectly. So I ask those in the community who are closer to the topic: are these awards at all meaningful? WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 14:57, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

This is whole politics. 2 years ago Mamata Banerjee came to power in West Bengal. To create a class of intellectuals who will support her she created the award Banga Vibhushan in the model of Padma Vibhushan. Only a few awards of India are de facto notable all else are politics. Hope this provides a light. Solomon7968 (talk) 21:37, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

2013 Bangladesh India WikiProjects dispute resolution

(You must be aware that) the relation between WikiProject Bangladesh and WikiProject India (in alphabetical order) unfortunately have not been very smooth always. Very recently we have had some heated discussions at few AFDs and almost regularly we fight on some unclear issues. The unclear issues/problematic I can think at this moment—

This list might be incomplete. Consider expanding the list
  • Nationality of the people born before 1971 (the year Bangladesh was formed). This has been a serious issue with no clear consensus.
  • Categorization issue (example)
  • Riots, violence related articles disputes
  • Editors dispute
  • Alleged editor targeting

I am proposing an initiative from our WikiProject which will—

  1. Attempt to resolve the current disputes
  2. Attempt to build community decision and consensus on confusing issues
  3. Attempt to to strengthen the relationship between WP Bangladesh and WP India editors. --Tito Dutta (contact) 03:47, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
Thanks Tito for trying to address this important issue. Have you posted a link for this in Wikiproject Bangladesh?
Regarding the nationality issue, the problem is it is not a simple mathematical issue. I will propose that whoever lived in British India (before 1947) have British Indian as one of the nationalities. Then, up to 1971, have Indian or Pakistani as appropriate, and then Bangladeshi if the person lived in (or, had citizenship of) Bangladesh. All these need to go in the infobox. Meanwhile, the text in lead may have just the ethnicity (eg Bengal). See Sheikh Mujibur Rahman for example. For example from other parts of the world, see Albert Einstein. A notable exception of this proposed rule, currently, is Kazi Nazrul Islam, who had Bangladeshi citizenship only for a few months of his life. So, the info in the infobx of thia article definitely needs to be addressed.
Another aspect is those who dies before 1947. Will have to think something about them.--Dwaipayan (talk) 04:11, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
No, actually it was a suggestion to WP India to start the initiative. We can create a page Wikipedia:2013 Bangladesh India WikiProjects dispute resolution initiative, list the problematic issues and ask editors of both the WikiProjects and some best admins and WP:DRN, WP:3O editors to help us to find "peace"! --Tito Dutta (contact) 04:16, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
About the nationality issue, I would second Dwaipayan, except the case of Kazi Nazrul Islam. Nazrul is generally regarded as a Bangladeshi poet, there is also a reference given in the infobox where he was described as a Bangladeshi poet by Times of India. Similar case is there with Rabindranath Tagore (who died in 1941) where his nationality is stated as Indian. I would also add the issue of ethnicity, where some editors are trying to add Bengali Hindu as the ethnicity in the infobox of the Hindu people from Bengal. The ethnicity should and always be Bengali and the religion should be Hindu, we must not mix these two. About the category issue, my whole rationale can be seen in that discussion. I would like to show the example of Jibanananda Das, he is regarded as a native poet in Bangladesh, quite justifiably, as he was born and raised in and also lived most of his life in what is now known as Bangladesh. Now, if a reader is searching for a poet who was born in Bangladesh but don't know the exact name, he would definitely go for the Category:Bangladeshi poets. That's why the category is added in those articles. Lastly, I appreciate the proposal of Tito Dutta, but I guess this is not the right time to take this initiative as most of the experienced editors of WP Bangladesh are now in wikibreaks and not much active these days. I would suggest we wait till their full return to wikipedia. --Zayeem (talk) 09:16, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
@User:Kmzayeem will you explain why you added Jagadish Chandra Bose in the Template:Scientists of Bangladesh. If anyone is born in the geographical area of Bangladesh he does not become a Bangladeshi. Jagadish Chandra Bose died long before Bangladesh was created in 1971. Solomon7968 (talk) 11:49, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
The explanation lies in the title, Scientists of Bangladesh not Bangladeshi scientists! BTW, why are you removing the categories from Michael Madhusudan Dutt without any discussion? --Zayeem (talk) 12:25, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
I have added your category people from jessore, which is valid but Bangladeshi poets is misleading. Solomon7968 (talk) 12:30, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
So did you even see my rationales before removing them? Moreover those categories were added years ago, nobody raised this issue until recently! --Zayeem (talk) 12:34, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
Your rationale is that if a Bangladeshi people searches, he or she can then go to Bengali poets category and "nobody raised this issue until recently!" is no argument. If you want to promote Bangladesh you can do it in a better way but your policy of confusing a nationality with birthplace seems very misleading to me. Solomon7968 (talk) 12:38, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
Now this is what we call a personal attack! On the point of category, the Category:Bengali poets have almost the double number of articles compared to Category:Bangladeshi poets, it is quite understandable that a reader would find it easier to search from the latter. --Zayeem (talk) 12:57, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
We are here to build an encyclopedia which people can trust. You can make the template poets born in jessore, nobody is stopping you, but you cannot use wikipedia to fool other people by propaganda that Michael was a Bangladeshi. You can do it in any other place but not in wikipedia. Solomon7968 (talk) 13:02, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
My rationales about the category issue are given in the discussion in WP Bangladesh NB and here and don't think they have been countered with a reasonable explanation. Hence I'm re-adding those categories in the article. --Zayeem (talk) 13:13, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
You are not following wikipedia guidelines of neutrality. You cannot add false info to help people in searching. Solomon7968 (talk) 13:19, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
Look, adding a category doesn't mean that it's a fact, I've already explained these things in the discussion. It's quite justified to add these categories in the article, you can also get many articles about people who died before '47 and still have categories like Indian writers, Indian poets etc. Hence, don't remove those categories, however feel free to revert if anyone adds Bangladeshi as the nationality in the infobox or refer him as a Bangladeshi in the text. --Zayeem (talk) 13:30, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Wouldn't it make more sense to use whatever nationality an individual had at death, if dead, or whatever their current nationality is? If I read this correctly, then a living Bangladeshi citizen born prior to 1947 would have British Indian, Pakistani, and Bangladeshi nationality which doesn't make sense to me. That would make the case of Kazi Nasrul Islam straightforward as well. He would be merely identified as Bangladeshi. --regentspark (comment) 12:50, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
^I support that! --Zayeem (talk) 12:57, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
I think, in the infobox, all the nationalities should be given (as in the case of Muzibur Rahaman or Einstein); and in the text (lead), to avoid clumsiness, the ethnicity (Bengali) is sufficient.--Dwaipayan (talk) 13:36, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
As far as nationality is concerned, I'm often reluctant to assign it. Nationality can be granted or adopted and is not necessarily one's place of birth (eg: my great-grandmother was born in Bangalore but she was not Indian in any sense of the word). The issue should by quite simple in the case of India/Bangladesh: find sources that are from the post-1971 period and determine from those which nationality should apply, if any, rather as with WP:COMMONNAME. If someone self-identified then that trumps other sources and should always be required for BLPs ... and please note that there are many sports people who play for countries other than that of which they are citizens. If there is ambiguity in the sources or no sources exists to verify the point, then omit it. - Sitush (talk) 13:44, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
Regarding categorisation of poets etc, are those categories intended to reflect nationality or language in which they write? - Sitush (talk) 13:46, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
There is already a category Bengali Poets, so definitely adding Bangladeshi poets mean Michael was a Bangladeshi or born after 1971 but actually he died a 100 years ago. Solomon7968 (talk) 13:51, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
Well, we have two categories, Category:Bengali poets and Category:Bangladeshi poets. The category Bengali poets is about the poets of Bengali language or ethnicity, while the category Bangladeshi poets is generally used in the articles about poets who were born in Bangladesh or are referred as Bangladeshi. --Zayeem (talk) 13:59, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
That is why I inserted the category People from Jessore but you are in a totally wrong dimension. He was born in Jessore but does that means he was a Bangladeshi? You cannot term everyone born in Bangladesh a Bangladeshi unless he has the citizenship or is born after 1971. Solomon7968 (talk) 14:05, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
You are replying with the same words again and again. As I have pointed before, you will find many similar examples from the categories of other countries as well, including India. Let me show you an example of Martha Wadsworth Brewster, she died in 1757 but still have the Category:American women poets. We can go with the conventional terms in this case.--Zayeem (talk) 14:11, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
Replied in your talk page. I am least concerned with Martha Wadsworth Brewster. If you wish you can argue on it on the talk page of the article. Wikiproject India noticeboard is not the place to argue about Martha Wadsworth Brewster. Show me a reliable secondary source that Michael was a Bangladeshi. Unsourced opinions are not the suitable place for wikipedia. Solomon7968 (talk) 14:24, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
As I've said before one would not become Bangladeshi only by having a category, however feel free to revert if anyone adds Bangladeshi as the nationality in the infobox or refer him as a Bangladeshi in the text. Besides, there must be 100s of articles with these type of categories and its definitely not possible by a human to discuss in each and every article talk page. In addition, if someone removes the Indian categories from similar articles based on your rationales, many will rant on the issue in the same fashion. Hence, its better to go with the conventional terms. P.S no need to post about the issue in my talk page, we can have the whole discussion here! --Zayeem (talk) 14:33, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
It is absurd that even after knowing he is not a Bangladeshi, you are keen to add the category. Please wait till any third man interrupts in the noticeboard talk page. P.S No more posting on your talk page. Solomon7968 (talk) 14:36, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
He was not a Bangladeshi in legal terms, however he was born in what is now known as Bangladesh, quite justified to add the category.--Zayeem (talk) 14:42, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
Wikipedia needs "Secondary Reliable sources" for justification. Can you provide it. Opinion does not matters. Again do not post before any third person interrupts. Solomon7968 (talk) 14:49, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
As regards The "Indian" categories to those pages, Zayeem, the term "Indian" has a historical connotation (and has been used in history texts). It does not only mean something belonging to Republic of India(after 1947). The term India has been used in academia for indicating things before 1947, too. For example, Indian independence movement.For example, Rabindranath Tagore, who was a Bengali by ethnicity, and technically a subject of the British Indian Emperor, is referred to as Indian.--Dwaipayan (talk) 14:46, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
Indeed. And this is why we have to follow the sources. I really do not understand the obsession that some people have regarding nationality, which is generally an amorphous concept anyway, but if we must obsess then at least do so in accordance with policy. - Sitush (talk) 14:50, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
Dwaipayan, I'm not saying we should remove the Indian categories, rather I'm in favor of hiving both Indian and Bangladeshi categories, going with the conventional terms.--Zayeem (talk) 14:57, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
Nothing in wikipedia is conventional. It is a working draft. Only guidelines are permanent which enforces me, you or any other third person to stay NPOV and make any changes only with reference. I have reference that Michael was Indian but you do not have reference to prove he was a Bangladeshi. So debate closes. Solomon7968 (talk) 15:03, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
(edit conflict)I admit that some cases won't be simply mathematical, and individual considerations may be needed. However, Michael having Bangladeshi category is absurd (also lack of sources supporting that). Same goes for Jibanananda Das, although I can personally sense the sentiment in his case. Academia does not refer to pre-1971 Jessore, Khulna, Barisal, Dhaka as Bangladesh. That's the convention worldwide.--Dwaipayan (talk) 15:06, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

This is a little more complicated than I thought. Clearly, anyone who died before 1947 should be Indian because that's what they would have identified as. Bose and Tagore are therefore Indians. Anyone who died after 1971 is clearly a Bangladeshi because, I assume, that's the identification they would have made. Mujibur Rahman falls in this category. The problem is with individuals who died between 1947 and 1971. It does seem odd to call them Pakistanis not only because it is not PC, but also because our readers won't necessarily realize that he or she was never a part of what we know as Pakistan today. It is, at best, misleading. I scanned the text but couldn't pick out any examples from that period. Any well known names? (Sitush, your great grandmother is hereby granted honorary Indian citizenship by the all powerful Wikipedia admin cabal!) --regentspark (comment) 15:00, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

The greatest example was the Ex prime Minister of Pakistan Huseyn Shaheed Suhrawardy who was the godfather of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman what a Irony. Solomon7968 (talk) 15:06, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
Ironical indeed. But a good example. Suhrawardy would have had no problems identifying as a Pakistani. Perhaps my simple solution above is a workable one for the general case. --regentspark (comment) 15:11, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
@RP, I wonder if she could contribute from beyond the grave? Or might that constitute necropuppetry? Anyway, all the rows that are circulating re: matters India are rather depressing me at the moment, and many seem to be repeats of past rows. Is there any chance of declaring a Wikipedia Peace Day? - Sitush (talk) 15:12, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
I would suggest to take a look at the talk page of Jagadish Chandra Bose, there have been extensive discussion about the nationality where it was decided to include British Indian as the nationality, in response of edit warring on the nationality issue. I guess we should have the nationality British Indian for individuals who died before '47 to avoid further conflicts. --Zayeem (talk) 15:15, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
I agree with you philosophically though I do not like the term "British Indian". You can add to Jagadish Chandra Bose the category "People from Mymensingh". But please do not refer to him as Bangladeshi.Solomon7968 (talk) 15:19, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
"British Indian" only works from 1857, and even then may have a few exceptions. - Sitush (talk) 15:49, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
The whole of Bengal except Coochbihar falls in "British Indian" if my history is correct. Solomon7968 (talk) 15:53, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
I thought that Coochbihar and all the other princely states were protectorates under the British Crown and member of the Council of States and hence they fell under the so called 'British India'. BengaliHindu (talk) 17:10, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
I am confused. Probably you are right. Solomon7968 (talk) 17:21, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

How do other projects deal with this? For example, Germany since the Berlin Wall came down and prior to Bismarck's unification in the 19th century, Italy prior to unification, and the various Balkan and former Eastern Bloc areas? - Sitush (talk) 15:54, 24 May 2013 (UTC)


I've been through this whole thing many times in the past. Several issues complicate the national "tag", and that caused this "conflict". So, here are my observations:

  • "India" as in "Republic of India" is not the same as "British India" or "India" as a general region. When you tag someone as "Indian poet", what does that mean? Does it mean and Indian poet linked to the current nation, or someone born in the region where the current Republic of India is located at? To give an illustration, let us consider Iqbal, Pakistan's national poet. He was born and died in Lahore, which is part of Pakistan post 1947. But he died prior to 1947. So, what is he, "Indian poet", or "Pakistani poet"? If you claim him to be "Indian poet" that will be very confusing to readers because clearly the "India" they have in mind doesn't contain Lahore. Similarly, if he is tagged as a "Pakistani poet", then according to some arguments put forth above, it will be incorrect (Pakistan didn't exist when Iqbal died). Another example is Goethe. When he was born, Frankfurt was a part of Holy Roman Empire, and Germany didn't exist. So, why is he tagged as a "German poet"? (Notice that there is a slight difference in the cases of Iqbal and Goethe ... The "German" tag may very well indicate ethnicity rather than the nation state).
  • Tagging people by nationality of them at their death is also problematic. For example, many freedom fighters of Bangladesh died prior to Bangladesh becoming a free country. Would you tag them as "Pakistani x"?That would be very misleading.
  • Also, when you add "Indian poet" to someone, what does that mean? The problem is that the same category includes both poets belonging to historical region of India, as well as the poets belonging to Republic of India. The two groups are not exactly the same. But if you apply the same tag to both groups, confusions will arise. (I also want to know why this logic of "Historical region" applies to Indians but not "Bangla deshis" ... the term "Bangla Desh" has been used prior to 1947 even to indicate the historical region of Bengal. (referring to Tagore's poems, songs where this term was used).
  • My solution was simple: use ethnicity which doesn't really change. For example, no matter how many times Nazrul's bones are moved, he will still be a Bengali. So, in the lead, it is perhaps better to tag him as "Nazrul was a Bengali poet ....", and in the categories apply appropriate stuff.
  • Also, we can err in the side of inclusion. That is, tag someone like Surya Sen as belonging to both India (as in British India) and Bangladesh (as in the region where he was born and lived and died). --Ragib (talk) 17:30, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
Your Iqbal point is very relevant here. He first coined the term Pakistan in a speech in 1930 (ahead of Jinnah). Thus it can be argued that he himself owed his allegiance to the then hypothetical Pakistan. The same applies for the freedom fighters of Bangladesh who owed their allegiance to the then hypothetical Bangladesh. Solomon7968 (talk) 17:42, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
I note that Iqbal is classified as British Indian. Pakistani would not be correct because there was no Pakistan (but...). Ragib, what about Suhrawardy? Would the Pakistani tag apply? Bengali doesn't seem correct because he was a founding father of Pakistan. --regentspark (comment) 17:47, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
Why incorrect, Of course Pakistan did not exist then but he himself believed him to be a Pakistani. Interested editors may check the article on Choudhry Rahmat Ali. Solomon7968 (talk) 17:52, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
Suhrawardy was definitely a Pakistani national. He was the Prime Minister of Pakistan at point of time. And when he died, Bangladesh was not born. Not only him, many people of former East Bengal who died before 26 March 1971, would be Pakistanis by nationality. Even Hindus, who were freedom fighters in the Indian Independence Movement, like Trailokyanath Chakravarty, and chose to stay on in Pakistan and died before 26 March 1971 were Pakistani nationals. BengaliHindu (talk) 18:17, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
Solomon, if I suddenly start to believe I am an American or British, would that make me so? :) Also, he can't be a citizen of a non-existent country, even if he believes himself to be so, according to the many arguments posted above. (Regents, will reply shortly). --Ragib (talk) 18:04, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
Muhammad Iqbal was technically not a citizen or national of Pakistan. BengaliHindu (talk) 18:08, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
Ragib, you have raised valid points.
  • In case of Iqbal, the nationality in the infobox should be British Indian, but the category Indian poets is okay, because as User:Dwaipayanc explained above, the term Indian has historical usage. It not only corresponds to the present Republic of India, but also the ancient, medieval and colonial India. User:Kmzayeem may argue that by this logic the category Bangladeshi poets is also justified, but please note that the term Bangladeshi does not have any historical usage. Most certainly it was not used before 1971. There is no contemporary evidence regarding the use of the term Bangladeshi before 1971. Even after liberation, the nationality of the people of Bangladeshi was officially Bengali, which was later modified to Bangladeshi by Ziaur Rahman.
  • Tagging people by nationality at their death may be problematic, yes in some cases, it may be. However, for the overwhelming majority of the cases, it won't be. This rule makes more sense than others if any, and its simple enough to be understood and implemented. Can you please name some freedom fighters who represent the problematic cases?
  • Ethnic categorization is well accepted. Category Bengali poets have never been questioned. But why categorize someone as Bangladeshi poet when he/she never was a Bangladeshi national?
  • Surya Sen can be tagged with People from Chittagong no problem. But can he be tagged with People from Bangladesh. I think no. BengaliHindu (talk) 18:09, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
I support BengaliHindu. People from chittagong is Ok but not Bangladeshi. Solomon7968 (talk) 18:14, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
The "Historical usage" theory also applies to Bangladesh, as referred by Ragib earlier. --Zayeem (talk) 18:17, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
The historical usage doesn't apply for Bangladesh as explained below.
  • Prior to 1947, the term Bangladesh was informally used (in Bengali) to refer to the whole region of Bengal. It was not an official name. The term Bangladesh was not officially used in present territory of Bangladesh in the period between 1947 and 1971.
  • Bangladesh was not the only term used to refer to the region of Bengal. Other terms like Banga, Bangadesh and Bangla were used interchangeably.
  • The people of the region of Bangladesh was called Bengali (Bangali) and not Bangladeshi. Can you provide any pre-1947 reference where a particular person has been called Bangladeshi? Then how can you call pre-1947 people like Michael Madhusudan Dutt, a Bangladeshi? BengaliHindu (talk) 18:26, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
@Ragib can you explain which poem of Tagore explicitly stated Bangla"desh". Solomon7968 (talk) 18:22, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
There is a famous Rabindra Sangeet "Aji Bangladesh er ridoy hote"! --Zayeem (talk) 18:25, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
Solomon, আজি বাংলাদেশের হৃদয় হতে ... --Ragib (talk) 19:57, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
As explain above, in pre-1947 days, the term Bangladesh was informally used in Bengali to refer to the whole of Bengal. Bangladesh, Bangla, Bangadesh and Banga were user ingterchageably, albeit informally. By Bangladesh, Tagore must have referred to the whole of Bengal and not the current political territory of Bangladesh. BengaliHindu (talk) 18:35, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
(edit conflict) There are few writings of Tagore where "Bangladesh" or "Bangla" was mentioned (search result for "Bangladesh"), but, he did not mean the current Bangladesh (geographic location), might be both Bengals! --Tito Dutta (contact) 18:28, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Anybody who have the slightest knowledge of Tagore knows he was one of the first "Internationalists" who warned the civilisation of the consequences of agressive Nationalism. It is shameful that editors here are using Tagore to justify the use of "Bangladeshi Poets" in case of Michael. The Philosophy of Tagore was completely different. Solomon7968 (talk) 18:31, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

(edit conflict) The term bangladesh (and others such as banga, bangla, bangadesh) were used in literary creations even before 1947, and that denoted Bengal. This was in poems etc, but hardly in academia. The academia (published reports, texts etc) used Bengal. --Dwaipayan (talk) 18:36, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
Agree with User:Dwaipayanc. I also noted that Satyajit Ray used the term Bangladesh as late as 1960s to refer to perhaps the whole of Bengal. However, after the birth of Bangladesh, Bengali literature from West Bengal do longer use Bangladesh to refer to the whole of Bengal. BengaliHindu (talk) 18:58, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

I guess we need to make sure we don't mix ethnicity and nationality (citizenship is probably a better word). Iqbal was an Indian (or British Indian), a Punjabi, and an inspiration for Pakistan. Sen was an Indian (or British Indian), a Bengali and a Poet. Suhrawardy was a Pakistani and a Bengali. Michael Madhusudan Dutt was an Indian and a Bengali and a Poet. Perhaps a category like "People born in what is now Bangladesh" - not sure how to frame it - would take care of linking a historical person with a modern region? --regentspark (comment) 18:55, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

I suggest User:Kmzayeem to work on the article List of people born in what is now Bangladesh if he is willing to do so, instead of misleading people by category bombing. Solomon7968 (talk) 18:58, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
I support you infact I created a new page List of colonial universities in British India two days back. User:Kmzayeem can you take your time to improve that. Solomon7968 (talk) 19:24, 24 May 2013 (UTC)


I fail to understand the argument repeatedly put forth above. Here is what the argument looks like:

  • Historically, "India" referred to the whole region, so even if someone was from/born/lived/died a place which is not part of Republic of India, they are historically "Indian".
  • Historically, "Bengal" or "Bangladesh" referred to the whole region, but if someone was from/born/lived/died a place what is now "Bangladesh", which is not the entire undivided Bengal, they cannot be historically "Bangladeshi"

The two arguments above are contradictory, yet the same users above are stating both viewpoints. Which one is your *actual* position? --Ragib (talk) 19:57, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Ragib, there is no historical entity known as Bangladesh. The point is that Tagore or Sen would have identified themselves as Indian so it is ok to assign that nationality to them. I'm afraid I don't see a contradiction and I think you're confusing ethnicity with nationality. --regentspark (comment) 20:18, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
With due respect, Regentspark, you really didn't get my point. I wasn't making the above arguments, rather these were two arguments made by Indian wikipedians above. (see User:BengaliHindu's comments etc.). --Ragib (talk) 02:31, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

A Compromise formula

I'm proposing a formula that had worked fine for many years since I had faced this issue as early as 2005. To summarize the formula in general:

  • People who are citizen's of India (i.e., were Indian citizens who are living or died after 1947) -> "X was an Indian Y".
  • People who were born/and-or mostly living in or died in what is now the Republic of India (died prior to 1947) -> "X was an Indian Y") or "X was a z-ethnicity Y from British India/Mughal empire (in what is now India).
  • Bengali People who were born in British India and lived/died in East Pakistan -> "X was a Bengali Y from former East Pakistan (current Bangladesh)"
  • Bengali people who were born in British India and are living/lived in Bangladesh with Bangladeshi citizenship -> "X was a Bangladeshi Y"

With this formula, the following happens:

  • "Tagore was a Bengali poet from British India" (or "Tagore was a Bengali poet from India during British India")
  • "Surya Sen was a Bengali revolutionary from the Chittagong in British India (which is currently part of Bangladesh) (or something suitable that explains everything)

There can be outliers that need to be dealt individually.

The advantage of this formula is that it removes the possibility of confusion. A major confusion in this whole issue arises out of the fact that "India" prior to 1947 is not the same as India post-1947. If you say someone is an "Indian poet" (e.g. Iqbal), that causes multiple confusing points for non-South-Asian readers. Does this mean Iqbal is related to current day India? Or according to some of you above, the historical region known historically as India? I'm not, contrary to what RegentsPark claims above, asking to mark Iqbal as "Pakistani" or Tagore as "Bangladeshi". Rather, I am saying that blindly putting "Indian" tags on everyone in the south asian region pre-1947 is misleading when the current day Indians (post 1947) are also put in the same category. Instead, it will make sense, and be more accurate to say exactly what they were, "Iqbal was a (his ethnicity, pardon my ignorance here) poet from Lahore(?) in British India (currentday Pakistan)". This is accurate, leaves no room for confusion, and doesn't require current day interpretation of what country Iqbal identified with. Thank you all. --Ragib (talk) 02:31, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

No worries Ragib. I misunderstood, it happens. Your detailed explanation makes sense and I think we're on the same page. (Iqbal was a Punjabi.) So, bottom line: pre-1947 deceased people are either British Indian (if their relationship with current day India is unclear or tenuous or transcends any one modern SA nation - Iqbal, Tagore), Indian (if that relationship is clear - Premchand), Indian, Pakistani, Bangladeshi or East Pakistani if they died as citizens of either entity. Looks clear enough to be workable. --regentspark (comment) 02:46, 25 May 2013 (UTC)
Ragib, thanks for the suggestion. As per your suggestion, a person can be described as X is/was a Bangladeshi Y if he/she lives/lived in Bangladesh with a Bangladeshi citizenship, even though he/she might have been born in British India (pre-1947) or East Pakistan (1947-71). By this logic Chandravati cannot be describe as Chandravati was a Bangladeshi poet, because she never lived in Bangladesh with Bangladeshi citizenship. Hence Category:Bangladeshi poets is not applicable for Chandravati. Same logic would apply for Michael Madhusudan Dutt and Nabin Chandra Sen. Please confirm if my understanding is correct. BengaliHindu (talk) 17:46, 25 May 2013 (UTC)
Ragib's proposal makes eminent good sense. Bangladesh is not just an empty identity, it also is a defined land area. Pre-Independence America may not be the USA, but it still remains American. Magna Graecia may be Greek in culutre, but it still remains a part of the Italian identity, though the very name Italy emerged almost a thousand years later. Nothing should stop a person from being both from Bangladesh (a land area) and India (a citizenship or whatever), it applies doubly to people and things that belong to both Bangladesh and India in geographical terms. As for precedence in order, India can have it all as the bigger and older body of identity. Aditya(talk • contribs) 04:19, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

Well, I have a solution, I guess it will work.

1) Those people who were born in undivided India(prior to 1947) but those parts are currently in Bangladesh, and those people who earned their fame as Indian or when died then still partition of India did not happen, will be referred as Indian.

Example- Jagadish Chandra Bose- Born in undivided India long ago before partition, earned fame as Indian.

2) Those people who were born in undivided India,either went to East Pakistan after Partition or where they were born that is right now in Bangladesh and resided there, and earned their fame as Bangladeshi, will be mentioned as Bangladeshi.

Sheikh Mujibar Rahman.

Ovsek (talk) 08:53, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

Was not India still India before her independence?

The country was called British India, because she was under British rule! Here "British" is an adjective. For example Quit India Movement, no one says Quit British India Movement. The country was named India by ancient Greeks from Indus River. I have just mentioned "Quite India Movement". Here is a list of newspaper articles published before 9 August 1942 which show direct and clear use of the word "India"! --Tito Dutta (contact) 03:48, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

Well,your argument has a serious gap.

We know "Quit India Movement" was anti-British movement.

1) we generally know British India as British ruled India and only India as free India from foreign rule.

2) What you said "Quit British India" means( If I explain) "you" are ordered to leave British ruled India, hence India was ruled by British, this "You" then does not represent British.It does not make sense. So it is clear, hence the movement was anti-British,then it was British who were ordered to quit India."Quit India" means I am ordering you to quit India.Whom am i ordering British, because "Quit India" movement was anti-British.

Dont accept British documents,because British-India's government was not representative of Indian people,British Viceroy was nominated by British parliament, and was responsible to British parliament.Ovsek (talk) 08:40, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

This is the moot point, which people needs to understand. Well put forward by Tito! I'm also adding a few points in support of Tito's argument.
  • British India was officially known as Indian Empire and issued passports under that name.
  • Indian Empire was a founding member of the League of Nations and the United Nations under the name India.
  • Indian Empire was a member nation of the the Summer Olympics in 1900, 1920, 1928, 1932 and 1936 under the name India. BengaliHindu (talk) 17:19, 25 May 2013 (UTC)
we had a discussion on this a while back. the term "Indian Empire" was never used officially in India or Britain.--it did appear on the leather cover of passports but not in the inside where the actual text appears. (The legislation about passprots did not mention the covers so it was an unofficial decision by some worker in the printshop), Rjensen (talk) 07:16, 5 June 2013 (UTC)
Very interesting observation. Since India was named by the Greeks, therefore you probably may also propose that nothing was Indian before the Greeks named it India. May be the Aryans never came to India, or the Mohenjodaro was never an Indian town. Say what? Aditya(talk • contribs) 04:10, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

Bangladeshi Indian

Please take a look at the article Bangladeshi Indian. There is a unresolved discussion in the talk page as well. BengaliHindu (talk) 19:12, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

I also think, it is incorrect to call Rabi Thakur (i.e. Rabindranath Tagore) a Bangladeshi Indian. But, that has been solved. Is not it? In addition, I feel, the naming of the article is not the best one. It can be Indian people of Bangladeshi descent or something like that. I am unsure how the list includes Jibanananda Das who died in 1954! --Tito Dutta (contact) 03:31, 25 May 2013 (UTC)
The article is now somewhat better than what it was. However, I feel that the list "Notable Bengali Bangal people living in India whose ancestry lies in present-day Bangladesh" is somewhat out of context and hence confusing. It can best be removed. BengaliHindu (talk) 17:09, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

List of Bengali films 1931—2013

We have some 90 articles (lists) in Wikipedia on "List of Bengali films", for example List of Bengali films of 2013, List of Bengali films of 2012 etc.
Now, all these articles list only Indian Bengali films. So, it is clear the articles have been misnamed. Now, what to do? A request move discussion was taking place at Talk:List_of_Bengali_films_of_2013#Requested_move where two things have been suggested

If you are creating a list of "Bengali language films" and naming the article "List of Bengali films", that MUST contain Bengali language films made in Bangladesh. I don't know about the size of the Indian Bengali language film industry, but according to Cinema of Bangladesh, as of 2004, 100+ Bengali language films are produced in Bangladesh per year. As for List of Bangladeshi films, I don't see why that needs to be merged with this list of Bengali films, that's because it represents films made in Bangladesh regardless of language. (there are indeed a few English language movies made in BD, though just a few). Let's keep 3 lists List of Indian films, List of Bangladeshi films, and list of Bengali language films. --Ragib (talk) 02:39, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

a) Did you mean "List of Indian Bengali films"? b) See a merged Bangladesh India (in alphabetical order) template, this merge can be done similarly, but first we need to prepare content first. 100+ films per year? Wikipedia badly lacks information and articles on Bangladeshi Bengali film. c) Bengali Tollywood is a large industry and Wikipedia articles are more or less up to date, start from the current list: List of Bengali films of 2013 --Tito Dutta (contact) 03:23, 25 May 2013 (UTC)
Wikipedia has Category:Lists of films by country of production and Category:Lists of films by language. I really can't see why the lists for films made in Bangladesh and films made in the Bengali language can't co-exist. Check the categories Category:Lists of British films and Category:Lists of American films. I am pretty sure most of these films are made in English. Aditya(talk • contribs) 03:59, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

Absence of Aryabhatta, and Tansen, Euro Centric bias

We have a meta:List of articles every Wikipedia should have‎. It does not have any mention of Indian scientists and no Indian composers. Interested editors may see the discussion on meta:Talk:List of articles every Wikipedia should have. Solomon7968 (talk) 21:44, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

  • Excellent catch! Will be there, though I am unsure how much I can contribute with my slow internet (I'll get my normal internet speed back on 9th of this month)! --Tito Dutta  (talk • contributions • email) 06:50, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

Change

I recently saw some articles written systematically biased in favor of British.

Those are-

Home_front_during_World_War_II#British_India-All I wanted to say India was a colony was Britain,Britain declared war without consulting with Indian leaders.One said it was vandalism.

Indian_Army#World_Wars,here is a picture saying Sikh soldier,may I ask are Sikhs separate from Indians?Are only Hindus Indians?Please take action.

Here should be section because large element of Indian army also played critical role in Freedom movement.

India_in_World_War_II here the writer wants to prove Netaji was collaborator of Axis,some what may be truth,but not completely.As well as Quit India Movement is missing.

As well as Pakistanis always try to ignore the fact that Pakistan was created following partition of India.In many articles no mention that this present Pakistani area was part of India previously.They say "independence' and creation are synonyms,are they?

In short British want to prove India was supportive with Britain,and try to ignore Indian opposition to British as much as possible.

They are also many more.Ovsek (talk) 05:08, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

In Indian_Army#World_Wars, the picture mention "15th Sikh Regiment", which is the name of regiment and is not a sikh/hindu/indian issue. 2nd, you must have failed to notice the "Gentlemen of India" also mentioned in the same caption.--Vigyanitalkਯੋਗਦਾਨ 05:17, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

Off course the soldier is from Sikh regiment,but the problem is when other Indian soldiers are mentioned as Indians,not by their regiment.Why this exceptions for Sikhs?Ovsek (talk) 05:33, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

You guys wont change,ok sorry.Ovsek (talk) 05:33, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

unfortunately Ovsek wants Wikipedia to reflect his personal POV views, and if he does not something that happened in the past he will try to "fix" it to his liking despite the objections of other editors. He does not cite RS to support his claims. For example he wants the section on India in WW2 in the Homefront article to be called "British India" instead of "India." Yes "India" is the name used then and now by RS. He is unaware that "British India" is actually the term for the part of India controlled at the time directly by the British (while the rest of India was controlled by Indian princes). Rjensen (talk) 06:04, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

Hello,dear,I know in British period India was divided between 2 parts,directly British controlled India,Princely states.How ever British was in absolute control of India.India had no self identity.British declared war against Germany with out consulting with Indian leaders?India was ruled by British people(Viceroy) nominated by British parliament.Can you please tell me why this?It is very easy to say any thing but hard to prove.If it was India then why India achieved independence in 1947?Why Britain declared war on Germany with out consulting with Indian leaders resulting in resignation of Congress province government??Why Indian freedom movement happened and it's long history happened???

Fact is India was India but hence India was controlled by Britain,so it is better to say British India.These are not my personal views.Ovsek (talk) 06:37, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

Factually incorrect that "divided between 2 parts". There were French India, Portuguese India... Solomon7968 (talk) 06:42, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

Neither French India or Portugese India played important role,as it was played by British India.With exception of tiny exclaves of them,they had no importance in mainland India.World know India is being ruled by British.Mainland India decided their fate,that's why when mainland India got freedom,India tried to get them back.Ovsek (talk) 06:49, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

In the British system then (and now) only the king declares war so in 1939 the Parliament in London did NOT vote on it. Likewise the Viceroy had no power to declare war. Rjensen (talk) 09:15, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

Off course,but King cant do anything without consulting with ministers.In case of India,King declared war without consulting with Indians.Ovsek (talk) 03:52, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

I agree that these edits are pointy and not constructive. Sikh is a specific identity and the article is on the Indian Army so I don't see the problem there at all. The nation of India supported the war while the section clearly mentions the differences between the views of the INC and the Muslim league. Looking over Ovsek's last few contributions, they all appear to be nit picky and pointy ones (eg. [1]) and labeling editors as 'imperialist' is definitely an NPA violation [2]. Ovsek, if you want to keep editing here you need to straighten up a bit. Follow titodutta's suggestions, they are wise ones. --regentspark (comment) 10:52, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

Ok,sirs,sorry If I was offensive-I am giving another images describing Indian Sikh soldier issue,these 2 pictures are from Indian army in WW2 article-

Indian_Army_during_World_War_II#North_Africa here in this picture soldiers are off course Sikh and are from Sikh Regiment.Here they are mentioned as "Sikh Soldiers",I dont know how they are mentioned as Sikh,they wear turban and by religion they are Sikh in this sense or they are from Sikh Regiment in this sense?

Indian_Army_during_World_War_II#Hong_Kong here you can find another section of Indian soldiers,by religion they are definitely Hindu,according to order of battle Battle_of_Hong_Kong#Order_of_battle they are Rajput soldiers and they are Hindu,by religion.In Battle of Hong Kong,2 Indian groups participated Sikhs and Rajput troops,these soldiers cant be Sikh.

It can be argued off course soldiers are mentioned by their regiment,then you can see when Sikh soldiers are mentioned according to their regiment as they belong to Sikh regiment,then these Rajput soldiers are not mentioned as Rajput soldiers(They belong to Rajput Regiment),instead it was said Indian soldiers.

So it is clear Soldiers are not mentioned by their regiment but by their religion.

Now Rajput soldier's religion is Hindu and Sikh soldiers are Sikh.

Problem is when we call Rajput soldiers as Indians,then why we dont mention Sikhs as Indians? Are they not Indian?If we have to mention soldiers by their religion,then Hindu Indian soldiers should be said Hindu soldiers,and Sikhs as Sikh soldiers,we dont do it,when we mention Hindus then we call them Indian,but when we mention Sikhs then why should we omit their nationality?If we have to mention through their regiment then say these soldiers from their respective regiments in all cases.

I hope you understand,English is not native language.And also Indian Sikhs as only Sikh indirectly fuels in Khalistan Movement.

Sikh is religion,like Islam.An Iraqi solder is also Muslim,like Iranian Soldiers,should we call them Muslim soldiers instead of saying Iraqi or Iranian?WW2 was not religious war like Crusade that you can say them Muslim soldiers or Christian soldiers.Ovsek (talk) 13:55, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

Sirs,I by no mean do vandalism-I added During WW2,hence Britain declared war on behalf of India without consulting with Indian leaders,it led to their resignation-Indian_Provincial_Elections,_1937#Resignation_of_Congress_Ministries it is one of the source.

I add this type of statements in Pakistan articles(mainly of Military and political back ground) such as Following Partition of India,India was divided between 2 new countries India and Pakistan,Pakistanis dont mention it,When I do(cause it is fact,so it should be mentioned)they say it is un-constructive?

I added "Quit India Movement" in "India during WW2" article,cause it happened,they say un constructive?!As well they randomly try to prove Indian revolutionary leaders were bad,collaborator of enemy,ignoring their argument.Netaji said Britain was acting like hypocrite because they were saying to fight for human rights,but it was British who were violating Indian's human right in India itself.no mention of it here.India_in_World_War_II

But Netaji said this- "He criticized the British during World War II, saying that while Britain was allegedly fighting for the freedom of the European nations under Nazi control, it would not grant independence to its own colonies, including India." Subhas_Chandra_Bose's_political_views

2001_Indian%E2%80%93Bangladeshi_border_conflict here in this,I found the the link previously provided(You can see in History) about strength,did not work.So I changed it to "unkown" as i saw in many war article's,I was opposed,the link provided about causality says Indian causality was 15,not 16,so I changed this,I was opposed,finally an user from Pakistan,agreed with me about the the causality and dead link,these were changed.That's what I do.Ovsek (talk) 14:26, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

I'd also suggest not to make long postings. We are all volunteers here and generally lack the time to read and interpret long messages. You might want to take each point to the talk page of the relevant articles and (briefly!) make your point there. For example, you could say "Shouldn't the image be titled 'Indian soldier' since the article is about the Indian army in WWII?" Then wait and see what others say and where consensus lands. --regentspark (comment) 21:18, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

I did it in the " Indian Army in WW2" article's talk page's image section,still they dont agree.Ovsek (talk) 03:52, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

In addition,they just only revert,without discussing it in Talk page.Ovsek (talk) 04:06, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

I looked at that discussion Ovsek (here) and I don't see a problem with the discussion. At least one editor agrees with you. And the discussion is ongoing so it is not correct to say that they only revert without discussing it. Generally, you can expect that your changes will not be made without consensus so just go on discussing it there. Few things happen quickly on Wikipedia. --regentspark (comment) 13:49, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

Ok, sorry, then what about the topics?Ovsek (talk) 06:42, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

INCOTM for July

INCOTM is restarting and you are welcome to nominate articles for collaborative improvement during July 2013. If you would like to receive notices on your own talk page regarding INCOTM then please add your name to the list at Wikipedia:INCOTM/Members. - Sitush (talk) 12:30, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

The yellow religion boxes

I see a lot of these showing up in articles (example: Visakhapatnam#Language, but they are unsourced. This concerns me. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 10:13, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

  • Welcome back to WikiProject India noticeboard. (In my opinion) remove unsourced sensitive/important content! --Tito Dutta  (talk • contributions • email) 21:56, 7 June 2013 (UTC)
    • Thank you. Yes, sensitive and important is darn right. Religious distribution for populated places is sort of like a BLP for geography', if you know what I mean. Someone may be adding them en masse. I'll try to track him down and see where these figures are coming from. Cheers, Anna Frodesiak (talk) 22:47, 7 June 2013 (UTC)
I think this is something we can all handle. We just sort it out here and implement it.
Here are some plans for this religion box matter:
  • A - We could remove the religion boxes, which may prompt others to restore them with a source.
  • B - We could citation needed tag them on sight.
  • C - We could find a single, good source for lots of places all over the country like some india.gov.in/‎ site, spot check a few, and if need be, form a team to list and update articles with these religion boxes.
Thoughts? Anna Frodesiak (talk) 23:10, 7 June 2013 (UTC)
  • Good thoughts. I have already removed the religion box from the article you mentioned! Using article blamer (that "edit history" search tool) we can track the editors! If you want to restart that "Telugu script RM post", we can try starting that once again! --Tito Dutta  (talk • contributions • email) 23:17, 7 June 2013 (UTC)
Fine by me, but maybe we should see what others think. The figures may be accurate but just need a source, so Plan C may be best.
By "Telugu script RM post" do you mean the addition of Telugu script to the infoboxes? If so, I don't think there was a strong leaning one way or the other. Plus, that's not very controversial, so it's not a big deal to me. If you want to raise that issue again, please feel free. Cheers :), Anna Frodesiak (talk) 23:43, 7 June 2013 (UTC)
Unsourced data should be removed immediately imo. If the data is sourced, then it is worth discussing whether it adds value to an article or not. --regentspark (comment) 00:05, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

I found http://censusindia.gov.in/Census_And_You/religion.aspx and at the bottom it shows some province breakdown. But where are the tables??? Anna Frodesiak (talk) 23:49, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

Politician categories

Should all the Lok Sabha member categories - Category:7th Lok Sabha members etc - be subcategories of Category:Indian politicians? I don't mind sorting it all out if there is agreement. - Sitush (talk) 10:15, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

That makes sense! --Tito Dutta  (talk • contributions • email) 10:36, 5 June 2013 (UTC)
Category:Members of the Lok Sabha shouldn't really contain any names - it should just be a list of subcategories for each of the ordinal Lok Sabha categories (1st, 2nd, 3rd etc). - Sitush (talk) 11:13, 5 June 2013 (UTC)
  • I see no objections above - something of a rarity given that I proposed the thing! - and so I'll probably make a start on it soon. - Sitush (talk) 20:43, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

Ram Thakur

Ram Thakur (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) The article is in hopelessly irreparable condition! I started from this version. Will WP:TNT or reducing to stub help? --Tito Dutta  (talk • contributions • email) 11:30, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

Spelling in English of Son Beel

Hello all,
The article started off as "Son Bill", then mentioned an alternative spelling as "Shon Bill"

The newspaper refs I've looked up predominantly favour "Son Beel".
I'm confused! --Shirt58 (talk) 11:02, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

  • Welcome to WikiProject India noticeboard! Actually this is an issue of "transliteration", As far I can understand the word is "সোন বিল"/"सोन बिल" (Bengali/Hindi) where the meaning of "Son" might be gold and the meaning of "beel" is "water land" (common Indian word). Now transliteration of बिल/বিল is correctly done. "Bill" might be confusing! In addition I have found out a Government document of the state, which might be helpful! --Tito Dutta  (talk • contributions • email) 11:12, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

Saran and Ballia districts

Can anyone help me figure out the pre-1937 provinces or whatever that Saran district (Bihar) and Ballia district (UP) came under? Our articles on those two places are pretty abysmal but right now I'm trying to fix another issue and it would be helpful to know what administrative regions they came under around 1902. With reliable sources, of course ;) - Sitush (talk) 20:40, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

Here is a link on Ballia town and Ballia district of Encyclopedia Britanica 1911 Ballia and a link which gives details about Saran district [3] and another link to a google book The Limited Raj: Agrarian Relations in Colonial India, Saran District, 1793-1920 By Anand A. Yang - :) - Jethwarp (talk) 04:25, 11 June 2013 (UTC)
Thanks, although I'm still confused! It seems that Ballia was a part of the United Provinces ca. 1911 but the info for Saran appears to be much more recent. The 1911 EB entry for Saran refers to a place in Bengal, which is almost certainly not the district I am concerned about.

The problem that I have is that various modern sources put a 1902 birthplace as being a village in Ballia, Uttar Pradesh and a similarly-named village in Saran, Bihar. I suspect they are the same place. I've even forgotten the article subject right now but it will come back to me before the day is done. - Sitush (talk) 09:43, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

The 1911 EB entry for Saran refers to a place in Bengal is correct - for province of Bihar & Orissa were not formed till 1912. So the Saran before 1912 that is till 1911 was part of Bengal Presidency after which it became part of Bihar. - Jethwarp (talk) 16:02, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

RM at Udaipur Airport

Jethwarp (talk) 08:24, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

Women's health in India needs a little help at GA

Article passed GA. Where's the party tonight? --Tito☸Dutta 18:49, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Hello all, I'm the GA reviewer for this article. It seems that the nom who was on a WAP project has long gone. The article is nearly ready but could do with a better lead section. I've suggested some possible images you might like to include, also. Be glad if you could lend a hand... Chiswick Chap (talk) 18:48, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Child's play at Godhra, Gujarat, riot related articles

Editors blocked. No more discussion required at this moment. --Tito☸Dutta 18:47, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

See this version. All editors are reporting against each other. User Kmzayeem has been reported twice too. This is neither disruption, nor vandalism. This is immature behaviour. Suggested remedies: 1) Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents 2) Wikipedia:Requests for comment/User conduct 3) NPOV noticeboard 4) Edit warring noticeboard (already tried) --Tito Dutta  (talk • contributions • email) 19:26, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

  • I just blocked 3 editors for this lameness. I'm happy to dish out more vacations for editing if people can't play nice. Thanks. Spartaz Humbug! 19:33, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
I guess, Wikipedia:Requests for comment/User conduct is preferable.--Zayeem (talk) 19:41, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
👍 Like §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 20:01, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
Why good for everyone?  Dislike Faizan 10:47, 10 June 2013 (UTC)
Let's stop this now: grave-dancing is unhelpful. - Sitush (talk) 20:37, 10 June 2013 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

RM at Mahatma Gandhi

Mr T(Talk?) (New thread?) 17:18, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

  • Welcome back to WikiProject India noticeboard. You can start an RFC too. --TitoↂDutta 20:02, 12 June 2013 (UTC)
Support: British renamed Mumbai to Bombay and until few years ago 'Bombay' was common name but after changing back to Mumbai, Mumbai has become common now. Like British, Congress has renamed Mohandas Gandhi to Mahatma Gandhi and forced people to accept it. We need to correct politically sponsered name as per WP:NPOV.

(can't post this to article talkpage due to edit box limit) neo (talk) 15:59, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

Karisma Kapoor

Can someone look at Talk:Karisma Kapoor#Sunjay Kapur or Kapoor? and helps us decides her husband's name. This User:‎Isaacsirup is editing based upon his own ideas despite strong reliable sources presented. The sources he cite having clearly proven unreliable. But probably he doesn't understand or have taken it personally or just simply trolling.--Vigyanitalkਯੋਗਦਾਨ 16:27, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi.. I was not aware of the essay. I have now read it. I had thought that google hits is rather a supportive statement. However I might not have engaged myself much, if it was only google hits. My main reason to argue was his twitter, linkedin and his company profile.--Vigyanitalkਯੋਗਦਾਨ 16:49, 14 June 2013 (UTC)
  • By providing official website and Twitter profile, you made your argument too strong. If he is the person then we can follow that spelling. --Tito☸Dutta 16:52, 14 June 2013 (UTC)
I also went by his official names and restored last version by you but I don't see that you have made any changes. neo (talk) 16:55, 14 June 2013 (UTC)
I didn't indent to do an edit war. I reverted once, then started a discussion. 2nd revert was, once could verify that twitter account indeed belong to Sunjay Kapur by logging into my own twitter account. After that the other editor still pressed his own views and kept on reverting himself. In fact before coming here also, I gave the other user a lot of time to come up with some sources.--Vigyanitalkਯੋਗਦਾਨ 17:01, 14 June 2013 (UTC)
Or if I am missing, do you mean something else by changes? or you mean that I have not edited that article before?--Vigyanitalkਯੋਗਦਾਨ 17:02, 14 June 2013 (UTC)
I thought you have changed name from 'sanjay kapoor' to 'sunjay kapur' but even after restoring your version I saw 'sanjay kapoor'. neo (talk) 17:12, 14 June 2013 (UTC)
Oh.. this thing has taken lot of time today. Now I see the problem. The Sanjay Kapoor is mentioned at 2-3 places and I only changed at one. Plus you reverted to 2nd last version of mine, not the last. Anyhow no worry, I will fix it now.--Vigyanitalkਯੋਗਦਾਨ 17:16, 14 June 2013 (UTC)
Someone change Karishma Kapoor's name to "Karishma Kapur" per timesofindia--Isaacsirup (talk) 19:18, 14 June 2013 (UTC)
  • To clarify that one, you have referred a ToI article, here is another one where they have used two different spelling of a person's name in the same article (see article body and image caption). So, a single news article proves nothing. We need to see that spelling is "consistently" being used by that newspaper and other newspapers as well. Need help to find Indian English Newspaper articles quickly? Try this tool --Tito☸Dutta 19:24, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

Note: The user (Isaacsirup) is being pretty disrupting even on Dil Se.. for crediting Jiah Khan Please opine on Talk:Dil Se.. as if possible. - Vivvt (Talk) 19:28, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

Dual articles

Can anyone check if the articles Casino Goa and Casino Royale Goa are same or not. Solomon7968 19:37, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

Online religious conversion of ancient Indian Kings

Rahuljain2307 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) The user has changed religion of Bimbisara, Chandragupta Maurya and Chanakya to Jainism. I have removed his edit on Bimbisara, so far he has not reverted it. Chandragupta Maurya is still showing religion as Jain. I can't edit that article due to edit box limit. But he has resorted to edit war on Chanakya and is fighting over it at article talkpage, reliable sources noticeboard and dispute resolution noticeboard. If we do not correct him, these kings will be converted to Jainism and he may go on converting more Indian kings. neo (talk) 15:27, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

  • I noticed the thread at ANI. Very irritating. --Tito☸Dutta 16:45, 14 June 2013 (UTC)
And extremely irritating for me also when users and admins don't comment at all. For every irritation there is equal and opposite irritation. Irrr... neo (talk) 17:05, 14 June 2013 (UTC)
  • I'll request Bwilkins's opinion. I can not understand what he meant by Oh look. You're back. Again. --Tito☸Dutta 17:17, 14 June 2013 (UTC)
  • I removed the religion of Chandragupta Maurya but he reverted my edit giving two book references. Both of the books seems authentic. Solomon7968 17:20, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

I don't see the big deal. Looks like a straightforward sourcing issue. If sources use one religion, use that. If sources disagree, use both or none. --regentspark (comment) 17:34, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

Exactly as RegentsPark says. Content disputes don't belong on ANI, they belong on DRN. 3RR belongs on its own noticeboard. I've gotten rather sick of someone bringing issues to the wrong board again and again (✉→BWilkins←✎) 17:55, 14 June 2013 (UTC)
  • This is weird. ANI is suggesting DRN. And the DRN thread is being closed because ANI is pending. I'll request DRN closer's comment too. --Tito☸Dutta 18:05, 14 June 2013 (UTC)
    Not weird tito. That's what happens when the same question is posted in multiple places - never a good idea! :) --regentspark (comment) 18:27, 14 June 2013 (UTC)
    I've reopened the DRN listing since it looks pretty snowy that the ANI listing is just going to bounce it back to DRN. I am, however, going to put the DRN listing on hold until that happens. Best regards, TransporterMan (TALK) 18:33, 14 June 2013 (UTC)
  • (edit conflict)As it has been clarified that this is a DRN issue, we can close the ANI thread and restart the DRN one. --Tito☸Dutta 18:35, 14 June 2013 (UTC)
  • Regarding the dispute of Chanakya, I have provided three book sources to support my claim[4]. Last time User:Neo. used four web-blogs as reference [5] which I demonstrated to be unreliable[6]. The five websites he is using now does not even support his opinion, apart from being of dubious reliability. I have already stated my views at the talk page. Even WP:DRN is an overkill according to me, however as I might be wrong I am using it to solve the issue. Rahul Jain (talk) 18:47, 14 June 2013 (UTC)
  • I forgot to mention that this is User:Neo.'s fourth complaint in WP:ANI in succession despite being repeatedly told that ANI is not the place for content disputes. Rahul Jain (talk) 19:09, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

Section break

Section break per this request --Tito☸Dutta 19:27, 14 June 2013 (UTC)
@Rahuljain2307 These [7][8][9] looks 3 threads but anyone can see they are continuation of 1 thread because of my edit box limit. Why are you saying '3 complaints' only because of section breaks? And they are specific to Chanakya. this second complaint is about all your history. You also tried to fool 3O by reporting this rather incomplete and wrong thread on Chanakya talkpage. I have posted detailed reply in this thread on same page but you ignored it. neo (talk) 20:17, 14 June 2013 (UTC)
@regentspark I had suggested, and I still suggest, to leave religion field blank. Later in some section of article we can state both religion arguments with sources. But the user keep inserting Jain religion. And he has inserted it 12 times despite reverts by 5 users. neo (talk) 10:23, 15 June 2013 (UTC)
The user has inserted Jain religion in Chandragupta Maurya and is not even trying to discuss contradictory sources and my proposal on talkpage. He keep reverting to insert his religion. What should user do in such situation when no admin or user is coming forward to resolve dispute? Admins and other users are forcing only one solution for me, i.e 3RR and get blocked. neo (talk) 18:14, 15 June 2013 (UTC)
  • Admins and other users are forcing only one solution for me, i.e 3RR and get blocked.
User:TransporterMan, can you remove the "hold" notice from DRN?
Neo, show me two high standard reliable sources where it is clearly told Chanakya was a Hindu, I'll handle the issue. Remember, it should be clearly told in those sources. --Tito☸Dutta 18:22, 15 June 2013 (UTC)
A quick look suggest opposite is true. The references of Rahul Jain does not seem dubious at least for Chandragupta Maurya. Solomon7968 18:32, 15 June 2013 (UTC)
Pls see Ancestry of Chandragupta Maurya and talkpage. Existing sources are contradictory but user refuses to acknowledge. Claiming that Kshatriyas and Brahmins are Jain is weird. In other words, he is claiming that as I am Kshatriya hence I am also Jain. What to argue? neo (talk) 20:35, 15 June 2013 (UTC)
AFAIK, Chandragupta Maurya became a Jain in the later part of his life, I have not read anything like that about Chanakya, I have read that he was a brahmin. We can find a lot of sources which says that he was a Brahmin. -sarvajna (talk) 03:36, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
For the moment Rahuljain2307 has removed DRN post and has posted 'retired' message on his userpage. neo (talk) 07:59, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

Symbol of Indian National Congress

One editor has removed the Indian National Congress symbol from the article of same name, with an edit summary that there is "no authentic confirmation". Before removing such well known and widely accepted symbol, consensus be reached by other editors and I have reinstated the symbol. The symbol (a hand inside tricolour) is widely accepted in India as the symbol of Indian National Congress and there is remote scope for any dispute regarding the authenticity of the symbol. The symbol is used in more than 100 articles of wikipedia, shown as a symbol of Indian National Congress. If any editor disputes the authenticity of the symbol and using it in 'Indian National Congress' article, then I propose, a thorough discussion should be done before removing the symbol from the article. Rayabhari (talk) 17:03, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

  • It is ok to create your own image provided that it is an accurate reflection of the real thing. Isn't it? - Sitush (talk) 20:44, 16 June 2013 (UTC)
  • So the dispute is on whether the hand should be shown fat or slim. Right? §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 06:31, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
  • I've no idea really but I rather suspect that is not the locus. - Sitush (talk) 06:36, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
The revision history of the file shows those two differences, one using a fat bulging hand added maybe to represent the current hands of INC politicians who no longer fast as much as the old guys used to do.
Jokes apart, i think the current version matches well with the one present at http://www.aicc.org.in/ in a better manner than the bulged one. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 06:54, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
Hehe. Not being very good with image-related stuff, is there some prohibition that prevents us from uploading the logo used on the AICC website? I have a vague memory that logos can be ok under FUR or something similar. - Sitush (talk) 07:03, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
You can copy the logo and claim that its geometrically a simple drawing and thus not copyrightable and then fight over it if someone raises a deletion request. Or else we can add it under a fair-use rationale here. But that would be for limited article. (Current file on Commons is being used by many articles throughout all wikis.) Or we can simply compromise with the current image which some user claims that he has created. Or if we really are very peculiar about all details we can request Graphic lab to mend it. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 07:27, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for the info. What if the logo has been in use for > 60 years? Is it not out of copyright in India then? - Sitush (talk) 07:29, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
Hmmm! I dont know about that. Means will be able to use the much hyped Apple logo freely after few more years? Maybe corporate symbols are allowed to renew copyrights. Or else many duplicates can legally start using their symbol. Of course they would still be sued for such misrepresentation. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 08:03, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
<So the dispute is on whether the hand should be shown fat or slim. Right?> The dispute is not about the fatness of the hand, but user:AcorruptionfreeIndia has deleted the image with a reason that "no authentic confirmation". I reinstated the image in INC article and raised the concern here, for discussion, because the image is used in more than 100 articles and in my opinion, it is a fairly accepted symbol in India. Rayabhari (talk) 07:44, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
He should propose alternative image if he doesnt like this one. We run by consensus here rather than whats right or wrong. If majority say that a lotus should be put in that hand, we will do that!!! §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 08:03, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
I'm afraid the idea of providing alternatives has been a problem for the user in question almost from their first contribution to Wikipedia. There is a difference between WP:BOLD and WP:RECKLESS ;) - Sitush (talk) 08:12, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
I forgot to use the joke font. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 08:36, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

Dil Se

I would appreciate if some people weight-in with their views here. Thank you and regards--Isaacsirup (talk) 00:23, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

Note both Vivvit and Isaacsirup are blocked for 24 hours for edit warring. Anyone interested in deciding weather to credit Jiah Khan for Dil se or not?--Vigyanitalkਯੋਗਦਾਨ 01:55, 15 June 2013 (UTC)
  • Vivvt blocked? Unbelievable. --Tito☸Dutta 07:54, 15 June 2013 (UTC)
  • I am unblocked also. Yeahh!!--Isaacsirup (talk) 23:05, 15 June 2013 (UTC)
  • Vivvt, can you name few recently indef blocked editors who were working in Hindi film articles? --Tito☸Dutta 23:45, 15 June 2013 (UTC)
  • Not that I know immediately. Need to recollect. Sitush or Dharma may know. - Vivvt (Talk) 02:30, 16 June 2013 (UTC)
I don't have guesses as of now. Maybe User:Vensatry can help. He recently struggled with few socks on Telugu film articles. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 15:36, 16 June 2013 (UTC)
I've no idea, either. - Sitush (talk) 20:43, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

If Jiah Khan's name doesnt appear in the movie Dil se anymore, it would be appropriate to also update the 'career' section of Jiah Khan which states "Khan first appeared in 1998 as a child artist in Mani Ratnam's Dil Se.. ..." Thanks! - Ninney (talk) 16:20, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

 Done §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 06:48, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

Confusion

Confusion regarding Foundation day(or Formal launch) of AAP party . Read [10].I've started a discussion Talk page here.I would appreciate your advise/comment/Help to sort this out.regards TY of Walk 09:15, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

Revision of Indic scripts in lead

WikiProject India has her own consensus which was attained recently. It is requested to follow that consensus and not to add Indic scripts in lead (and infobox). Of course, that consensus may change someday. Only time will tell. --Tito☸Dutta 11:02, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

It seems that the trend in Wikipedia is to include both the native name in the native language and IPA rather than only IPA. We should consider changing WP:INDICSCRIPT policy. Jujhar.pannu (talk) 20:36, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

No it isn't. It is just iull-informed people such as you who keep doing it, eg: at Bhagat Singh. I'm sure that I've told you before and we have only recently had a discussion here about it. Let's not start again with this nonsense, please. - Sitush (talk) 20:42, 16 June 2013 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Indian Hindi television hoax information

Related discussions

Wikipedia_talk:Noticeboard_for_India-related_topics/Archive_50#TV_serial_related_articles

We had a discussion earlier. Multiple articles have been semi-protected too (see this CoIN thread). Now, someone has suspected one article fake/false information. I doubt many other Indian Hindi television articles may be affected too and I suggest to remove unsourced Awards from the articles. --Tito☸Dutta 10:44, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

I think, this seems to be larger issue, most Indian television articles, especially popular TV series articles, are poorly sourced and unwatched, so open to hoaxes and paid editing as someone had previously suggested. Perhaps, we should start watching them, I have kept a few under my watch, so that at least they do not become TV forums or face vandalism, like citation deletion etc. Someone from WikiProject Indian television, be also involved. --Ekabhishektalk 11:05, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
  • I would suggest you both to stay away from it unless you have a practical proposal to maintain the articles in clean state. I was quite deep in it for a period and had cleaned many article. They have simply gotten back to their miserable shapes again. Locking the article doesn't help. There are many auto-confirmed editors/IPs. Also the issues are spread over biographies. Example, Aishwarya Sakhuja has been locked few times in early 2013 as some IP, probably fan, kept removing the multi-sourced statements about her romantic relationships. The sentence remains removed in the current version. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 11:29, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

AfD of Jain Diwali article Deva Devali

User:Rahuljain2307 nominated this article at AfD and currently arguments, counter-arguments are going on this AfD page. Article name is wrong but it can be corrected. I think article should not be deleted only because it lacks contents or sourced contents. Deleting article about Jain Diwali is like deleting Hindu Diwali article. Jains have their own faith about origin and celebration of Diwali.[11] Article subject is clearly notable and encyclopedic. Article needs improvement, not deletion. neo (talk) 11:43, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

In addition, the nominator of this AfD has announced his retirement, so he has gone and has no further connection with the AfD or the article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Rahuljain2307. --Zananiri (talk) 16:18, 17 June 2013 (UTC)


I hope some experienced editors join Talk:Deva Devali and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Deva Devali - some of the editors have agreed (on their personal talk page) that they have erred in creating the article - and are trying to push thru their mistakes - I did not see they have raised issue here also - it just came to my notice today morning. Thanks. Jethwarp (talk) 02:39, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

Template:Indian random quote

New template: Template:Indian random quote. --Tito☸Dutta 11:32, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject India/Indian cuisine personal user awards

I have started preparing this page. Can someone tell me the available Indian food PUA? There is Rasgulla and Hyderabadi Haleem, but I do not know the templates. Do we have templates for Idli Dosa? --Tito☸Dutta 17:38, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

Vada Pav neo (talk) 17:58, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
  • PUA template code? --Tito☸Dutta 18:22, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
Hyderabadi Haleem template found in your archives [12]
Yummy ! Enjoy !! - Ninney (talk) 19:11, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
Ya, that was subst-ed. I was looking for original code. In addition, other Indian cuisine codes too. --Tito☸Dutta 19:45, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
can we get one for Gud & Saunf (Jaggery&Fennal) and barfi--Vigyanitalkਯੋਗਦਾਨ 22:49, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

Namaste, you are invited to visit the Kitchen of WikiProject India where you'll find many delicious Indian cuisines to have yourself or to share with others. Thank you. Tito☸Dutta 01:00, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

Diwali in Gujarat

One of the editors User:Moonraker12 has, who is also involved in discussons on Deva Devali - has deleted whole rfeferenced Hindu view of Dev Diwali on Diwali in Gujarat while there are no reliable source ee google book result [13], [14] almost zero results not a single book mentions it as a major festival of Jains.. The only source is a website, which do not accept as RS - [15] - becoz all other sources say (see google search) [16] Mahavira Swami attained nirvana on Diwali day.

I may be wrong, so I am bringing it to notice here if some experienced editors can join to arrive at a consensus there. Thanks Jethwarp (talk) 05:05, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

BLP vandalism: Rahul Gandhi and Pappu

Today is his birthday. Edits are coming from twitter as some politicians has tweeted this page. I have already reverted 3 times. Attention of other users is needed. neo (talk) 10:22, 19 June 2013 (UTC)]

very difficult to keep it clean. I have request the page protection.--Vigyanitalkਯੋਗਦਾਨ 11:00, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
Yes, I am seeing that. This page is tweeted hundreds of times and IPs just want to restore same content again and again. neo (talk) 11:10, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
protected now.--Vigyanitalkਯੋਗਦਾਨ 11:19, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
Thanks. Many people on twitter will curse now as their tweets are wasted. :-) neo (talk) 11:30, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
:).. I am no admin :p, thanks to regentspark --Vigyanitalkਯੋਗਦਾਨ 11:33, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

Addition of Pappu in Rahul Gandhi

Neo, I noticed that you yourself added Pappu to article Rahul Gandhi as his nickname, today. I think it should be removed. It is defamatory and is only used by a handful of people, which doesn't make it his nickname. Second, since you yourself added it to Rahul Gandhi, I want to know why you then reverted it in article Pappu and brought it here.--Vigyanitalkਯੋਗਦਾਨ 14:02, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

It is used commonly by his political opponents and it is covered widely in media. It deserve mention. But it is not his nickname commonly accepted by ALL so don't deserve mention in Pappu. There is difference between criticism and unsourced defamation. So I reverted on Pappu and mentioned criticism in Rahul Gandhi. Now if most of the users think that it does not deserve mention then you can remove it. But controversy/criticism part should be there as it is there in Narendra Modi. neo (talk) 14:42, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
It is only in reference to the beehive speech that he was called Pappu, in the 2nd reference you provided it is Modi:Rahul::Feku:Pappu. So I think use of Pappu is not widespread. Going by that trend, Modi has been given lots of weird nicknames by Congress.--Vigyanitalkਯੋਗਦਾਨ 14:50, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
'Yamraj' is not used by Congress widely for Modi but still it is included in the article. Compared to it 'Pappu' is being used on social media far widely and for many months now. neo (talk) 15:06, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
hmm.. maybe from the point of view of criticism it is okay.--Vigyanitalkਯੋਗਦਾਨ 15:16, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
  • Can you tell me if this was a legitimate edit, I reverted because it was unsourced. --Tito☸Dutta 16:16, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
I don't think it is legitimate edit. 'Pappu' is not common name of Rahul Gandhi just like 'Yamraj' is not common name of Narendra Modi. It is criticism by their opponents. neo (talk) 16:26, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
Quite why this issue has been discussed more here than at Talk:Rahul Gandhi is beyond me. Please can people weigh-in there rather than here. - Sitush (talk) 10:27, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

MOS for dealing with Indian style (?) initials for names?

I very frequently see in Indian articles the writing of initials for names all run together, such as VVK Valath, while in American (and I believe British) English it would be V. V. K. Valath.

Is there a clear policy somewhere as to whether we "standardise" all names to be "Capital letter, period, space" or run them directly together? Is this a specific and formally accepted style which should be universally/generally applied to all articles written in Indian English, or all articles about Indian people whose fame is based within India (as opposed to, say, Americans or British people of Indian heritage)?

To one side, I wouldn't want to be messing with what may be a standard convention in one standardised regional dialect of English, but to the other there is some disruption in having a relatively unique name-initialing style for one region of the world. Thoughts? MatthewVanitas (talk) 21:59, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

I see there's a proposed policy, but not fully adopted: Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Indic). MatthewVanitas (talk) 22:02, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
I see from a quick look at some major Indian newspapers that they seem to use the conventional and correct usage, not the 'VVK Valath'. I think the questioned usage should just be treated as poor punctuation (and / or grammar). This goes together with the omission of spaces after commas and fullstops. Imc (talk) 07:10, 20 June 2013 (UTC)
Some past discussion in other MOS pages had some argument that Southern Indian names have a structure very different from Western names, so since they don't have direct equivalences to surname and the like the the "VVK" style is correct in that particular case.
So far as your last point, I actually was curious about that: it is my vague observation that you see a lack of spaces after commas or periods way more in Indian articles than in other articles written by non-fluent speakers. I don't believe I've seen such in formal Indian English so I don't think it's just a dialect difference. Is it a carryover of some convention from one of the non-Latin Indian alphabets, or does it have some validity as a non-Standard but internally-grammatical feature of some Indian English dialects? I realise it could just be called "a common mistake" but it seems to occur with particularly frequency with Indian editors (not here referring to fluent speakers of Indian English but to those for whom it's not a primary langauge), as compared to distinctly different common mistakes seen with, say, Albanian, Japanese, Somali, or what-have-you editors. MatthewVanitas (talk) 16:03, 20 June 2013 (UTC)
Yes, you probably refer to such practices as abbreviating a full name to the initial written characters; e.g. a well known Kannada writer is often referred to as ಅನಕೃ = anakru, with the three successive initial syllables. So this practice may be carried over to English usage when his initials would be ANK. (I have some recollection of a convention among some Tamils for concanating the first characters of one's ancestor's given names to make a complex construction that reflects the generations.) This makes distincly more sense in the syllabilic scripts of Indian languages. I think omitting stops and spaces should continue to be treated as sloppy in Wikipedia, even though I do it myself in casual writing. Imc (talk) 17:44, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

Jana Mana Gana lyrics

Do we need so many languages here Jana_Gana_Mana#Lyrics? --Tito☸Dutta 00:20, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

No. IMO, Only Romanization is enough. - Vivvt (Talk) 02:13, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Sri Venkateswara University

I'm concern that Sri Venkateswara University may be a close paraphrasing, or copy-and-paste in parts, of this site. I've tagged it at the moment, and removed some of the obvious parts, but it looks like a lot of it matches the content of the site. Does anyone here want to take a look? --S.G.(GH) ping! 17:51, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Vandalism of Jainism related articles

It seems nobody is watching Jainism related articles and User:Rahuljain2307 AKA User:Rahul RJ Jain AKA User:The Fake ID is getting away with vandalism and WP:GAME. He has removed massive sourced contents, cats, infoboxes, templates, wikitables etc from dozens of articles. Instead of tagging contents with cn or refimprove he has removed massive contents from the articles. He also keep redirecting, moving, AFDing articles, merging contents at whims. Earlier I had reported him only related Chanakya but now I am trying to report his whole history on ANI here. neo (talk) 20:35, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

Hmmm.... Will keep a watch on all his edits henceforth - Ninney (talk) 23:42, 13 June 2013 (UTC)
Thanks. But it seems massive contents are lost. neo (talk) 15:35, 14 June 2013 (UTC)
Nothing is "lost" since anyone can easily go into the page History and either revert to the version prior to the vandalism edits, or can copy-paste useful content from earlier versions if it's buried too far back. If you're concerned about lost content, use the "Contributions" button to see the edits of those accounts, and check the History tabs of them to see if there are any large deletions or inappropriate additions that have not yet been corrected. MatthewVanitas (talk) 17:07, 14 June 2013 (UTC)
I've been monitoring User:The Rahul Jain edits, and they all appear to be constructive. The edit summaries note content was removed due to copyright violation, and when I did a simple Google search, that appears to be the case. Can't speak for all the edits but I checked out about 5 or so of them. Not sure if I'd call this gaming the system. — MusikAnimal talk 19:35, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
What do you mean by "The edit summaries note content was removed due to copyright violation"? Are you referring today's edits? Well, he could have re-worded content or could have searched new sources but he tagged them for copyvio and admin deleted 18 articles of Jainism founders. Admin restored them. If you see such edits constructive, well, what can I say. neo (talk) 20:17, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

Bangladesh: 2013 Shahbag protests

A number of editors have pointed to persistent bias at the article 2013 Shahbag protests. I made some edits in the spirit of WP:Bold to remove the Awami League party bias from the article and I also self reverted. You can find the copy that has been continually charged with bias in mainspace, while you can see my edit diff here [17] and a discussion I started at Talk:2013_Shahbag_protests#Persistent_POV_bias_in_this_article. Your comments to improve this article would be appreciated by editors on all sides of the issue. I know this is not about India, but I'm posting this on several related boards. Respectfully and in the spirit of WP:Bold, Crtew (talk) 21:41, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

No Need To Call People By Just Their Surname

How should wikipedia refer to people from India? Should they be referred to by just their surname after the full name is established? This is what seems to be the practice for people from some other countries, at last for the wikipage of the person in question. Should there be an international consistency in this - at least in english? (Maybe we can avoid talking about whether Indian english should be acceptable, since we are only talking about how to refer to the name of a person.)
We can begin with the quote by Emerson: “A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by little statesmen and philosophers and divines. With consistency a great soul has simply nothing to do." However the problem of what names to use for people in India is not just a matter of consistency. It is also a matter of deciding whether to conform to the hegemonic powers who would like to define what the whole world says.
The problem is this:
Certain names of people in India are not suitable to being shortened by using only the surname (sometimes it is also difficult to define what is the surname). Therefore the usual practice in scholarly articles and books is to use a name that is culturally appropriate - which may be two full names, initials and another name, or to use just the first name, or just the last name, or just the initials.
It will not be appropriate to make a rule and demand that it be followed in all cases because the usage depends on the name and where the person is from (e.g. which part of India).
Therefore, I propose that there should NOT be a wiki policy on how to refer to a person or whether to use just the last name, or just the first name, or just the initials and the last name, or just the initials, or whatever. These things should be decided on a case-to-case basis, using the usual conventions in accepted references.
For example, take the case of the famous Bhagat Singh. There is a convention that the name Singh is used by all men who are Sikh. Therefore the surname or last name by itself (if we can call Singh the surname or last name) is not used to refer to a person because it does not specify which person is being referred to. Even if it is obvious due to the context, this convention is not used. It is not conventional in everyday speech or in scholarly articles to say "Then Singh went to the school..." The convention is to say, "Then Bhagat Singh went to the school..."
In other words, the shortest way to refer to Bhagat Singh is to refer to "Bhagat Singh", not just "Singh". This convention is followed in all the scholarly articles and books in which Bhagat Singh is discussed (I have listed some of them on the Bhagat Singh talk page). The only place where I have seen this custom being violated is in some recent english newspaper articles, where the editor seems to be bending backwards to employ a ridiculous western rule to an inappropriate situation - or maybe the editor checked in wikipedia and unthinkingly followed suit.
I say, use the usual local, appropriate convention for each person, deciding on a case to case basis. We should not try to make or follow a rule for this.Khaydock (talk) 18:00, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

  • I'll prefer to follow the original Wikipedia policy: WP:SURNAME --Tito☸Dutta 18:05, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
Why? And what is the original wikipedia policy? The wikipedia policy accepts country-specific usage, which is what this is.Khaydock (talk) 18:38, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
I don't see the problem you're trying to solve. Are you suggesting that we start using first names for Indian's? Is this a widespread issue on Indian pages. What's wrong with using Singh when referring to the Prime Minister in the text (isn't it better than using Manmohan)? Using last names is a fairly normal convention in formal English writing (not just on Wikipedia) and you're going to have to think of a good reason to break with English language conventions on an English language encyclopedia. (Obviously, if there is a strong reason not to use the last name, then that would be acceptable. But do we need a specific guideline for something like that?)--regentspark (comment) 20:30, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
There is the policy WP:COMMONNAME, which does dictate that people be titled as the name they are commonly referred to. Our famous default example being that the singer Madonna Louise Ciccone has an article entitled Madonna (entertainer) and is referred to as Madonna throughout the article rather than Ciccone because that is the stage name by which she is known. If someone is generally known in media/academia by a name other than their surname, I could see that being used if the precedent is clearly established. MatthewVanitas (talk) 21:12, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
COMMONNAME applies only to article titles; that the Madonna article sticks with it throughout is WP:COMMONSENSE, I guess. I've never seen WP:SURNAME before and will have to read up on that. - Sitush (talk) 21:36, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
  • Exactly, if we have to discuss two or more people with same surname, then we can mention first name to disambiguate. I have done it many times. My latest example might be Churni Ganguly, where her husband is Kaushik Ganguly. No reason to write our own rule. WikiPolicy is fine here. --Tito☸Dutta 22:13, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

Jainism articles: Serious problem

There are 24 Tirthankars or founders of Jainism. User:The Rahul Jain just managed to delete and wipe out almost all of them from wikipedia. But wisdom dawned on admin User:INeverCry and he restored all of them. Some copy-vio text was/is in articles and instead of re-wording he tagged them for speedy deletion. I have already complained so many times that the user keep removing contents, infoboxes, cats, templates, moving-redirecting pages. I seldom see him adding contents. I reported him on ANI 3 times but all admins remain silent. Only admin User:Qwyrxian took lead in looking in matter. And Qwyrxian blamed me on his talkpage! Perhaps user was encouraged by comforting words of admin and today he went in full swing. Woo-hoo! He managed to wipe out almost entire rank of Jainism founders. neo (talk) 19:04, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

I only have time to make a very brief comment here. I assume you're referring to edits like this one? Not only is that edit correct, it's actually mandatory. The information was copied, word for word, from the source. That's a copyright violation--always against our rules, and usually illegal. Reinserting copyrighted material can result in your account being blocked, Neo. Now, if you want to re-add the info, it would need to be re-written entirely. However, I'm fairly certain that said book isn't even a reliable source anyway, though I'd have to examine it to be sure. But no matter, what, copying directly from another source is absolutely forbidden, unless that source is in the public domain or CC-BY-SA licensed (and, even then, you need to explicitly state that the info is copied, using a special template). Qwyrxian (talk) 12:23, 26 June 2013 (UTC)
I am referring to edits like this. We don't tag articles for speedy deletion if we detect that some copy-vio text is included in article few years ago. We remove that text and rewrite if possible. But we don't delete articles of notable subject. TRJ had tagged 18 articles for deletion and they were deleted. To avoid another deletion by some admin I simply reverted his edits. Do you support deleting articles of notable subject because of some copyvio text in the article? If that's policy, pls give me link. neo (talk) 08:56, 27 June 2013 (UTC)
I absolutely do. Copyright violations MUST be removed for legal reasons. If a stub is possible, then that is, of course, a better alternative, but getting the copyvio off the site is the first, most important task. Qwyrxian (talk) 09:55, 27 June 2013 (UTC)
If you "absolutely do" support deletion of articles because 'some' copyvio material was inserted at some time, then being a admin you should delete those articles first and then talk to me later. This speedy deletion criteria states that if non-infringing material is on page that is worth saving then page should not be deleted. I am seeing that after removing copyvio text, articles like Shantinath, Aranath, Nami Natha have at least 1 ref. Current policy does not support your assertion that what TRJ did was right. If I am wrong, I request other users to correct me. neo (talk) 11:16, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

Rituparno Ghosh

Can someone keep an eye on this article Rituparno Ghosh for addition of unsourced information? --Tito☸Dutta 20:06, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Recent major caste cleanups

I've been tackling a few more caste-cleanup articles as of late. If anyone is interested in the struggle thereof, wants to help refine a few of these or spot-check for accuracy, or watchlist them, your support is always appreciated. Here are a few I've worked on in the last week, often near-total rewrites:

Again, my intent is not to "denigrate" groups by noting that their lofty origin stories are not credited by anyone but themselves. My intent is instead to show the complexity of these social situations, and their variations over time. And also to prevent the very frequent use of Wikipedia as a caste-advancement tool to "re-write" caste history for political and social advantage. MatthewVanitas (talk) 21:48, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

Vishwabrahmin has been a problem for years and spikes are common. You may not have noticed that it has existed under various names/POV forks etc. Right now, it is way longer than it would be if it were policy-compliant and it incorporates a lot of the stuff that was removed from other versions. I think that Chettiar might have had a few iterations also. I've had both of these articles watchlisted under prior names but missed the redirects. - Sitush (talk) 21:56, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

Overcat in a template

Pallava dynasty in categorised in both Category:Former monarchies of Asia and Category:Former countries in Asia. The monarchies category is a subcategory of the countries one, so we do not need both. Problem is, I can't spot where these two categories are being added to the article - it must be via one of the three templates on the page but I'm useless at template markup and cannot work out which is causing the issue. If someone can, please could they remove Category:Former countries in Asia from it. I realise that this will affect a host of other articles also but an overcat is an overcat on any article. Thanks. - Sitush (talk) 05:13, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

Template:Infobox former country is the root cause, but is fully protected, so can't edit. --Redtigerxyz Talk 06:14, 29 June 2013 (UTC)
Maybe you can leave the |continent=Asia field empty. It will remove the category. But maybe it will add another general category. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 06:24, 29 June 2013 (UTC)
Thanks, both. I've queried it at the template talk page using a link to this discussion. - Sitush (talk) 06:25, 29 June 2013 (UTC)
Interesting choice of terminology - technically, kingdoms are not countries so the infobox should be "former kingdom" rather than "former country". --regentspark (comment) 11:43, 29 June 2013 (UTC)
I wondered about that, too. I could resolve the immediate problem by changing the infobox but the template would still seem to need some sort of work. - Sitush (talk) 13:29, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

Jainism: Peer review

Hello, I have listed the article Jainism for peer review. It is one of the ancient Indian religions. The peer review is at Wikipedia:Peer_review/Jainism/archive4. Please do participate in the discussion. Thanks, Rahul Jain (talk) 17:19, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

Finding original source for these Madiga caste images?

As so often is the case, I'm finding some good vintage photos of an Indian caste, but the only versions online are unattributed/uncited, and/or have an ugly watermark stamped on them by some person who's done no actual work other than simply scan an old book but still asserts some authority over an item.

In any case, Madiga could really use some images, do any of the images in this link look familiar to anyone, can you guess what book I might seek out that would contain these photos: http://mahadiga-channal.babelred.com/?counter=45 ? MatthewVanitas (talk) 20:23, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

India Project Collaboration of the Month dead?

Is the INCOTM dead? No-one seems to be suggesting anything for the July collaboration. - Sitush (talk) 14:58, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

Seriously, that was a lot of nominations by present standards! Let's go with Ladakh if its up above! AshLin (talk) 17:13, 28 June 2013 (UTC)
Sorry, that will teach me. The page is watchlisted (turquoise blue star is there) but for some reason has not appeared on my watchlist. I should have checked the link directly. I'll take a decent look at it in a few hours, after I've recovered from my puzzlement and embarrassment! - Sitush (talk) 17:38, 28 June 2013 (UTC)
It seems that Tito did some fancy footwork with organisation of the INCOTM nomination page and tripped me up. Anyway, I've now got back on my feet and see that Ladakh has the most support. I wasn't aware that this process was basically a straight vote but that it how it is and so I've updated a couple of pages to indicate that this article is our Collaboration of the Month for July. Thanks to all who gave suggestions and indicated preferences - now let's collaborate! - Sitush (talk) 21:08, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

User:Haripriya63

Does anyone know ways to contact User:Haripriya63? --Tito☸Dutta 00:59, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

Policy regarding article names of Indic origin

This policy makes it clear that name used in more than 75% wider usage of english should be used. But this link is not given in WP:ENGLISH and WP:COMMONNAME. Users like User:The Rahul Jain and User:Ruud Koot misinterpret it as "scientific name used ony in reliable sources" and ignore the words common, wider usage or popular. Please see this Rfc and this discussion. In future someone may insert reliable sources in article Rama which write 'Rama' as 'Rāma' and will move article to IAST name. So policy regarding articles names of Indic origin should be made absolutely clear. neo (talk) 07:21, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

Try to avoid IAST, if only because it makes it difficult for people with standard English-language keyboards to search an article for recurrence of a word or term. I made the mistake in one of my creations - Lohara dynasty - and I regret it. - Sitush (talk) 10:04, 30 June 2013 (UTC)
Every time I have to copy-paste these IAST alphabets. I think most of the wikipedia readers don't know how to type or pronounce IAST alphabets like ñāīśṇūṃēṣ. Sometime I just see boxes. Assuming that ALL english wikipedia readers have learned IAST language and ALL readers have right browsers to display IAST characters is wrong. BTW, perhaps you didn't notice, it is 'Mokṣa', not 'Moksa' and as I found more results for 'Moksha', so I proposed to change name to 'Moksha'. I think policy is already clear. We just need to include link in WP:ENGLISH. Otherwise users will keep moving pages to IAST spellings. neo (talk) 07:15, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

Template/ Navbox distortion

 Done §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 15:10, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

Possible vandalism at Bhaag Milkha Bhaag article

I suspect possible vandalism there. User Wraithful has said that "I see this problem across the site on articles pertaining to Indian topics - unwarranted glorification or promotional tone.". Experienced editors may help here. I request them to give their comments. Thanks. --Abhijeet Safai (talk) 16:48, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

For some reason, Abhijeet Safai asked me about this on my talk page - this is my reply:
I'm not sure why you are asking me about this - but I'd start by reading WP:VANDAL. This is a content dispute, and making accusations of vandalism is entirely inappropriate. Looking at the material removed, I'm inclined to agree with Wraithful that it is inappropriate trivia for an unreleased film, and I'm not even sure that an article on the film can be justified at all under Wikipedia:Notability (films) guidelines. I suggest that rather than arguing over minor details, you look for evidence from third-party reliable sources that the film is of any significance. AndyTheGrump (talk) 17:31, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

File:Babri rearview.jpg

Has been deleted, anyone here got a photo of the Babri Mosque either before or after demolition? Darkness Shines (talk) 19:42, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

Deleted? Admin thought that it can be created? ah? What was the reason? BTW, today I noticed that Rahul Gandhi image is also deleted. Felt very sad. Really. neo (talk) 19:54, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

Free India media resources

To search free images related to India, you can use WP:INDFREE. Free images of Rahul Gandhi, Chanakya etc are available there. And you can help to expand the resources page too. --Tito☸Dutta 22:56, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

FilmiTadka.in should also be there. But it has very few images compared to BollywoodHungama. Sometime images of cricketers, politicians etc also prop up on BH if bollywood celebrity has attended that event. I have searched images for EVERY actress in 'Hindi film actresses' category (at that time 432 actresses). If you can't find image in some article of actress, it is because no image was on BH. There is no problem of free images for bollywood articles. But very difficult to find free images for other articles. neo (talk) 05:45, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
  • FilmiTadka has been added by Dharmadhakshya. I was discussing with Crisco to contact few sites to allow us to use images. --Tito☸Dutta 06:16, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
  • Does anyone know some source for images of Indian politicians, especially from Punjab? --Vigyanitalkਯੋਗਦਾਨ 09:31, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

WP:INDICSCRIPT

This is being challenged at Talk:Birbhum district#Including Bengali script in the lead. Any interested parties are invited to contribute. noq (talk) 07:00, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

New article: Mettukulam

Please feel free to improve Mettukulam. Thanks! Northamerica1000(talk) 08:21, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

Centralized Monitoring System - Indian surveillance programme

Anyone interested in beefing up Centralized Monitoring System? I found that a writer in The Hindu compared it to PRISM. It might be something that will come up in Indian politics.

I also made a request for a Hindi version of this article. Any editors who want to write articles about this in regional languages are welcome to do so. WhisperToMe (talk) 20:24, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

  • It's now available in Hindi and Tamil WhisperToMe (talk) 14:00, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Merge proposal at Talk:Keshav Dev Temple

More opinions are welcome. ComfyKem (talk) 20:32, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Chanakya and Chandragupta Maurya public domain images

Chanakya and Chandragupta Maurya are among most important figures in Indian history. It is shame that even after 2000 years after their death we don't have their public domain images for articles. Users keep uploading non-free images and they gets deleted. One user pointed out here that there should be public domain image on net. I did some hard search and found 1915 image of Chanakya here and here. As it is published before 1953, it is in public domain. I request users to verify this, especially to expert User:Dharmadhyaksha. But please make sure that we get public domain images of Chanakya and Chandragupta. They are among most important figures in Indian history. Thanks! neo (talk) 07:41, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

  • Is there any original photograph of these two people? (since the answer is surely "no"), all we can collect is artistic depictions. Image published before 1953 does not make it a public domain image. It must be PD in US too. --Tito☸Dutta 07:57, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
  • This is published in 1915 as noted by neo. Is this serves purpose? The Legend of Zorro 08:01, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
As per Public domain in the United States, works published before 1923 are in public domain in US. Commons have [ https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:When_to_use_the_PD-Art_tag#Works_first_published_outside_the_United_States_before_1923 this tag] for work published outside US before 1923. So I think it is in public domain in US too. So far actual looks are concerned, it is impossible. We just give general idea of looks of historic figures. For example, Rama's looks varies in different pics but he is depicted with bow-arrow, dhoti, clean-shaved face, rather medium built body etc. So we can just give general idea of Chanakya's and Chandragupta's looks which are consistent with their biography and Indian culture. neo (talk) 09:19, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
That image is a graphic design work. Does not seem to be the cover of original work. --Tito☸Dutta 09:27, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
You mean derivative of original work? If we doubt that publisher has plagarized work of someone else, then we can doubt EVERY WORK without any basis. neo (talk) 10:21, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
I think User:Titodutta said that the picture on the website may not be the cover of the original book. Not necessary it is plagarism. The Legend of Zorro 10:41, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
hmm... Titodutta is right. this looks original cover of book of R. Shamasastry. this is bit high res image. And this is same image. If that sitting person is Chandragupta and that person with flag is Kautilya/Chanakya, then we got 2-in-1. Ek teer mein do shikar. neo (talk) 11:13, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

Thanks Titodutta for uploading Chanakya image. Hope that problem is solved forever. Also pls upload above image. It can be used at least for R. Shamasastry. The whole book is in worldwide public domain as per wikisource. So no copyright problem. My browser is giving me trouble, so I can't upload image. neo (talk) 17:11, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

Neo, that img can't be used. The site says book is CC BY-NC-ND 3.0 [18]. "noncommercial" clause is not compatible with wikicommons/wikipedia. Redtigerxyz Talk 17:24, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

Sub section

(due to edit box limit) @Redtigerxyz I think government laws supersedes what that site or anyone claims. Still I will ask question at WP:CQ to clear doubts. neo (talk) 17:39, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

No doubt the text is public domain, but not the reprint edition. Book cover is part of new packaging (reprint) so the author of reprint is the author of the image. archive.org book does not say that it is copy of the 1915 first edition. Redtigerxyz Talk 17:46, 3 July 2013 (UTC)
I asked in WP:CQ. If someone modify public domain work then the 'modification' has copyrights of new author. Not sure whether the image is original or from reprint edition. But thanks to Dharmadhyaksha for finding free image of Chandragupta. We got free images of both Chanakya and Chandragupta. And thanks to you, Redtigerxyz, for indirectly forcing me to find free images. :) neo (talk) 15:42, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

New article: Central mahallu jama'ath

Central mahallu jama'ath would benefit from more sources and copy editing. Northamerica1000(talk) 02:43, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

Now deleted under Wikipedia:G11, notwithstanding all Northamerica1000's good work. I wouldn't be willing at present to partially userfy the content at present: see Wikipedia:Copying_within_Wikipedia#Userfication, but more than willing to help out otherwise. --Shirt58 (talk) 13:35, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

New article Thuggee and Dacoity Department

I've got just a basic who-what-where-when-why stub worked up, but this article has a lot of room for expansion in critiquing its missions and assumptions, how it effected the British conception of Indian society, etc. I think there are some good academic studies about the role of the group. Offhand I haven't found any good photos, but would ideally like to add some group photo of the employees of the outfit posing together or something. Hope this is of interest to a few editors, MatthewVanitas (talk) 22:13, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

Need assistance from anyone, conflict on Narayana_Gosain_Temple article

The article Narayana_Gosain_Temple is currently a stub, while doing clean up this happened, even my clean up tags got reverted. I tried to contact this user but got no response, I've explained my reasons on the article talk page. Can someone help and solve this dispute. -Ugog Nizdast (talk) 15:25, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

RFC:Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (Indic)#On promotion

New rfc on a longstanding proposal. Also listed at Wikipedia:Village pump (policy) and Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style. LeadSongDog come howl! 18:08, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

Shiva

User:The Rahul Jain had added Jainism view on Shiva - [19] which I have reverted as it is offending to Hindus. I have mentioned in my edit note --- this is article about Hindu God --- please create separate article for Shiva ----as per Jainism ----your content do not belong here. Please someone look into it as I am busy in real life and may not be able to follow up for some days.Jethwarp (talk) 09:34, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

He has already reverted it back without creating a consensus. !!! Jethwarp (talk) 09:37, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
I have reverted his edit. Only one source which claim Shiva was son of 'jain nun' and Parvati was 'prostitute'. Looks altogether different subject and he should create separate article for that. neo (talk) 10:48, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
I agree with you Neo. It is totally a different subject and if he wishes he can create separate article something named like Shiva (Jain mythology) - which should not be linked with Shiva of Hindism. Thanks. Jethwarp (talk) 04:18, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
Also please see new section Wikipedia_talk:Noticeboard_for_India-related_topics#Articles_for_creation.2FJainism_and_Hinduism below --- where he is trying to do same thing link Hindu Gods Shiva and Rama with similar named characters appearing in Jain mythology. Regards. Jethwarp (talk) 04:21, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
"which I have reverted as it is offending to Hindus"—you may want to avoid such arguments per WP:Wikipedia is not censored:

Wikipedia may contain content that some readers consider objectionable or offensive, even exceedingly so (see Wikipedia:Content disclaimer). Wikipedia cannot guarantee that articles or images will always be acceptable to all readers, or that they will adhere to general social or religious norms.

—indopug (talk) 07:36, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Articles for creation/Jainism and Hinduism

This is a very sensitive issue.

User:The Rahul Jain is also in process of making an article Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Jainism and Hinduism - which it under process. Although, as has been declined at present.

In this article also he is put same story of Shiva being son of Jain nun and Parvati being a prostitute and Parvati kills Shiva. It is same thing which is being discussed at Talk:Shiva#Significance_of_Shiva_in_Jainism.

As I have already commented there in my opinion --- Shiva and Rama mentioned in Jain mythology cannot be taken as same person or Gods of Hindu mythology -- just because they have same names --- and as such both of them cannot be co-related. The sources, cited in article are all of Jain books and Jain writers or other authors citing Jain books --- where are reliable other third party sources ---- which claim that Shiva (Jain mythology) or Rama (Jain mythology) mentioned by Jain mythology are same as the Shiva and Rama of Hindus. None of the Hindu scripts / writer has ever mentioned about it. The same is case for Rama in Jainism - it should be renamed as Rama (Jain mythology) without a redirect.

As I may be off the Wikipedia for at-least one week and may not be to follow up but thought it is wise that subject is brought here so other people can participate. Thanks. Jethwarp (talk) 04:08, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

Rama in Jainism is the accurate name. Ramanujan and Iyengar are references by Hindu writers. There is ample evidence and references that support that Ramayana and Mahabharata have Jain versions, Rama and Krishna play important roles in these versions too. Rama of the Hindus was adopted in Jain (as well as Buddhist) tales. His character and personality may be Jain, but his roots are Hindu. --Redtigerxyz Talk 13:02, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Wikiproject India and GANG

Wrong venue: discuss user behaviour at WP:ANI, WP:AN3 or somewhere, not here - Sitush (talk) 16:52, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

It is becoming impossible to contribute to some India related articles due to WP:GANG of Users User:Darkness Shines, User:Maunus, User:Qwyrxian, User:RegentsPark and possibly User:The Rahul Jain. They edit in co-ordination to support each other, start own interpretation of policy and sources, use threatning tone, force users to go away. And as two of them are Admins, users can't contribute freely due to constant fear of blocking. I think, RegentsPark is deliberately staying away from 2002 Gujarat violence to perform admin action as uninvolved to support DS, Maunus and Qwyrxian. No matter what sources I bring, no matter what argument I give, as they are WP:GANG, they have "consensus" not to allow edit to the article(s). I seek guidance of Wikiproject India community. Please don't hezitate to point out my mistakes, if any. Thanks. neo (talk) 16:25, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

Without even looking at what has gone on, I can tell you that your mistake at least in relation to Qwyrxian and RegentsPark is one of not assuming good faith. In particular, I've had dealings with you and found you to be distinctly in need of guidance. If you still think that the guidance etc offered by those people is disruptive or whatever then you'll have to take it to WP:ANI. That you brought the matter here rather than take it there is indicative of your own problem in understanding how Wikipedia operates, regardless of the veracity of the problems you allege of others. - Sitush (talk) 16:47, 13 July 2013 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Maybe a "Guideline for South Asian villages and towns" policy?

Note I am creating a very basic draft at User:MatthewVanitas/Guidelines for South Asia villages and towns articles. Please feel free to modify and contribute to this.

Given there are thousands of articles on villages in India (and to lesser degrees adjoining South Asian nations) that frequently suffer from nigh-identical flaws, maybe we could make a Guideline article to point out common errors, note what components (infobox, coords, pushpin maps, templates) should be added, etc? We could then make a Talk template to advise article originators, and an article template a specialised "Cleanup"-type template saying "please bring this article into accordance with Guidelines".

Just based on population and userbase, this is 80% an India issue, but given regional political sensitivities and similarities of articles, a broader "South Asia" guideline might be more advisable. This would be largely modeled off of Wikipedia:WikiProject Schools/Article guidelines, which I think is a great writeup.

Realising that I might be the main person writing the actual policy, would other folks support/endorse such a policy, and would a few folks be willing to help tag articles (maybe each choose X many districts of a given province?) or otherwise help come up with a way that we can, as much as possible) mark those articles that are severely flawed.

As a few observations:

  • The infoboxes for villages/towns are very simple, generally helpful, and the pushpin maps are great. There is little/no reason for editors not to use them other than just being unaware.
  • A "what not to include" could mention things like:
    • Don't waste space on "X many km from Foo town, Y km from Goo town, adjoins the border of Hoo district" minutiate.
    • This is not a guidebook, we don't need to know what buses to take from Hoo City Bus Terminal
    • If you mention that the village grows mangos, plays cricket, or any such similar basic info, you must cite somewhere a source which notes that the village is exceptionally known for this more than any of a thousand other communities
    • Generic statements like "is a wonderful place" or "all people are living together in peace" are opinion and not really useful
    • Comments on "many people have left and live in UAE, British Colubmia, Wales, etc" are not useful unless you have specific citations to news or book reporting on this

The near-uniformity of poor village articles is really almost impressive, someone could probably write a decent sociology article about it. It's almost as though someone created a template of "how to write a poor quality village article" and people are following it to the letter (somewhat joking). Given the prolific number of articles, and more being made daily, do folks think a clear policy of advice would help, or would it never even be read by contributors? MatthewVanitas (talk) 17:48, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

Seems like a pretty good idea. Perhaps some good examples of village articles could be highlighted as templates. Hack (talk) 17:58, 13 July 2013 (UTC)
I've looked at hundreds and seen some diamonds amongst the coal, but if anyone recalls a great one off the top of my head, I could certainly use some suggestions. I could also probably choose some earlier revisions of a few articles as a "don't do this" section. Purely out of curiosity, does it seem to anyone else that the whole "X many km from Foo town, Y from Goo, Z from Hoo town" huge listings of relative measurements appears to be particularly a South Asia thing? The sample size is clearly huger for that region, but off the top of my head I don't recall articles on African villages, South American small towns, etc. having that same phrasing. It rather reminds of the WWII photos of US Army bases where they would have signposts on some remote Pacific island pointing out the direction and distance to various hometowns of troops (I've seen the same in the Iraq War). Is the fixation on location via mention of neighbours and distance some British remnant, or something inspired by Indian government stylings? MatthewVanitas (talk) 18:27, 13 July 2013 (UTC)
Whatever be the origin of X-is-n-km-from-Y statements, i find them quite useful. I have geocoded many articles and these unsourced unreliable minutia helps at many times to geocode. Many places are coded under variations of spellings and then its easy to surf around this Y place searching for X in the said radius. Also, would be wrong to mention that a village X administratively falls under Y taluka and is n km away from it. But Z taluka is (n-m) km away only? Would it be wrong to mention that the nearest town is n km away? Or where the nearest railway station is? §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 19:10, 13 July 2013 (UTC)
I'm less concerned about someone mentioning it's Xkm away from the talkua/tehsil/panchayat/district-capital, but some articles have literally seven or eight comparisons to other points. I grant they can be useful in initially locating areas (particularly when the user fails to note the country/state/district of the village in question), but there has to be a practical limit, and also in some cases the article is solely a list of measurements to other areas. If there is a WP:RS that notes the village bases its economy at the nearby train depot of Hoo Town, I'm fine with that, but just generally noting it isn't helpful. MatthewVanitas (talk) 20:38, 13 July 2013 (UTC)
Apart from whether it is useful or not. This XYFooGoo is coming from tour and travel websites or government transport websites, which list all distances from nearby places and the bus/train information for obvious reasons and editors while creating article, use these websites as source. And also I think in India people do talk about distances from nearby towns when they talk about a new town or village, maybe because we are not used to using a map in our daily life.--Vigyanitalkਯੋਗਦਾਨ 00:59, 14 July 2013 (UTC)
Wherever they are coming from; travel sites or portals or whatever, distance for at least one or two such major locations should be present. If its a huge list then its fine to delete. And as you note that Indians don't use maps but reply on such distances, how useful will our articles be if that info is not available? Also, WP:RAILSTATION considers every railway station as generally notable. In such case we don't need RS linking this village's economy with that station. We need to keep in mind that majority, if not all, these villages and towns don't have any great sources at all. In such case it isn't a good idea to insist on a RS linking the two. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 05:07, 15 July 2013 (UTC)
I will also support the inclusion of about 3 distance numbers.--Vigyanitalkਯੋਗਦਾਨ 05:12, 15 July 2013 (UTC)
That's fair enough. One addition that we can do while mentioning these distances is to mention the direction also. I haven't seen that in any of the articles that we are discussing here. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 05:25, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

2002 Gujarat violence

Article 2002 Gujarat violence is written by wikipedia community over 10 years and user:Darkness Shines calls it Shite. He has created his own version of article here in user space and slowly replacing whole article with his own POV version. Articles on similar incidents of violence like September 11 attacks use media sources. But user is removing reputed media sources and has picked up so-called 'academic sources' to support his POV. The article needs to be corrected to show right facts with NPOV. Thanks. neo (talk) 09:50, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

A stitch in time would have saved nine. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 13:38, 6 July 2013 (UTC)
DS inserted his POV in article, I removed it but this The Rahul Jain dropped in out of blue just to oppose me and inserted again POV of DS. Now the article is protected with massive POV of DS. I have requested RegentsPark to restore earlier NPOV version and then protect article. neo (talk) 15:28, 6 July 2013 (UTC)
Similar thing is happening in this article Anti-Muslim violence in India. - abhi (talk) 20:23, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Mediation requested

I request volunteers to please mediate in the dispute between me and Users Darkness Shines, Maunus, The Rahul Jain regarding contents. Please see this discussion on article's talkpage. Your help may prevent the issue escalating further. Thanks. neo (talk) 21:43, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

If at all anyone is considering mediation, make sure you aren't involved already in this topic. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 04:00, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

New article request: Telegram in India

I Request community to write a separate article on Telegraph in India as on 14th July, 2013 160yrs old telegram service ended in India. India was a last country to end this service. There are plenty of news sources covering this event and history. It can be feature on In The News section as telegram service ends in world. Please consider it.--Nizil (talk) 08:52, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

Why new? How is it drastically different from the system used in other countries? Also the ITN is being reviewed at Wikipedia:In_the_news/Candidates#Telegraphy. But some very good refs are added there to show how other countries are still going to use it. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 10:50, 15 July 2013 (UTC)
I think Telegraphy or Electrical Telegraph does not covers history of telegraph in relation to India well or in depth like when it was founded, how important was it in relation to culture and history of india, network sstrengh etc. Even thaugh it is not on ITN , it should be created to present history and sociocultural effect of it on india.-Nizil (talk) 06:09, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Category:Days of the year in India

Please leave your comments and concerns on the Mass-merge discussion in Category talk:Days of the year in India --Neechalkaran (talk) 01:29, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Gorakhpur railway station

An anonymous editor is continually trying to remove referenced information from the Gorakhpur railway station page and insert his own unreferenced information, thereby distorting the information on that page. Other editors are requested to visit the page and do the needful please. - Chandan Guha (talk) 09:35, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

  • There has been no disturbance since I put up this. - Chandan Guha (talk) 03:48, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

"Gram Tangra"?

Hello all.
I'm currently trying to tidy the article. "Gram" isn't part of the name of the village, that I'm fairly sure of. Looking on maps there is a b\named place called "Tangra Colony" in the Bongaon area, very near to the border with Bangladesh. There's also Tangra, Kolkata, but according to the article it is in Kolkata itself.
Help! --Shirt58 (talk) 12:52, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

It should be the Tangra Colny in Bongaon area. I don't know if Gram Tangra is a local name for the entity.--Dwaipayan (talk) 20:51, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

Brahmin variants

Could someone please take a look a Jain Brahmins and Buddhist Brahmins, both created by the same user and both seeming to be a little odd to me. Perhaps they are not but I vaguely recall a recent episode where someone tried to coatrack a conflation of names. I'll let the originator know of this post. - Sitush (talk) 17:07, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Ah, I see that the Jain one is a recreation of a prevoiously CSD A10 item, per this. The claim is that the new version is better than the deleted one. - Sitush (talk) 17:13, 14 July 2013 (UTC)
And there is also Sikh Brahmins created by same user, who has also done some large scale edits at Shiva -- seems to be sockpuppet of one user.Jethwarp (talk) 03:25, 15 July 2013 (UTC)
Sikh Brahmins. wow.. a new term. Some of the people cited in that article existed before a formal Sikhism was official coined and in modern time they are referred as Bhagats not Brahmins. I do not think Sikhism ever define a Brahmin.--Vigyanitalkਯੋਗਦਾਨ 03:34, 15 July 2013 (UTC)
I'm sure that I've seen this sort of behaviour before but I cannot remember who did it. Should these articles all be sent to AfD? Are they coatracking, as I suspect they are? - Sitush (talk) 14:40, 15 July 2013 (UTC)
And what about Buddhism and Rulership? This is horrendous and the contributor seems not to respond to comments. - Sitush (talk) 15:02, 15 July 2013 (UTC)
Yes, I won't mind these being deleted. Maybe the can be moved like Buddhist Brahmins is moved to Buddhists born to Brahmin families, which is what probably author meant if we go by his first line in each articles. However I will see the direct deleted then. As these titles itself are misleading. Brahmin is a social class defined in Hinduism. If a brahmin decided to follow Jaininsm/Sikhism etc then I think he is cease to be a brahmin and becomes Jain/Sikh.--Vigyanitalkਯੋਗਦਾਨ 15:59, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

Well, in Punjab there is a Mohyal brahmin community who are also called Hussaini Brahmins. In addition to having an islamic sounding name, they also have a tradition of bringing up the eldest son in the family as a Sikh! Complicates the matters, doesn't it ? But that is what caste is in the Indian subcontinent. It just isn't easy to nicely pigeonhole any group in this or that category.Jonathansammy (talk) 20:50, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

While I agree with you that caste in India is not neatly pigeonholed into Hinduism, the problem is one of sourcing. For example, it's going to be hard to find sources that identify any particular Sikh as a brahmin. The fact that the article Sikh Brahmins says nothing worth saying is probably the best illustration of this. --regentspark (comment) 21:11, 15 July 2013 (UTC)
I can only really comment on the Brahmin Sikh article in that it should be scrutinised to the same level as Jatt Sikh, i.e. references should specify Brahmin Sikh. Thanks SH 15:48, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of TiE

The article TiE has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Does not meet WP:GNG. The sole independent source for this article is a >10 year old article that mentions the organization a single time. Gnews hits likewise mention it in passing.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Brianhe (talk) 22:20, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

Improve My Article

I have created an article Sunday Shalom which is about a Christian Newspaper published in Kerala. A few days before a banner was added at the top of the articles saying This article may rely excessively on sources too closely associated with the subject. I have added almost all sources I have got. The newspaper have RNI number. But there is no option in Infobox newspaper to add it! Will RNI number improve reliability of an article? Can anybody help me to improve the article by adding enough sources? --Joseph 07:04, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

I have replied on your talk page. -Ugog Nizdast (talk) 10:10, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

Shared watchlist for vandalism prone India related topics?

Wikiprojects like New Zealand have a shared watchlist for important articles, which belongs to their vandalism patrol. Such a shared watchlist for important high risk, high quality (GAs,FAs) and high page views articles would be a good addition to our Counter–vandalism page. Does anyone else think that this is a good idea and should be implemented? -Ugog Nizdast (talk) 10:55, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

Massive copying within Wikipedia

Could someone please take a look at these?

Concerns:

  • Technically copyvios because of no attribution.
  • Possibly inappropriate duplication of content.
  • Some edits may be from external sites. I'm spot-checking now.

Thanks, Anna Frodesiak (talk) 10:00, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

Actually, maybe I'm wrong here. I've just never seen such a massive amount of content creation in such a short time. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 10:12, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

I don't think you're wrong. Even if the content isn't a copyvio, he's spamming several articles with the exact same content. Further investigation is merited.—indopug (talk) 10:31, 27 July 2013 (UTC)
WP:COPYWITHIN is a difficult policy to understand. It's counter-intuitive: "Wikipedia content is free, right? So it must be OK to copy content from one article to the the other." I'll have a look and see if I can find some concrete examples to discuss with the user.--Shirt58 (talk) 11:26, 27 July 2013 (UTC)
User has been unresponsive so far, the only reply was given to DPL bot. -Ugog Nizdast (talk) 14:10, 27 July 2013 (UTC)
Also found in edits WP:UNDUE promotion of Kottiyoor Vysakha Mahotsavam (redirect from Daksha Yaga), created by the author.--Redtigerxyz Talk 18:42, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

Hi every one, I think I had replied to Anna Frodesiak, I have created the page regarding Kottiyoor Vysakha Mahotsavam. Please help me explain this.

The page is regarging hindu mythology. A story named ‘Daksha Yaga’ . There is a sect in Hinduism named Shaktism and Shakti Peethas are their revered temples. There are 51 of these shrines spread all over South Asia. The list of these temples sometimes varies in some regions, which means some other temple also claim the status so it could be larger than 51 temples. The origin of Shakti Peetha temples, (a mythological story), is connected to the story of Daksha Yaga.(infact the climax is the creation of divinity in these shrines), the page I have created.


So what happens is in every wikipedia pages related to the Shakti Peetha status temple; the story of Daksha Yaga repeats in one way or another. I am relatively new to Wikipedia and as far as I understand we can use MAIN tag ({{main) to avoid redundancy. So I created a brief information about the incident and gave the main tag.

Another Kottiyoor Vysakha Mahotsavam (TRANSLATION: The festival which is conducted on the Vysakha month (Indian Calendar) in the place named Kottiyoor) is the same as Daksha Yaga. The entire mythological story of Daksha Yaga is in this page. It is the place believed to be the mythological story took place and thousands of pilgrims visit the place (Please check the reference and photographs proving this claim). This has been going early from the period of ancient dynasties. So it not something that I have created and promoting through this medium. The festival has been going on from ancient period.

The mythology is believed to have occurred here and the entire story regarding the mythology is in the page, so why should it be repeated again and again in different pages. That is why I gave a small description and gave a main tag. There is another temple in the state of Andhra Pradesh which also believes to be the location of the mythology, like Kottiyoor, As I am not sure about that I did not gave it. The name ‘Vysakha Mahotsavam’ is not so understandable but the story’s name ‘Daksha Yaga’ is well known all over India (I meant mostly within Hinduism). That is the reason the redirection of Daksha Yaga to Kottiyoor Vysakha Mahotsavam happened.

So please think whether you prefer the story to be repeated again and again in different page or to be in a common location. I am new to Wikipedia and did not know about the copy issues, but this is simply to avoid redundancy in a large scale. Please think about the same 2/3 para story repeated again and again in 51 to ~80 Wikipedia pages related to each of these temples and other related pages. Also I wanted to avoid ’Edit wars’ so did not delete much of the story currently in some Wikipedia pages.

Thanks for being patient. Hope my explanation is satisfactory. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ilango adikal chera (talk • contribs) 11:27, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
Hi everyone, I have changed the redirection in the page Daksha Yaga to " Kottiyoor Vysakha Mahotsavam#Mythology " and added additional link of " Shakti Peethas " to the main tag in the side of Daksha Yaga. I hope it is okay as there is option to redirect to a section in a page. In addition I have resolved a disambiguation link in all these pages. I have also removed the mentioning of Kottiyoor Vysakha Mahotsavam from these pages.

Kerala article

Please see Talk:Kerala#Massive removal of content. Thanks, Anna Frodesiak (talk) 15:59, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

114.143.62.117 (talk) 16:09, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

Judiciary reforms of India.

It has been from long ago, efforts are being made to improve the judiciary performance.I wanted to site a simple example that the justice also must be termed as a class of other service like,Medical,bank,telephone,railways,or rather any paid service.But all the service people will have their rules framed.Similarly,already the RULES bible for judiciary is in place by means of Law Board or any kind of such Institutions or standard law rules. My understanding to improve the pendencey /backlog of huge no of cases is the matter of concern,since it is stopping all the progress of ongoing work streams.In medical profession as they have adopted a very PRACTICAL AND RATIONAL APPROACH OF WORKING ROUND THE CLOCK,BY SUITABLE INDIVIDUAL ,TURN BY TURN OR EXACTLY IN SHIFTS working pattern,and still following the standard procedures of clinical dispensing,thereby achieving the noble goal of speedy recovery of any patient irrespective of its type or severiety.I think,if we adopt the same principle of 24*7 for the working in judiciary courts,then the cases pending no.can be brought to very minimal level,and moreever,and most important, the work stream will be in its fastest steam to reach the top.everybody will be happy to get the decisions time bound and right point of time.Any Takers? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arun Bandi--114.143.62.117 (talk) 16:09, 1 August 2013 (UTC)114.143.62.117 (talk) 15:42, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

AfC submission

An article for your consideration: Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Mardana. Regards, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 00:48, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

Peer review notice

Comments are welcome at Hyderabadi haleem peer review.--Dwaipayan (talk) 02:01, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

K. A. Senthilvelan

There are a few non RS which call K. A. Senthilvelan a "real hero" the "real world Singham", what is the story, is he covered better in Tamil sources? I deleted a speedy delete and cleaned the article up. We need more substance for the article to survive, it may be sent to AfD any time. Yogesh Khandke (talk) 05:52, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

New Task Force

Patna is one of the Oldest continuously inhabited places in the world and has many places of interest. Wikipedia has many articles related to it (See Category:People from Patna, Category:Patna templates, Category:Patna). So, ALLOW ME TO CREATE A TASK FORCE FOR WP:PAT - SHIVAM SETU (U-T-C-E) 08:41, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

Categorising "People from ..."

Does anyone know of or have any objections to adding Category:People from Kolkata to Category:University of Calcutta people and then removing the first from all articles that are a part of the second? I'm always conscious that we tend to overuse the "people from" categories but in this instance if they attended a university or were faculty there then at present they are often also shown as being from there. The same obviously applies to all other institutes of higher learning in India. It's a big move but will reduce clutter. - Sitush (talk) 16:56, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

Featured List of recognised political parties in India

The featured List of political parties in India has for a long time, had a lot of major edits done by IPs/New users and it also attracts lot of drive by additions since it's a stand-alone list. It would be worth watchlisting it to keep up its quality and against vandalism. -Ugog Nizdast (talk) 19:35, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

Another list, Districts of India seems to be grossly neglected too. -Ugog Nizdast (talk) 09:38, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

Tags

Can some editors help me in solving the tags at Durga Shakti Nagpal. Thanks! Anir1uph | talk | contrib 21:26, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Sharing a nice news

Hi! Let me share this great news for the project. Hyderabad, India has become a WP:FA. This is particularly commendable as it had five failed FACs earlier. This was the sixth time, and it came out successful. This is an Indian city related featured article after quite a while, perhaps years.--Dwaipayan (talk) 22:56, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

That is such good news, I salute all those who worked for it. Another reason for everyone to keep an eye on it, other than it being currently at high risk. -Ugog Nizdast (talk) 07:38, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

Andamanese Language Map

For the Andamanese Language wiki, I had updated the current map with this schematic map which highlights the language distribution with current context (cities, GT Road). Since this is a map about language distribution (in 1858), a schematic map works well (precise geographical features can be approximated to highlight distribution). Also, the original map is too small (292×477px), say for printing or discussing online.

My change was reverted by kwami since he didn't find any major improvement in the new map. Any suggestions for possible improvements, or if I should replace the current map with the schematic one? — Rasagy (talk) 06:38, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

Firstly welcome! I've quickly glanced through it, there seems to be nothing wrong with the old map. Forgive my ignorance in this, but both the maps display the same thing but the former is a physical map while the later is a schematic one. I think maps are always preferred over it. I understand your frustration over this, and good work so far. Why not consider contributing somewhere there is a lack of images? Sincerely, Ugog Nizdast (talk) 06:56, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

Nomination of List of songs by Lata Mangeshkar for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of songs by Lata Mangeshkar is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted. Djembayz (talk) 22:45, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Kalattiyur-village

Hello experts on India! The above article about a village in India has been left unedited since last year. I added a couple of references, but someone from this Wikiproject would be able to fix this up properly if he or she is willing. Any takers? —Anne Delong (talk) 22:14, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

  • The article is in very poor condition. You can have it deleted as well. Tito☸Dutta 08:44, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Kammavari Palem and Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Kammavaripalem

Hello again! The first article above is only a stub, and the second one will soon be deleted because it hasn't been edited for a long time. It has a nice map, though, and some other information. Would anyone like to try combining these articles? —Anne Delong (talk) 22:28, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

The second should be deleted, the map locator is wrong and there's really no salvageable info from it, although it is of a completely different village compared to the first -- apparently villages of the same name exist in at least three neighboring districts. —SpacemanSpiff 12:24, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Killing of Dr. Dabholkar in Wikinews?

Dear all, your valuable opinions are requested to bring killing of Dr. Dabholkar in Wikinews. It is my request to all of you to please give your valuable opinion. Every single opinion is important. Thanks a lot. -- Abhijeet Safai (talk) 11:00, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

The discussion for wikinews is going on here - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:In_the_news/Candidates#RD_:_Narendra_Dabholkar

India rail budget articles

Please see: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Trains#India rail budget articles

Thanks. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 11:42, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

  • Welcome back to WikiProject India Noticeboard. Works of www.indianrailways.gov.in are licensed under all right reserved. You should start CCI, in my opinion. --Tito☸Dutta 11:46, 25 August 2013 (UTC)
Ok. I posted that info at the trains project linked above. Best to centralize discussion there. Cheers, Anna Frodesiak (talk) 12:01, 25 August 2013 (UTC)
Resolved

Anna Frodesiak (talk) 12:37, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

  • Very quick action. Well done. Tito☸Dutta 12:42, 25 August 2013 (UTC)
Thanks to you for pointing out www.indianrailways.gov.in . :) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 12:46, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

84 kosi parikrama

is this notable? --Vigyanitalkਯੋਗਦਾਨ 10:21, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

  • Namaste, yes the tradition/concept is notable. But, I have nominated it fro deletion under CSD#G12. --Tito☸Dutta 10:33, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
Namaste and Sat Sri Akaal, Thanks. I was in doubt and also no reference was provided. --Vigyanitalkਯੋਗਦਾਨ 10:37, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
you are very fast at leaving TB, you do it manually or have written some script ? --Vigyanitalkਯੋਗਦਾਨ 10:38, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
I do not understand why 84 kosi parikrama was nominated for deletion, what were the reasons? Why was it not notable?.-122.167.103.121 (talk) 19:16, 28 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Namaste and welcome to WikiProject India noticeboard. The article was deleted for copyright violation. It was directly copied and pasted from othe websites. See Wikipedia:Copyright for more details. --Tito☸Dutta 20:01, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Informing INB about Aam Aadmi Party

User:Titodutta has suggested I inform the India Notice Board about this talk [20]TheWikiIndian (talk) 17:54, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Asaram Bapu help

Editors are being requested to have a look at Talk:Asaram_Bapu#Removed_sections Tito☸Dutta 17:18, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

The 2013 rape case against him is being suppressed on the Wikipedia. Please discuss this at the Admin noticeboard.[21]--Crème3.14159 (talk) 07:01, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

  • Namaste and welcome to WikiProject India noticeboard. That page is not the correct place to move question. Consider moving the post to at WP:ANI (post at the bottom of the page). --Tito☸Dutta 12:48, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

Call for volunteering to report bugs for VisualEditor + Universal Language Selector input: Marathi and Hindi

Hello, While technically unicode input has been enabled in VisualEditor,It is long way to practically usable for indic languages.Since most developers would not be using Universal Language Selector input methods and would not be knowing indic languages such as Marathi and Hindi it would be defficult for them to understand problem areas.

Only few people doing effort is not enough.We need more volunteering specially indic people on english wikipedia atleast know what is Visual Editor by now.Please do take a lead to test Universale language input methods for indic languages in VE environment.Please report problems at Wikipedia:VisualEditor/Feedback.For a while please do keep aside your individual aprehensions about Visual Editor and come forward to report problems. Your lead will benefit indic wikipedias.

Thanks in advance.

Mahitgar (talk) 07:34, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aruvikkuzhy Falls

Determination of existence and location of sourcing would be helpful. Thanks. Dlohcierekim 11:54, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

  • Welcome to WikiProject India noticeboard. I was checking these AFDs today morning. The Aruvikkuzhy Falls looks suspicious. If you see interwikis, they have created copies in some other language Wikipedias, but, not in Malayalam, the local language. I am pinioning User:Vanischenu, who might help here. --Tito☸Dutta 12:24, 25 August 2013 (UTC)
I figure they do exist, based on Google. How much is written about them, I do not know. I also was wondering if there might be non English sourcing. Thanks, Dlohcierekim 12:32, 25 August 2013 (UTC)
An editor that is from Kerala? That could be helpful. Dlohcierekim 12:34, 25 August 2013 (UTC)
Thank you so much! Sorry for a late response.···Vanischenu「m/Talk」 15:06, 28 August 2013 (UTC)
I've just relisted this one. Do you (or does anyone else) have any insight to offer, please? Thanks. -- Trevj (talk) 12:09, 4 September 2013 (UTC)
Thank you. I have requested help from Malayalam Wikipedia. It is quite an active Wikipedia, hope that someone will be interested in this. By the way, I will try to find more reliable sources. Regards···Vanischenu「m/Talk」 19:48, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

Operation Blue Star

Can some experienced eyes take a look at Talk:Operation_Blue_Star#Regarding_the_use_of_specific_words and help out there. Earlier once consensus was formed but now User:Jujhar.pannu is ignoring that consensus and pressing his own view despite opposition my multiple editors. Mention @Sitush: --Vigyanitalkਯੋਗਦਾਨ 23:17, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

http://www.ambedkar.org

Is this considered to be at all reliable? I've reverted this edit to Tamil language, which introduced something based on this page from ambedkar.org. Besides the rather exceptional claim and poor grammar, "Ancient language of whole of India was Tamil Language", the source looks thoroughly unreliable — no authorship information, and the disclaimer at the bottom of the website's main page basically says "People write what they want here; it's not our responsibility". If you have reason to disagree, please show me why I'm wrong. I virtually never edit in India-related topics; I only found it because the edit in question immediately followed a housekeeping edit I'd made on the same article. Nyttend (talk) 02:11, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

  • Namaste and welcome to WikiProject India noticeboard. That revert seems fine. They did not clarify "ancient India", because, "ancient India" means nothing unless exact period is mentioned and language of whole India Tamil becomes an exceptional claim, which needs an exceptional citation. --Tito☸Dutta 02:34, 4 September 2013 (UTC)
Nyttend, this is just an offshoot of the ultra fringe views of Devaneya Pavanar, and with the set of fanboys following that article, no critical info will ever be added there either. —SpacemanSpiff 04:01, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

For your information,According to Bhimrao Ramji Ambedkar (he was an Indian jurist, politician, philosopher, anthropologist, historian and economis) Tamil was not merely the language of South India,it was the language of the whole of India.Do you thing is there any wrong to place that info at Tamil language article?Please find the reliable citations[1][2][3]. here I am waiting to join for further talk .Thank you all.

Reference List

  1. ^ Ṭi. Ecc. Pi Centāraśśēri (1 January 1998). History of the Indigenous Indians. APH Publishing. pp. 46–. ISBN 978-81-7024-959-7. Retrieved 6 September 2013.
  2. ^ S. R. Bakshi (29 November 2009). Dr. B. R. Ambedkar Socio-Economic and Political Ideology. Pinnacle Technology. pp. 120–. ISBN 978-1-61820-500-1. Retrieved 6 September 2013.
  3. ^ Dr. Bheemrao Ambedkar (1948). The Untouchables. Gautambookcentre. pp. 71–. ISBN 978-81-905689-2-0. Retrieved 6 September 2013.

--Eshwar.omTalk tome 22:56, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

The source you quote is not Ambedkar but B.R. Bhandarkar (not to be confused with R. G. Bhandarkar); none of the sources you quote have any bearing in linguistics or anthropology, just having a book published in a topic that one has no specialty in doesn't make it reliable. Linguistic history of the Indian subcontinent provides a more scholarly understanding of the subject. —SpacemanSpiff 03:55, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for creation/Noorpur Muzbida Harsana

Dear India experts: The above is an article about an Indian village that is in the Afc. Can someone please take a look at it? Thanks. —Anne Delong (talk) 03:37, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

  • Namaste and welcome to WikiProject India noticeboard. I don't think we'll find many references for this village (you may see WP:INDAFDKI). Are you asking to improve the article? In that case, I can add few references and remove non-encyclopedic portions from the submission. --Tito☸Dutta 03:43, 4 September 2013 (UTC)
That would be helpful. The original editor hasn't made any changes for a year. I understand that towns just need proof of legal existence to pass notability, but I don't know where to look, so if you can make the improvements you suggested it can be moved to the main encyclopedia. —Anne Delong (talk) 03:55, 4 September 2013 (UTC)
  • Namaste, I started copyediting the article and found this article. I am unsure if this is about the same place. Some information are matching and some are not. --Tito☸Dutta 04:15, 4 September 2013 (UTC)
  • Yes, I saw that too, but I think that Noorpur is a larger area with a bigger population, whereas the village in the article I posted here is a small place, perhaps inside the boundary of the Noorpur area. I don't know enough about how Indian municipalities are divided up; that's why I thought someone more familiar with India might be able to describe it more accurately. —Anne Delong (talk) 04:32, 4 September 2013 (UTC)
  • I'll ask GaneshK who created the other article. Actually the situation is a bit complicated since the other article was created by a bot. Let's see if GaneshK can help. Else, we need to find some other option. --Tito☸Dutta 04:39, 4 September 2013 (UTC)
  • This is a village in Bagpat district with a population of 1283; 686M, 597F, part of Khekada/Khekara sub district. The official name is just Noorpur Muzbida and has its own village panchayat. —SpacemanSpiff 05:22, 4 September 2013 (UTC)
Thanks Spaceman. The article may need to be called Noorpur Muzbida. — Ganeshk (talk) 12:27, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

Institute of Mathematical Sciences

Numerous pages on India-related topics currently link to Institute of Mathematical Sciences, a disambiguation page. They should link to Institute of Mathematical Sciences, Chennai. Could people here help fix this? Michael Hardy (talk) 03:18, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

  • Namaste and welcome to WikiProject India noticeboard. I am doing it. I'll inform you at your talk page after finishing this task. --Tito☸Dutta 03:27, 7 September 2013 (UTC)
  • I don't know what is wrong [Institute of Mathematical Sciences here]. Actually there is not any dablinks in these pages. I have checked transcluded templates, there is not any problem either. I have fixed the dabs. --Tito☸Dutta 04:06, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

NROER: CC-BY-SA content

The National Repository of Open Educational Resources content is now available under CC-BY-SA license. The images might be particularly useful for India-related articles on Wikipedia. utcursch | talk 20:42, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

wow, that's a wonderful news. I saw the news in the mailing list today. Thanks for sharing it. --Dwaipayan (talk) 22:44, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
I will see if there is any automatic system or bot available at Commons to take this loot away. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 08:48, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
  • There isn't any automatic bot facility available for us as of now. But you may upload the images from http://nroer.in/gstudio/resources/images/?page=1 to Commons and use the template {{NROER}} where you insert the license information. The template will fill in all the necessary license info and categories. Admins or reviewers will review the image and then its all free for use.
    However, we have found some samples which would not be allowed on Commons for various reasons. For example some images are PD India but not PD in USA. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 05:50, 27 August 2013 (UTC)
I skimmed through half of the 64 pages at the site. There are some nice color pictures of flora, fauna, and natural scenery. Those could be very useful. However, the quality of some the pictures black and white pictures is poor. A third of the pictures are illustrations from geometry or arithmetic books published by the Ministry of Education in the 1950s. There are a few pictures, e.g. of the Shah of Iran visiting the Qutub Minar etc, which might be of some interest. Some pictures, such as this picture of Hitler, I'm unsure about. They are there because they were in an NCERT textbook, but did the book have rights to publish it? I'm can't say. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 09:23, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

GANDHI'S SALT MARCH

I'm not certain, but I believe that Dandi and Danti, are interchanged in the Wiki article on the Salt March. It doesn't make sense as written. Thanks, 71.83.107.69 (talk) 14:56, 3 September 2013 (UTC)Richard Bargen, MD

  • Namaste and welcome to WikiProject India. Can you please link the article? The article Mahatma Gandhi is in the process of an expansion or major restructuring. Mention @Fowler&fowler: --Tito☸Dutta 19:04, 3 September 2013 (UTC)
Richard Bargen, I haven't really taken a good look at the Dandi March article, but where is it called "Danti March?" Fowler&fowler«Talk» 09:05, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

Royalty puffery on India-related pages

As many editors are painfully aware ("painfully," because they've wasted much valuable time on it), there is widespread "royalty puffery" on India-related articles, in which editors fill up the pages of descendants of former rulers of princely states with the old-style HH Maharajadhiraja Sri Sri Sri Supercalifragilistic of All Ten Square Miles, etc etc. The latest example of this obscenity is Priyadarshini Raje Scindia, a woman whose only claim to fame is that she is married to the descendant of the former ruler of Gwalior who is a junior minister of power in the Indian government Jyotiraditya Madhavrao Scindia. The problem with these articles is that Indian newspapers—who task a wide-eyed cub-reporter, making a pittance for a salary, with trailing the "royal, or whose editor is himself very upper-class—often do describe them in these gushing terms. But the plain fact is the rulers, who, regardless of their descent from the Sun or the Moon, were creations of the British, lost their power in 1948, and their titles, privileges, and privy purses in 1971. They are not "Titular Rulers" of anywhere. Both Mr. and Mrs. Scindia are ordinary Indian citizens, except that Mr. Scindia is fighting with his sisters over the $2.3 billion property left behind by his deceased father. The ordinary Indian citizen of Madhya Pradesh, the state he represents in parliament, on the other hand, has children with malnutrition rates higher than the poorest countries of sub-Saharan Africa. The PRS article came up for AfD for a second time, but the same one, two, or three, editors turned up and saved it. I think WP:INDIA needs to do something about this shame, and in a hurry. All the people who died in the Indian freedom movement, from which the princes were conspicuously absent, did not die in vain. The princes were playing instead at their extra-long Gwalior Palace dining table with their extra-long toy train set, replete with tracks, which ferried expensive European wine and spirits from one end to the other. Guess who paid for those luxuries? The same ordinary Indian whose children today are underweight and stunted. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 08:50, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

New article: Durjanwas

Durjanwas was just published in main namespace. It would benefit from improvements such as better sources and expansion, if anyone is interested. Cheers, Northamerica1000(talk) 01:00, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Transl

Template:Transl has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page.

Template:Transl is up for deletion. Pages like this, which use the International Alphabet of Sanskrit Transliteration (IAST) (or other systems), may suffer. Future edits may be tedious as a lot of Sanskrit texts are solely available in IAST format and not in the original script. Join the discussion and voice your opinions.

Kenfyre (talk) 10:59, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

  • Namaste @Kenfyre: and welcome to WikiProject India noticeboard. Thanks for notifying us about the discussion. But, generally, these are included at WP:DSI. Let us know if you have any question. Tito☸Dutta 13:35, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Jai Shri Shani Dev Satrod Dham Hisar

Hello India experts: I am not sure whether this is an Indian topic or not, because I can't figure out which parts are the place names. Have I given this submission the right title? Is this a subject worth improving? If so, it seems as though the submitter will need a lot of help. —Anne Delong (talk) 12:41, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

It's just another local temple to Shani in Hisar (district). Don't think there's anything much about it anywhere. —SpacemanSpiff 16:13, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

Use of Indic-text in lead/infobox

I was not following Wikipedia regularly for last 2-3 months. In the meanwhile, I have observed that Indic-name has been added in a large number of India-related articles. Is there a change in the consensus? Kindly let me know the latest consensus on this issue. Amartyabag TALK2ME 07:28, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

The official consensus is still the old one (which cannot be really summarized) that said no to indic scripts. But there have been numerous discussions over here over the year or so which have been slammed showing the old consensus. And the fact remains that indic scripts are vastly used and are still being introduced and that this topic is the most revisited one on this noticeboard. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 18:46, 9 September 2013 (UTC)
WP:INDICSCRIPT is the last consensus on this. —SpacemanSpiff 09:39, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

How to spell "Nachuk Tahate Shyama"

Tito Dutta wanted me to write "Nachuk Tahate Shyama" but I'm having trouble finding reliable sources. Is there an alternate spelling? Does anyone have access to academic databases? WhisperToMe (talk) 20:49, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

U mean spell in bengali? Will "নাচুক তাহাতে শ্যামা" do ? --Vigyanitalkਯੋਗਦਾਨ 03:44, 10 September 2013 (UTC)
  • @Vigyani: , @WhisperToMe:, Namaste and Welcome to WikiProject India noticeboard. I had already provided sources and alternative names at your talk page. Let us know if have any other question. --Tito☸Dutta 13:32, 10 September 2013 (UTC)
To all: Thank you :) WhisperToMe (talk) 14:02, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

Climate data for Indian cities

For some time, the Meerut article had two tables for climate data. Then sometime ago one of them was removed because the reference url had changed (the site changed its url format) and the editor considered the url to be incorrect. Also, the climate data was changed per a new reference added by the user. (see [diff]). I'm not saying it was vandalism or anything, but it brought up a question on what could/should be considered an RS for climate data for Indian cities.

Copy-pasting my comment from Talk:Meerut#Climate_data: It appears we have multiple sources for climate data with the sources providing different values for the avg monthly temperatures.

  1. climate-data.org is currently in use
  2. worldweatheronline.com has been previously used
  3. rainfall data from India Meteorological Department for 2008-12 (archived at webcite). Wayback machine has an archive showing data for 2005-09.
  4. temperature data from India meteorological department which was previously used (but is still listed as a source in the template). The link doesn't seem to work now and the wayback machine doesn't have it archived.

The question now is which of these data should be used? The data appears to differ by as much as 5 degree celsius in some cases. Any ideas/views for deciding are welcome.

Since the above problem probably applies to all Indian cities and not just Meerut, I thought there should probably be a consensus regarding this.--Siddhartha Ghai (talk) 20:35, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

Climate data is one of the worst things for reliability. I've noticed this before when I stumble on something in a Wikipedia article which is absolutely clearly wrong, but can't replace with better data because the data source I want to replace it with is no more reliable in general than the one I want to remove. There's also the effect that while something may be obviously way off to someone who lives there, someone from another country might not even notice the error. e.g. if someone replaced the Death Valley climate data with temperatures about 20°F too high, a lot of people ,even Americans, wouldnt see anything obviously wrong because Death Valley is just "that place in the desert where it gets stupidly hot all the time" in their minds. Some of my experiences and opinions are listed at User:Soap/Climate data essay. The best advice I can come up with is to have no firm policy on which sites are more reliable than others, and just take each case on an individual basis, even if we end up using different sources for different cities. Generally if we can find a few sources that agree with each other it's better and more trustworthy to use those sources than to use an outlier that doesn't agree with any of them, but even then it's highly possible that the "majority" is still wrong. But verifiability is the standard we should follow, and if we're unsure about the truthfulness of a source, it is OK to just say "according to WXMeteo" etc. so that readers don't come away with misinformed ideas. —Soap— 21:12, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
First, the diff link (which I forgot to place above) is [22].
Second, I agree that we can't know which websites are more reliable than others, but in the end they're taking their data from somewhere, and as far as I know, the only people in India who do collect climate data are the India Meteorological Department people. (I'm not aware of anyone else running stations for collecting data.) So, in my opinion, we should consider the people actually collecting the data most reliable, which in case of India is the IMD. Unfortunately data from the IMD isn't availaible easily for most cities (as can be seen by the broken url above). The question then would be what to do when such url breaking happens (assuming we can't find an archived page anywhere)? Do we keep the data or do we replace it? And if we do replace it, shouldn't we choose the source which conforms most closely to the IMD?--Siddhartha Ghai (talk) 22:20, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
For Indian geographical entities, IMD data is not reliable, when available. There are some instances when Hongkong Obserrvatory Data were used. I am not sure about the archiving. Often, the URL loss of such government sites are due to th exact that they changed the URL, and the data should be available in some new URL.--Dwaipayan (talk) 03:40, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
IMD data not reliable for Indian geographic entities?!? Seems a bit odd to me. Could you point to specific instances (or previous discussions) where this was found. Also, I don't understand how anyone else (the Hongkong observatory, for instance) have independent climate data for Indian geographical entities. Wouldn't there need to be ground stations collecting temperature, rain data etc at the location concerned? I haven't heard of anyone other than the IMD having ground stations in India.--Siddhartha Ghai (talk) 11:12, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
@Dwaipayan: see above.--Siddhartha Ghai (talk) 11:21, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
oooops, that was a fatal typo! I dont know what I was thinking when I typed that. IMD data needs to be used for Indian geographic entities, if available.--Dwaipayan (talk) 19:12, 28 August 2013 (UTC)
@Dwaipayan:: Right. So why don't we have this as a project guideline anywhere? I'd like this to be a guideline. If this is not the right place for such a proposal, please tell me where the proposal may be made.
Also pinging @Titodutta: and @SpacemanSpiff: who seem to be active. More views on the formulation of a guideline are welcome.--Siddhartha Ghai (talk) 07:48, 7 September 2013 (UTC)
I'm not really familiar with climate data sources. Isn't there a Central govt database for this? I know that for Chennai the Met dept has longstanding data for recordings at Meenambakkam and Nungambakkam. I'll try to find out if they are online. cheers. —SpacemanSpiff 16:07, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

IMD (see data store link) has rainfall data from 1901 and temperature from 1969 available by district. However the report costs some money, I think there's somewhere on wiki where you can post requests for resources; worth a try IMO. @Dwai, @Siddhartha Ghai. cheers. —SpacemanSpiff 16:09, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

This PDF file from IMD has minimum, maximum temp and rainfall data for many cities, averaged from 1901 to 2000. This was used for the article [[Tripura]. Yes, this data should take precedence over other sources. @SpacemanSpiff:, @Siddhartha Ghai:. Added that in Wikipedia:WikiProject Indian cities. However, this may need to be added at some more visible page.--Dwaipayan (talk) 00:59, 11 September 2013 (UTC)
@Dwaipayanc::Thanks for the addition. And I've seen that file, it doesn't contain Meerut.
Now what to do about the problem specific to Meerut article? The IMD data for Meerut was earlier availaible at [23] on mausam.gov.in, but that link is now broken (site seems to be down), and not archived in Wayback either.
Is there any policy about what to do if a source link is broken? Can the information be kept, or does it have to be deleted?--Siddhartha Ghai (talk) 00:58, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

request for sourcing assistance

The article Antha Scene Ledu need sourcing. Its text tells us filming wrapped July 19, 2013, promotion will begin September 21, 2013, and the film is slated for release November 2013. Its a Telugu and Tamil film and will need input and assistance from editors better able to find Tamil and Telugu sources. Certainly its production has been spoken of somewehere. Can anyone here help? Schmidt, Michael Q. 18:31, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

  • Namaste and welcome to WikiProject India noticeboard. I have searched in Google Telugu, but have not found any source. I feel, a) the film is going to release in November 2013 is a first hand report/original research. The article creator attempted creating an article on "Chakravarthy Ramachandra" the film's producer (he has made few films). They have created an article on the film production too Bad Monkey (notability unclear). His friend has created Rahul koda (with wrong cap) who is the film's screenplay writer. b) it is a low budget film c) they are just advertising/spamming. --Tito☸Dutta 19:01, 13 September 2013 (UTC)
  • Much appreciate the second set of eyes. Schmidt, Michael Q. 20:17, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

Foreign language spellings in articles related to poems

I heard that it is against the project's consensus to have the original written name of a poem (Hindi, Bengali, Tamil, etc.) in the article about a poem. See this edit.

May I see the discussion about this? I'm going to check the overall Manual of Style to see what it says. WhisperToMe (talk) 15:01, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

  • Namaste @WhisperToMe: and welcome to WikiProject India noticeboard once again. Actually it is just above. Or, see WP:INDICSCRIPT. People may like it, they may dislike it. But, the current consensus suggests not to include Indic script in lead. Let me know if you have any question. Tito☸Dutta 15:09, 10 September 2013 (UTC)
    • Is there another location where the original name of the poem may be included? I understand the reasoning was to prevent "territorial marking" of different people as mentioned in Wikipedia_talk:Noticeboard_for_India-related_topics/Archive_48#Native_languages_in_lead. However this is about a poem written in the Bengali language so it would be very useful for the reader to know how the name of the poem is written in Bengali. WhisperToMe (talk) 15:37, 10 September 2013 (UTC)
      • It is already in the title and in the lyrics section Nachuk Tahate Shyama. --Tito☸Dutta 15:44, 10 September 2013 (UTC)
        • Well, I tried a text search for "নাচুক তাহাতে শ্যামা" and it does not find it in there. The reader will likely not pick out which Bengali characters are "Nachuk Tahate Shyama" in the lyrics. Is it fine if the Bengali text is in the infobox? WhisperToMe (talk) 15:51, 10 September 2013 (UTC)
          • This is one of the problems with WP:INDICSCRIPT, especially as relates to literature. Native language spellings are a critical requirement for a good percentage of people who look at these articles (as opposed to bios etc), but we'll need to run a new and more structured RfC to identify these nuances. cheers. —SpacemanSpiff 16:00, 10 September 2013 (UTC)
            • I would also suggest changing INDICSCRIPT since it can conflict with other projects, and the wider community may strongly disagree. WhisperToMe (talk) 01:01, 11 September 2013 (UTC)
              • No. I oppose. This article also relates to literature. But, out articles often turn into something like this. --Tito☸Dutta 01:46, 11 September 2013 (UTC)
                • Poems from other countries typically do have their native names stated, whether Chinese, Japanese, Korean, or Russian. I'm not sure if the Wikipedia community would want the native names of Indian or Bangladeshi poems omitted when poems from other countries do have their native names. WhisperToMe (talk) 03:53, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

I think Whisper raises a good point. WP:INDICSCRIPT makes sense for biographical, geographical, philosophical etc articles where (1) the subject is (typically) not innately linked to one particular language, (2) including "native" scripts is often just territorial marking by editors, and of little use to general reader. However for articles related to literature (books, poems) this may not be an issue since typically the subject is intrinsically linked to a language and more importantly, if the reader wants to search for the primary document they will probably need the name spelled out in the Indic script.

Now I can think of some exceptions such as Jana Gana Mana (where some editors have debated whether it is truly in Bengali), historical texts pre-dating writing (Ramayana is clearly linked to Sanskrit; its link to Devanagari is at least arguable), and oral literature like movie songs (are they in Hindi/Urdu/...). I don't have a clean proposal for these exceptional cases but I think for written literature at least WP:INDICSCRIPT may be throwing out the baby with the bathwater and perhaps we can carve out a narrow exception without collateral damage or setting out edit-wars. Thoughts? Abecedare (talk) 04:17, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

@User:WhisperToMe, WP:INDICSCRIPT came about through an RfC, not just Wikiproject consensus. However, it wasn't a very well structured discussion as it focused mostly on bio and geo articles and didn't provide the requisite focus for arts and literature. We'll need to redo a proper discussion, but some sort of a proper recommendation needs to be arrived at prior to going down the RfC process again or we'll end up with similar troubles. —SpacemanSpiff 04:39, 11 September 2013 (UTC)
Do you think we should:
  1. Redo the RFC that led to WP:INDICSCRIPT? (That's reopening a can of worms!)
  2. Just carve a (written) literature exception for now ? (That I can start off)
  3. Neither/something else ?
Abecedare (talk) 05:07, 11 September 2013 (UTC)
I think 2 is a given (albeit including arts in addition to literature, e.g. It is definitely helpful to have Pather Panchali in Bengali too), but there might be something around 3 that is needed -- especially with numerous geo AfDs, we might need to include script in geo articles, but the scope needs to be clear -- e.g. Palghat should not have Tamil despite the fact that there's a significant minority population and so on. I think it should be crystal clear that only the state's official language and in cases where cities have additional official languages they could be included, but nothing more. I think structuring an RfC after a few discussions here might be helpful as the main problem last time was that the RfC became a moving target and caused the final outcome. So we probably need to list out the multiple options (1) Status quo, (2) Exceptions for (a) Lit, (b) arts, (c) geo and so on. cheers. —SpacemanSpiff 06:42, 11 September 2013 (UTC)
I think we may need multiple RFCs since the different classes of articles present different issues.
For example, I think the current WP:INDICSCRIPT is a good call for biographical articles. For literature articles, I have drafted a RFC proposal on my talk page for further discussion (Note: That is not an RFC per se; just trying to determine the scope and wording of the question to pose. Input welcome there.) The situation may be quite complex with geographic articles: for example how would we deal with features that cross state lines (eg, Cauvery River!), historic places/cities (eg, Indraprastha) or cities with close, but possibly not official, language associations (eg, Lucknow and Urdu). I can see the temptation to just go with the blanket prohibition, though editors with more experience in that area can weigh in and/or draft a RFC proposal. Abecedare (talk) 07:27, 11 September 2013 (UTC)
  • The initial old RfC did have different sections discussed separately. Only the closing admin did not consider them so. Anyways... we can always start another RfC. But who ever starts it, i would request then to include the option of having indic scripts, how many so ever possibly related, if more than one should be included in a footnote. There is no good reason to exclude them from lead other than aesthetics and edit-wars which both can be solved if a footnote of all possible scripts of Rajinikanth was present. For non-controversial articles, which would be say 80% of the scope, scripts can be added in lead. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 05:50, 12 September 2013 (UTC)
  • And please propose a brief and easy solution. I think the way we are approaching, our consensus will be something like

    "In "these" articles you may add Indic scripts, but not in "thEse" articles, again in "theSE" articles you may add Indic scripts, but again not in "thesE" articles. In 'thESE" articles you may add Indic scripts only if the article is uncontroversial, in "tHeSe" articles, please do not add Indic scripts if there was any dispute/edit warring over it already, for South Indian articles add only South Indian scripts and not Devanagari, for Adi Shankara's biography add .. umm I don't know what...


    Such conclusions will be difficult to explain. --Tito☸Dutta 08:04, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

I don't like the idea of going down this road (think downward, very slick!). The problem with carving out exceptions is that the exception will itself not be very clear.Something like Sare Jahan Se Achha springs to mind almost immediately as a problematic case. What's wrong with decluttering the lead and just sticking it in the infobox as we've decided to do? --regentspark (comment) 18:50, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

Is there space to put it in the infobox of Nachuk Tahate Shyama? If the article has no infobox, will it be okay in the lead? Often solutions aren't easy but they may be the best and we just have to do our best. WhisperToMe (talk) 07:19, 14 September 2013 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Noticeboard_for_India-related_topics/Archive_54&oldid=1151015967"