Misplaced Pages

talk:Noticeboard for India-related topics: Difference between revisions - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 20:36, 30 October 2009 editRegentsPark (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators45,714 edits →Darjeeling, Sugauli Treaty, and Greater Nepal: reply← Previous edit Latest revision as of 11:25, 3 January 2025 edit undoVelthorian (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users1,020 edits →Discussion at Misplaced Pages talk:Manual of Style/India-related articles # Proposal for WP:INDICSCRIPTTags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit 
Line 1: Line 1:
{{WikiProject banner shell|
<center>'''This page is a notice board for things particularly relevant to Wikipedians working on articles on India.'''<br />'''Do you need the Indic name(s) of something or somebody? Post a ].'''</center>
{{WikiProject India |importance=NA |assess-date=April 2023}}
}}
{{Misplaced Pages:Misplaced Pages Signpost/Templates/Signpost article link for WikiProjects|link=Misplaced Pages:Misplaced Pages Signpost/2011-11-14/WikiProject report|writer= ]| ||day =14|month=November|year=2011}}
{{Misplaced Pages:Misplaced Pages Signpost/Templates/Signpost article link for WikiProjects|link=Misplaced Pages:Misplaced Pages Signpost/2007-12-26/WikiProject report|writer= ]|||day =26|month=December|year=2007}}
{{Press
|author = Pete Hunt
|title = Will Indian Courts Tame Misplaced Pages?
|date = September 22, 2024
|org = ]
|url = https://thediplomat.com/2024/09/will-indian-courts-tame-wikipedia/
|lang =
|quote = "I would personally hate to see Misplaced Pages get banned in India," an editor at an India-related noticeboard said.
|archiveurl =
|archivedate = <!-- do not wikilink -->
|accessdate = September 22, 2024
|author2 = Apoorva Mandhani
|title2 = In ANI vs Wikimedia, Round 1 goes to India’s tech law. The US firm has taken a beating twice
|date2 = October 30, 2024
|org2 = ]
|url2 = https://theprint.in/ground-reports/in-ani-vs-wikimedia-round-1-goes-to-indias-tech-law-the-us-co-has-taken-a-beating-twice/2333951/
|lang2 =
|quote2 = “I would personally hate to see Misplaced Pages get banned in India,” an editor at an India-related noticeboard wrote. These noticeboards are public administrative pages where editors can discuss issues related to Misplaced Pages articles.
|archiveurl2 =
|archivedate2 = <!-- do not wikilink -->
|accessdate2 = October 30, 2024
|author3 = Vineet Bhalla
|title3 = A Delhi High Court case could end up threatening how Misplaced Pages works in India
|date3 = November 5, 2024
|org3 = ]
|url3 = https://scroll.in/article/1075145/a-delhi-high-court-case-could-end-up-threatening-how-wikipedia-works-in-india
|lang3 =
|quote3 = Indeed, this is what is indicated by public discussions on Misplaced Pages noticeboards – public forums where editors of the encylopedia discuss issues related to content, policy and site maintenance. “I can’t imagine they would reveal any names,” wrote one user. “That would set a terrible precedent.”
|archiveurl3 =
|archivedate3 = <!-- do not wikilink -->
|accessdate3 = November 5, 2024
}}

{{center|'''This page is a noticeboard for things particularly relevant to Wikipedians working on articles on India.'''}}
<div class=plainlinks style="text-align: center; width: auto; margin: .5em 15%; padding: .5em 1em; border: solid #aaaaaa 1px; font-size:90%">''''''</div> <div class=plainlinks style="text-align: center; width: auto; margin: .5em 15%; padding: .5em 1em; border: solid #aaaaaa 1px; font-size:90%">''''''</div>

<div style="height: 100px; overflow:auto; border: 1.5px solid #242424; width: 98%; background: #ecd9bc; padding: 4px; text-align: left;">
{{Misplaced Pages:WikiProject India/Article alerts/Table}}
</div>


{| style="border: transparent; background: transparent; float: right;" cellpadding=0 cellspacing=0 {| style="border: transparent; background: transparent; float: right;" cellpadding=0 cellspacing=0
Line 6: Line 50:
|{{Shortcut|WT:IN|WT:INB}} |{{Shortcut|WT:IN|WT:INB}}
|- |-
|{{archives|auto=short|bot=MiszaBot II|age=5|search=yes}}<!-- |{{archives|auto=short|bot=lowercase sigmabot III|age=15|search=yes}}
-->{{User:MiszaBot/config {{User:MiszaBot/config
|maxarchivesize = 250K |maxarchivesize = 250K
|counter = 42 |counter = 78
|algo = old(5d) |algo = old(15d)
|minthreadstoarchive = 1
|minthreadsleft = 3
|archive = Misplaced Pages talk:Noticeboard for India-related topics/Archive %(counter)d |archive = Misplaced Pages talk:Noticeboard for India-related topics/Archive %(counter)d
}} }}
|- |-
|{{WP India|class=NA|small=yes}} |{{Meetup-India}}
|} <!-- |}

== Notes and References ==

{{Reflist}}Please maintain this Reflist section as the last section in this page; do not add a section below this one -->

== Help needed in identifying photos of ] fort and ] in ] ==

I have a photo I took of Jaisalmer Fort back in 1994 - ] which is on the Jaisalmer page. Someone wrote to say recently that it was actually a photo of Mehrangarh fort in Jodhpur. Now, I feel very confident that my photo is of Jaisalmer but when I went looking for other photos both on Wikimedia and using Google I found a lot of confusion between photos of the two forts. It is true that from some angles they look similar - but I believe they can be distinguished if one looks carefully. If you look at the detail in the photo of Mehrangahr at you will see the construction at the right of the photo is very different from that shown in my photo of Jaisalmer
For further evidence - have a look at the stock photo here -

I could be wrong, of course (in which case I apologise) but, whatever, a quick search on WikiMedia and Google will quickly show that, whoever is right, a number of photos of these forts have been misidentied (even on Govt. tourist sites), and it would be great if someone could sort them out.

Is there anyone here who really knows and can identify which fort is which? And, please, could you then go through the pertinent articles in the Misplaced Pages and WikiCommons and correct the mistaken ones? Thank you very much, ] (]) 03:03, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

:Looks like the Jodhpur Fort to me. The Jaiselmer fort, from what I recall (it's been a while!) is wider and lower. --] <small>(])</small> 12:38, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
::Jodhpur fort. Have been to both. ] (]) 10:07, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

== Notability of स्वप्नलोक ==

Another editor created the article ] with the following text:
: '''स्वप्नलोक''' is http://doordrishti.blogspot.com/ लोकप्रिय हिन्दी चिट्ठा है । इसे विवेक सिंह द्वारा चलाया जाता है । इस चिट्ठे की विशेषता यह है कि यह चिट्ठाकार की लेखनी का प्रतिनिधित्व करता है न कि किसी विशेष विचारधारा या विधा का । इस चिट्ठे पर व्यंग्य, कहानी, कविता, गज़ल, कार्टून और सामान्यज्ञान के अलावा और भी बहुत कुछ है जो पाठकों को आकर्षित करता है ।
If you think the subject is notable, you may want to create an English-language article about it, or add the Hindi text to the Hindi Misplaced Pages. The article ] may be deleted speedily. -- ] (]) 15:15, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

: I speedied the page about the non-notable blog. Its claimed importance was simply that it "represents the writings of the blogger, and not some ideology". ] (]) 15:38, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

== iloveindia.com ==

There are a large number of "references" being added to articles without edit summary from an IP number that seem to me to be intended to promote an external website rather than as an actual source for the articles they are being added to. For examples see . See ]. Before commencing a lot of deletions, I thought it should be discussed here. If there is a consensus that these links should be deleted, is there a simple way to do a mass reversion?--<small>] | ]</small> 19:49, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
* Iloveindia.com was used by me because it was a great source. There is no other intentions. It is a great link that is why I used it. These is no reason that it should be deleted. I did a great amount of clean up work as well and I don't want them to get undone. Please keep them as it is! Also if you wish to delete the iloveindia.com reference will the other clean up edits I made be erased? (] (]) 20:45, 26 October 2009 (UTC))

::IP, I noticed that you were doing some very useful cleanup work on several India related articles, and even left a welcome message on your talk page earlier today. Unfortunately www.iloveindia.com is just another generic website, and we have no way to be confident if the information it hosts is reliable or not (see ] for the type of sources we consider reliable on wikipedia). Therefore we need to remove citations to this website that you added in good-faith, but there is no reason for us to undo any of your other clean-up work. In fact would you be willing to remove the links yourself ? You can access the list of pages you edited at ]. I would also recommend getting an ] on wikipedia, which will make both editing and communications easier. Cheers. ] (]) 21:51, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
* I have removed all the iloveindia.com reference. (] (]) 23:57, 26 October 2009 (UTC))
:::It looks like there are left although I have not examined them to see which user has added them. They should all go. --<small>] | ]</small> 00:29, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
::::Hi, 159.91,151.97! It looks like you're making some good progress on your editing technique! But I would agree with KenWalker that iloveindia.com isn't a reliable reference. A number of the articles I looked at seemed very casual or informal. (At random, I just picked "How to Watch Birds" . Statements such as "thoroughly enjoyed by people of all age groups" are ] and "make sure that you stick to certain tips" isn't even correct English.) In that article there are no citations, no references, no links, no date, no author. Reliable references need things such as those. Otherwise, Regards ] (]) 13:56, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

== ] - more eyes please ==

Hi

I've been copyediting this page for some time now. Another editor is making good-faith amendments (he is a successful student from one of these schools) but his edits are a bit NPOV. I would appreciate it if someone with a bit more knowledge of the Indian schools system (particularly in Delhi) could give this article a look; as there are only the two of us currently editing it's potentially a bit confrontational, and I don't want to discourage the other editor. Thanks. &nbsp;<span style="border-left: 1px solid #c30;">]</span><sub style="text-shadow: 3px 3px 3px rgba(255,255,0,0.75); color: #c30;">].</sub> 20:58, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
:Hey. Just checking quickly, your most recent edit here is "good" . You added a reference, dated it, and removed the original research phrase "came as an exception to the image of government schools with the best of facilities". The smallest bit of caution: my guess is the original research phrase is correct. I don't know about Indian schools, and that phrase was highly useful to me. If it could have been "saved" by adding a reliable reference, or by moderating the statement, that would have been optimal. Best Regards, ] (]) 14:25, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

== ], ], and ] ==


== Good article reassessment for ] ==
I noticed an addition to the Darjeeling page stating that Darjeeling was a part of Nepal and was ceded to India under the Sugauli Treaty in 1819, but the article also says that the area was leased by the British from the Chogyal of Sikkim in 1839 and these two pieces of information are contradictory. The leasing from Sikkim is cited, but I am not confident about the quality of that source. I trimmed some or from the sugauli treaty part but would appreciate it if someone with more knowledge about this could take a look at it.
] has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the ]. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. ] (]) 19:27, 19 December 2024 (UTC)


== Discussion at ] ==
As a follow-up, I searched JSTOR for Sugauli Treaty and all I could find was an Economic and Political Weekly article that indicated that all the territory seized by the British was subsequently returned (see my note on ]). The ] article makes similar claims about the treaty (though, this may be ok because the article is about a movement and claiming that the movement rests on a belief says nothing about the veracity of that belief). Again, if someone who knows something about this can take a look, that would be great. --] <small>(])</small> 19:02, 28 October 2009 (UTC)


] There is a discussion at ] that may be of interest to participants of this WikiProject. ] (]) 14:32, 28 December 2024 (UTC)
:According to Darjeeling was ceded to to the EIC on Feb 1st 1835. It's just a listing though and doesn't have treaty details. ] (]) 19:15, 28 October 2009 (UTC)


== Nomination of ] for deletion ==
: (1894) confirms the cession (not lease) of Darjeeling in Feb 1835, with some details of the circumstances. Is this good enough ? ] (]) 19:22, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
<div class="afd-notice">
<div class="floatleft" style="margin-bottom:0;">]</div>A discussion is taking place as to whether the article ] is suitable for inclusion in Misplaced Pages according to ] or whether it should be ].


The article will be discussed at ''']''' until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
The actual history as it relates to Darjeeling is much more complex than what I said above, and involves the Treaties of Segauli (1816), Titaliya (1817), Tunlong (1861) and Sinchulia (1865) besides the 1835 bit I mentioned, and some fighting in 1849-50. See (pages 47-48) and for more gory details (the dates in the two don't match up exactly but I guess that is because of the differnce in the timings of the skirmishes, signing of the treaties, transfer of land etc.) ] (]) 19:54, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
:That's interesting. EB1911 says that Darjeeling was taken by the British by the 1816 treaty and handed over to Sikkim (apparently because Nepal had 'wrested' the region from Sikkim at an earlier unstated date). So, I guess Darjeeling was a part of the Sugauli treaty after all though apparently not in the way it is currently described. --] <small>(])</small> 21:12, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
::Hmmm, that's interesting. I never delved so much into the history during the improvement of the article (back in 2006). So, what do you guys suggest? Do you need to change anything in the History portion of ] article? Or, any change in ]? What needs to be removed is that additional small sub-paragraph from History segment of ] article (and discussion in talk page in case of any dispute). Also, the article ] definitely needs copy-edit, and use of more encyclopedic language.--] (]) 14:50, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
::: It does appear that the treaty of 1816 affected the status of Darjeeling, so that is a useful addition to the history of Darjeeling and that part of the subpara should be corrected and merged into the main history section (a separate connection with Nepal is unnecessary). I agree that the Sugauli Treaty is a bit of a mess and needs cleaning up and verification (I'm not sure if the treaty is better called ] - some legwork may be necessary. --] <small>(])</small> 20:36, 30 October 2009 (UTC)


Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.<!-- Template:Afd notice --></div>
== Help needed reading the Dravidian language ==
It is alleged that this clan fails ], and the sources in use require review by a ] expert. No comments by other users directly address this concern. –] (]]) 04:43, 31 December 2024 (UTC)


:From a cursory glance sources such as Shakespear, John (1912), Bertram Sausmarez Carey and Henry Newman Tuck (1896) and Shaw, William (1929) should be discarded per ] and for being severely outdated. Lalthangliana, B's master thesis should also be discarded unless proven to have had a significant scholarly influence per ]. Rest, I do not have access to, so I cannot evaluate them. - ] (]) 04:57, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
Please see the ]. Can someone read the text and tell description of the deities written on the plank, or at least their names in sequence from top to bottom. I want to separate the images so that they can be used in the ] articles. Thanks. --] <sup> ] </sup> 17:21, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
:Can't read Telugu, but here's what I've been able to identify (or at least think I've identified):
:*1 - ] (Guruvu/Jupiter)
:*2 - ] (Budhudu/Mercury)
:*3 - ] (Shukrudu/Venus)
:*4 - ] (Kujudu/Mars)<ref></ref>
:*5 - ] (Rahuvu/North Lunar Node)
:*6 - ] (Chandrudu/Moon)
:*7 - ] (Ravi/Sun)
:*8 - ] (Kethuvu/South Lunar Node)
:*9 - ] (Sani/Saturn)
:anyone, feel free to correct if I've made an error :) cheers. -]''']''' 17:51, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
:: Is it Telugu? Identifying them like thsi would be ]. PLease somebody read the planks. --] <sup> ] </sup> 05:21, 30 October 2009 (UTC)


== Requested move at ] ==
;References
{{reflist}}


There is a requested move discussion at ] that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. ] ] 12:13, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
:I can read Telugu. I had a difficult time with Kujudu, but was able to find a reference. HTH. Regards, <font color="navy">] (])</font> 10:44, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
::Saw the lion and id'd 5 as Budha, didn't pay attention to the snake lower body! -]''']''' 19:17, 30 October 2009 (UTC)


== Discussion at ] ==
== New Pages - Indian villages and towns ==


There is an ongoing proposal for ] ] ] 11:24, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
There have been a large number of articles added recently about small villages and towns in India. Do they warrant inclusion into the project? I can start tagging them all as I patrol them if you'd like. ] (]) 15:07, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
:Villages and towns are inherently notable and are covered by the gazetteer function of our ]. Also see ]. The pages will not get deleted without an AfD, and even then only if they are not verifiable. cheers. -]''']''' 15:12, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
::Right, I was asking if I should tag them as part of ] or wait until they're more substantial. I assume the whole point of the project is to better flesh articles like these out, but I figured I'd ask first. ] (]) 15:19, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
:::Ah, sorry; when anyone says tag, I assume they mean "tag for deletion". Tagging the WP project will be helpful, but I think ] runs a bot that tags pages if they have the necessary categories on them. cheers. -]''']''' 15:23, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
::::Gotcha. I'll let the bot do its thing then, no sense jumping in and ruining any consistency. Take care. ] (]) 15:29, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 11:25, 3 January 2025

This project page does not require a rating on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject iconIndia
WikiProject iconThis page is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Misplaced Pages's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia
Note icon
This page was last assessed in April 2023.
Noticeboard for India-related topics was featured in a WikiProject Report in the Signpost on 14 November 2011.
Noticeboard for India-related topics was featured in a WikiProject Report in the Signpost on 26 December 2007.
Media mentionThis page has been mentioned by multiple media organizations:
This page is a noticeboard for things particularly relevant to Wikipedians working on articles on India. Click here to add a new section
Article alerts for WikiProject India

Did you know

Articles for deletion

(112 more...)

Proposed deletions

(11 more...)

Categories for discussion

Templates for discussion

Redirects for discussion

Files for discussion

Featured list candidates

Good article nominees

(5 more...)

Requests for comments

Peer reviews

Requested moves

(8 more...)

Articles to be merged

(20 more...)

Articles to be split

(13 more...)

Articles for creation

(48 more...)

This table is updated daily by a bot
Shortcuts
Archiving icon
Archives

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10
11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20
21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30
31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40
41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50
51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60
61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70
71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78


This page has archives. Sections older than 15 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 3 sections are present.

Misplaced Pages Meetups edit
Upcoming
none
Recent
Outside India
Past meetups

Good article reassessment for Temper (film)

Temper (film) has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 19:27, 19 December 2024 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:Disney Star#First sentence & infobox

There is a discussion at Talk:Disney Star#First sentence & infobox that may be of interest to participants of this WikiProject. RachelTensions (talk) 14:32, 28 December 2024 (UTC)

Nomination of Guite people for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Guite people is suitable for inclusion in Misplaced Pages according to Misplaced Pages's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Guite people until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

It is alleged that this clan fails WP:GNG, and the sources in use require review by a WP:GSCASTE expert. No comments by other users directly address this concern. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 04:43, 31 December 2024 (UTC)

From a cursory glance sources such as Shakespear, John (1912), Bertram Sausmarez Carey and Henry Newman Tuck (1896) and Shaw, William (1929) should be discarded per WP:RAJ and for being severely outdated. Lalthangliana, B's master thesis should also be discarded unless proven to have had a significant scholarly influence per WP:SCHOLARSHIP. Rest, I do not have access to, so I cannot evaluate them. - Ratnahastin (talk) 04:57, 31 December 2024 (UTC)

Requested move at Template_talk:Bangladeshi_wedding#Requested_move_25_December_2024

There is a requested move discussion at Template_talk:Bangladeshi_wedding#Requested_move_25_December_2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Bongan →TalkToMe← 12:13, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

Discussion at Misplaced Pages talk:Manual of Style/India-related articles # Proposal for WP:INDICSCRIPT

There is an ongoing proposal for WP:Indicscript Velthorion (𑲀𑲰𑱺‎!) 11:24, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

Categories: