Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 02:57, 2 December 2006

• ]

Do you need the Indic name(s) of something or somebody? Post a request for it.

Archives 1 | 1a | 2 | 2a | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19

New 'People' Workgroup?

Is there a chance of a new workgroup being created under 'People' or a similar title? Within this workgroup could be included major figures of India such as Mahatma Gandhi, Nehru, Tilak, etc. There could even be sub-workgroups splitting them up into celebrities, politicians, saints/godmen, etc. Tags and banners would need to be created for this purpose. Hopefully there will be enough consensus to give the green light to creating and expanding this new workgroup? Ekantik 06:47, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Biography articles are already maintained by WikiProject Biography grouped by profession. Would it really help to seperate them by nationality? Although I was thinking the name could be WikiProject Indian biography that would be child project of both India and biography projects (just like Indian cinema is related to Films and India projects). -- Ganeshk (talk) 06:54, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Sounds like a good idea. What about a separate section for saints/godmen? I haven't seen a separate section for them in WP:HINDU although this could be done over there. Ekantik 01:21, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

You could post at Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Biography requesting for such categorization. -- Ganeshk (talk) 01:25, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Even though that would probably involve religious leaders of other religions and traditions it might better the project for saints/godmen of all religions to have a common set of guidelines to work by. Good suggestions, thanks. I'll get on it straightaway. Ekantik 01:32, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

I support the proposal as mentioned by Ganeshk. It would be a great idea to have a separete project on Indian personalities. Amartyabag 09:34, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Articles by class and importance

There is a discussion going on about creating statistics in the following format:

India articles by quality and importance
Quality	Importance
	Top	High	Mid	Low	NA	???	Total
FA	3	7	34	49			93
FL	7	9	29	139			184
FM					68		68
A	1	2	2	2			7
GA	28	61	176	466		1	732
B	135	463	890	1,811	1	164	3,464
C	104	908	2,338	10,412		775	14,537
Start	16	998	5,193	64,045	2	2,287	72,541
Stub	1	294	2,324	95,215	2	2,271	100,107
List	24	212	649	5,263	26	204	6,378
Category					37,798		37,798
Disambig					715		715
File					1,425		1,425
Portal					88		88
Project					198		198
Redirect	1	94	393	5,940	3,820		10,248
Template					5,737		5,737
NA		24	31	350	5,612		6,017
Draft					821		821
Assessed	320	3,072	12,059	183,692	56,313	5,702	261,158
Unassessed	1	1	1	102		2,819	2,924
Total	321	3,073	12,060	183,794	56,313	8,521	264,082
WikiWork factors (?)		ω = 1,033,767			Ω = 5.40

This table is now up to date again.
It is updated by a tool on the toolserver; it will not work if the toolserver is
having problems. If this chart is showing much more than zero,
then the table will be updated slowly or not at all.

Using the above idea, I updated our banner to implement intersection categories. Please check India articles by quality and importance. Now you can find out Stub-Class India articles of Top-importance. I feel B-Class India articles of Top-importance will be really useful for FA writers for pick articles. And Category:Stub-Class India articles of Top-importance could feed WP:INCOTW. Please comment. Regards, Ganeshk (talk) 22:47, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

It seems good to have it in a tabular format. =Nichalp «Talk»= 00:44, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Kukhran

Who edited the Kukhran page?

the grammar is absolutely terrible and a lot of the information is speculative (such as greeks having intermingled with Kukhran tribes???? I'd be very interested to see the evidence you can provide for this assertion)

in fact the previous page prior to this one was much better and more accurate with regards to scope and historical verification. Whoever edited this page (I mean you're a Kukhran as well, at least you better be), I don't mean to put you down but before you edit a page like this consider the grammar and citation that is necessary in order to maintain a certain level of professionalism and respect. You need citations on many occasions and deleted! the writing of previous authors who actually did a very good job and whose actual work was accurate.

This is what I absolutely hate about wikipedia you know someone comes along and does a great job and then another person comes along and ruins it.

I mean I see here you did try and create a more distinct structure to the page and create differentiated categories which is great, yet you added some of your own speculative information which is (ahem) not the ultimate goal of this website I presume, and this whole project for that regard.

I'd like to edit this page and check for grammatical mistakes as well as add much needed RESEARCHED citations and evidence. Being a Kukhran myself the validity and accuracy of this page is essential and important to me.

please contact me at chadhas@umich.edu to let me know how I can get involved and fix this page.

Thank you.

I just tried fixing up the Kukhran page but there's just too much to do right now grammatically etc. I have to come back to it, why did you interchange Kukhran and Kukhrein, its Kukhran/Kukhrain man...just Kukhran I've never heard of Kukhrein before in my life. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 125.23.72.200 (talk • contribs) 09:59, 21 November 2006.

You can check out who edited the page by clicking the history button on the top. This is the shortcut. If you intend to copyedit or make changes, please make sure that the content is referenced by credible sources, is neutrally written and contains brilliant prose. There is no need to email you, why don't you create an account here so we get to know you better? Thanks! =Nichalp «Talk»= 00:43, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

why would I want to join a community which allows anyone to edit and change information that masses of people can then access and assume as fact? I went to your little history page...and here we have PAKISTANI individuals who have listed "India" as a nation they consider to be a threat to world peace on their personal pages, editing and writing articles regarding an Indian caste/community of Hindus and Sikhs. What really pissed me off is that this man CHANGED the pages history by stating that large numbers of Kukhrans converted to Islam..when in actuallity it is a ridiculously small community that was unable to leave their land after partition and thus did not want to be killed by muslim mobs. Kukhrans are warrior peoples and we are the ones who resisted Muslim rule for centuries..and this Pakistani who openly states that he hates India is now editing pages of Indian regard, ABSOLUTELY PROPOSTEROUS...this website will never have any credibility as long as things like this are allowed to go on. Its a shame, a damn shame. Maybe if you fix this issue I'd consider actively participating on this website. But as long as anyone can come in and try and re-write/create their own history...NO WAY.

YOU have the power to change it. =Nichalp «Talk»= 14:52, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

and someone ELSE can come along and change it back...u clearly didn't read my post. Do you have an answer to the question I raised? I presume you do not because I'm right. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 61.246.25.237 (talk • contribs)

Well, that is the problem that wikipedia faces See the (Disclaimers). However, if you are willing to work on it, cite credible sources along with a neutral tone, it will be easier for people to revert unsourced claims to your stable version. A case in point is the India article, 20-30th most hit site on wikipedia. The article gets less revisions for a hit rate that high as it is neutrally written, and well referenced. =Nichalp «Talk»= 02:41, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Sarila

The contribution of Narendra Singh Sarila to the history of the Partition of India certainly needs to be incorporated into the article about it. Unfortunately, I'm not sufficiently Wiki-knowledgeable to do it myself (can't figure out how to log in or write). He wrote _The Shadow of the Great Game— The Untold Story of India’s Partition_, and is certainly well qualified to understand the issues. Won't somebody please look him up, or at least look at the book reviews, which give the gist of the Mountbatten-Jinnah negotiations he witnessed in 1947? -- Marshall Price of Miami, Florida, November 22, 2006; email d021317c@yahoo.com

Sorry, we can't email you but why don't you get make an account and we get to know you better? Then we can discuss the issue and perhaps you can author the article yourself as per wikipedia standards? How does that sound? =Nichalp «Talk»= 00:35, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Atrocity#Atrocity_in_India

I think this is somewhat POV (to say the least). Can somebody fix this? utcursch | talk 04:30, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Fixed.-Bharatveer 05:13, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Delhi, a state?

Someone has changed the entry on the India main page to show Delhi as a full-fledged state. I haven't come across any bill or act that has given such a status to Delhi. Please correct me if I'm wrong. Thanks! =Nichalp «Talk»= 15:17, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

It seems to be included under what looks like a category:India states. However, I can't seem to find such a category. Perhaps someone else understands how that "inclusion" works. --BostonMA 15:26, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

It is was stored under Template:India states. I have "fixed" it. Feel free to change the format if you choose. Sincerely, --BostonMA 15:31, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

reverted self. Edit history for the temlate had an edit with the comment, Delhi now a state per . --BostonMA 15:43, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

As far as my knowledge goes, that site is incorrect. For a state to be created, a Constitutional ammendment is a must. =Nichalp «Talk»= 15:55, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Delhi is not a state (yet). It has some features of a state like its own legislative assembly but is not a full fledged state yet. Politicians have been demanding for a long time though -- Lost 16:32, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

No, Delhi is not a state. It is a special type of UT. One page has been created related to this: National Capital Territory of Delhi. Shyam 16:39, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

National capital territory as a special UT is still misleading. There is either a state or a union territory, no 'special union territory'. As per the constitution the Centre can pass a legislation for the creation of a legislature if it so wishes. =Nichalp «Talk»= 01:37, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

Further sorting of {{India-bio-stub}}

After starting with sorting this Very Large stub this week, have proposed the further creation of some more stubs at Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Stub sorting/Proposals/2006/November. STTW (talk) 20:15, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Original Script for Ghatam Udupa

Recently I created an article Ghatam Udupa, a percussionist from Bangalore, Karnataka. However, I haven't been able to find the original script (possiby Kannada) for the title. Can anyone with a fair knowledge of Kannada put the original script in the article ? Thanks. --NRS | /_M\ 14:26, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

Post your request here: Misplaced Pages:WikiProject India/Translation--D-Boy 08:00, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

I know how to write Kannada, but for that you have to confirm the pronunciation first. I hope you understand the Hindi I write below.

• Ghatam=घतम or घटम?
• In Udupa:

U=उ or ऊ

d=द or ड or ड़

u=उ or ऊ

pa=प or पा

• If you can confirm the combination in Hindi, I will translate it to Kannada/Telugu (whichever is desired). — Ambuj Saxena (talk) 08:36, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, so much for your replies. Ambuj, I can't say about Ghatam. But, it should be the first one. As for Udupa, it's like this -

U=ऊ

d=ड

u=उ

pa=पा

Well, that's how it should be. Thanks, again. --NRS | /_M\ 07:41, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

For घटम ऊडुपा, the transliteration is: ಘಟಮ್ ಊಡುಪಾ. However, "Udupa" may even be ಉಡುಪಾ for the same pronunciation as the default vowel length of "u" is higher in Kannada as compared to Hindi. — Ambuj Saxena (talk) 13:24, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, I have added the first one for now. If any Kannada editor happens to check this article, then he may change it if it's not correct. --NRS | /_M\ 06:16, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

I have corrected the script. It should have been ಘಟಮ್ ಉಡುಪ. Udupa is always written as ಉಡುಪ and it is the common usage. Thanks -- Naveen 06:37, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Village_pump_(policy)#Use_of_vernacular_scripts_in_India_bio_articles

interesting discussion --D-Boy 07:28, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Requesting an article be made for Agasthiya

Apparently, Agasthiya was an old prophet in Nadi astrology who lived around 3000 BC. I stumbled upon him while I was researching stuff for this odd little Japanese game titled Nostradamus ni Kiite Miro♪. Which is apparently about cute little girls being the incarnations of Nostradamus' and Agasthiya's prophecies. Apparently, he's moderately well known in Japan, but I've never heard of him (I'm American). Anyways, I'm getting confused already, so it would be nice if I could have some more information to go off so I could understand this whole Agasthiya character thing better. Even a simple stub would be nice, whatever you happen to be able to dig up. --SeizureDog 22:08, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

There is already an article on Agastya - Parthi 22:13, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

I see. Alternate spelling that just needed a redirect. Thanks for the help. --SeizureDog 00:28, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

There is also an article Naadi which should be merged into Nadi astrology. Tintin (talk) 01:17, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Done! - Parthi 10:09, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Template:WPIndia Navigation

I re-adjusted the table width while making the font of the stats table smaller. If it's hard to read, users may simply click "view full worklist". AQu01rius (User • Talk) 23:10, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

The Bharat Scouts and Guides

Can someone put this text File:Indianamestrip.jpg into the organization name on the article? Thanks Chris 04:19, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Kannada Misplaced Pages

Can anyone with contacts in Kannada Misplaced Pages see into this matter. They seem to be using a fair use image kn:ಚಿತ್ರ:ಸುವರ್ಣ ಕರ್ನಾಟಕ.png in all their encyclopedia articles. The image is from NIC.IN website and is about celebration of 50 years of existence of Karnataka. Even if the image were free, I am sure such things are unwarranted. In the past, the Urdu Misplaced Pages was pulled up for putting Quranic verses on top of all articles. We shouldn't let that happen to one of Indian language encyclopedias. — Ambuj Saxena (talk) 05:48, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

The image was put up to mark the occasion of Golden Jubilee of Karnataka, which happened in November. I guess they would stay on only for this month (November) and would be removed after that. Hope this helps in clarifying. -- Naveen 05:59, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

I know that. But the image is a fair-use image. It might be suitable for an article on Karnataka, its hisotry, or even culture; but you can't use it in every article of the encyclopedia. — Ambuj Saxena (talk) 06:04, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Ambuj, the image was marked under fair-use by me just because there was no explicit license for the image. There is very little bother and understanding here about the licenses of images that most of it is taken for granted - which, is the bitter truth for us Wikipedians so much used with licensing for all images. Frankly, though, there are very less reasons why anyone should be too much worried about the use of this particular image since the image in most possibility *falls under public domain* as it is a work done by Karnataka Government, and they would be more than happy to let people use it to celebrate the Golden Jubilee of the state. Cheers, --H P Nadig * 06:18, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Indian government images don't fall under "public domain". They are copyrighted under the Indian copyright law. A celebration such as this should be a news-item on the News section of the main-page. Misplaced Pages should be neutral and not participate in these happenings/celebrations. Language on Misplaced Pages is just a vehicle to promote knowledge, it should not be used to identify a set of people/state. Lastly fair-use images should never be displayed on the main-page. Regards, Ganeshk (talk) 06:55, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Now the image license has been changed to show it as PD, but no rationale provided. The image still lacks a source description which makes it impossible to verify the exact copyright status of the image. Again, as Ganesh said, images by Indian/State governments, or even nic.in are not in public domain, and are copyrighted under the Indian Copyright Law. I request any editor who has sysop access on kannada wikipedia to see to it that the image is remove from the wikipedia's sitenotice. — Ambuj Saxena (talk) 09:27, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Wikimeetup

Have a look at Misplaced Pages:Meetup, this can happen in big Indian cities as well where there are multiple wikipedians. Vjdchauhan 11:13, 27 November 2006 (UTC). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vjdchauhan (talk • contribs)

Yeah, the bangaloreans had a good one sometime back. Still waiting for one in North India though — Lost 11:36, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Please see Misplaced Pages:Meetup/Bangalore/Bangalore1. Template:Meetup was missing this meetup! Have added now.--Dwaipayan (talk) 20:31, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

template logo

User:Szhaider makes a good point here that the flag of the Republic of India should not be affixed to the Wikiproject:India template, since the template covers subjects like Mohenjo-Daro which were never under the Republic of India. — goethean ॐ 21:52, 28 November 2006 (UTC) Well said and I agreeNadirali 03:19, 29 November 2006 (UTC)Nadirali

The logo is just a identifier. It's no big deal. WP India project scope covers both pre and post indenpendence periods. That user should not be removing other project tags without discussion. I am constantly having to remind WP:AGF, that the intention is not mark the territory, but to improve the quality of the aritcle. In the end, we are all working to make a encyclopedia of good quality. Assessment departments help with it. Regards, Ganeshk (talk) 22:08, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

The logo is just a identifier. It's no big deal.

Obviously, not all agree. — goethean ॐ 21:13, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Well, he's taking them off and removing scripts. I'd like to file on rfc on him.--D-Boy 22:10, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

I think bot-assisted tagging of articles are not really a good idea, because it adds a lot of articles unrelated to the actual project. Unless people from a Wikiproject actually are working on the article, it will be wrong to do a brute-force mechanized tagging. My 2 cents. --Ragib 22:20, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

The bots just follow the categories such as Category:History of India. They are not intelligent. These categories were added by humans. Would it be wrong to tag a article that had a category such as the one I noted with WP India? Regards, Ganeshk (talk) 22:25, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Isn't there a Wikiproject on History of India? If so, it might be relevant and also not so objectionable (to people who are removing the tags) to add WP History of India tag on these articles, rather than adding the WP India tag. In fact, articles like Taxila may be more relevant to the WP History of India rather than WP India. What's your take on this idea? --Ragib 22:28, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

There is a project for History of India. It was made a work-group of India project. So the tag on the talk page would read {{WP India|history=yes}}. This avoids the need to create seperate project banners for each workgroup. India is just a over-all root project. The maintanance of the article will be done by the respective workgroup. Regards, Ganeshk (talk) 22:37, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

I want to know couple of things. Is there any reason why an article cannot be a part of two independent WikiProjects? If there is no such restriction, what is wrong in having both tags on the talk pages? Sarvagnya 22:40, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Apart from using a little talk-page real-estate, there is no restriction on having multiple project templates. Talk-page real-estate issue was addressed with the small=yes parameter (see Talk:Leonardo da Vinci). Regards, Ganeshk (talk) 22:44, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

I see nothing wrong with having the history template on the pages. WP history of india covers both before 1947 and after. That includes ancient history such as indic civilizations. They have plenty of space to add their templates. History should be consist on wikipedia. What happens to pakistan after 1947 except for the wars, terrorism, international politics is their business.--D-Boy 23:39, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

The flag of the Republic of India should not be on the project template if the Wikiproject concerns the subcontinent of India. — goethean ॐ 21:12, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Since one of the bots doing the tagging is mine, I'd like to add that I take a lot of care while selecting categories and dont include ambiguous categories. Errors are bound to happen however and anyone finding an error with the bot edits is free to remove them. — Lost 05:16, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Proposal

Since some strongly feel about this flag image, I wanted to suggest adding a parameter to the banner, "pre=yes" to denote pre-independence article. If "pre" is set to "yes", the template will morph itself to show a image "Ashoka pillar" (for example) and any links to India will link to Indian subcontinent. How does this sound? -- Ganeshk (talk) 22:58, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

This is a great proposal, and definitely fair to everyone, and true to the history of the region. I support this wholeheartedly. Thanks. --Ragib 23:01, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

I oppose the proposal. The flag image should be replaced with an image of the subcontinent of India. — goethean ॐ 23:05, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

That is what I meant. This proposal will replace flag image for all pre-indendence articles. The image could be ashoka pillar or sub-continent map or whatever. It should be a free-image. That is a pre-requisite. -- Ganeshk (talk) 23:08, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Well, I guess I can't do anything but to shake my head and wonder about the irrepressible need to put the Republic of India's flag on all post-1947 articles. I do not get it. You all should consider getting over this pissing contest. — goethean ॐ 23:15, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Let me think over what you are saying. India is no exception. Many WikiProjects have flags on their banners. But if changing to a Indian sub-continent map will solve this, I might be (reluctantly) for it. But I will wait to hear what others feel about this. Regards, Ganeshk (talk) 23:24, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Well, I stated my opinion. What ever happens,..happens.--D-Boy 06:08, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

The Ashoka Pillar, Taj Mahal, or other Indian image is fine by me too. — goethean ॐ 23:30, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Goethean, I thought about it. I feel pre=yes is the way to go. The flag is best way to indentify the scope of the India project, post-indepedence. Any other image will not completely represent Republic of India. The pre parameter lets the template define the scope of the project pre-indepedence. Regards, Ganeshk (talk) 06:17, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

I'd rather stick with the flag. Any other person can put their flag template on the article. US and UK projects don't have this problem. Why do we? Sino-Indian war has chinese and indian flags on it.It's only because two people that there's a problem. They're allowed to put their flag icon on it. Why does this project always have to make more compromises.--D-Boy 04:44, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

And another thing, It's only because Szhaider (talk · contribs) and Nadirali (talk · contribs) we have this problem. We've never had it before. Not even Siddiqui had this problem.--D-Boy 04:50, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

I am with Ganesh. Pre=yes is a good idea. Let the flag be replaced by another symbol for ambiguous articles. There is a whole lot of tagging to do. I would like to get on with it as soon as we get over this thing — Lost 04:57, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:WikiProject South Asia here's the solution.--D-Boy 05:01, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

South Asia project is not the solution. It is similar to having WikiProject Countries. Regards, Ganeshk (talk) 05:45, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

I support GaneshK's proposal. pre=yes is a nice solution.--Dwaipayan (talk) 06:59, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

I too support Ganeshk's proposal. The flag for post ind. and Ashok pillar for pre-independence. Ashoka pillar is the best one for pre-indepence since Ashoka's rule was over practically the whole sub-continent and he was the first to do so. Nevertheless, other proposals are welcome. --NRS | /_M\ 07:12, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Mock-up

How does this look? I used the Mauryan map when pre is set to "yes". I chose this one since it loads fast. The Indian sub-contitent map is too huge. Ashoka pillar does not fit correctly. There no links to India, so nothing else (except the image) changed. Does anyone else have better image ideas? -- Ganeshk (talk) 08:24, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

This is a test.

• Comment Umm...it's not looking good. Even Indians may face problem identifying with it. Is it absolutely impossible to manage the Indian subcontinent map? How about Taj Mahal as suggested above?--Dwaipayan (talk) 10:16, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the comment. I changed it to the sub-continent image. Regards, Ganeshk (talk) 15:05, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the effort. With the Indian subcontinent map incorporated, the template looks better, and more easily recognizable. IMO, pre=yes producing this template is ok. Let's see what others have to say. Regards.--Dwaipayan (talk) 15:12, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

• CommentI'd just like to say one thing. Why must the Indian template be changed for a minor problem? Most country projects have flags for their templates. A talk page has plenty of space for every projects template. A pak is offended because a template is put on say the indus valley civilization because of an Indian flag. If that is the case, I find the pak flag offensive on say Talk:Rajput. I find that flag offensive. Why is that flag not changed? Why is their not a more "neutral flag" pak template? Compromise and gandhism should only go so far. I find appeasement at this level wrong. That is all.--D-Boy 01:24, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

I have implemented the new parameter (pre=yes). You can see it at work at Talk:Taxila. Hopefully there should be less resistance for the banner now. Regards, Ganeshk (talk) 07:38, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

New workgroups

I have started two new workgroups, WikiProject Andhra Pradesh and WikiProject Karnataka. The banner flags are andhra=yes and karnataka=yes respy. Please feel free to join-in and contribute. Thanks, Ganeshk (talk) 06:08, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Village_pump_(policy)#Use_of_vernacular_scripts_in_India_bio_articles_-_2

Voting on the use of indic scripts.--D-Boy 01:21, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

This voting is invalid, as there are no formal proposals, and the guidelines at Misplaced Pages:How to create policy are not being followed. I've created a proposal page at Misplaced Pages:Village pump (policy)/Use of vernacular scripts. Please add your proposals. utcursch | talk 09:36, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Jesus Christ! >_<! --D-Boy 01:29, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Villayil Raman Gopala Pillai

Shall I attempt to merge this with Njekkad, using the Asiaweek article as a reference?Ivygohnair 14:09, 30 November 2006 (UTC) If so,I will need help to check the Malayalam spellings in the article :-) Ivygohnair 14:22, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Tamil people in FAR

Tamil people has been brought to FAR. Please be there and comment. Regards.--Dwaipayan (talk) 15:45, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Mair Rajputs

Hello there! A user has created the article Mair Rajputs and wikilinked to several Indian articles. We would like a member of this WikiProject to determine if this article is actually necessary. The article itself triggered a copyvio warning at Misplaced Pages:Suspected copyright violations, and another at the spam bot for the amount of links linked there. I deleted this article earlier today because it was blatant copyvio, but now it appears not to have that problem. Thanks. -- ReyBrujo 21:02, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Tags

It is being suggested and stressed that all articles about historical sites in South Asia which are not in the Republic of India should be tagged using {{WP SouthAsia}} instead of {{WP India}}. {{WP India}} contains references to present day India, including but not limited to the Flag of India/Ashoka Chakra, which represent India the country rather than the whole region. Using this tag for those sites which are not in India is deemed strongly offensive and an indirect territorial claim over the country of the site. Any article can have tags representing the country where the site is located along with {{WP SouthAsia}} to emphasize the importance of the site in the history of whole region including all countries. Szhaider 18:38, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

PS: The same suggestion is applied to the personalities with historical importance for the entire South Asia.

this is one reason why objected to the change...>_>...--D-Boy 21:28, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Szhaider, please see the discussion a few sections above this one. There is already a good solution. Thanks — Lost 02:57, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Kilometers are not "kms"

Time for the periodic reminder to use proper symbols. When is somebody involved in the WikiProject:India going to take some responsibility and fix these to "km", the proper symbol? Why are India-related articles such frequent violators of the rules in this regard in the first place? Also, meters are "m" not "mtr", and the symbols are case sensitive too (i.e., "KM" is just as incorrect as "kms"). Gene Nygaard 01:27, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

It is also metre, not meter, right? --Ragib 01:47, 2 December 2006 (UTC)