Talk:C. V. Madhukar

Untitled

I object the deletion of the article. To use a user-name that indicates affiliation with the described person was provoking this discussion, but on the other hand was just making transparent what could have been hidden otherwise as well. In spite of the conflict of interest there are too many points speaking in favour of the importance of the article to delete it:

a) The article names an article in a India wide published newspaper liveMint that found it important enough to spend a whole page on CV Madhukar and describing his project.

b) The Indian Express and the The Economic Times found it both important enough what CV Madhukar works on to let him several times space in their newspapers to express it. More links to further articles in further newspaper can be added.

c) In spite of most civil society groups in this case the financial background is named and made already public before by the Mint article. This is unusually transparent especially in the Indian environment.

d) The cause CV Madhukar fights for is - politically debatable affiliations with the World Bank left aside - very much the same as for the Wikipedia project as well: making debates more informed, transparent and participatory and therefore likely to lead to a better end. As can be proven by a lot of articles as well which name it explicitely, it is additionally the policy of PRS to share own statistical data (about what happens in parliament) which are compiled freely with everybody who's interested, very much again a policy as open as in the Wikipedia project.

e) It could be discounted that the most important argument, the influence of CV Madhukar on legislative debates and the thinking of MPs in Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha is difficult to be proven. But already the size of the project should prove a relevant influence of the described person on Indian politics, which makes the article relevant, including for those who object the liberal political background.

With these arguments I only object the deletion of the article. Much speaks in favour of making language and content more neutral by avoiding unmarked citations from the self-published bio in the article. Buergerbeck 04:56, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:05122008(001).jpg

Image:05122008(001).jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 02:08, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

"Madhukar" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Madhukar has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 April 1 § Madhukar until a consensus is reached. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 15:31, 1 April 2024 (UTC)