Talk:National Highway 24 (India)(old numbering)

Gurjar Samrat Mihir Bhoj Marg

Hi, The article of boloji.com was written by Priyadarshi Dutta. Priyadarsi Dutta is a content-writer based in New Delhi.He writes on national and international issues in the five-edition news daily The Pioneer. Here

The section of highway he mentioned is renamed as Gurjar Samrat Mihir Bhoj Marg.It is a fact, but the only inline source i found is this boloji link. Regards Chhora (talk) 21:47, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

I'm beginning to think that this is likely. I found a few links, such as this one, that independently (of wikipedia) talk about this road. A RS would be nice though. --RegentsPark (sticks and stones) 22:12, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Likely yes, but it's only part of the highway. NH24 connects Delhi (Nizamuddin) to Lucknow, a distance of 400+ km. The part that was named was the Nizamuddin to Ghaziabad stretch which is about 25km. Therefore, the move was incorrect. As far as including it in the article, I'm sure there must be some source somewhere. —SpacemanSpiff 22:35, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

I'm not talking about the move (obviously incorrect and I assume that's not even open for discussion!) but about the inclusion of A part of this highway from Sarai Kale Khan Village to Moradabad via Hapur bypass is known as Gurjar Samrat Mihir Bhoja Marg in tribute the emperor Mihir Bhoja. (The word 'emperor' should be replaced by king or some other appropriate word - chief?.)--RegentsPark (sticks and stones) 22:41, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

I've reworded to remove ambiguity on the stretch of the highway and also used the terms from the lede of Mihira Bhoja I for the bit about him. Feel free to correct that. —SpacemanSpiff 23:08, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Me like! --RegentsPark (sticks and stones) 23:12, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

About the boloji source: I don't think that Dutta made up the renaming; rather the problem with such sources with poor or non-existent editorial oversight is the loss of nuance, qualifiers, details and follow-up corrections. (Admittedly many mainstream newspapers, and especially newspaper websites, are guilty of this too - I am sure you can find several sources announcing that Delhi has become a state). I think it is okay to leave the statement in till we find an good reliable source talking about the renaming, and till then the {{cn}} tag will at least warn the reader to take the information with a pinch of salt. Abecedare (talk) 03:12, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

hmm, agree but still we can cite that boloji source too along with {{cn}} tag.RegardsChhora (talk) 03:55, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

We can leave the unsourced statement in for a week or two to try to find a source that verifies whether the stretch was actually renamed, or whether the ranaming was officially proposed, or whether the CM announced a plan to make such a proposal, ..., and add it to the article (see past discussions at Talk:Bangalore to get an idea of how many stages renamings may need to go through); if we don't find a proper source, we remove the statement. In either case, there is no point adding a source that cannot trust. It's better for wikipedia to lack some trivial information, than to become a source for misinformation. Abecedare (talk) 04:05, 11 February 2010 (UTC)