Template:Did you know nominations/Geographical Indications of Goods (Registration and Protection) Act, 1999
- The following discussion is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was: rejected by — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:45, 22 May 2013 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Geographical Indications of Goods (Registration and Protection) Act, 1999 edit
- ... that till March 2013, 193 goods has been registered as geographical indication in India under the Geographical Indications of Goods (Registration and Protection) Act, 1999?
Created/expanded by Amartyabag (talk). Self nominated at 04:18, 21 April 2013 (UTC).
This is one needs much more inline citations. Entire paragraphs are not covered as of yet. —♦♦ AMBER(ЯʘCK) 15:02, 8 May 2013 (UTC)
- I have added few references. In certain paras, the source ie, Section number have been provided within the text of the article. If inline citations are still needed let me know or mark them. If you are requesting for addition of more citations for the hook, the citation provided is a statutory document, ie, forms part of official register of records as per the Act and Rules. There cannot be more authentical source than this. Amartyabag TALK2ME 17:27, 8 May 2013 (UTC)
- There are still a number of paragraphs and sections that don't include any references: DYK rules require every paragraph and section to include at least one reference. Harrias talk 11:20, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
- Update I have marked all possible paragraphs. Amartyabag TALK2ME 14:12, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
The article relies almost entirely on primary sources, including for the hook fact. It also takes some WP:SYNTH to extract some of the article claims. For instance, Darjeeling tea is claimed to be the first GI tagged product. Now as it has serial number 1 that is quite likely to be true. But without a secondary source actually extracting that information for us we can't be sure. Compare, for instance, the situation with patents. They can take years to be granted and issue numbers are not necessarily (in fact are highly unlikely to be) in the same order as application numbers. Likewise, the division registrations into agricultural goods and manufactured goods is pure WP:OR, the source makes no such distinction - a secondary source is required making this judgement. These are not the only examples, the whole article is pretty much like this, extracted from primary sources without secondary sources to make judgements. SpinningSpark 20:33, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
