Talk:List of museums in India

Museums deleted

The following museums names have been deleted in the last months by Bleaney in a very unconstructive way (no message to IP, newbies, he neither used this talk page). Please, help searching sources for them:

• Ajab Bangla (Central Museum Of Nagpur) [1] (drafted and added)
• Bharat Kala Bhavan (B. H. U.) (?)
• Digboi Centenary Museum, Digboi (?)
• Dravyaguna Museum, Dept. Of Dravya Guna (?)
• Fort Museum, Chennai (?)
• Gurusaday Museum [2] (drafted and added to List of museums in West Bengal)
• Guru Gopinath National Dance Museum (?)
• Jaya Chamaraja Art Gallery (?)
• Jawaharlal Nehru Museum (?)
• Indra Gandhi Fountain Park Military Museum (?)
• Madikeri Fort Museum (?)
• Museum of Himachal Culture & Folk Art, Manali [3]
• Narrow Gauge Rail Museum (?)
• Regional Museum of Natural History, Odisha (?)
• Regional Science centre, Odisha (?)
• Science City, Jalandhar (?)
• Seemanthi Bai Government Museum (?)
• Srhi Krishna Museum in Kurushetra (?)
• Tribal Museum, Odisha (?)
• Urvashi museum of folklore in Madhram (?)
• Venkatappa Art Gallery (?)
• Wax World - Wax Museum & Art Gallery (?)

Thanks. emijrp (talk) 11:58, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

In common with many large lists on Wikipedia, I have simply got rid of any unsourced redlinks on this list. Lists on wikipedia still have to conform to 2 wikipedia rules - Verifibility and notability. None of these did when they were added. Bleaney (talk) 12:01, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Inclusion criteria

This was mentioned 4 years ago (see above) - when all redlinks were removed, but they have crept back since.
As stated at Wikipedia:Stand-alone lists, Wikipedia:Notability#Stand-alone lists and Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Lists#Adding individual items to a list:-

1. All lists must have clearly defined inclusion criteria
2. Every entry should meet the notability criteria for its own article. Red-linked entries are acceptable if the entry is verifiably a member of the list, and it is reasonable to expect an article could be forthcoming in the future. This prevents indiscriminate lists, and prevents individual lists from being too large to be useful to readers.
3. Editors may, at their discretion, choose to limit large lists by only including entries for independently notable items or those with Wikipedia articles.
4. All items on the list must follow Wikipedia's core content policies of Verifiability (through good sources in the item's one or more references), No original research, and Neutral point of view

Currently, there are no inclusion criteria for this list, so these need to be agreed.
To comply with points 1-4 above:- All redlinks, without a verifiable citation, will be removed; and those with a citation will only remain if it is reasonable to expect an article to be written in the near future.
Personally, I would like to "choose to limit the list to entries with a Wikipedia articles", and eliminate all redlinks - as point 3 above - and seek consensus for that. - Arjayay (talk) 10:21, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

With no objections to that proposal, in over three months, the inclusion criteria is now "No article = No inclusion" even where there are references. - Arjayay (talk) 17:56, 27 July 2017 (UTC)

Per Wikipedia:Red link, there is no need to remove redlinks as it encourages growth. Lack of discussion is not a license to break existing guidelines. Shyamal (talk) 08:48, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

Per WP:NOTESAL "editors may, at their discretion, choose to limit large lists by only including entries for independently notable items or those with Wikipedia articles." which is what has been "on the table" for over three months. - Arjayay (talk) 09:34, 28 July 2017 (UTC)