Talk:National Waterway 4

Section

1) Needs copy edits. This reads like a govt policy document (as it is sourced mostly from govt reports). The style has to be changed. For example the govt will assert in future such and such thing will happen (when completed canal will carry X amount of traffic), while repeating the info, we have to change it read like "according government projects the canal will carry X amount of traffic when completed"--Sodabottle (talk) 08:34, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

2) External links have to be avoided as much as possible. Either use an internal wl (if not available, leave it as a redlink, article can be created later).

Fine Soda! Let me work the Copy editing part. I will try to avoid External Links. ----Raj 6644(தமிழன்) 08:49, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

I'm a member of the Guild of Copy Editors, so when I get the time I'll give this article a thorough copy edit. The Raptor ^{You rang?}/_{My mistakes; I mean, er, contributions} 12:59, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

Template:InfoboxWatertransit

I have used Infobox Watertransit template in the article National Waterway 4. I tried using Image in the Infobox using

|image           = 
|image_size      =

But Error Mesg of [[Image:|px|Image]] is appearing in the Article Info Box. Pls help me in rectifying this error. Please have a look at the article Info Box to see the error. Even if i try to assign Image size to |image_size, its not working properly. ----Raj 6644(தமிழன்) 06:48, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

I fixed it. The "Image =" field should have the unprefixed file name ONLY, "India's_NW-4.png" while the "image_size =" should say "200px". I hope it looks as you want it, now. --Jayron32 06:54, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

Thank you
Hi Jayron!. Thank you so much for the help. Nice to meet you. Have a great Day! ----Raj 6644(தமிழன்) 07:38, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

Review

Hi. I was asked to give this article a review. In this article, I have found similar issues that were found in the CERC article when I first reviewed it. Go to the article's talk page to see what issues I am talking about. Also, as mentioned above, this article needs a good copy edit. I have a couple errands I have to run today, but once I get the time, I'll do this, as I am a member of the Guild of Copy Editors. The Raptor ^{You rang?}/_{My mistakes; I mean, er, contributions} 13:04, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

This article has been tagged as needing copy edit. I'll try to get to it later today. The Raptor ^{You rang?}/_{My mistakes; I mean, er, contributions} 13:19, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

potential traffic

potential traffic section is currently unsourced and IMO unnecessarily detailed. Since this is total speculation on the govt's part,--Sodabottle (talk) 16:39, 23 August 2010 (UTC) it should be reduced in size. A couple of lines would suffice to cover the area.

Great Job Soda! You have developed the article very well.Pls give me some time,let me work on potential traffic part. ----Raj 6644(தமிழன்) 04:54, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

Sentence I did not understand

Hi, as promised I'm giving this article a good copy edit. While copy editing, I came across a sentence that confuses me:

"...the 11 million tonne of cargos per annum are expected transported to moved on NW-4..."

Could somebody please explain to me what this sentence means? It will help with the copy edit. Thanks! The Raptor ^{You rang?}/_{My mistakes; I mean, er, contributions} 14:53, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

Should read as

"..11 million tonnes of cargo is expected to be transported through NW-4 every year..."--Sodabottle (talk) 15:17, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

I see. Thank you. The Raptor ^{You rang?}/_{My mistakes; I mean, er, contributions} 15:19, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

Requested move 26 October 2015

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: page moved. Wbm1058 (talk) 03:39, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

---

National Waterway 4 (India) → National Waterway 4 – unnecessary disambiguation -- Pankaj Jain Capankajsmilyo (talk · contribs · count) 03:32, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

• Object. Many nations have waterways that could be described as national waterways. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 06:37, 26 October 2015 (UTC)
• Support per nominator. Many countries may have national waterways, but I do not see any evidence that they have a system of numbering them like India does, and thus the title "National Waterway 4" is unambiguous. (Even if you search for "National Waterway 4" -India, all the results are still about the Indian waterway). The only non-India related GBooks hits are mishits like "contaminated national waterway.⁴". 58.176.246.42 (talk) 04:50, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on National Waterway 4. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20161230000000/http://shipping.nic.in/writereaddata/mainlinkfile/File337.htm to http://shipping.nic.in/writereaddata/mainlinkfile/File337.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:03, 20 September 2017 (UTC)