Talk:P.D. Jain Homoeopathic Medical College

Sources

@Iridescent: Even if we remove the official website as source, even then it will be adequately sourced. The state website clearly mentions the founding date, city, homeopathy and that it is a medical college. If you are wondering about degree and masters, then it doesnt need source as it is normal logic. "The sky is blue" doesnt require citation. In the same manner, homeopathy colleges in India usually provide masters, unless it is cloudy or total eclipse. —usernamekiran(talk) 23:21, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

@JJMC89 and Iridescent: would you two please actually improve the article, instead of adding tags?

And JJMC89, are you accusing Directorate of medical education and research being biased towards this article? The {third party} tag doesnt make any sense on this article. —usernamekiran(talk) 20:57, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

@JJMC89: with recent "primary" tag, are you trying to imply the enitre Directorate is owned by this college?

This article is not about rocket science, or neutron bombs, or some unsolved controversial mystery, or a controversial topic. The article has two statements, if you want to contribute to wikipedia, then please stop adding such tags where you can actually improve the article itself. If you dont know, tagging (excessively) when the article can be improved by the person who tagged it, is considered as disruptive editing. —usernamekiran(talk) 08:55, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

No. Learn what a primary source is. It has nothing to do with the relationship of the publisher to the article subject. Also, one tag is not excessive. Perhaps you shouldn't have created an article on something that has not been shown to satisfy WP:N/WP:NORG and then expect others to do work for you. — JJMC89 (T·C) 14:14, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

Hello, Usernamekiran. I appreicate that you are trying to create articles and we need more people doing so, as there are a huge amount of missing topics. However, I agree you've misunderstood a lot here. The source counts as a primary one (see WP:PRIMARY), which doesn't mean it's bad, but it can't be used to show notability (see WP:GNG). The WP:BURDEN is on you, as creator, to create it ready to go straight into an encyclopaedia. However, I haven't always got this right myself, and have had to go back and improve sourcing many times when other editors have questioned its notability. Don't be too worried about the tags - they will hopefully attract editors who specifically go around adding sources.

You need to show that the topic meets WP:GNG or WP:ORG. At the moment, it's unclear. Educational institutions are usually able to meet this requirements, but not all of them do, especially small, private institutions. All information should be sourced, and homeopathy colleges offer master's degrees (something I have no idea if they often do or not) is far from 'the sky is blue'. Information needs to be sourced. DO you have WP:RELIABLESOURCES that you can add? Best wishes, Boleyn (talk) 16:44, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

I have searched for reliable sources, and there appear to be none, in English at least. I propose a redirect to Parbhani#Education, which can be easily reverted when/if reliable sources are found which show it meets WP:GNG or WP:ORG. Pinging Usernamekiran, JJMC89 and Iridescent. Boleyn (talk) 17:03, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @Boleyn: Hello,
Thanks for the reply. :-) I'm aware about the primary sources. But the content of the article doesn't include anything out of the ordinary. It merely states the founding date, and location (city) of college. The article doesn't state anything like "it best medical college in the region" or "first choice of students in region". As per Wikipedia:College_and_university_article_advice#Notability, "most of the colleges are de facto notable, and should have an article". As this particular college was established in 1918, and has been operational consecutively for almost a century, with providing a masters degree, it is notable in India. I've some "medium" reliable tertiary sources that I can add. Thanks again for the suggestions. :-)

@JJMC89: Before telling someone else, please make sure you have knowledge of that particular field. The intake capacity of that college is a standard for medical college in India. More than that is considered as too much. It is definitely not small. Also, kindly see Wikipedia:Tagging_pages_for_problems#Constructive_tagging. I'm not telling someone or anyone to do my work.
If you think the article should not be on wikipedia, you are more than welcome to propose deletion. —usernamekiran(talk) 17:21, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

@Boleyn: Yes, I think redirecting it would be a good idea till a stand alone article could be created. —usernamekiran(talk) 17:24, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for your response, Usernamekiran. I think it is likely that there is notability here, but that needs to meet WP:V verifiability. At the moment, it doesn't, and redirection is much better than possible deletion. I'll boldly redirect it for now. Good luck with finding reliable sources - some good newspaper sources in a local language may be helpful. It is not easy for most editors to find sources or work on this article, because the sources are unlikely to be in English, which is why the burden of sourcing is on the creator. Hopefully, you'll be successful here. Best wishes, Boleyn (talk) 18:33, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

• @Boleyn, JJMC89, and Iridescent: lmao! I cant believe that was just 5 months ago. It is also surprising how far I have come along since then. To editor JJMC89: I apologise for my comments above. I was sort of rude towards you. —usernamekiran(talk) 20:35, 11 October 2017 (UTC)