Wikipedia talk:Noticeboard for India-related topics/Archive 7

Infoboxes

• Gujarat used another box [1] - I reverted to the standard box.
• I moved some infoboxes. The name should allways be like "Infobox Foo" with capital F.
• I used Infobox State IN, Infobox District IN, Infobox City IN. Maybe town is more apropriate? I used the two letter country code as I have seen it for some other subdivision templates. I used the subdivision term before the "IN", so in Infobox listings all state/city/disrict templates would be grouped together. One could also argue it is better to have all India templates together and thus use "Infobox IN state". - But than all the subdivision boxes will be very much dispersed. Tobias Conradi (Talk) 07:19, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

Some minor adjustments have to be made: Some districts are classified as 100% urban, so we would have to have an extra template. Also union territories use another infobox. =Nichalp «Talk»= 05:25, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

Srinagar (city)

Could any of the admins please do the following,

1. Delete Srinagar. It is a disambiguation page.
2. Move Srinagar (city) to Srinagar.

This is the convention we follow when creating city and district articles with a similar name. See WikiProject Indian districts.

I have updated the Srinagar (city) article with a link to the district one. Thanks, Ganeshk (talk) 23:22, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

Done =Nichalp «Talk»= 05:26, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

Indian district project

I'm launching an ambitious project to populate and disambiguate all Indian districts. See: List of Indian districts.

1. Part 1 -- If a district and its district headquarters share the same name, then split it into two articles. The town gets the name (eg: Mysore) and the district will have the word district appended to it (eg Mysore district). Note that the word district is in small case.
2. Part 2 -- Populate all red links
3. Part 3 -- Add infoboxes to all districts. (A bot probably will be needed)

Any volunteers? =Nichalp «Talk»= 05:39, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

Note that a ~100% urban district need not have a dist HQ. =Nichalp «Talk»= 06:13, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

Done:

1. Andaman and Nicobar, Andhra Pradesh, Goa, Chandigarh, Sikkim, Daman and Diu, Dadra and Nagar Haveli, Meghalaya, Tripura. =Nichalp «Talk»= 06:13, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

   +Arunachal Pradesh

   + Maharashtra

Tom and me and some others allready did a lot of these splittings. Actually you reverted Tirap and Lohit. One should not only look for whether the town and district have the same name, but there can also be other things in the world having the district's name. In most cases better add the word "District" now, than to fix lots of links later. Tobias Conradi (Talk) 12:12, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm aware of the Tirap and Lohit dab pages. I had created a River Lohit page to compensate for the loss. I've also been doing the cleanups while moving. Double redirects are a problem, but a bot can easily solve those. =Nichalp «Talk»= 12:43, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

But you changed links that referred to Lohit District to Lohit. Why? BTW I moved your "River X" to "X River" as this is the naming used for other articles in Category:Rivers and Category:Rivers_of_India Tobias Conradi (Talk) 09:06, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

Having the uppercase title "District" is against wikipedia conventions, so I suggest that we effect the changes as soon as possible instead of worrying about fixing double redirects which are a more of a minor issue. =Nichalp «Talk»= 13:10, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

WRONG. Please read Names of Wikipedia articles should be optimized for readers over editors; and for a general audience over specialists. Tobias Conradi (Talk) 09:06, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

1. Anantapur district (NDTV), Anantnag district (ToI), Kinnaur district (Hindustan times). As I've pointed by these three examples, the word district is in small case.
2. Names of Wikipedia articles should be optimized for readers over editors: I don't see why this is a conflict between readers and editors. It has to do with the correct capitalisation of a word. Hardly something a reader would misunderstand.
3. See Wikipedia:WikiProject Rivers : River articles may be named "X", "X River", or "River X", depending on location and most common usage. River X is more prevalent in British English and since Indian English follows BE, there's nothing wrong with having "River X".

Regards, =Nichalp «Talk»= 09:24, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

For rivers I would prefer using X River.--Raghu 16:45, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

Done:

Assam - Ganeshk (talk) 07:06, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

---

Vote

Let's put this through a vote:

what nonsense is this? to vote ont the notice board? you can also vote on your userpage and invite your friends. Tobias Conradi 23:19, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

And why do you have problems with the vote being placed here? This notice board is meant to discuss India-related topics, the ideal place for such a vote. Secondly, I don't need to set my userpage or invite friends over. Please note that we are seeking a larger mandate, and are following all wikipedia procedures of fair resolution. As the opposing party, I though it would be fair to invite you over here to share your opinion, and so have messaged only you. I don't see the need for you to be so obstinate and defensive. Regards, =Nichalp «Talk»= 04:43, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

It makes lot of sense to have the vote here; else, people would turn back and say, "you held the vote on your user page and invited your friends - it should be in a more public place etc." ;) Anyways, polls without discussion are evil; not polls per se. People who vote here would obviously have a look at the discussion above, before voting. Or may be, should we call it a straw poll? --Gurubrahma 04:43, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

Straw poll is probably better. - Taxman ^Talk 19:27, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

X district

• =Nichalp «Talk»= 09:30, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
• --Gurubrahma 12:05, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
• Ganeshk (talk) 15:37, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
• --Raghu 16:45, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
• Taxman ^Talk 19:27, 10 February 2006 (UTC) This makes sense, but is assuming "district" is not part of the proper name, is that a correct assumption? Either way, it will be nice to have standardization on the district names and separate articles for the district and the HQ.

X District

Portal:India

We must get portal:India up to featured status. =Nichalp «Talk»= 10:17, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

Yes, this is certainly a good idea. We all should plan to achieve this status for our portal:India. --Bhadani 12:46, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

Some suggestions and comments:

• Remove Hinduism template.
• Somehow make the world map showing India link fit into the box (expanding the lead text is the easiest way.)
• Why does the quote section have so much empty space?
• There are other empty spaces that can be avoided by "horizontalizing" lists.
• The left and right columns should be roughly equal length.

I'll be making some of these changes. deeptrivia (talk) 04:58, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

• Something needs to be done for the Life in India section. The title is repeated, and it's looking a bit weird even otherwise. deeptrivia (talk) 05:08, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

I propose making it a COTW. deeptrivia (talk) 20:41, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

Featured picture

Fresco from Ajanta

I'm thinking of nominating this picture for FP. Is it a good idea? Does anybody know when this might have been painted. The Ajanta article isn't very helpful. It just gives a date between 200 BCE and 600 CE for all paintings. deeptrivia (talk) 03:27, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

Good one for FA. No idea about the dates though. -- Sundar ^{\talk \contribs} 04:57, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

The image description on the image page gives it as 6th Century and I'd go with it. --Gurubrahma 10:42, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

Indian Cabinet, Ministers and politicians

There are a lot of missing articles on Indian politicians, especially ministers currently in the Manmohan Singh cabinet. Also the list of the ministers on the following pages is quite out-dated - Manmohan Singh and Indian Cabinet Ministers. The entire and accurate list can be found on the page - List of Council of Ministers. I would have updated the list myself on the Manmohan Singh page, but the list is too big, and would occupy too much of space on that page. Should the entire list be put on that page? Or only the "important" ministries? Who decides which ministers are important and which are not? - Aksi great 14:56, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

You can put them in a seperate article and link to it. All of the ministers are important. It would be a good idea to start WikiProjects, Wikipedia:WikiProject Indian politicians and Wikipedia:WikiProject Indian Parliament in lines of Wikipedia:WikiProject U.S. politicians and Wikipedia:WikiProject U.S. Congress. I made some changes to T R Baalu. Added infobox and categories. Do have a look. - Ganeshk (talk) 18:18, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

While you are at it, it would be better to start a WP:INCA, short for Wikipedia Project:Indian Current affairs. However, please do not start single line stubs. Given the craze among editors to list the articles started by them on their user pages (including me), very few would touch articles started by others. Hence, it would be best to leave them at red links or work on them to make 500-600 words long. Please check with other lists such as "List of 14th Loksabha members" to ensure that you are not creating a duplicate article with alternate spelling. Also, we shd probly try to get such articles featured at DYK. btw, I have been updating DYK regularly for the last 45 days or so and if some one needs tips, I am game. --Gurubrahma 13:40, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

I don't understand your logic of not starting single-line stubs. After all, stubs are meant to be short articles with the most basic stuff. I have been working on trying to populate the red links of atleast the cabinet ministers of India. Once I have the basic things ready in all articles, I will try to try and increase the length of those articles with more information. But there are very few ministers for whom I could write 600 word articles. - Aksi great 20:09, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

I agree with Aksi. It is better to have a single line article than not to have an article at all. These articles won't show up as red links when they are linked from other articles. The shorter articles need to be properly categorized and marked as appropriate stubs. My 2 cents - Ganeshk (talk) 20:23, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

It is ok as long as it is not a line which reads "so and so is a cabinet minister," because I would already know that from the list of cabinet ministers. Also, as a reader, I would be disappointed with WP if all it returns is a single line stub stating the obvious. --Gurubrahma 17:28, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

I see your point. The stub should state date of birth, a external link to the parliament website and a infobox. That would give little more information than the "is a cabinet minister line". All this will ensure it not be WP:AFD. - Ganeshk (talk) 17:40, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

Gandhi PR

Hi all - I've opened a peer review of the Gandhi article Wikipedia:Peer review/Mahatma Gandhi/archive1 in hopes of getting the community to solve some long-standing problems that are threatening its FA quality and status. Please participate in preserving this article's integrity. Jai Sri Rama! Rama's Arrow 16:20, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Politics of India

I started this project to create and expand articles related to the Indian politics. That includes biographies, portfolios, ministries etc. For a start, we should have biography articles for all current ministers at the national and state levels. Please join and contribute. Thanks, Ganeshk (talk) 07:00, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

Trolling?

User:Anwar saadat (same as User:212.32.80.19) has been putting about 14 templates all at once (such as "POV", "Sensationalism", etc) on many articles related to History of India. He doesn't explain much, except claiming that these articles are "Islamophobic" and picked up from Hindutva websites. Can someone address his concerns? deeptrivia (talk) 23:16, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

Khalistan

If anyone has got a bit of time on their hands, please read and comment on Khalistan. It's been subject to all sorts of vandalism in the past and the current version has taken a while to get to! I've tried to do a lot of NPOV'ing and cleaning up, but it still needs further input. Thanks. Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 02:04, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

List of Indian state and union territory capitals

I added comments about the inconsistent dates used in List of Indian state and union territory capitals at Talk:List of Indian state and union territory capitals. Also, I have a disagreement with the way Delhi is classified in various lists including List of Indian state and union territory capitals and States and territories of India. My arguments can be found at Talk:States and territories of India. --Manojb 18:27, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

Jana Gana Mana

I was wondering if anyone wants to make this an FA. I wrote My Belarusy, the only national anthem to pass a peer review (IIRC), and I expanded the American, Mexican and Russian anthem pages, and uploaded various PD reocrdings of anthems. While I like to research about anthems, and of course, listen to them, with India not being a country that I study in my spare time (I mostly study Russia in my spare time), I really could use some help on this article. Please come see me at my talk page and we could get this ball rolling. Thanks. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire) Fair use policy} 06:53, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

I'm actually getting Rabindranath Tagore (who wrote it) ready for FAC — if I find anything germane, I'll be sure to add it to Jana Gana Mana also. Saravask 21:46, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

Alright, that sounds good. Perhaps some recordings could be good too. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire) Fair use policy} 22:00, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

Indian admins

I'm sorry if this posting is inappropriate, but wanted to let people know that my views on the above can be found here. --Gurubrahma 19:34, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

Also wanted to add that it comprises/ consists of my personal opinion alone. --Gurubrahma 07:46, 19 February 2006 (UTC) 15:08, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

Admins please help

User Bhola (talk · contribs) (only 11 contributions, nothing since Aug 2005) has suddenly emerged to move the old "Rajput" article to Rajput (Hindu caste) and then create a "Rajput" page giving a bad view of the caste system, refer that page here. All this was done with no discussion, so can some admin please un-do these moves, and also investigate the user? If this isn't vandalism, what is? ImpuMozhi 21:26, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

Reverted. If he continues to create problems, warn him and have him banned. =Nichalp «Talk»= 09:05, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

Thanx very much Nichalp -- lets hope not to have more problems. But hey, no danger of ever lacking for those: somehow, the talk-page did not get moved! Maybe because the fork had developed its own talkpage -- does it need cut-paste, deletion and another move? Happily, all the archives connect to the correct name. Sorry to come back with trouble. Regards, ImpuMozhi 18:48, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

Sakastan

According to my knowledge and google search, the article Sakastan is almost entirely incorrect. From Google search, it appears to be an old name of the Sistan province of Iran, but the article extends it to Haryana. It also asserts as Truth a controversial hypothesis of "Hindu" "crusades" against Buddhism. The same information has been added to the Rajput article. Can somebody please take a look? Thanks! deeptrivia (talk) 23:29, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

Deeptrivia's recent experiences in seeking citations bring to mind a matter I put forth to someone else in the "Rajput" context: citations need to be from acceptable sources. For instance, Hitler saying in Mein Kamph that "Jews are filth" does not make it acceptable for people to present "Jews are filth" as an established fact on WP, and smugly point out that book on being challenged. Deeptrivia, I urge you to "Be bold" and not remove your citation templates upon being shown disreputable websites. Maybe you can put up the NPOV template also -- is that inappropriate? I really would like to know what the options are in such cases. Also, can nothing be done about the page-move issue I brought up earlier? ImpuMozhi 02:41, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

ImpuMozhi, I fully agree. Please see my discussion at Wikipedia_talk:Verifiability#Propaganda_websites_as_sources and Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Fact_and_Reference_Check#Propaganda_websites_as_sources. I am trying to find ways to prevent such POV insertions without creating hostility and ego clashes, which only results in waste of a lot of time that could be used for constructive purposes. No luck yet :) deeptrivia (talk) 03:22, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Ajanta Painting

Sorry for the delay, but the Ajanta painting photo is now nominated as an FP candidate. deeptrivia (talk) 04:11, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

possible featured pic?

Fishing in Mukkah, outside Mangalore.

I am considering nominating Image:Mangalore fishing.JPG as a featured picture candidate. Do other users agree with its potential? DJR (Talk) 12:08, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

It's looking good to me, but I have no clue how will the nomination go. deeptrivia (talk) 02:31, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

List of postal codes

Such a list exists for so many countries. Time to create one for India? deeptrivia (talk) 02:31, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, it does exist. Wasn't categorized. deeptrivia (talk) 02:37, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

Historic revisionism?

A user has been replacing "British" in British rule with "United Kingdom" on several pages to do with Indian Independence Movement. I have placed this message on his talkpage. --Gurubrahma 16:59, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

Here is his reply. I am not very sure , though, because all books refer to it as the British rule and not as UK rule. Can someone throw more light?? --Gurubrahma 06:34, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

He is not incorrect, except for the date -- In 1707, the Anglo-Welsh kingdom of "England" was formally united with Scotland to create Great Britain. It was in 1800 that Great Britain was formally united with Ireland to create "The United Kingdom of Great Britain & Ireland" (amended in 1922 to read "Northern Ireland" and colloquially referred to as UK). However, the colloquialisms of "England" and "Britain" persist and are in fact more common. The issue is not unlike the India/Indian Sub-continent/South Asia issue. Regards, ImpuMozhi 04:50, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

In this connection, note that nearly everywhere on WP, the term "Republic of India" is used. One may argue that this is not really incorrect, since India is a republic; however, the formal name adopted by the Indian constitution and used for all government purposes is "Union of India" (Indian languages: "Samyukta BhArata GaNarAjya", not just "BhArata GaNarAjya"). IMHO, both the English and the Hindi need to be changed in many, many pages including India and Template:HistoryOfSouthAsia. In the interests of exactitude, many pages should also mention Dominion of India where appropriate. Regards, ImpuMozhi 04:53, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

Query regarding Ajanta paintings

Has anyone here actually been to the Ajanta caves? There are 3 versions of the same painting being discussed at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Ajanta Painting. The question is about whether the originals have a yellowish tinge or not. Please have a look at the 3 versions and comment on which one is closer to reality. deeptrivia (talk) 18:14, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

Great idea!!

Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2006-02-20/Wikimedia_UK - Can we do it in India? Legal eagles among Indian wikipedians, I'd like to hear from you. Also, I want some input on the historic revisionism post above from other users. --Gurubrahma 17:30, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

HPN was already pushing for such a chapter from a long time. There is a mailing list somewhere for that. Just leave a message/mail him for more info. --Pamri • Talk 00:11, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

You (especially those staying in Bangalore) may be interested in the Wikimedia meet being organised by the Kannada wikipedia team. See http://kn.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E0%B2%B5%E0%B2%BF%E0%B2%95%E0%B2%BF%E0%B2%AA%E0%B3%80%E0%B2%A1%E0%B2%BF%E0%B2%AF:%E0%B2%95%E0%B2%A8%E0%B3%8D%E0%B2%A8%E0%B2%A1_%E0%B2%B5%E0%B2%BF%E0%B2%95%E0%B2%BF%E0%B2%AA%E0%B3%80%E0%B2%A1%E0%B2%BF%E0%B2%AF_meet_and_press_conference (Sorry, its partially in Kannada. will put up more details soon.

--Pamri • Talk 03:05, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

Pakistan

Pakistan is currently going through a peer review. It would be much appreciated if anyone here looked it over for any inconsistencies and/or helpful hints. Pepsidrinka 22:00, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

State of the Union

Folks, the article on India has been heavily edited of late and this is just the diff since the new year. Though, a lot of that adds value to the article, there've been some edits that are not unencyclopedic. Also, the article is bloated, particularly the section on government. It's no longer using summary style. Can we look for them and remedy? I've made some fixes. -- Sundar ^{\talk \contribs} 10:30, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

I've cut a lot down. =Nichalp «Talk»= 07:16, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

Thanks a lot, Nichalp. -- Sundar ^{\talk \contribs} 07:32, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

LOTHAL IS FAC

Hi All - please vote up-or-down for Lothal at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Lothal. Thank you. Rama's Arrow 05:57, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

Cleanup needed

Hey everyone; there's a recent article Evolution of Shaivism that could really do with cleanup. I'm afraid much of it might be original research, but that's out of my realm of expertise. If anybody's interested, please give it some attention! Thanks, QuartierLatin1968 22:10, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

Yadav

Hi, strange happenings on Yadav - lots of non-yadavs, including a Reddy being added to the section titled famous Yadavs by several anons. Can someone knowledgeable watchlist it and keep a close watch?? TIA, --Gurubrahma 14:12, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

Rqst to move Kochi, India to Kochi

Could a sysop consider moving Kochi, India to Kochi (w/ a {{otheruses}} dab hatnote) while moving Kochi (now a dab page) to Kochi (disambiguation)? IMHO, most people searching for Kochi will be interested in the large Indian city, which is much more populous than any of the other places. For an analogous example, the French capital is not named Paris, France but instead Paris, w/ other places linked off the dab page. I could instead post this request at Wikipedia:Requested moves if sysops here think this issue is not straightforward or too controversial. Saravask 22:12, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

Requested moves would be better suited to stave off future controversy. =Nichalp «Talk»= 08:15, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

Indian Collaboration of the week

Portal India is this week's Indian Colloboration of the Week. Please come and help it become a featured-standard article. - Ganeshk (talk) 02:03, 4 March 2006 (UTC)