Wikipedia talk:Noticeboard for India-related topics/Archive 1

This is an archive of past discussions on Wikipedia:Noticeboard for India-related topics. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Hey folks, how about starting an Indian Collaboration of the Week? Or better still, an Indo-Pak Collaboration of the Week? utcursch 06:26, Dec 29, 2004 (UTC)

I cant agree more. I am seeing a whole lot of work put in by individual wikipedians on India related content. We must get together and edit collaboratively on one topic per week. I second you utcursch. Let us look for at least 10 wikipedians to support this initiative. We are now 2.

I would like to propose that we start of with expanding the following article... 2004_Indian_Ocean_earthquake_in_India. It has grown in content since the last few days. It really needs all our support considering the scale of the calamity. Cheers Arunram 04:58, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)

2004_Indian_Ocean_earthquake_in_India is already being contributed to by many people (esp. by you). It's already a great article. I would prefer taking stubs, and converting them to the status of a near-featured article. Neverthless, 2004_Indian_Ocean_earthquake_in_India would be a good idea for the first Indian Collaboration of the Week. Good Idea. Let's wait for other people to air their views.utcursch 12:25, Dec 31, 2004 (UTC)

utcursch asked me to give my opinion on this. Personally, I like the fact that anyone can contribute in any way they want to at any time and that I don't have to make any commitments to Wikipedia. But I am gladdened when I see people improving India-related articles on Wikipedia especially since a lot of them do need lot of work, lots aren't yet created. I'll be happy to do what I can for the India-related article collaboration of the week if and when it starts. But I don't think I'll take a lead in it. Just my 2 cents. --Hemanshu 19:05, 4 Jan 2005 (UTC)

We have 15 people now! So what do we start on first??? and how about a seperate page for Collaboration of the week? for discussion and all? --kunjan1029 05:32, Jan 28, 2005 (UTC)

Any idea on the Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Cities project? It is proposing to delete all the Town and Cities of XXXX state? See Categories_for_deletion#Cities_and_towns_of_countries_and_states

Alren 22:24, 14 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Is the decision to keep the list of Indians working on India-related topics and others separate a conscious one? What are the pros and cons? What do people think of it? In creating Wikipedia:Africa-related regional notice board I chose not to make that distinction. I feel it makes people unwelcome.—iFaqeer (Talk to me!) 00:30, Dec 15, 2004 (UTC)

I second IFaqeer. We can remove the distinction. -- Sundar 05:46, Dec 15, 2004 (UTC)

The reason I set it up that way initially was that the Russian notice board I used to copy the things over had it that way. I might guess that it's there to distinguish people who are more likely to be knowledgable from people, like myself, who are definitely less authoritative but still interested in helping out. I have no objections to removing the distinction. --Improv 05:58, 15 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Agreed. We should have no distinction. There are lot of people who might know more about Indian History and India related affairs more then many of us here. How about "India-related articles notice board" ? --kunjan1029 07:33, 20 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I have merged the sections --Improv 03:56, 27 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I don't want to be obnoxious, but shouldn't the board be named "India-related Notice Board" or something? I just feel non-Indians (like me) would be more comfortable being part of it that way...—iFaqeer (Talk to me!) 20:59, Feb 3, 2005 (UTC)

I second that. The board should be renamed to something that conveys that _any_ person who wants to contribute to India-related articles can join varunrebel 04:29, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Can somebody move it to Wikipedia:Notice board for India-related topics? -- Sundar 04:44, Feb 4, 2005 (UTC)

'The article has since been moved.' -- Sundar 10:04, Feb 4, 2005 (UTC)

We need to

• Add more South Asian leaders to Category:Lists of state leaders by year
• Add more South Asian leaders to Category:Lists of current office-holders

—iFaqeer (Talk to me!) 04:57, Dec 15, 2004 (UTC)

Does anyone know the principle areas of India for the manufacture of incense or dhoop sticks? --

From the top of my head, Mysore(vasu agarbathis(now acquired by ITC), govt sandalwood factory,etc have their base here). Bangalore, Delhi & Mumbai have some factories too, but i don't know any famous brand mfg there. pamri 06:06, 24 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Hi everybody! Christmas is a featured article candidate. I have added two lines about Christmas in India. If anybody can knows more, please contribute. utcursch 09:22, Dec 20, 2004 (UTC)

Done that. Nichalp

Hey all, some random IP just removed a few paragraphs from the article on Anhra Pradesh. Does anyone have any thoughts on whether the removed material should've been in the encyclopedia or not? --Improv 04:29, 24 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Lately, I have been seen many articles on insignificant religious figures from India. Sri Deep Narayan Mahaprabhuji is on Votes for deletion page(Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Sri Deep Narayan Mahaprabhuji). But some non-Indians are voting keep, because they think that this man is well-known in India. I would like you folks to comment on the notability of these people, as I am planning to move them to Votes for deletion page:

• Dharmsamrat Paramhans Swami Madhavananda
• International Sri Deep Madhavananda Ashram Fellowship
• Mahamandaleshwar Paramhans Swami Maheshwarananda
• Paramyogeshwar Sri Devpuriji
• Siddha Guru Sri Alakh Puriji
  • It's gone. See Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Siddha Guru Sri Alakh Puriji. utcursch 11:58, Feb 13, 2005 (UTC)
• Sri Deep Narayan Mahaprabhuji
• Akhandanand, Swami Akhandanand Saraswati

utcursch 07:18, Dec 29, 2004 (UTC)

Nope. Never heard of them. Pass it on to VFD. Nichalp 20:01, Jan 3, 2005 (UTC)

I would not agree. Unless these are pure vanity articles, I would vote against deleting them. This is an encyclopedia and personally I believe that it is a good place to have information on topics, personalities, and issues that not everyone cares about. And think of a scenario where a Pope or a Shankar Acharya or, say, the Shahi Imam or the head of a religious foundation passes away (not to wish for that, but as a hypothetical), and we start turning to our favorite encyclopedia to find out about possible successors or someone who has been appointed to replace him/her/them. What if we had decided earlier that that person or persons were not "significant" enough for inclusion.

My two cowry's worth.—iFaqeer (Talk to me!) 00:53, Jan 5, 2005 (UTC)

I think the people listed above are more of quacks then sadhus --kunjan1029 03:42, Jan 5, 2005 (UTC)

Even in that case, isn't there a case to document the what, who, where, etc. of them so people can get information? Of course, I am not agreeing with that; I am saying we need to document all such people as objectively as possible. You or I may consider Bhagwan Shree Rajneesh or the Sufi peers religious impostors, but they are definitely significant to know about and we have to bring all the information on them together.—iFaqeer (Talk to me!) 05:41, Jan 5, 2005 (UTC)

Add to the list Bala Sai Baba. -- Paddu 11:16, 16 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I agree with IFaqeer. Also, sometimes, we may be rushing to judge people based on our own knowledge and prejudices. E.g. Swami Akhandananda Saraswati mentioned above - he was a well-konwn editor of Gita Press in 1940's or 50's, two of his followers went on to become Shankaracharyas, his followers included Birla, Singhania (JK), Hinduja families, he was president of Bharat Sadhu Samaj which was a prominent organization in 60's, he was an honorary member of the board of Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan - an honour shared with Prince Charles, HH Dalai Lama, Swami Chinmayananda, Pt Jawaharlal Nehru, Dr Rajendra Prasad, Dr Zakir Husain, Jai Prakash Narayan, Dr V V Giri, JRD Tata, GD Birla, Mother Teresa. Check out: Bhawan Trustees List. Swami Akhandananda's wikipedia bio does not mention this, and arguably the original contributor didn't do justice to the article and subsequent editors were not aware of this, but if the bio was deleted by Utcursch, Nichalp, and others - even with the best of intentions - we would lose out on the knowledge that wikipedia is supposed to preserve.

utcursch I came to know about these articles (Samyamindra Thirtha & Sudhindra Thirtha), in which most of the information is based Kashi Mutt website, these articles lack third party sources. Earlier I put a template asking for independent references, these articles has improved since then, but still lack independent sources to verify.. Currently there is an increase in these kind of articles on wiki. Logical1004 (talk) 06:13, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

I think Facts about India article should be deleted. Nothing important there and looks more like a forward email. what do you people think? --kunjan1029 03:45, Jan 5, 2005 (UTC)

I would move it into the India article under a heading like "Interesting facts" or something.—iFaqeer (Talk to me!) 05:24, Jan 5, 2005 (UTC)

No DO NOT add unnecessary information to the India page. The page is fully mature. Leave this page as it is. Nichalp 19:40, Jan 5, 2005 (UTC)

Hi, Shouldn't there be an article on Article 356 of the Indian Constitution? -- Sundar 05:41, Jan 6, 2005 (UTC)

The Dalit article has been shifted to Dalit (outcaste). I don't know, but I don't think that's a good title. First I though of shifting it to "Dalit (Scheduled Caste)", but SC does not cover Dalits in Nepal, etc. Any opinions? --Soman 12:02, 6 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Dalit (caste system) or Dalit (caste)? -- Sundar 14:09, Jan 6, 2005 (UTC)

Dalit (caste) would be the best. Nichalp 19:46, Jan 6, 2005 (UTC)

Oh, perfect, I was hoping there could be wider discussion about this, but I didn't know where it might take place. I was the one who moved the article to Dalit (outcaste), although to be clear I did not move any article entitled Dalit. The article I moved was Untouchable, because I noticed that a number of articles had links or redirects essentially saying "for Dalit, see untouchable", which I'm sure everybody can agree is highly unfelicitous. Dalit is (and was) a disambiguation page. I came up with the name Dalit (outcaste), but I'd be happy to see it changed if some better name can be arrived at. (I have reservations about Dalit (caste), because Dalit jatis are outside the varna system, which is key to the problem of Dalit exclusion.) Alternatively, we could move the article to Dalit and create a new page Dalit (disambiguation); or else move the page to Dalits, which is currently a redirect. (By-the-by, for people interested in a related topic, I'd love to see additions and improvements to the article on Scheduled Tribes, currently at Tribes of India, which is still in its infancy.) QuartierLatin1968 00:28, 7 Jan 2005 (UTC)

The use of "{{India-stub}}" in the source of Category:India-related stubs causes the category to show up as a subcategory of itself. This can be confusing. - dcljr 06:31, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Fixed. utcursch 08:03, Jan 10, 2005 (UTC)

NPOV rewrites by anti-Netaji advocates (who most probably have only studied British & US sources on the war) constantly take place on the Subash Chandra Bose article. Please chip in on the effort to keep the article correct. --Soman 23:05, 14 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Do you mean POV when you say NPOV? -- Sundar 08:23, Jan 19, 2005 (UTC)

Actually, I always confuse which one is means what. Yes, you're correct, I intended to write POV. --Soman 09:10, 19 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I'm considering to launch a WikiProject on political parties of India. In any case assistance is needed on the subject. Most urgent is that many of relatively large, regional-based parties make taher stub-like articles, such as Rashtriya Janata Dal, Bahujan Samaj Party, Janata Dal (United), Janata Dal (Secular) and Samajwadi Party.

Also, see Indian general elections, 2004 or List of political parties in India and fill in some of the red links. --Soman 23:14, 14 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Since most of us have problems obtaining images and photos, if you know of any organisation/site that provides images on Indian themes on a PD or GDFL licence, please quote the site so that editors may use the images in the future. Nichalp 10:13, Jan 21, 2005 (UTC)

Just 2 cents:

• for biographical articles[1] has a number of photos, including those of Indian personalities. They are believed to be in the public domain, and should qualify for fair use at least.
• [2] has photographs of Indian musicians that are also believed to be in the public domain, as stated in the FAQ of the site. I also have email confirmation from the web admin. --ashwatha 07:04, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC)

We have two lists...

• Wikipedia:Wikipedians/India
• Talk page of Wikipedia:Indian_wikipedians'_notice_board

I think this is quite confusing. Some users are list at one of these places and are not aware of the other. I propose that we have only one. At Wikipedia:Wikipedians/India. Can I have your views. Arunram 22:28, 22 Jan 2005 (UTC)

• • The first list is the list of Indian nationals contributing to wikipedia. The second list is the list of contributors (not necessarily Indian nationals or of Indian origin) contributing to mainly India themed articles. The page serves as a forum for discussing India related articles. Nichalp 09:51, Jan 23, 2005 (UTC)

Please look at Talk:Hijra (India) and see if you can help. --Rrjanbiah 19:53, 23 Jan 2005 (UTC)

• Sari - Need to get permission to use Anna Kournikova in Sari [3].
• Kolam - Needs picture.
• Tirukkural - Need to use [4] and to get permission.

--Rrjanbiah 20:09, 23 Jan 2005 (UTC)

You can request permission from the webmaster of above sites using Wikipedia:Boilerplate request for permission. utcursch 12:38, Jan 24, 2005 (UTC)

Already done. Look at my talk page. Just want to test others' luck. --Rrjanbiah 06:00, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC)

The current China Collaboration of the Week is Sino-Indian relations. Perhaps the text could do with some inputs from ourside. Nichalp 20:39, Jan 23, 2005 (UTC)

As a follow-up to the to-do list item of having at least a dozen featured articles, thought I would post the current India-related articles that have FA status:

1. India
2. Aryan invasion theory
3. British East India Company
4. Governor-General of India
5. Mahatma Gandhi
6. Greco-Buddhism
7. Buddhism
8. Hinduism
9. Auto rickshaw
10. Sikkim - latest in the list!!

I think Indian independence movement is also FA material, even though it might not be there yet. It needs a bit of information regarding Subhash Chandra Bose and the Indian National Army, as well as proof-reading, pruning and some minor structuring. After this it would be good enough for a peer review, at least. I have been working on this for the past few days, please jump in if interested. --ashwatha 21:53, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Should we create Wikipedia:Indian wikipedians' notice board/FA and maintain a list of India-related FAs there? utcursch 11:33, Jan 25, 2005 (UTC)

I couldn't agree more. We should have a Wikipedia:Indian wikipedians' notice board/FA page. 202.88.172.228 12:18, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)

See Talk:Economy of India#Rewrite. pamri 17:02, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Nice template. Continue your good work. We'll chime in. -- Sundar 06:04, Jan 28, 2005 (UTC)

Should this project page be moved to a more appropriate title that doesn't preclude non-Indians working on Indian articles? -- Paddu 18:59, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC)

How about Wikipedia:Notice board for India-related topics? -- Sundar 06:20, Jan 27, 2005 (UTC)

I agree. utcursch 05:38, Jan 28, 2005 (UTC)

In my opinion any title is fine as long as it makes it welcome for anyone interested in contributing to articles related to India. The current title (please see) reasonably reflects that. Arunram 15:41, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC)

'The article has since been moved.' -- Sundar 10:04, Feb 4, 2005 (UTC)

Should we also move the Wikipedia:Indian wikipedians' notice board/INCOTW to Wikipedia:Notice board for India-related topics/INCOTW? -- Brhaspati 01:57, 2005 Feb 5 (UTC)

Yeah. utcursch 04:37, Feb 7, 2005 (UTC)

Moved. -- Brhaspati 15:50, 2005 Feb 7 (UTC)

Any Wikipedians from Bangalore out there. I would like to meet up with you all sometime in the next few weeks. Any takers? Please list your name...

1. Arunram 10:23, 30 Jan 2005 (UTC)
2. Sundar 05:01, Jan 31, 2005 (UTC)

History of science and technology#Indian contributions to the sciences is a pathetic stub section. Please help improve that so that it can stand as an independent article in itself. -- Sundar 10:43, Jan 31, 2005 (UTC)

I have added a write-up. I am yet to add sections on Contributions to Medicine & Surgery. Was wondering if I can put up some pictures? User:Prashanthns

I noticed your edits. I appreciate your effort. It needs some more formatting and style edits. You can definitely add any relevant pictures that are in public domain (that is free for anyone to use). -- Sundar 05:15, Feb 8, 2005 (UTC)

I've made this page List of RTO districts in India; listing all the vehicle RTO districts. Please add all the district numbers you know of. Nichalp 19:03, Feb 4, 2005 (UTC)

Please take a look at Mysore Zoo . Although, once upon a time (and even now) a pride for Mysore, there were a spate of deaths, many linked to poisoning of animals. It sure painted a ghastly picture of the staff. But, is it really necessary to have such a wide coverage of this controversy on wikipedia? Does it not suit a newspaper/tabloid better to give actual dates of deaths and doubtful reasons. Doesent it just suffice to report that there is such an event taking place at the zoo, and talk about all the nice thigs that are STILL there?

Thought I will discuss this issue before I make changes I deem fit.

Prashanth

A new Wikiportal, India has been created on 11 February 2005.

The portal intends to be the kaleidoscope of India content in wikipedia. Please visit, comment and contribute to this portal. Would greatly appreciate review, comments, suggestions and criticism.

Cheers Arunram 12:41, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I created this although I admit to little knowledge of the subject and poor access to data. I used the information from news sources like AP which claim very infrequent executions rather than those of Amnesty International which claimed a dozen executions a year. I don't understand why the sources conflict. Any help appreciated. Rmhermen 15:22, Feb 16, 2005 (UTC)