Wikipedia talk:Noticeboard for India-related topics/Archive 51

Photo montages in infoboxes of caste/community articles

Can these be justified? There have been localised discussions on various articles, and also discussions at Template talk:Infobox caste, for at least the last year. How do we ensure that they do not give undue weight to those people who are selected? How do we deal with (yet again) the problem of people warring with regard to unverified claims/BLP violations? How do we stop puffery, and in particular a tendency to show only good-looking models/film stars etc? Is it really worth all the effort? - Sitush (talk) 12:33, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

This is not an India-related issue. This issue is common to all articles about various ethnic groups all over the world such as Han people, Tatars, Tibetan people, Catalan people, Germans, Italians, Armenians, Irish people, etc. Since it is not an India-specific issue, there is no reason to discuss this matter here. It is generally accepted that articles on ethnic groups shall contain an ethnic group infobox with either a montage or a gallery of prominent members of the particular group. If you have any concerns, you shall raise them in the template talk page. - InarZan Verifiable 13:17, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

Not really, we can and discuss usage of templates specific to project articles. —SpacemanSpiff 13:34, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

& is Sitush proposing to not have any images in the infobox? §§AnimeshKulkarni (talk) 13:41, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

Animesh, I don't say that, do I? You could, for example, in the case of a caste article find use for a single representative, historical, public domain image of a member of the community going about their traditional occupation. Indeed, that has been the route taken by some contributors - Fowler&fowler and MatthewVanitas, for example. I've had a lot of involvement in caste articles and the warring is ridiculous when it comes to these montages, whether presented as a single composite image file or as a set of discrete images. I do not have a lot of interest in image work but I know a POV magnet etc when I see one, and I find myself frequently having to fix issues relating to the montages. Some of these montages have been deleted (without my involvement) due to copyright issues etc, including at least a couple of composite versions (one was at Nair).

InarZan, I had already explained to you the peculiar circumstance whereby many articles allow non-Roman scripts but we have consensus that Indic scripts should not be used in leads etc of India-related articles. Projects can and do make decisions such as this. - Sitush (talk) 13:56, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

The inclusion of Indic script is an India-related issue, and hence it must be discussed here. But Template:Infobox ethnic group is not specific to this project, neither the potential problems that may arise when using montages of ethnic groups. These issues are universal in nature. It should be addressed universally with a wider discussion. No country-specific remedies possible. - InarZan Verifiable 14:11, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

No, it is not. Articles related to Pakistan also use it, for example. - Sitush (talk) 14:14, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

Are you sure Indic scripts are not used in leads of India-related articles? I can still see them in Malayalam, Tamil language, Sanskrit, etc. - InarZan Verifiable 14:25, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

It is this sort of speciousness that I am finding tiresome. This thread is about montages, not scripts. I mentioned scripts as an example of what SpacemanSpiff had noted (itself a response to an incorrect understanding) and you are now derailing the thread with irrelevancies. The consensus is that scripts should not be in the leads etc but you didn't really think that an hour later someone would have gone through the tens of thousands of articles and removed them all, did you? Now, can we get back on topic, please. - Sitush (talk) 14:57, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

If a notable person could be categorized into an ethnic group following WP:EGRS, his image could be used in the montage of that particular ethnic group. While creating the montage, an editor could use his reasoning and creativity to select the persons based on different priorities like 1.Notability 2.Field of eminence 3. Free-image etc. Moreover, usage of montages with the photos of notable persons is universal; not restricted to India. --AshLey ^Msg 15:25, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

I don't think that what has been said above is sinking in, is it? Why do you think that another editor might not use different "reasoning and creativity"; why do you think that this is not subjective; how are you going to stop the disruption; how do you propose to balance things; why are you ignoring the clear arguments that this issue is of relevance to the India project in a manner that may not apply to other projects, as was the case with the scripts? - Sitush (talk) 15:48, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

@Sitush: I infact wouldnt mind if you propose removal of celebrity images from infoboxes. We should have some other images there. Maybe some 1890's group photo, or traditional costumes, or some traditional food-dish, or old housing, or something. Images of these celebrities can be used in other sections if there exists a section that mentions them in length, not just bulleted list of names. The infobox should be a summary of the article. Image should represent that caste. These cricketers and actresses dont represent the caste in complete sense. Whereas some other images might do it better. §§AnimeshKulkarni (talk) 17:06, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

I am walking away from this thread for the weekend: between this and another article, I am getting a bit frustrated with a couple of people. I'll go fell some more trees & return on Sunday. - Sitush (talk) 17:51, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

I agree with Sitush. The celebrity montages feature people who belong to the caste in name only, people who have achieved fame far afield from the caste's traditional specialties. Other than making an enabling statement of the sort, "We too can rise to the top," these pictures tell us little about the caste.

In the past, we have used traditional (over a century old) "ethnographic" prints in the caste articles. See Kurmi, Yadav, Jat people for examples. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 10:31, 26 May 2012 (UTC)

(I'm trying hard to care about this!) If we go with the photo montage, we should make sure that any person included in the montage has self-identified with the "caste". Other than that, I have no comment. --regentspark (comment) 12:47, 26 May 2012 (UTC)

Hi RegentsPark, May I know why you are specific about self-identification here. I think, caste can't be equated to religion and hence we can't stress for self-identification here. --AshLey ^Msg 15:37, 26 May 2012 (UTC)

Not everybody cares about belonging to this caste or that. And some people actively care about not being identified with a caste. We should respect that, at least in photo montages which have (approximately) zero encyclopedic value. The only way to respect it is to include only those who have self-identified as belonging to a particular group.--regentspark (comment) 15:48, 26 May 2012 (UTC)

I've no problem in including people who self-identify them with any caste. Although, I'm more or less reluctant to show garish pictures of actors, models, or other media personalities just because they were born in any particular caste. However, including politicians, religious leaders (including reformers), etc, who are actually identified by their castes, can be justified. — Bill william compton^Talk 15:40, 26 May 2012 (UTC)

@Animesh & Fowler:

"cricketers and actresses" in fact stand as an evidence for the community's present-day existence. And of course not just them; scientists, writers, freedom fighters, statesmen, philosophers, rulers, politicians... All of them should be included. If you doubt, please have look on the article Nair. All you can see there is some weird (I'll say funny) looking paintings and a very ancient photo of two Nair women who look really like some aboriginal tribes. I bet, if you are not an Indian, you are going to think that the Nairs are an extinct people of past - like Normans or Vikings. But in reality, Nairs are one of the most forward and prominent communities at least in Kerala. This is where we need a montage of prominent people. Such a montage immediately gives the reader an impression that this community is an active one with a lot of notable personalities.

In articles relating to western ethnic groups, no such aggressive removal was ever proposed; disputes do occur there too, and as you know everywhere else on Wikipedia. For example, there may be different people with same name. Then there may occur some debate on who is more notable, whose article should be there in the default namespace, etc. My point is, debates and disputes are part of Wikipedia, they can't be avoided. But some editors promote an impression that India-related articles are particularly prone to puffery, while western-related articles are not. This means that, at least some people cherish a prejudice that Indians are so aggressive POV-pushers and self-glorifiers, that they cannot keep montages in articles without bloody disputes, while westerners are really mature enough to keep collages in articles related to themselves, without making any problems. This is a kind of colonial attitude. - InarZan Verifiable 11:44, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

There is nothing wrong with the Nair article, and please don't underestimate the intelligence of non-Indians. How do you know what they will think? In fact, they might equally think that the Nair caste as a system of social stratification is dead if the group can contribute its share of third-rate acting talent that comprises much of Bollywood, and its share of corrupt middle-aged men applying jet black hair dye who make up much of India's political class. "Colonial attitude," by the way is the typical riposte found in bristling post-colonial rants of the type you have posted above. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 14:42, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

I think, Inarzan has a valid point. While we are discussing an ethnic group, a montage with the photos of popular people from multiple spheres would help readers to identify the social mobility within the group and of the group, physical appearance of it's members etc. --AshLey ^Msg 07:34, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

What you mean is that it is an opening for puffery. Can you show me an India-related infobox montage that includes someone from the underbelly of society, someone with acne, a notable person with a terrible reputation for criminality, someone ... well, you get the gist. Nope, I didn't think so. And since when did we stereotype ethnic appearance? I thought that scientific racism had been discredited? Indian ethnic articles are prone to puffery. - Sitush (talk) 09:28, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

Any opening could be used for positive or negative causes and an unconditional closure of an opening will mar the free dissemination of knowledge. All who reach the upper echelons of society, fighting multitude of social, economical or physical barriers are not good-looking. For example, see the article: Ezhava, once an untouchable community. The pictures of Actor Sreenivasan, ex-CM Achuthanandan and CPM State Secretary Vijayan are given in the infobox, which in turn inform the reader that "Oh yes! They have come forward". However, I don't think it has any trace of puffery. They are not cream of the society on the basis of "physical beauty", hence one could imagine that an average ezhava could more or less look like this. --AshLey ^Msg 12:07, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

These people's images don't indicate how an average Ezhava person looks. Add A. P. J. Abdul Kalam, George Fernandes, Boman Irani, etc. (all non-Hindus) to this infobox and you make no difference. They show how an average person from Indian-subcontinent looks, irrespective of their caste or even religion. §§AnimeshKulkarni (talk) 13:42, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

In WP:VPP, I have proposed a new clause in WP:EGRS to ensure "self-identification" in the case of ethnicity similar to that in religion. The change should be global one, and I know many experienced editors here support this view. Kindly take up the issue and help to implement the policy change in the global platform. --AshLey ^Msg 14:12, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

Last year, Sitush had tried placing this issue here. No one supported him but one person. Seeing his proposal being rejected, he is now here with the same issue.

My question is simple. Why it is an India-only issue? Infobox: Ethnic Group is used globally. Then why should Indian ethnic articles be treated seperately ? Wikiproject India has to discuss and act on this issue only if India-related articles are a special case. I am just trying to tell that Indian ethnic articles are like those of any other country. So nothing special to India. Sitush is trying to establish that self-glorification or POV pushing are particular to India-related articles. But I do not agree to that. I can show any number of articles related to Western ethnic groups full of puffery, POV, edit warring, etc. For example, go here, here or here to read the ferocious disputes regarding the pictures of notable persons to be included in the infobox montage. If such disputes exist there too, what is the use of removing montages only from Indian articles ? If you think there is something to be done, the issue should addressed globally, not in one country only. Despite all such disputes, they still keep such montages and no particular decision was taken against inclusion of montages either in Template talk:Infobox ethnic group nor in Wikipedia:WikiProject Ethnic groups.

It will be a discrimination that Indians are not allowed to use montages in their community articles while western people are allowed to do so. Articles such as Delhi, Chennai, Bangalore, Punjab, Kolkata, etc are also using montages. Will you propose to remove them too? - InarZan Verifiable 18:23, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

The thing is, at this project we are trying to improve the quality of articles related to India, if you think that because other articles have it so it's ok, then you're wrong, if you think improving article quality shouldn't be a goal -- that is, puffery, POV pushing etc should be allowed, then I think you are at the wrong place -- Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia. There can of course be disagreements on how to implement things or what's best, but arguing that puffery and POV pushing should be allowed implies that you are confusing this place with Blogspot etc.—SpacemanSpiff 18:35, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

InarZan, remember your comment of a few days ago? That was a pretty blatant POV statement and is not untypical of what we see on the Indian community articles. POV has no place here.

I do believe that many caste etc articles are in need of improvement, have spent the last 12 months or so doing mostly just that, and have done so almost without reference to non-India articles. As SpacemanSpiff says, the other articles are not relevant. Montages are POV magnets (and you appear to agree with that) and Indian community articles are so troublesome that they are subject to general sanctions. You need also to bear in mind that we have various infobox templates akin to Template:Infobox ethnic group and quite a few Indian articles use those; and yet again I refer you to the decision that arose from the Indic scripts RfC.

Animesh raises an important point. - Sitush (talk) 20:24, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

@InarZan: Also, i would suggest you to take up this discussion here itself for another reason. My experience is that bigger global forums are not as active as these smaller ones are. In case we have a consensus here, which you do not like, you can always go to the global forum. Take it as District Court, High Court and Supreme Court.
And i am confused here. The city articles which you gave as example use landmarks in their montages. They clearly make sense there. Lotus Temple is associated with Delhi. But these celebrities don't necessarily do that. I am not saying we shouldn't have any montage at all. You can very well have montages of weapons used by Rajputs. §§AnimeshKulkarni (talk) 20:27, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

@Animeshkulkarni: It's regarding your previous comment. If you compare the images of a randomly selected set of 15 persons each from Aiyer and Ezhava you could see the fault in your theory. --AshLey ^Msg 07:29, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Do you mean to say that readers (especially you) can understand caste of a person from their looks? §§AnimeshKulkarni (talk) 08:36, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Not all relations are symmetric both way. I didn't infer any "=" relation in my previous statement. --AshLey ^Msg 09:35, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Well then what you inferred wasn't inferrable to me. Would you mind retrying it? §§AnimeshKulkarni (talk) 09:49, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Simple illustration: I will be able to calculate the average of a set of 15 random numbers, if the numbers are given. But, the reverse-engineering is not possible here. ie, If I'm given with only the average, it's not possible to assume the set of numbers, since infinite number of sets have same average. I think you could get the "connection" between the analogy and the situation here. --AshLey ^Msg 11:06, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

I understood the Math part. But i still don't see fault in my theory. (I will go & get some Chavanprash till you come up with another analogy involving maybe biomechanics now. I will need it.) §§AnimeshKulkarni (talk) 11:26, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Please can you try to explain again, AshLey. We don't seem to have much in the way of policy-based discussion here but your analogy really doesn't help if people do not understand it. - Sitush (talk) 20:37, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

The analogy explains how I could assess the the <appearance of an average person of a particular caste> if I'm given with about {15-20 photos of randomly elected individuals from that caste}(it's a random sample of the set). It also explains why I could not assess {the caste}(it's the set) , if I'm given with <a photo of an individual from a particular caste> --AshLey ^Msg 08:37, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

So if we give you two sets A & B, you will be able to tell which set is of which caste?
You know, keep that brilliance with you. Readers know how people look. They know how Indians look (nothing different from Pakistanis or Sri Lankans). They know how Hindus look (nothing different from Muslims or Parsis). When you are at a different level of the tree, you have to show readers something thats different from other branches, something that distinguishes them. You would not find distinguishing things always through photographs. But then you at least should try showing something thats much better than celebrity faces. Eg. Although a collage of weapons won't distinguish amongst different types of Rajputs, it would at least distinguish them from Brahmins. Bunch of 15 people dont even do that. §§AnimeshKulkarni (talk) 09:05, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

As AK has clearly elucidated, photo montages are not a way of building some kind of "caste recognition facility using facial features of celebrities". Let's not worry about that any longer. So that leaves us with the questions: Is there any encyclopedic value in including a celebrity photo montage in a caste article? Do we need a montage at all? --regentspark (comment) 14:07, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

We don't need montages of people anywhere in the caste articles. My personal opinion is to have some image in infobox. Empty infoboxes don't look good. Now if they are montages of some suitable images or simply single image would change case-by-case. §§AnimeshKulkarni (talk) 14:44, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

I wonder how AK could say that the appearance of individuals belonging to different Indian castes is indistinguishably similar. So you say the members of Deshastha Brahmin and Adivasi groups are looking similar. --AshLey ^Msg 13:40, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

Montages of celebrities in Indian caste/community articles seem to me not to add anything of encyclopedic significance. Primarily because they are most definitely not representative of the communities as a whole. I am ambivalent regarding whether any image should appear and that is something that can be determined on a case-by-case basis: if there is something suitable then we can use it but otherwise we should not have some sort of ruling that an image must exist because that would rather force us into a corner. - Sitush (talk) 10:31, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

@Ashley: Yes! §§AnimeshKulkarni (talk) 11:09, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

I strongly oppose you in this regard. I think anybody with a public exposure in India would not support your view. && I'm not interested to continue this talk as it's going against common sense. Bye --AshLey ^Msg 14:16, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

You are being disingenuous over here, you talk about identifying regular folks and then show images that are more culturally unique. The image you link to above does not fall into the same category of showing a picture of Rahul Dravid and MS Dhoni side by side and being able to identify the castes of either of the two. You can oppose all you want, but get your arguments straight. —SpacemanSpiff 08:52, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

Again I'm drawn into this disingenuous discussion. I didn't ask for Rahul Dravid or Sachin's photo in the montage. But we would find it difficult to get some free images of 10-15 common folks for each caste. That's why, as an alternative, we could post the fotos of 10-15 notable people(not 10 film stars) from different fields (music, poetry, politics, business, scholar, sports....), but reliable citation should not be compromised. If you have a group foto of people belonging to a caste, you post it (with WP:RS citation).--AshLey ^Msg 12:54, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

It is disingenuous because you're (the only one, now that InarZan has left the conversation) taking it in that direction.—SpacemanSpiff 13:17, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

Spaceman, you are not supposed to talk like this- introspect! Difference of opinion will be there, but accusing some one opposing your opinion with dishonesty is not a courteous behavior. I will not respond to any of the posts here....Njoy friends! --AshLey ^Msg 13:40, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

You do not know my opinion because I haven't expressed any. I have only commented on the fallacy of your arguments as you've been wasting everyone's time here. As is obvious, you are just not going to listen to anyone but keep deflecting, so I'll stop. —SpacemanSpiff 13:47, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

"Deflecting" - that's the behavioural word that I have been missing for weeks. One to remember for the future. - Sitush (talk) 18:17, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

• Its the same case as with the mentioning of caste in the articles/inclusion in List of people of X caste thing. No self identification, no listing, least of all, a photo. If one has self identification, then there's a case to be made out, but without that, we can't violate BLP just for the sake of aesthetics. Maybe we need to increase the font size of our BLP policy. Lynch7 14:45, 4 June 2012 (UTC)
• FWIW, I took a look at two articles Rajput and Gurjar. The Gurjar article does have a photo montage but, imo, it adds nothing to the article. The people in the picture are indistinguishable from those of other communities and none of the people are even remotely well known. The Rajput article, on the other hand, had no montage (a montage was added yesterday) but instead had two photographs of historical value. The one with the Mayo college students was particularly informative. Personally, I'd prefer the Rajput approach (as it was before the addition of the montage) over the Gurjar approach. --regentspark (comment) 14:56, 4 June 2012 (UTC) Additional note: In the Rajput article, there also appears to be some uncertainty as to whether the people in the montage are Rajput (or Bengali, Gurjar, Marathi, ...). I suspect this is going to be a problem in lots of articles (some of the Gurjar montage residents are Sikh!). I say let's do away with the montage, include only images of people who either self-identify with a clan or, for historical figures, reliable sources identify them with the clan. Much cleaner, more encyclopedic! --regentspark (comment) 18:07, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

Ask AshLey! He might help with his superpowers. §§AnimeshKulkarni (talk) 09:01, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

You mean with his mathematical powers! --regentspark (comment) 13:12, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

RegentsPark, my original query included not only montages created as a single image from a selection of images but also wikicode montages, ie: a series of discrete images loaded individually into the infobox. From your "include only images of people who either self-identify with a clan or, for historical figures, reliable sources identify them with the clan" it seems that you are content with the latter manner of doing things. Or have I misread? - Sitush (talk) 18:13, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

No. What it meant is that I hadn't given the matter serious thought. Based on my rajput/gurjar analysis, I'm leaning toward not including any montage that contains only pictures of people. I can see some relevance in including very well known people, the kind that a reader in the English speaking world would already know, but I can't see much relevance in just including photographs of people who are not well known outside India. And, no relevance at all in including people (as in the Gurjar montage) people who are not even well known in India. Looking at the montage in Bengali people, for example, I'm ok with Satyajit Ray and Tagore but the other photographs are mere meaningless clutter (imo!). As a matter of personal taste, I don't like these upfront montages at all - too busy - but they seem popular on Wikipedia so what do I know!--regentspark (comment) 18:42, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

So, where are we at with this? There are at least two possible types of montage currently used in infoboxes: those that involve multiple images contained within one "metaimage" and those that involve multiple images that are coded individually in the infobox. In both cases, the issues of WP:V, WP:BLP etc exist, And it remains my contention that the issue of weighting/balance/POV etc may well exist & in practice usually does. - Sitush (talk) 00:17, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

I think it is safe to skip montages entirely. My conclusion (from the discussion above) is that they don't offer any advantages but come with several disadvantages that include the ones you've listed above. Let's get rid of them. --regentspark (comment) 16:52, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

Discussion summary

A summary of the above discussion shows that there are several problems with including images of people in montages. There are issues of blp, verifiability issues, issues of weight, they tend to be pov magnets, possible copyright issues tend to be hidden (this applies to all images in montages), and the unfortunate fact that most people whose images are in montages are not household names and add no encyclopedic value to the article. On the flip side, the arguments are that other projects include montages (that's not really an argument), that people will infer the facial features of members of a caste (fairly clear that this is untrue), that it will help readers identify social mobility within groups (how?), and that it is discrimination to exclude montages from caste related articles when other articles have it (again, a non-argument). Clearly, the arguments against including people images in montages is far stronger. The conclusion from all this is straightforward: No montages with people images in caste related articles for now. Editors who believe otherwise are invited to initiate an RfC on this issue. Since current consensus is to remove these montages, we'll remove them pending the outcome of an RfC. --regentspark (comment) 19:59, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

Rfc: Montage with people image in caste related articles

Should the montages of notable persons be included in the articles related to Indian castes or ethnic groups? (Please see the discussion above) AshLey ^Msg 10:19, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

I am not likely to participate in a RfC that has a skewed question, nor do we need one given the discussion above. - Sitush (talk) 10:46, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

Agreed with Sitush. There is cut and dried consensus against having photo montages. End of story. No need for a dawdling time waster of an RfC. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 11:23, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

The discussion above has little weight, WikiProjects don't have the authority to create binding decisions on articles in their scope, particularly since almost every article in Wikipedia falls under multiple projects. What do you expect would happen if WP India decided not to include montage images in ethnic infoboxes but WP:WikiProject Ethnic groups decided they should be included? Who takes precedence? WikiProjects can establish 'recommended practice' within their scope but actual application of those recommendations still needs to go through consensus-building at the change level - eg. the article itself for an individual change, or through a properly advertised RFC in a central location for changes to multiple articles. That's all covered at WP:Advice pages, but the short answer is yes, an RFC is a good idea to solicit community input before making changes to a number of articles. – NULL ‹talk›
‹edits› 05:31, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

Its like going step-by-step. If WP:India finds it unsuitable and there is consensus here and someone from WP:Ethnic groups objects it, they are welcome to opine here or start another discussion here or there or anywhere. In case there is no consensus in-house, we don't need to bother other projects at all. §§AnimeshKulkarni (talk) 07:51, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

Good point, Animesh. It seems from the WP:AN thread that a RfC here will suffice, as happened with the Indic scripts palaver, but if some other project chooses to challenge then they are welcome to do so. This is why I keep banging on about the phrasing of the question that had been proposed for comment. It is not long since that we have gone through the scripts issue and that one, while "sort of" ok, could have been phrased better in order to define the scope. I remain unhappy with the current (revised) wording of this RfC but because my opinions are so obvious it is inappropriate for me to amend the question. For what it is worth, I oppose the current RfC query as it is formed. Fowler&fowler and others - plus the consensus summarised by RegentsPark in the discussion above - summarise my objections in a far better manner than I could do myself. - Sitush (talk) 00:04, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

• Comment I don't even know what you are asking. Are you asking "Should montages of notable persons be included on castes or ethnic groups in India articles which are germane to the aforementioned articles?"?Curb Chain (talk) 19:46, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

Yes, I have modified the question (courtesy: Curb Chain ) for better understanding. --AshLey ^Msg 10:19, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

• Decide per-article. There's no compelling reason to require or prohibit particular types of image, or even the presence of an image at all, in ethnic infoboxes. Montages are used in a wide range of infoboxes across the project, often quite effectively. If a good quality montage can be presented for any given ethnicity/caste article, I can't see any reason why it should be disqualified simply on the basis of it being a montage. – NULL ‹talk›
  ‹edits› 05:31, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

That's what is happening here. But instead of giving views on all hundreds of articles included in Category:Indian castes, we have discussed it here. It would be good if your vote is not discuss-somewhere-else when a discussion has already happened/ is happening here. §§AnimeshKulkarni (talk) 07:54, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

I strongly agree with User:NULL. I have started a thread in WP:AN questioning the authority of WikiProjects to create binding decisions on articles they claim to cover. All participants of the discussion, except Sitush and RegentsPark agreed to my view that WikiProjects do not possess any authority to impose anything on articles, since a WikiProject is just a group of people who like to work together on some topic of interest and most articles fall under multiple WikiProjects. At best they can make recommendations. They cannot make decisions that act like proxy-policies. --InarZan Verifiable 12:54, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

Actually, I don;t think I commented for or against at AN - I merely gave the context, which had been requested by someone else. However, this is irrelevant to the RfC because an RfC result will comply with the wider community requirements as discussed in that thread. So, let's leave this bit behind and work out a proper question to be put forward for comment. - Sitush (talk) 12:59, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

consensus has not yet reached, thankx, I can see seevral disagreements Paansing (talk) 18:53, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

Generalities that apply to most Wikiprojects are not very helpful when dealing with Indian caste-related articles, and to that extent, user:InarZan has been disingenuous in framing his RfC statement at AN. His interest had nothing to do with Antarctica, which is just an attempt to reel in the readers, an innocuous front, one poles apart from the ugly hurly-burly of Indian caste related pages. Indian caste-related articles are notorious for rampant POV, for unimaginable puffery, and for unmitigated abuse of every Wikipedia guideline related to reliable sourcing. These articles (as far as I can tell) are the only ones that come with a "castewarning" template (that give attending admins some discretionary powers). See below. Unlike InarZan (talk · contribs), who has made just a handful (read tens) of edits to only Kerala-based community pages and consequently has an ax to grind, I've worked on a wider range of Indian caste groups, so I know. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 01:06, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

The Wikipedia community has permitted administrators to impose discretionary sanctions on any editor who is active on any page about social groups, explicitly including caste associations and political parties, related to India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh and Nepal. Discretionary sanctions can be used against an editor who repeatedly or seriously fails to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behavior, or any normal editorial process. If you engage in further inappropriate behavior in this area, you may be placed under sanctions, which can include blocks, a revert limitation, or an article ban. The discussion leading to the imposition of these sanctions can be read here. Please familiarise yourself with the information page at Wikipedia:General sanctions.

Perhaps, InarZan should be challenging this template as well. How about an RfC on that and how about using an abused poodle as a front? Fowler&fowler«Talk» 01:11, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

While I agree with the sentiment, and do feel that if the wider community rules apply here then it is a case of the lunatics running the asylum, I also think that there is an easy solution. That is, to find a suitable neutrally worded question for the RfC. It is in a sense a waste of time because there is no way that these montages are going to stay, but if it takes a bit of slavish adherence to achieve the bleeding obvious then so be it.

Let's face reality here: there were some heavy hitters among those who argued above against inclusion, and there were no policy-based reasons among the opposite arguments. I know that is a cruel statement and flies in the face of how the politically correct like to pretend thing are done, but it is true. It will be a tedious re-run and will involve the usual chaotic activity, but the outcome seems to be inevitable. Yes, I do realise that everyone is equal here, but experience does count and I cannot even begin to guess at the disparities on that score. The likes of myself and Fowler (and other above whom I will not name) have been through this mill time and again, and we know exactly what the problems are in the big picture of India caste/community/ethnic group articles wide. It may seem like bullying, but the chances of the wider community disregarding the experience seems slim, My only regret is that the outcome will affect just stuff that is uniquely related to the India Project. As with the general sanctions, it should really apply to the Pakistan project etc also. Indeed, how to resolve the potential blurred lines is the biggest problem in phrasing the question. - Sitush (talk) 01:43, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

• Statement of Fowler&fowler There is no place for photomontages in Indian caste-related articles, especially ones including pictures of living persons. Caste not only is not recognized by the Indian constitution, but also is not, unqualifiedly, a social positive any more, even among people with higher caste surnames. Including a living individual's picture in a montage, and consequently "outing" them, can be a BLP violation. If there is no reliable reference stating that they unequivocally identify with the social group, this is clearly the case. If there is such a source, for example in the case of a caste-based politician, a picture can be a conflict-of-interest violation, and Wikipedia can be seen as an instrument of the politician's purpose. There are other issues as well. The former photomontage in the Kashmiri Pandit page had six or seven pictures, four of which were of members of the Nehru family, including one of Jawaharlal Nehru, who was an atheist, and didn't identify with the religious aspect of the Pandit community. Photomontages consequently create visual bias. They favor the few outstanding over the vast average. Photomontages are, moreover, anonymous. They provide no cue to what makes a Kashmiri pandit a Kashmiri pandit, no cue to the religion, the language, or the customs of a community. Caste pages are essentially historical pages and they should be treated as such. For it was only historically that people lived as close-knit members of a caste, followed not only the rituals, but also the social prohibitions associated with their caste, even ones unpalatable to them. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 02:00, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

PS Finally, photomontages reinforce caste as hierarchy. The more privileged castes, having had more historical resources, have more "notable" people. Why is it that the "untouchables" (see, for example, chamar or bhangi) pages have not had issues with photomontages, indeed have not carried them? Fowler&fowler«Talk» 02:11, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

• Oppose - Since the caste system has no place under the Indian Constitution - and has had no such place for 50 years, using page content (such as montages) risks the neutrality of content over all. There are simply too many variables with image and montage that cause Due and Undue weight to be Incalculable. Whilst there maybe WP:V and WP:NPOV sources that can deal with the reality of caste in modern social settings, it would require that every image and all it's content/elements to be measured against the same standard - every element verified - every element assessed for NPOV - gender has to be assessed - equivalence of clothing and ornament - hair styles - time of day and shadow - saturation of image - Black and white vs Colour - is the Colour a valid representation .... It just goes on and on. The implications of the aesthetic being used over the Neutral and WP:V simply make the issue a none starter. They say a picture paints a thousand words. Here it would take billions of words and there would still be more due to the aesthetic issues. ... and then it's Montage vs Montage! It's endless and should not even be started. Media-Hound 'D 3rd P^) (talk) 23:04, 23 June 2012 (UTC)
• 'Oppose - I have been thinking for days of how I could possible add or otherwise improve upon the statement of Fowler&fowler. I cannot do so because it encapsulates everything that I think to be correct. I do hope that whoever closes this thread takes some account of the preamble discussion, however: some of the comments opposing inclusion in that section are directly related to Fowler's excellent summary. (Oh, and MediaHound is obviously correct in their statement also). - Sitush (talk) 02:18, 28 June 2012 (UTC)
• Support - The issues enlisted to oppose the inclusion of montage could be dealt better within the WP policy framework, not by removing it entirely. The montages could help the readers to get some idea of the physical traits of people belonging to a particular caste or community. (However, the reverse is not true; one can not guess the caste of an individual from his physical appearance.) Anthropometric differences of castes and tribes in India is not my disingenuous opinion but supported by many sources like 11, 12, 13, 14, 15. Another point, I raised in the above discussion was that the image of notable persons from a caste could give the reader an impression on the historical social mobility of the caste within the system. This view is partially supported by the argument of flower that "The more privileged castes, having had more historical resources, have more notable people." The situation in India is dynamically changing, once untouchable castes have now become indispensable and I was happy to see that many beaurocrats, Chief Ministers and Cabinet Ministers are from such communities. Such information is valuable, interesting for many common readers and subject of research for many social engineers. Montages are already there in hundreds of caste articles and here the proposal is to undo the hard work of many Wikipedians. --AshLey ^Msg 13:49, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

• Hm. Despite the prior discussion, Ashley, it seems that you are still intent on promoting alleged racial characteristics here and hoping to promote the few as being representative of the many. You seem even to be suggesting that some subliminal attempt to achieve these goals is acceptable. It is twaddle, sorry. See WP:DUE and umpteen other policies. It is evident that you have a COI with regard to this particular community, but I had hoped that you could see beyond it: the earlier discussion provided you with plenty of reasons why these arguments are not sustainable. - Sitush (talk) 00:12, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

• Please don't be silly. I have my opinion and even if it conflicts 'your view' or even the majority's view, I should register it. A few could always represent the many and it's a universal phenomena, too pervasive to deny. If you are not aware of "Sampling theory" or "Unequal probability sampling" just have a look! My view on racial characteristics have already been supported with sufficient number of sources. You have made your opinion and I made mine in the RFC; leave it there! AshLey ^Msg 09:12, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

Yes, many years ago I did a course in advanced statistics. Please indicate the sampling methods you believe to be suitable in this instance & which frequently cause the beautiful and the successful to somehow come out as representative of the population. I find it hard to believe that these people fall anywhere near centre of the bell curve. Perhaps they do but I have yet to see any sources provided by you that remotely support your contentions, and the burden would be on you to verify. - Sitush (talk) 13:37, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

Actually, if it is claimed that such montages illustrate 'racial differences', it would be a serious violation of WP:BLP policy to include any living person in them - under no circumstances do we classify living individuals by 'race'. This is non-negotiable. It is also offensive, and based on an outdated and discredited attempt to make a 'science' out of a social construct. That the British in India a century ago thought that they could construct different 'racial groups' out of what is self-evidently a population with gradients of genetic variation with no clear boundaries is no reason to continue the practice here. AndyTheGrump (talk) 14:39, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

• Include montage for ethnic groups - [from uninvolved editor invited by RfC bot] Many WP articles on ethnic groups include photo montages (to pick one at random: Pashtun people). So there is no problem doing the same for ethnic groups within India. On the other hand, for groups which are based on non-ethnic criteria (economics, profession, culture etc) montages do not seem appropriate. For articles on castes, the question should be asked the the caste is primarily ethnic vs economic/cultural. --Noleander (talk) 14:20, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
  • Comment. Wikipedia isn't bound by precedent, and nor is it bound by RfC's run by WikiProjects. This is a total waste of time - any 'decision' made here is irrelevant. AndyTheGrump (talk) 14:46, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
    • I thought that the recent WP:AN discussion had indicated that a RfC would suffice it involved the wider community (as evidenced also by Noleander's thoughts above)? Noleander, the discussion immediately prior to this subsection indicates why the montages are so problematic in the India-related articles and why a specific adjustment to normal practices might therefore be justified. - Sitush (talk) 15:44, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

Okay, I just read the section above, but I don't see how it changes anything. The objections raised to photos seem to fall into two categories: (1) WP:Verifiability - apparently editors were including photos without a WP:Reliable source that conclusively identified the person as belonging to the group; and (2) Editors were apparently including photos for some groups that are not generally accepted as ethnicities, but rather are culturally-defined or economically-defined groups. My RfC comment above is consistent with those two issues: (1) Of course, no photo may be included without outstanding sourcing, particularly if the person is alive; Footnotes are needed for the montage photos. See WP:BLP; see also Wikipedia:Categorization/Ethnicity, gender, religion and sexuality; and (2) As I said, photo montages should not be used with culturally-defined or economically-defined groups. --Noleander (talk) 03:25, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Noleander, do you think that there is ever such a thing as an ethnicity that isn't 'culturally-defined'? If you do, I suggest you either (a) learn a little about the subject, or (b) stop responding to invitations to participate in subjects you know nothing about. What the heck do you think an 'ethnicity' is? AndyTheGrump (talk) 03:32, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Hmm, I'm not sure what you are driving at. It sounds like you object to grouping persons by ethnicity? WP includes many, many important entities based on ethnicities: categories, lists, etc. Many articles on ethnicities contain photo montages: that is a widespread WP convention. If you object to ethnicity-based photo montages, you should initiate an effort to change that practice at a more centralized forum. If the articles covered by this RfC are not ethnicity-based, then the RfC should be re-worded (it explicitly mentions "ethnicity" in the 1st sentence). Regards. --Noleander (talk) 03:40, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

I would object to persons other than the persons involved grouping people by 'ethnicity' - because ethnicity involves self-identification, by definition. This is a basic sociological/anthropological tenet - and hardly worth discussing further. My comment however was based on what I saw as a suggestion on your part that ethnicity could be something other than 'culturally-defined'. If you are claiming this, please provide a source. If you aren't, then you seem to be contradicting yourself, in that you argued that "photo montages should not be used with culturally-defined ... groups". Ethnicity is a social construct. It is almost the archetype for a social construct. An 'ethnicity' has no meaning beyond what people collectively chose it to mean. As for whether a 'caste' is an 'ethnicity', that is another question - but whatever a 'caste' is, it is likewise a social construct - or, in your words "culturally-defined". So do you think that Wikipedia articles on 'culturally-defined castes' (there are no other castes) should include montages? Yes, or no? AndyTheGrump (talk) 04:06, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Noleander, are you aware that caste articles are subject to sanctions due to the frequency of policy abuses etc? They do not constitute run-of-the-mill Wikipedia articles concerning society. Furthermore, their intricacies regarding actual content and policy matters seem to limit quite considerably the number of people who are both willing and have the time to attempt to stem the ever-increasing tide of misinformed contributors. Unless and until the WMF can sort out a contributor education program to match their drive for more editors from India, the situation is likely only to get worse. In this fairly unusual situation, WP:OSE arguments against proposals based on practicality (including the very necessary upholding of WP:BLP) are perhaps not the most helpful of things. - Sitush (talk) 05:48, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

• Opposing the inclusion of montages: In-depth views expressed in the discussion above. In short; montages of celebrities don't necessarily add any value to the caste article. §§AnimeshKulkarni (talk) 11:25, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

• Include montage for ethnic groups : I completely agree with Noleander that image montages should be used in articles of Indian castes. Most of the wiki articles on social groups have these image montages. These image montages give the idea that the article is about a social group and the following people hail from this group.

If there comes an issue regarding inclusion of the image of a specific person, it can be solved on talk pages. There can be as many image montages as many are necessary as we can see Pathan in which there are over 15 image montages. The article looks much better than those of Indian social groups like Rajput in which no montage is used. However, completely removing the image montages make these articles completely bleach.

If we have image montages on Pathan, then they shud be in Indian castes also. And if they are not being used in Indian castes, then they shud be deleted from every article related to social groups of all other countries. Only articles of Hindu castes should not be targeted then. There should be no double standards. Either image montages shud be allowed for Hindu castes, or it shud be banned for Pakistan related articles like Pathans also.  JC Ramek  07:16, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Bengali brother terms

Hello. I understand that in Bengali there are special words for the siblings in a family, by birth order - so Barda is the oldest brother, Mejda the second, etc. What would the names be for a sequence of 10 brothers? Please point me in the right direction. Thank you. 184.147.116.155 (talk) 17:45, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Resident Commissioner

There appears to be a rank of Resident Commissioner in the IAS. However, it is not mentioned at Resident Commissioner and it does not appear at File:Progression of IAS.jpg. Can anyone enlighten me regarding where this post sits in relation to others? - Sitush (talk) 06:52, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Resident Commissioner or any Commissioner for that matter, is a post or a field designation, not a rank. Similar posts, at times, can be filled by officers of different ranks. Therefore, it is difficult to classify posts in a strict hierarchy like ranks. Based on my powers of deduction, something you are quite familiar with, I would say this post is usually filled by GOI Joint Secretary level officers. Needless to say, I don't know this for a fact. CorrectKnowledge (talk) 07:51, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Dry wit is great. <g> You've come a fair way since April - no hard feelings etc on my part. So, if someone is a Resident Commissioner/Deputy Commissioner/Divisional Commissioner etc then it is probable but not guaranteed that they would be in the middle-ranks of the IAS? Is there any definition of the functions that such people might be performing, or is that also rather vague? - Sitush (talk) 07:58, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

The definition of functions for each post, no matter what ranked officer fills it, is very clear. Resident commissioner performs a specific function, but I really don't know what it is on paper. In real life, it serves as a magnet for people who want to stay in Delhi. (see this) CorrectKnowledge (talk) 08:06, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

This is the link I was looking for. According to it, Divisional commissioners are always GOI Joint Secretary. Whereas, DM/Collector can be both JS or AS at state government level. For hierarchy of commissioners across all services see this. CorrectKnowledge (talk) 08:24, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

I forgot to mention, there is a Principal Resident Commissioner who is an officer of Principal secretary rank. This is the link to his desk, there is some useful information about RCs there. That is all the work I can do for free. Cheers. CorrectKnowledge (talk) 08:41, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

New stub: Thakur Jaidev Singh

I noticed at Tarana that this musicologist was quoted, but has no article, so I started: Thakur Jaidev Singh. If anyone has access to better resources (in Hindi?) I'd appreciate any help expanding it. He's quite frequently mentioned in musicological works on gBooks, but I've had a hard time nailing down basic facts about him. Thanks! MatthewVanitas (talk) 19:33, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Can someone confirm these two political groups are the same?

I'm pretty sure that the article Subhasist Forward Bloc and the article All India Forward Bloc (Subhasist) are covering the same political party, but I'm having my lingering doubts. It was proposed that these articles be merged more than a year ago. If someone here can confirm that these two are on the same thing, it would be great if you could notify me or just merge them yourself. Thanks. Trinitresque (talk) 06:55, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

I have merged the articles with notes on the talk page. Thanks, Lynch7 07:13, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Cleanup

Hello, I have rewritten the essasy like contents in Shimoga district article. I have managed to copy edit and cleanup the article. But I am not so confident with cleanup because I may have missed a few things while rewriting such a large content. A little help is needed for atricle to grow. ShriRam^{Talk to}_me 18:42, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

It is good, no serious concerns. Lynch7 06:56, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Doon school spamming

Of late there seems to be a lot of spamming around Doon school alumni. Some of them may very well be alumni, but the problem is that these articles are being spammed as alumni without references, and worse, with references that say no such thing. The mess is quite wide, List of The Doon School alumni is a starting point for this, but there's random stuff being spammed into BLPs like "he was editor of Doon School weekly" etc etc. —SpacemanSpiff 19:11, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

OK. I'll take a trawl through some of the stuff. - Sitush (talk) 19:14, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

Before I forget, I got to the mess through the Featured List nomination where I was in for a shock. But it's worse as there seems to be some sort of gardening within walls going on linking the school magazine and stuff. The alumni category probably has all these articles captured in one go too. —SpacemanSpiff 19:33, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

Yes, already spotted that. It has been going on since at least late March. Given the manner in which it has happened, I am culling without mercy. Iif someone wants to source the stuff and reinstate then that is up to them. - Sitush (talk) 20:11, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

This I believe is a serious problem. As I see it, both the main The Doon School article and the Alumni list is (with one exception) being edited by SPAs: (Merlaysamuel (talk · contribs), Spy99 (talk · contribs), DoscoinDoon (talk · contribs), Mussolinispas (talk · contribs), TheJoneald (talk · contribs), TheKumarAtNo.42 (talk · contribs), Cambridgesis (talk · contribs), and a host of two-bit drive-bys, who have done nothing on Wikipedia other than promote the school- or school-related pages. What is surprising is the extent of the spamming. Dozens if not hundreds of subpages (of school headmasters, school music teachers, school buildings) have been created. I see a problem similar to caste-puffery soon raising its ugly head in the Indian school pages, especially in the so-called elite schools, for the old-school-tie might soon be replacing caste as a marker of social position in India. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 20:28, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

• This is becoming increasingly annoying, they are now spamming multiple articles with this editor/contributor to school newsletter and sourcing it to the same. It's not like this is some iconic publication, especially given the context of the achievements of most of these people. More eyes would definitely be appreciated, the problem here is that unlike the TV actors pages where such fanboy is prevalent, these pages are all rather relevant to an encyclopaedia that's just being hijacked. A visit to ANI is likely imminent but bound to waste a lot of time. —SpacemanSpiff 10:09, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

• I checked around 320 articles over a few hours, cleaned out a lot of them ... and then this happened. FWIW, I didn't even use the category or the list as a basis for my article selection - that was going to be today's task! - Sitush (talk) 14:03, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

It's getting very silly indeed. You've apparently gone on a rampage removing the [Category:The Doon School alumni] from dozens of articles, where it rightly belongs. Some of the glaring examples were Bunker Roy, Anish Kapoor, Wajahat Habibullah, Naveen Patnaik and the rest. In Lovraj Kumar's case you removed the category and the Doon education information saying 'sources don't support' but if you read The Independent obituary completely, it says at the bottom that he graduated from The Doon School. I don't appreciate your removing the categories only because there was no reference. Instead of marking them for [citation needed] (which are very easily available, in some cases now i have added more than 3), you just deleted them all. Please get serious about all this. This is becoming increasingly exhaustive and preposterous. --TheKumarAtNo.42 (talk) 14:26, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

WP:BLP, WP:BURDEN, WP:WEIGHT and WP:AGF. I am sorry but this could well be one of those rare situations where the more you attack me, the more I will look to prune back. The Doon School and/or its promoters seem to be on a mission here and I do not like their abuse of what is intended to be an encyclopedia. Have you ever considered that the privileged status of the people who attend the school says more about their subsequent achievements than the school itself? - Sitush (talk) 15:15, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

TheKumarAtNo.42: "exhaustive" means thorough; you likely mean "exhausting." Let me also offer some stylistic advice that they are not getting around to teaching at Doon School: "exhausting" doesn't go with "preposterous," and especially not in that order. As for rampage, it the Doon School SPAs who have gone on a rampage, indeed have gone on several since March 2012, one rampage sparking the next. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 17:04, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

There is also a template: Template:The_Doon_School that is being slapped willy-nilly at the bottom of all sorts of pages. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 01:50, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

Funnily enough, the SPAs have also been culling content from alumni pages of other Indian schools. See this edit to List of Mayoites (with edit summary: "Removed most egregious examples of spam and non-notable entries; this page still needs substantial cleanup"! Fowler&fowler«Talk» 02:47, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

Good grief! 'Exhaustive' means 'thorough'? I used the exact same phrase (exhaustive and preposterous) in my music essay to criticise a ghastly passage in Mahler's 8th symphony. My teacher would certainly be wondering whether it is 'thorough' or preposterous...:D Anyway, thanks so much for this one Fowler&fowler. And yes, you're right, they didn't teach me that one at Doon. What idiocy! TheKumarAtNo.42 (talk) 06:11, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

Caste system in Kerala

In the current version of Caste system in Kerala, its "Lead" fails to brief the major content and also the very idea of Caste system. Pls have review -AshLey ^Msg 08:52, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Why have you not raised this at the article talk page? I reverted something, sure, but that does not make this the appropriate forum. WP:BRD etc. - Sitush (talk) 09:05, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

because of poor participation of experienced editors there. -AshLey ^Msg 09:10, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Actually, there is no participation. Because you have not initiated a discussion. People do not necessarily participate in every discussion on a given talk page. I could initiate that discussion but I really am not sure what point it is that you were trying to make. - Sitush (talk) 09:12, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

I was talking abt poor participation there for previous discussions. Anyway, i'm not hesitant to discuss there. AshLey ^Msg 09:16, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Additional "GA of the month" under WP:INCOTM

Hi all, we are going for an additional GA of the month. We shall be working on an independence related article and promote it to GA level by 15 August. Please vote for the articles over here. Lets collaborate and work on an article which will possibly get many page views in and around that period! Voting closes on 20th of this month. Happy collaborating! BPositive (talk) 16:34, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Just reminding you folks to vote. Last one hour to go before I officially announce the result. Do vote :) BPositive (talk) 17:28, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Klaus Klostermaier

Klaus Klostermaier has written a lot on Indic subjects. Although he appears to have had a mainstream academic career, I vaguely recall seeing a thread somewhere that queried his interpretations and I can find quite a few web things that speak of his "controversial" opinions etc. I can take this to WP:RSN but thought I would test the waters here first - can anyone else recall a discussion about him? (It is not at RSN, btw - have checked the archives there). - Sitush (talk) 17:32, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Don't recall any. But Klostermaier is used as a reference in many Hinduism articles and I don't recall seeing any of his "controversial" opinions there, most of them are accurate facts, rather than opinions. Considering his profile, he would be regarded as a RS for Hinduism at least. There may be some opinions that may be WP:FRINGE and can be refuted on respective articles; I don't think going to RSN is necessary. --Redtigerxyz ^Talk 10:57, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Indian Independence Day

Hi all,

We have taken up this article as an additional GA of the month under WP:INCOTM on account of August 15, The Independence Day. I welcome you all to join us and help in making the article a GA on/before August 15. Vande Mataram! BPositive (talk) 03:58, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Next time, we should aim for an FA so it can be up on the Main Page on 15th. --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 10:29, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

yes, FA may be next year. For now, I have nominated the article for good article candidacy. Regards.--Dwaipayan (talk) 04:27, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

List of state and union territory capitals in India at FLRC

I have nominated List of state and union territory capitals in India for featured list removal here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured list criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks; editors may declare to "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here.)--Cheetah (talk) 02:55, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Name restoration in Uttar Pradesh

There have been name changes of towns and colleges in UP.

Please change the names of following articles -

• Chhatrapati Shahuji Maharaj Medical University -> King George Medical University
• Ramabai Nagar district -> Kanpur Dehat district
• Mahamaya Nagar district -> Hathras district
• Prabudh Nagar district -> Shamli district
• Panchsheel Nagar district -> Hapur district
• Jyotiba Phule Nagar district -> Amroha district
• Chhatrapati Shahuji Maharaj Nagar district -> Amethi district (not Gauriganj district[1])
• Bhimnagar district -> Sambhal district
• Kanshi Ram Nagar district -> Kasganj district — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.99.208.5 (talk) 08:45, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

DYK on Independence Day?

We are trying to improve the Independence Day (India) article so that it reaches WP:GA status before 15 August. Also, we can try to plan at least on WP:DYK entry related to some aspect of the independence or the freedom struggle for that day. In this way, there would be at least two Indian independence related links on the main page on that day (Independence Day link will be there in "On this day" section. Anybody have any idea, or already working on something? Any recent suggestions from WP:PINQ, guys?--Dwaipayan (talk) 14:42, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Though a while ago about the prominence of minorities in the movement. Jews/Parsis/Christians (Hindus/Muslims is well known). Also The Goan independence movement supported by Christians would be nice.

We could also add the oft-neglected north-east in the indep. movement.Lihaas (talk) 15:32, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Vidhan Sabha constituencies

Is anyone willing to help on creating pages for all the vidhan sabha constituences within the country? The WP: India Politics page's "Collaboration opportunities" is not updated so we change that to expanding for the vidhan sabha ones. big task and i envision it will take some weeks.Lihaas (talk) 15:50, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

• I see that someone already created hundreds if not thousands of articles named "So and So (Vidhan Sabha constituency)" The articles appear to be mechanically generated from some official report. Is this a good idea?
  Wikipedia is not a database nor a directory: it is not, and should not be, the place where one looks up official information such as who are the current assemblymen or the results of the last elections. Readers should be referred to official sites about that.
  Mechanically generated articles like these are quite boring, and ultimately unhelpful to readers, since the information in them is not official and is almost sure to become outdated. Moreover, those articles are "spamming" many searches for topics related to India.
  Articles on elections are welcome in Wikipedia, but they should be created and edited individually by hand -- so that they will tend to cover only elections and information that have wider and lasting interest.
  All the best, --Jorge Stolfi (talk) 05:39, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

I agree with Jorge Stolfi. Very bad idea. Lihas, please don't spam this project with more stubs. The India project is famous for generating (spamming) new articles, for automatedly assigning various grades (in the importance scale) on the talk page, but for staging the biggest disappearing act when it comes to working on the articles. We don't need new articles. Lihaas, go work on the thousands of India-related articles that are languishing, unworked, in plain sight. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 06:12, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

I tend to agree that this is a seriously low-priority matter. There are far more pressing concerns - and far greater discipline/experience/interested established contributors required - before such a project can be worthy of progression. Such articles do have some potential to be encyclopedic but, let's face it, those of us who are expressly interested in India-related stuff cannot even keep on top of what we already have and current affairs items are particularly problematic. If you are interested in the politics of India then you could do worse than fix up the hundreds (perhaps thousands) of BLPs etc that require major work & are often in breach of our policies. - Sitush (talk) 06:28, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Vasant Dhoble

I started this article a couple of weeks back, but haven't expanded it since. If anybody's interested, give it a shot; the man is hot in the news, and I imagine a lot of people are looking him up. Who better than Wikipedia to give an NPOV study of a person who is so very divisive?—indopug (talk) 09:55, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

Did anyone here know about proposed ArbCom motion for discretionary sanctions on India-related pages?

If so, I missed the memo. The proposed ArbCom motion can be found here for those who wish to read and/or comment. Ncmvocalist (talk) 16:12, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

First I've heard of this. I suppose arbitrators, wise people that they are, don't feel the need for wider community input. --regentspark (comment) 16:34, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

National Highway Numbers

We can use this map created by User:Planemad for reference.

.

Hi all, not many people may know about this, but National Highways in India were renumbered in 2010. Several highways have already started using the new numbers. This is leading to a lot of confusion and I think it is high time we all did something about it. So here are my suggestions:

• Go thru the list of renumbered highways and start creating stub articles for those which don't exist.
• Remove the map from the article, unless the highway route has NOT changed. Eg NH 68 is now 79 with no changes
• Remove images from the article.
• Back up sourced statements and put them in sections where they may be relevant. Eg: IN NH 67, the road upgrading section: One section can go to NH 181, one to 81 and one to 83.

Each of us can take up one set. I am willing to take up 44, 48, 544, 77, 75, 79, 32, 38, 81, 181, 948, 83, 132 [new numbers].

Right now, NH 544, alone has an article based on new numbering. Once we reach consensus, I'm willing to go ahead and start my share, and let others go ahead with a section they like.

The intro sections can be '''National Highway n''' is a National Highway in the state(s) of abc in India.<ref name="gnumber">{{Cite web|title=Renumberd list of National Highways|url=http://dorth.gov.in/writereaddata/sublinkimages/finaldoc6143316640.pdf|date=2010-04-28|accessdate=2012-07-20|format=pdf|work=[[Gazette of India]]|publisher=[[Government of India]]|location=New Delhi|language=Hindi, English}}</ref>

--Rsrikanth05 (talk) 13:17, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Shouldn't we start this type of article first ? List_of_National_Highways_in_India_by_highway_number -- naveenpf (talk) 07:30, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

So, in that gazette publication, the serial number on the left-most column is the previous Highway numbering, and the number mentioned in the next column is the new numbering, am I correct?--Dwaipayan (talk) 07:35, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

@Naveen, yes, we need an overhaul of the list by number first, followed by the list by state. @Dwaipayan, no the Gazette list doesn't mention old numbers at all. The first column is the serial number. The reason why the order may seem odd is because the list lists main highways and their spurs together. Eg: 48, 148, 248, 348, 49, 149, 249, etc. --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 12:03, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Like --naveenpf (talk) 03:13, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

So should we start with the list in Sandbox? --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 08:16, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

WP:INR/New Highway --naveenpf (talk) 02:02, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Am onto it. --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 19:51, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Infobox District IN

Template:Infobox District IN has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. DH85868993 (talk) 01:29, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

INCOTM Results for June 2012

Hi all,

The nominations for Indian collaboration of the month WikiProject are now closed. As per the nominations and voting that took place on the nominations page,

• Mary Kom has been selected as the article for collaboration of the month.
• Indian Cuisine has been selected as the article for taking upto GA/FA status.

Please join us in shaping up these two articles over the course of June 2012.

Happy editing, happy collaborating! :)

Signing so it gets archived in due course. §§AnimeshKulkarni (talk) 09:43, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

Looking for contributors of the animal rights article

I am wondering if someone here would be interested in adding Indian perspectives into the article animal rights. I think current under representation of India in the article is unacceptable because vegetarianism had such a along history in India.SSZvH7N5n8 (talk) 08:24, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

The animal rights article focuses overwhelmingly on animal rights in modern and contemporary times. Other than adding a sentence in Moral status of animals in ancient world and possibly adding another one on the influence of Arya Samaj on vegetarianism in 19th-20th century India, I don't see what else can be done. CorrectKnowledge (talk) 08:49, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply. I think the article "focuses overwhelmingly on animal rights in modern and contemporary times" of some group of people, this is actually the problem I am trying to improve. I am aware that

• per capita consumption of meat and use lab animals are very low in india, its about 1/20 compare with USA. It indicates good animal rights.
• vegetarian population in Indian is high. It indicates good animal rights.
• I think Indian traditional medicine does not do animal experimentation like western medicine. It indicates good animal rights.
• Hinduism philosophy of human animal relationship is unlike Abrahamic religions. Hinduism think animals have souls.
• There must be influential Indian figures/academics promoting some forms of animal rights ideology. They do not have to call the position animal rights, as long they promote compassion and respect for animals. Their theories should be included too. I am aware Gandhi had some comments.
• two articles of Indian’s recent ban of vivisection in education: http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2012-04-21/flora-fauna/31378798_1_animal-rights-group-andrew-rowan

http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2012-04-17/india/31355109_1_cpcsea-control-and-supervision-cruelty

One of the major reason I am asking for help is some editors of the articles seemed to have biased view on international materials. There have been case of repetitively rejecting sources of different view points using "voting" and "consensus" procedure. I don't think this is very good for the article's NPOV,so I am looking for people with open mind and awareness of cultural diversities to improve the article. SSZvH7N5n8 (talk) 10:02, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

I can see you are involved in a long dispute in the animal rights article. The discussion spanned a range of topics, but India wasn't one of them. Correct me if I am wrong, but you haven't tried inserting content related to India yet. So how do you already know that the editors are narrow minded and will revert the content? I hope you are not canvassing here, to find support for your ongoing dispute. That said, I don't think inserting content related to India, in the two sections I mentioned in previous post, should be any issue. CorrectKnowledge (talk) 10:20, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

There was a worldwide view tag on animal rights. But one active editor removed it without convincing arguments. You can see the talk page. I am seeking attention from different perspectives. You cannot have a reasonable consensus when voters are not familiar with the topic. This is what I am trying to do. Also I do not think its all my responsibility to improve the NPOV of the content. I am trying to find some people who is familiar with India. They would be able to contribute more content than those I mentioned. SSZvH7N5n8 (talk) 11:22, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

I think Indian need to have an independent section or subsection. Instead of being inserted into some current sections. SSZvH7N5n8 (talk) 11:31, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

Latest new, I added the worldwide view tag on animal rights, it was removed by the same editor despite of objections on the talk page. see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Animal_rights#Globalization_of_article_view SSZvH7N5n8 (talk) 03:33, 30 July 2012 (UTC) This is the recent tag removal history of the editor. It is the second time she removed the tag as far as I am aware. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Animal_rights&diff=504812007&oldid=504721345 SSZvH7N5n8 (talk) 03:52, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

Merger

There are two articles about the Naxalite-Maoist insurgency, here, and here. Both have pretty much the same info, so can they merged or something? -- Anurag2k12 (talk) 16:12, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

You have linked twice to one article, unless there is something wrong with my eyesight. - Sitush (talk) 16:38, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

Ooops my bad. Here ya go. Anurag2k12 (talk) 16:44, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

Ok, why isn't anyone answering. Anurag2k12 (talk) 21:27, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

Probably because you have not indicated what the two articles are. - Sitush (talk) 20:22, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

The scope of Naxalite–Maoist_insurgency#History and Timeline of the Naxalite-Maoist insurgency is different and therefore they cannot be merged. History section in Naxalite-Maoist insurgency article only highlights the general trend of insurgency, whereas the Timeline article is meant to be a detailed account of all acts of violence perpetrated by the maoists. Merging the two will make history section in the former too long and will render the article unreadable. CorrectKnowledge (talk) 20:42, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

Geez, it turns out that you edited your original query after I had mentioned the error, Anurag2k12. No wonder things were confused. Please do not do this in future. - Sitush (talk) 20:46, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

I didn't reply earlier for the same reason. I only noticed that the links had been changed after your comment. CorrectKnowledge (talk) 20:52, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

Alright, I'll not do that confusing thingy again. Anurag2k12 (talk) 22:09, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

That's ok. It is fine to make minor adjustments - spelling, punctuation etc - but it is not usually a great idea to (effectively) completely change your message. It makes the reply look really weird & can have some bizarre consequences as has happened in this instance. Far better to say "Ooops my bad, I meant [link here]." And, boy, I rank fairly high in the list of people who make errors in their own messages & so you are speaking with an expert idiot (?)! - Sitush (talk) 23:47, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

That cracked me up. I hope Anurag2k12 also sees the humour in it. CorrectKnowledge (talk) 14:45, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

Sure I do. :P Anurag2k12 (talk) 15:05, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

Minister of Power (India)

This article needs urgent expansion. Infobox, and all other things and especially the change of ministers during the blackout. Can anyone do it? extra999 (talk) 12:42, 1 August 2012 (UTC) Should not be speedy deleted, an AfD is worth. It is an article of current and high importance, instead of being deleted should be expanded. extra999 (talk) 13:15, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

Language scripts guideline?

Is there a guideline in relation to how many language scripts one puts in an article? Also, does it say anything about the ordering of languages (particularly in cases if it is unclear which language is used more), assuming it is not merely alphabetical order? For example, Shiva has a sanskrit language script in the lead and a short etymology section; if there was little about etymology, which other language scripts should be used (and in which order)? Ncmvocalist (talk) 11:03, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

WP:INDICSCRIPT. —SpacemanSpiff 11:22, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

Discussion on South Indian Barnstar

Advice requested on Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Film/Indian_cinema_task_force#North-South_Propaganda_through_Barnstars--DBigXray 11:28, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia article on Caste

I recently happened upon the Wikipedia article on Caste. Reading it you wouldn't know that caste had anything special to do with India. In the past, this sort of distancing of India from its evils, was engaged in by editors who work primarily on India-related topics. I don't know if this is still the case, but I'd be grateful if the editors associated with this project, many of whom have worked on caste-related issues, respond to the post I've made on the article talk page. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 13:03, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Dravidians as black people

An editor has added a gallery of images of Dravidians and other disparate populations to the black people article, arguing that they are all typically classified as "black people" based on their often-times dark skin coloration. I have argued that this is a fringe idea analogous to the Afrocentric "Africoid" concept and that the wikipage wasn't originally intended for this purpose. Input/feedback on this issue from members of this wikiproject would be appreciated. Soupforone (talk) 21:06, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Contacting some of the editors involved/who have expertise in this topic area might be a better option for you. Dougweller and Dbachmann are two such editors. If you think it's fringy, then WP:FTN might also be a good option. cheers. —SpacemanSpiff 03:25, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks; I'll give it a shot. Soupforone (talk) 12:32, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Zero stub drive on WP:INDIA/PP

Any thoughts on Zero stub drive on WP:INDIA/PP -- naveenpf (talk) 07:27, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

The drive is related to expansion of stub articles?? -- ♪Karthik♫ ♪Nadar♫ 13:45, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

This is a good proposal. Indeed the list is interesting, too. Sunny Leone is in between Rajneesh and Gandhi.--Dwaipayan (talk) 14:18, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

Interesting list indeed. #6-10 in the list are Sunny Leone, Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi, Salman Khan, Katrina Kaif and Shahrukh Khan. Guess the odd one out here. I'd say its probably Katrina Kaif, she is the only one who hasn't gone topless yet. CorrectKnowledge (talk) 14:51, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

Why is RDB rated as A-class? We don't have A-class ratings for our project. It should be GA for WP India unless I'm missing something. Sad that it gets less than 4% the views of Rowdy Rathore. —SpacemanSpiff 08:54, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

(Reply to Naveenpf) I am afraid this is a very bad idea. You are suggesting that we use a "page view statistics" page (a popularity page) as a guide in deciding which articles to work on, or, more bluntly, that we pander to popular taste. Popularity in the real world is not an index of encyclopedic notability. There are indeed many articles on a myriad India-related topics that need to be improved. Consider, for example, the Category: Boys' schools in India; most schools there are in stub form, including, for example, Alfred High School, Rajkot, Mahatma Gandhi's alma mater. Improvement drives should focus on subject areas. That way you have something tangible, and in one place, whose subsequent improvement is plainly to be seen and assessed. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 10:24, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

I don't find it to be such a bad idea; if a currently-popular page is a stub, that means a lot of people are seeing a page without much info and maybe feeling a bit disappointed about WP as a go-to source. Yes, we should avoid undue recentism, and the academic pursuit of knowledge is not a popularity contest, but if a film/singer/cricketer is Notable, there are substantive things to be said about it, and lots of people are googling it up, why not provide some quality info? On a minor sidenote, a sweep to check the Popular list for mis-labeled stubs might reduce the daunt of the task; just a spot check shows that some of the "stubs" have outdated ratings and are now clearly Start or "C" class at worst. MatthewVanitas (talk) 15:03, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

'List of Jats' or 'List of notable Jats' ?

Recently I moved the article List of Jats to List of notable Jats. My move was reverted and I was asked to discuss it. So I am here. But I can't understand what is the need to discuss it.

The word 'notable' must be added to the title 'List of Jats'. On adding the word 'notable', the meaning of the article will be more appropriately denoted.

List of Jats- this title mean that the list is supposed to contain the names of all the millions of Jat people living in the world. However, it is not so. In reality, the list contains the names of only notable people from the Jat community. The introduction itself says "The following is a list of notable Jats."

This change (adding notable to the title) should be made to all other similar castelists also like List of Rajputs, List of Gurjars etc.  JC Ramek  05:36, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

WP:LISTNAME / WP:MOSLIST. If you want to change policy, this isn't the right place, you'll need to discuss at VPP or at the talk page of that MOS. —SpacemanSpiff 06:51, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

I see your perspective on this, but disagree on any name change. Since every biography article on WP is require to meet WP:Notability, and technically even names just added to lists are supposed to meet WP:N, it's pretty much implied that "notable" is an aspect of "List of X Community" articles. I can't think of any real advantage to adding "notable" to the title, and it would add bulk to the title of probably thousands of articles. Good point to bring up, but I don't agree that it merits changing the titles. MatthewVanitas (talk) 14:51, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

Wrong practise , unable to be undone now , I had found number of article as such as above just listing the persons as list of brahmins, list of iyers , etc it made no sense and according to "me" it was not even wiki material as the basis for the list were mere current "societal" thought of cast bias and nothing more, i had tried to move some of the article to AFD but it was decided as important and got tremendous supporters for not deleting this kind of articles, hope fully future generation of wikipediance sees them as not a wiki material. so although hated have to keep them for majority and democracy sake Shrikanthv (talk) 09:18, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

Arbitration motion regarding Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/India-Pakistan

Resolved by motion at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification and Amendment that:

The India-Pakistan case is supplemented as follows:

Standard discretionary sanctions are authorized for all pages related to India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan, broadly construed.

For the Arbitration Committee, NW (Talk) 18:26, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

Discuss this

• Commented. --regentspark (comment) 19:10, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
• As have I. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 21:33, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
• And the last two pie coin I have. —SpacemanSpiff 04:46, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

Would someone who has been involved please summarize those long lectures in a small para? Not all arguments, but at least what the argument is for and what the result is. This discussion seems to be going on since 2007. §§AnimeshKulkarni (talk) 13:41, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

The point is that no one from the project has been involved. Arbcom decided to do this, without informing us or soliciting any opinions, all because someone took a clarification request regarding the current hot-bed issue of the Kashmir conflict. So in result, Arbcom decided to place anything connected to India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan under discretionary sanctions. —SpacemanSpiff 13:52, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

You mean articles related to India and Pakistan, India and Afghanistan & Pakistan and Afghanistan and not just all WP INDIA articles; right? §§AnimeshKulkarni (talk) 19:20, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

Unfortunately, no. The sanctions relate to all articles on India, Pakistan or Afghanistan (the union, not the intersection). I'm not sure how this will play out in practice , or even if there are some direct practical implications, but that's the decision. --regentspark (comment) 02:28, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

Well.... to see positive side in this one might use it to get all socks and IPs blocked. They mostly revert multiple times and don't respond to you through talk pages or even edit summaries. §§AnimeshKulkarni (talk) 06:23, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

Rumi from a neutral point of view

Hello, I have a recommendation about the article Rumi.

Please read all the information, I wrote on Talk, and tell whether you agree or disagree.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Rumi#Let.27s_Remove_POV_with_a_Neutral_Point_of_View

You know the ethnicity of Rumi is unknown and debated. I hope you contribute to this matter. Alternatively, from a neutral point of view, I recommend to change the (POV) sentence to a (NPOV) sentence:

"a 13th-century Persian Muslim poet, jurist, theologian, and Sufi mystic."

to "a 13th-century Muslim poet, jurist, theologian, and Sufi mystic of Persian literature. 81.213.117.125 (talk) 21:40, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

Burma → Myanmar requested-move notification

A requested move survey has been started (by Marcus Qwertyus (talk)) at Talk:Burma, which proposes to move:

• Burma → Myanmar

Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. — P.T. Aufrette (talk) 22:57, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

History templates

Has anyone got some background info regarding why we have both {{South Asian history}} and {{HistoryOfSouthAsia}}? Is there any preference with regard to India articles? Are there any other such templates out there? - Sitush (talk) 16:26, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

It's common to have two templates in these cases. The concise version is for the main articles while the expanded version is for sub articles (which are linked as sub-links under the main links) and they should be used as such. That said, I see that Dewan's been busy on both templates. —SpacemanSpiff 17:26, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

Hm. I've never noticed this before. It means that we should use the more bulky template at Lohara dynasty, even though it adds pretty much nothing of note to the article. Well, not to me at any rate. Presumably the rationale is that people might want to dig around other dynasties etc that might have existed around the same time/just before/just after.

I still struggle to spot Dewan, btw - I should be familiar with their disruption by now! - Sitush (talk) 17:54, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

To confound the confusion the Template:History of South Asia is titled "Outline of South Asian History;" conversely, the Template: South Asian history is titled "History of South Asia." Of the two, the first (which use to be the long one) is now very compact, and perhaps less POV-y (even though I vaguely remember opposing the change); it has historical periods rather than empires. The second has the old-fashioned periodization, in which, for example, the historically minor Maratha "empire," "founded" by the ubiquitous Shivaji, has managed to stick itself between the Mughals and the British. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 13:03, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Project newsletter

It's been a while since the last newsletter of the project came out (can't remember, more than a year ago I suppose). At present, we have a bunch of fairly active editors in the project. Anyone (rather, a group) interested to publish the next one? --Dwaipayan (talk) 23:45, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

I could give it a go. Would we want it to be more or less of the same format of the prior one, or would maybe something along the lines of the Christianity WikiProject newsletter, with appropriate changes of course, be acceptable? Also, could you show me a link to the last published newsletter? I'm afraid I'm not sure where to look. John Carter (talk) 00:07, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

I don't think we've had a newsletter in at least three years (that's as long as I've been here). —SpacemanSpiff 06:06, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

It has been a while. Tinu (and Ganeshk and Ncmvocalist if I remember correctly) had it going for a while but they're all mostly MIA these days. It'll be great if you could take the lead on this John Carter. --regentspark (comment) 11:50, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

This may the most recent edition. SBC-YPR and Sodabottle are credited as editors and neither seem to be around these days. --regentspark (comment) 18:27, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Yes RP, that was the last one. There was one before that in June 2010. I see an unfinished effort from April 2012 as well.--Dwaipayan (talk) 21:40, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

There's no shortage of stuff to write about now: on the plus side I see several successful COTMs, a formidable assessment drive (where did AshLin go?), several new GAs, the Kolkata FAR (others?). On the minus side we have discretionary sanctions and the usual caste wars :) --regentspark (comment) 21:48, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Yes, the discretionary sanction needs to be communicated, if possible with an explanation of practical implication (I personally did not understand the practical scope really although theoretically it is somewhat clear)!

Besides Kolkata FAR, the Mysore FAR was successful (the article retained FA status). But Bangalore and Chennai lost their FA status in FAR; I am not sure if there are more.--Dwaipayan (talk) 22:03, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

If I'm not mistaken, that newsletter was done based on the Wikimedia India mailing list which is more of a collaboration effort across all WM projects based on India than specific to this project's WP:India. I don't have an objection to that, currently it appears that en.wiki is less enjoyable than many of the other projects. Dwai, there are quite a few other articles that need to go the FAR route, many are not up to the standards of Bangalore, the most recent removal. The excess number of these old FAs that no longer meet even the criteria that was set out then, is providing us with a false sense of where we are as a project. If you compare Chola dynasty to one Ahalya, you'll see how badly the former needs attention. —SpacemanSpiff 03:09, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

GAN review needed

I have nominated Nawabs of Bengal & Murshidabad for GA and the review has started but the progress is a bit slow. I would like you all to edit the article and drive it to the path of GA. Please help me, it will be so kind of you. It will also add to the total number of GA article Wikiproject India has. Please help me! If replying please leave me a talk-back template. I have asked some other editors for the same. Thank you ! --Tamravidhir(২০১২) 15:22, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Report of Independence Day (India)

Hi all. A report of how things went by on the article, which was the additional collaboration of the month for taking upto GA status has been published on the reports page of the WikiProject. Do give it a read. Happy Independence Day to one and all! BPositive (talk) 18:48, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

Nominations open for September 2012 INCOTM

Hi all. The nominations for next month's collaborations are now open. Please nominate articles for collaboration on the nominations page of the WikiProject. Thanks.
BPositive (talk) 16:52, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:IEOTDArchiveBarMarch2005

Template:IEOTDArchiveBarMarch2005 has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. DH85868993 (talk) 05:02, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

Identification and description

Hello,

Could you please tell me who is this? Yann (talk) 13:09, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

• File:Indra on elephant, Crafts Museum, Delhi.jpg

No idea! Its a woman. Had it been a man i would have guessed Indra. Do you know which section of museum it was in? Or have it's neighbour's image? That one looks like a person on a bird. §§AnimeshKulkarni (talk) 14:06, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

No! It's not a woman..it's Lord Indra! The statue of the deity next to it is hopefully Garuda. --Tamravidhir(২০১২) 14:15, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

OK, thanks a lot! Yann (talk) 16:03, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

@Tamravidhir, you mean this male is wearing a choli and a nose ring? §§AnimeshKulkarni (talk) 20:01, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

Definitely not Indra. Seems to be a regional goddess. The Nagas, nose ring, bindi is inconsistent with Indra's iconography. --Redtigerxyz ^Talk 05:34, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Oops..but there are neither nose ring nor bindi. Both of them are common with most of the regional Goddesses. If to admit then it looks like a Goddess (yes actually) whose vahana is the same as Lord Indra. --Tamravidhir(২০১২) 15:39, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

(1) Laxmi riding white elephant (2) Indrani the consort of Indra, see Indrani holding a bowl like the one in the craft museum's photograph, head gear also looks similar, couldn't find cobras Yogesh Khandke (talk) 18:38, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

This style wooden sculptures is from South India, most probably, Kinhal Craft of Karnataka, and looks like Lakshmi, thanks to excellent research by Yogesh. The red forehead mark is also seen on South Indian women, though it denoted Shaivism making Lakshmi (Vaishnavism) as an option unclear, a more knowledgeable person would be a better guide. Yann, good work on images, by the way! --Ekabhishek^talk 03:47, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

proposal for AFD

I am proposing for AFD for the article Devita_Saraf, the whole article looks like a Resume of an unknown person. and also please refer to the talk page, it seems an editor has been sock puppeting to add information to the article and the reason for blocking him seems he confirmed that he was payed for changing the article please refer to link and new link so please contribute if you think it is important

That template is for the article itself, not here. Please note that per WP:CANVAS, when you notify boards like this one of an AfD, you're supposed to do so neutrally. In this case, though, it doesn't really matter, because that article will absolutely not be deleted. I was strongly tempted to act as an admin and close it immediately, because you didn't actually raise a policy based rationale for deletion--there is not now nor has there ever been a prohibition against editing Wikipedia for pay. Sockpuppetry, edit warring, violating NPOV, of course, are all bad, but not the mere act of being paid to write here. Qwyrxian (talk) 13:24, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

I do wanted to notify every one so thought notifying here would be appropraite , as i wanted concensus and not my peronnel goal, i have no connection to the topic concerend , yes was little bit apprehnsive in the begining and did not qoute the policies in AFD , I am not against paid editing may be i support it (i do think not every one in the world knows how to edit articles in wiki, a support would definitely help ) , my intention was to keep wiki out of Advertising and PR material , as i think the more this material are the more the wiki information will be distorted, if it is not deleted in AFD it does not matter, i did my job "trying" to keep pr and promotions out of wiki Shrikanthv (talk) 09:22, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Don't let it get to you Shrikanthv. You made a good faith AfD nomination and that's all that matters. --regentspark (comment) 16:16, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Notifying this board was fine, but when you do so, don't add information intended to sway potential commenters like you did. Qwyrxian (talk) 03:30, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

Requested move discussion for Mother Teresa Sarani

A discussion for moving the article Mother Teresa Sarani to Park Street, Kolkata is taking place. Please share your views here. Amartyabag ^TALK2ME 06:09, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

Shiromani Akali Dal

Hi folks, I asked the creator of Shiromani Akali Dal (Panthic) and Shiromani Akali Dal (Panthik) to comment on an outstanding merge proposal. The proposer didn't provide an argument, but the obvious conclusion is that he or she thought they both described the same party. I know very little about Indian politics, so I was hoping someone here could verify either that they're the same party (and should be merged) or separate (and should have a "not to be confused with" hatnote or something). Thanks, BDD (talk) 23:30, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

I wasn't necessarily expecting a quick response on such an obscure topic. I'm no longer watching this page, but please contact me on my talk page if you can help. --BDD (talk) 18:00, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

Please add the proposal on the article's talkpage as well..., personally I feel Panthic is the common spelling as seen here.--Ekabhishek^talk 04:34, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

India portal templates nominated for renaming

Template:PIfooter, Template:PITSAfooter, Template:PITSAempty, Template:PGoISAnnFooter and Template:PINPOTW have been nominated for renaming. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the templates' entry on the Templates for discussion page. DH85868993 (talk) 04:59, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

Proposed de-disambiguation of Chowk

I have proposed at Talk:Chowk to turn Chowk from a disambiguation page to an article. It appears that it is not so much a placename as a kind of place, and the persistant incoming links tend to reflect this general usage. bd2412 T 18:54, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

About Ghatotkacha Articles

In a article named Ghatotkacha two images are add for same reason. You fellows choose which one. Give your opinion.--Bhairava100 (talk) 03:16, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

Why self-identification for caste verification of a person?

To mention the caste of a notable Indian person, users are being asked to give a source which says that the notable person self-identifies of belonging to a certain caste. Why so? I mean we people in India identify caste of a person by his/her surname? Even if surname is not necessary, then a credible source should be enough.

But mandatory self-identification is too much. Should we expect that a newspaper reporter should ask a notable person while taking his interview; "Sir what is your caste ?"!!!

Due to this trend of asking self-identification proof, it has become almost impossible to mention caste of a notable person or include his name in a List of XYZ caste people. Whats the need of self-identification when other credible sources are available ?

Like take the example of Dharmendra. Being an Indian, I know that he is a Jat. Its a well known fact known to almost all Indians. His surname is Deol, which is a Jat clan. He is a member of Jat Mahasabha also. Even if all this stuff is not enough for wikipedia, then we have credible sources like this one. But still, I was denied to include the name of Dharmendra in the List of Jats.

This is not the only list, but almost every list related to caste of notable people is a victim of this "self-identification drama". See List of Rajputs, List of Kayasthas etc. Users are being asked to give self-identification proofs.

Another strange thing abut the present trend is that only living persons are required to self-identify. Why not the dead ones? Why is it so that newspapers and google books as sources of caste/ethnicity are ok for dead people but not enough for living people?

Caste is an important part of Indian society which is hereditary. A person can't be from a XYZ caste on his choice. His caste is what his forefather's caste. On the basis of caste, martial engagements take place. Politicians win or lose elections on the basis of caste. It has been claimed by some ignorant users that caste is illegal as per Indian constitution. Anyone claiming so is an ignorant as caste has got official status in Indian constitution. OBCs and SCs get reservation according to caste system. In caste-based census, each and every Indian citizen was asked his/her caste. Such an important thing, like caste can't be denied in wikipedia articles.

I request the members who have knowledge about Indian society to give their views over this and try to reach a consensus over the issue. JC Ramek (talk) 12:53, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Sigh. Not again! Please read User:Sitush/Common#Castelists and the links therein. - Sitush (talk) 12:59, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

BTW, in the case of Dharmendra, if you have a reliable source that says he is a member of the Jat Mahasabha then that would likely count as self-identification. As for your comment regarding dead people, well, I would quite happily see the concept extended to include them also but the fact is that the basis of the consensus relates to the constraints of WP:BLP. Indeed, I'd be happy to see these unencyclopedic lists removed in their entirety. - Sitush (talk) 13:03, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

It was you who suggested in an early discussion that self-identification shud be mandatory only for living people not for dead ones. Can you please give logic for this ? JC Ramek (talk) 13:09, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Although I really do not believe that I said that it "shud be mandatory only for living people", I am not repeating what I did say, You have been provided with the information and links to the voluminous discussions here from the recent past. I suggest that you drop it. - Sitush (talk) 13:22, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

The main point here is why living people should self-identify for verification? Don't you think that it becomes impossible to mention caste/ethnicity of a person due to this barrier? JC Ramek (talk) 13:52, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

This has all been discussed here previously, on more than one occasion this year. You can see from those discussions what it is that people think.

My opinion? Well, it is almost always as trivial a cultural nexus as would be, say, List of supporters of Dallas Cowboys. I really couldn't care less what caste someone may belong to and see no reason why anyone else should except possibly the individual and perhaps their family. If they want to accept an apartheid-type system then they can say so. Since the entire concept is allegedly anti-constitutional and socially damaging, I am constantly surprised that so many people - usually inexperienced contributors - do make such a fuss about it here. The only logical explanation is some weird form of social "one-upmanship" along the lines of "my dad's better than your dad"/"my sports team is better than yours". Nonetheless, and disregarding my own views, WP:BLP and WP:CONSENSUS mean that you are not going to get your way here any time soon. So drop it. Please. - Sitush (talk) 16:12, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

No one here is asking about whether you like the caste system or not. The point is that its an important part of Indian society. And this self-identification barrier is completely logical and non-constructive. JC Ramek (talk) 12:05, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

And as I said, regardless of my opinion there is WP:CONSENSUS and WP:BLP. WP:IDHT is also raising its head with your continued refusal to accept the first two. - Sitush (talk) 12:11, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

See Sitush, this is the issue of proxy'ing a limited consensus as a policy to manage issues in an entire project. If we could manage to collaborate to modify the concerned policy, that 'd be far far better. AshLey ^Msg 12:55, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

I wondered when you would join in, Ashley. You are another who has IDHT issues regarding this, per past discussions. - Sitush (talk) 13:56, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

Yes, IDH the consesus because it was just a limited and non-comprehensive one. That's why, I went for a policy modification in the WP:VPP. Desparately, none from this forum extended support for such a move. Unfortunately, your (not personal) favouring of such proxying would trap more and more new editors; it's a potential spiral of conflicts, blocks and ban. AshLey ^Msg 14:08, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

This present trend of asking for self-identification for verification of ethnicity/caste is nothing but a joke. A few users were convinced with this trend and it was taken as a consensus. However, this trend proved to be a non-constructive one. Why self-identification when already credible sources are available? Wikipedia policy about biographies of a person is that there should be a credible source for ethnicity(caste). Mandatory self-identification comes nowhere in the picture. JC Ramek (talk) 14:42, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

Because WP:BLP trumps every other rule. We need the person to verify that 1) they are from that caste and that, more fundamentally, 2) they accept the notion of caste and accept their designated place within it. This is no more than an extension of the policy we have with regards to religion and ethnicity...and caste is nothing more than a particular form of ethnicity, as modified by the history of India and surrounding areas. Or, to put it in more colloquial terms, I'd be extremely angry if a Wikipedia article on me (assuming I were ever notable enough to have one) said, "An American of Russian ancestry." Some people believe that identity has no connection to caste, gotra, clan, or any other notion. More importantly, reliable sources tend not to care, either, especially not tertiary sources like encyclopedias (which, if you've forgotten, is what Wikipedia is). So please note that not only is adding a caste without 1) self-identification and 2) evidence it's relevant to the person's notability against consensus, it's a very likely interpretation that it's against one of our core policies. Qwyrxian (talk) 15:42, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

"To mention the caste of a notable Indian person, users are being asked to give a source which says that the notable person self-identifies of belonging to a certain caste. Why so? Why so? Because that is Wikipedia policy, as arrived at by consensus, after much debate. And because 'caste' is nothing more than an arbitrary social construct - and a rather ridiculous one at that. There is no more reason why a twenty-first century encyclopaedia should consider statements by third parties regarding someone's 'caste' than there is to consider their opinions as how ugly the person is, whether they display bad taste in their choice of clothing, or whether they need to shower more often. If you want an encyclopaedia of obsolete and bigoted stereotypical classifications, start your own. AndyTheGrump (talk) 16:05, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

In the same twenty-first century, the government of India is conducting caste-based census which makes mandatory for everyone to reply what is his/her caste.

@ Qwyrxian

"Because WP:BLP trumps every other rule. We need the person to verify that 1) they are from that caste and that, more fundamentally, 2) they accept the notion of caste and accept their designated place within it."

Now why to reject the credible sources when those people haven't rejected the notion of caste ? And even if rejected, then why to hide their ethnicity? Take example of Ajmal Kasab, who is a well-known terrorist. Even if he dissociates himself of those terrorism charges, those still need a mention in his biography.

Why taking the example of Amitabh Bachhan, who is said to have dissociated himself from caste system? Why not taking the example of 99% Indians who still accept the caste system (Please note that caste discrimination is a different thing). Inter-caste marriage is still a rarity in Hindu society. Marriages are arranged as per their caste. JC Ramek (talk) 12:49, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

Its really unfortunate that some people, who don't have any knowledge about India and Hindu society are making policies on wikipedia, infact 'consensus' not policy. It has been already been tried by a member to include this 'mandatory self-identification for caste/ethnicity' on the policy page through discussion, but that member couldn't succeed. May be he couldn't succeed because mandatory self-identification for ethnicity/caste is too non-constructive and most administrators do understand this.  JC Ramek  15:37, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

If you don't like our policies, feel free to create your own website. —SpacemanSpiff 16:55, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

One correction: this is not 'Policy' yet. Its just a trend as I mentioned in the beginning of this thread. The reason it couldn't become a policy is that its highly non-constructive. Policy page says "Only Credible sources required". However in case of Hindus, it has become "self-identification required"!

What I understand from all this is that Sitush belongs to a non-Hindu community. So he just hate articles on Hindu castes to be glorified by names of famous people like Dharmendra or Vijender Singh. Even if it is a well-established fact (as per credible sources) that they are Jats, but still we can't mention that.

However, this self-identification drama is only meant for Hindu castes, not for non-Indian communities like Pathan, which is also an ethnicity/caste.  JC Ramek  09:13, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

@JC Ramek, its a waste of time arguing with policies of Wikipedia and especially with Admins. Not because they know better but because they don't listen and don't want any practical change and only do things as they wish. Also note that they don't necessarily apply these all-very-important policies everywhere. §§AnimeshKulkarni (talk) 10:12, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

Hi JC Ramek, You have a difference of opinion and of course have every right to say it louder. If your voice is not heard here, you could even try at different levels of dispute resolution to establish your side. However, you have resorted to some sort of personal attack in the above post and my gentle advice is to keep a cool mind in WP discussions. I hope, you would consider it as a friendly advice. With regards AshLey ^Msg 11:26, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

Some sentences from Wikipedia biographies of US and British Living persons :

1.Through his paternal grandmother, Enid Agnes Maud Levita, Cameron is a lineal descendant of King William IV by his mistress Dorothea Jordan. - David Cameron

2.Coe was born in Chiswick, London. His mother, Tina Angela Lal, died in London, in 2005, aged 75. She was half-Indian, born to a Punjabi father, Sardari Lal, and an English mother, Vera (née Swan)- Sebastian Coe. Seb Coe with "All English" looks did not publicize his asian ancestry for a very long time.

3.DNA testing in 1999 confirmed that Petrina Khashoggi —who was born shortly after Adnan divorced her mother[17]—, was in fact biologically not his, but Jonathan Aitken's and Soraya's child.[18] - Adnan Khashoggi - Khashoggi is not British but has strong ties to the British establishment

4.Spielberg was born in Cincinnati, Ohio, to a Jewish family - Steven Spielberg. I guess his jewish ancestry is important to him

5.Klug was born in Želva, Lithuania to Jewish parents Lazar and Bella (née Silin) Klug with whom he moved to South Africa at the age of two - Nobel prize winner Aaron Klug

6. Born in Alice, Texas, United States, Curl was the son of a Methodist Minister - Scientist Robert Curl, Does it really matter whether the father was methodist minister, Episcopal or Baptist ?

7.In October 1998, during his first period in the Cabinet, Mandelson was the centre of media attention when Matthew Parris (openly gay former MP and then Parliamentary sketch writer of The Times) mentioned during a live interview on Newsnight, in the wake of the resignation of Ron Davies, that "Peter Mandelson is certainly gay" - British politician Peter Mandelson

So there we are. It is OK to describe ancestries or sexual persuasions of British and American living persons but not for Indians where caste is central in describing a person's ancestry ! Jonathansammy (talk) 21:52, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Aren't they all sourced in self-recognized manner? §§AnimeshKulkarni (talk) 07:30, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

They are all sourced and I copied and pasted the sentences as they appear in the entries. Well , some people might say that David Cameron is proud of his "bastard" heritage and so it is not a problem. I believe the editors who decided that Indians are ashamed of their caste are mistaken but obviously mine is minority view ! Jonathansammy (talk) 16:41, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

Ashley, Ramek, Animesh, Sitush, others - I just read the chaintxt above where JC Ramek mentions that the need for self identification of caste or ethnicity lies with Indian (south asian) related articles only. I am not very well versed with the policies yet but if there are double standards here, then would really like to understand why and this would need to change. While there may be a greater debate on this issue, I would like to understand the background before commenting more. However, my personal views remain that self identification should be preferred & not mandatory. However, in case there are two sources that classify the individual with two different ethnicities (specially in case of mixed parental backgrounds), then self identification should be a must. However, in other cases it should be enough to have a credible source mentioning the caste, religion, ethnicity, origin, roots etc of the Individual. While I personally feel that the world would be a better place without the caste system in its current form (it wasnt always the way it is today or for the last few hundred years), the system is a reality today in India and also for indians globally. Encyclopedic entries should reflect facts and not an idealistic world that we are all working towards. Lots of comments would be welcome. -Ambar (talk) 20:51, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

But our policy clearly states that for ethnicity and religion, self-identification is mandatory. The only thing questionable here is whether caste/tribal status is the same, and Sitush, myself, and others have long argued that it is (and, perhaps, is probably more contentious in many ways). Qwyrxian (talk) 03:06, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Can you guide me to the location where this policy exists. I have already read the two strings that Sitush has linked to in the article above. I have but one point to make (Sitush in reading), Amitabh bachchan does not mention that he does not associate with his religion or ethnicity. He merely makes a point that his surname doesn't give away his caste (while it almost surely gives away his religion, his country of origin etc), & he is proud of that (& he says that specifically in support of his fathers decision to mention bachchan & not srivastav as his surname). He specifies that his feelings are against the discrimination bought about due to caste lines, and not specifically against any caste. For example, my surname also doesn't give away my religion or caste and I am proud of my surname, however, that doesn't mean that I don't associate myself with my ethnicity and family background or for that matter the culture and society that I have grown up in. In reality, these are two completely different things and need to be looked in perspective. For example, there are numerous articles where bachchan claims to be religious, like the one here published in 2006. He also mentions in another article here that nationality is also a cause of discrimination just like ethnicity and religion (I couldn't agree more). So while we start creating a ban on mentioning ethnicity and religion, we need to first look banning nationality, unless the person self identifies himself to be of a specific nationality. And while all this sounds idealistic and wonderful, in reality both are causes of discrimination, & the job is easier said than done. More comments and discussions are required on this topic and it is by no means a closed discussion yet. My opinion is that there are several ways to look at this problem. There are distinct social groups (Jats, Kashmiri Pandits, others) which have a distinct culture, launguage etc that shapes the lives of a large number of people of these communities. These communities are sometimes understood as castes or sub-castes. Banning the mention of these into articles related to people only makes the information incomplete. The ban should be on not allowing the use of discriminatory terms when used in reference to the castes of a person, for example Brahmins are better or shudras are not. For that, I think we will have total agreement. However, creating a bank on not mentioning the caste or social group / tribe etc will only create further disagreements and pointless debates. Look forward to more feedback from others also, not only qywrxian. I know Sitush is busy with some personal issues and will respond in time, however for others please leave your comments on my thoughts above. -Ambar (talk) 07:33, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

WP:BLP requires that all contentious information about living people be verified by high quality reliable sources. Nationality si completely different, because nationality is defined by law in all cases. In a few very special cases (such as with UK sub-nationalities), we sometimes leave the information out if it is contentious. Caste, like ethnicity is 100% arbitrary and subject to redefinition at whim (including the intentional creation of fictional pasts or cherry picking of ideas to support a particular caste/ethnicity). I live in Japan, but I was not born here. I am not now a Japanese citizen (I retain my birthright citizenship). If I were a permanent resident of Japan, am I Japanese? I don't know; but perhaps if I claimed to be, and that was verified by a reliable source, then perhaps it could be included in a WP article on me (which, of course, doesn't exist). But no other person can make that call for me.

Ultimately, the issue is this: some people directly and openly refute the continuance of the caste system, and specifically decline to be part of a caste, even if some arbitrary and constantly changing rule says they "should" be (because of blood, marriage, language, religion, etc.). Until we know whether the person chooses that as a part of their identity, it is inappropriate to include it (you could say, in a certain sense, that such a claim cannot be verified by someone else, because no one else is reliable with regards to a personal choice). Qwyrxian (talk) 08:05, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

{{od)) (1)The 2011-2021 census will solicit caste from respondents. (2)In India it is illegal to discriminate on the basis of caste. (3)India has a positive discrimination programme based on caste. (4)Caste is an important factor in India regards to implementation of welfare policies as implememted by the central and state governments. (Obvious facts so am not sharing sources) Yogesh Khandke (talk) 18:16, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Nice to see you back. Now, can you possibly explain why your points are relevant, or are you just stirring the pot? - Sitush (talk) 18:21, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Policy page regarding biographies clearly says that the person needs to self-identify only in case of religious belief or sexual orientation. Ethnicity/caste were never required to be self-identified as per the policy pages:-[2] and [3]. -Nitishk.55 (talk) 12:35, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

Actually, the particular policies regarding ethnicity etc are a complete irrelevance. Caste is a frequently-contested social construct, and as such any assertion that a living individual is of caste X not based on self-assertion is a violation of both WP:BLP and core Wikipedia policies, in that it is misrepresenting opinion as fact, and must, per WP:BLP policy, be deleted on sight. If you wish to argue that core Wikipedia policies should be revised, do it in the appropriate place, not here. AndyTheGrump (talk) 15:03, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

Heated debate Sreelakshmi Suresh afd for this =

It is 4th!! nomination for AFD and still heated argument here , please contribute if you think if its still necessary ?? Shrikanthv (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 11:42, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

Does this project cover the Indian diaspora...

Hi there!

I'm working on articles on Guyana, and I noticed that the article on the former Guyanese president, Cheddi Jagan, has a WikiProject India banner attached to it. Out of interest (and because it will be relevant for quite a lot of Guyana-articles), does WikiProject India generally include peoples of the Indian diaspora in its scope?

All best,

Lorelei (talk) 16:59, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

Imo it shouldn't be a part of WP:IN. Unless there is a direct connection to India, I'm not sure if we should be covering the diaspora. --regentspark (comment) 18:55, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for your quick response RegentsPark. Yes, this is kinda what I had thought as well, especially after reading the description of WP:IN's scope on the project page. Just out of interest, because if crossed my mind while thinking about this, I did first search for a WikiProject Indian Diaspora (like WikiProject African Diaspora) or an Indian Diaspora task force of this project ... All best, and thanks again, Lorelei (talk) 13:14, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

An issue needs immediate assistance

Two well-meaning editors have, I think, misunderstood my edits on India recently and reverted all my consecutive edits twice (even though it was partially patrolled/modified by an administrator before).

The reverter, I think, did not look closely at my additions and that's what spurred the argument I guess. I don't disagree that much with the reverter, nevertheless he didn't provide a solid rationale other than the Images which I added made the page exceedingly cluttered. For some reason I lost my cool and also due to the fact that I simply didn't (and still, to some extent, don't) understand why my edits were reverted in the first place. But I dropped it for the sake of greater good.

And I concede that I could have discussed the additions in the talk page first and it would have been more sensible. Again, I know what I could have done but I just don't get what I did wrong.

I started a new section titled "Changes that I seek to bring" in the talk, review the changes. I think they should be in the article somewhere. Mrt3366 ^{(Talk page?) (New section?)} 08:43, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

AFD for Chowk.com

I believe this page is a balant marketing activity for their website chowk.com , please contribute to AFD for this article. Shrikanthv (talk) 08:39, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

Before this goes into India Vs Pakisthan , please contribute Shrikanthv (talk) 07:21, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Comment requested at RfC on Caste

Your comment is elicited at an WP:RfC on the article Caste. The tertiary sources are largely agreed that Hindu India is central to a discussion of caste. Yet in the article Caste, India is casually mentioned as just one example. Does this article minimize that central role (in a social and historical ill) and thereby engage in a kind of defensive universalism, not to mention original research and synthesis?

Here is the link to the RfC: Talk:Caste#RfC:_Does_the_article_minimize_the_centrality_of_India_to_the_notion_of_caste.3F. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 17:51, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

help required on the AFD for Neo-Advaita

Western concept of already existing Advaita philo , It does not suffice with wiki notablity ,and may also dilute the existing one AFD here Shrikanthv (talk) 07:58, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

'Neelamma Malligwad' at Gadag-Betageri

This person was placed on this page as an "International cyclist, who represented India" under the section heading "Great Personalities of Gadag-Betgeri"( :-o I have rationalised that title to "Notable citizens"). Are they notable enough for inclusion? Having eliminated sites mirroring WP I got only 6 hits on Google here. Sportstar Vol. 25, No. 11, has a mention: "Karnataka dominates proceedings" from Mar. 16 - 22, 2002. The Deccan Herald has some coverage: "Three titles for Neelamma" from October 2, 2007. Any more claims to fame that I can't find? If not I will have to remove the entry as non-notable. - 220 of ^Borg 12:19, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

Do not delete you should be lucky enough there is no article about it !! , check Sreelakshmi Suresh , she had one article and has not even own "real" award or did not compete in "real" competition ,but it was decided as keep after 4 AFD's so let it go Shrikanthv (talk) 08:39, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

need help with Mausala Parva

Team,

I am stumped and I need some help. This article is about a chapter of Mahabharata (an Indian epic). I am not sure what sections to add to it. I mean should it have a section for criticism? cultural significance? style of writing? or what? I have only addressed the IN-Universe issue of the article. Please help by adding relevant sections -Wikishagnik 22:51, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

Sandbox review of All India Kashmiri Samaj

I have created a draft of the All India Kashmiri Samaj article, which is about a community organisation from India. The organisation helps voice the concerns of the recently displaced Kashmiri Pandit diaspora. I invite experienced editors and people with information about such community organisations to visit and review my draft article and leave your comments on the draft articles sandbox. Kindly click on the link here to visit the draft article page. I will submit the article as AfC by around 15-Sep.-Ambar (talk) 04:03, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

Varna in templates

Given the long-standing issues surrounding claims of varna status (see archives, ad infinitum), can we really justify classifying them in templates, eg: Template:Social groups of Gujarat? - Sitush (talk) 08:33, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

Agree with you, Sitush. Jonathansammy (talk) 20:38, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

File:Mangalyaan mars orbitter.jpg

File:Mangalyaan mars orbitter.jpg has been nominated for deletion as unsourced -- 76.65.131.248 (talk) 20:49, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

Help wanted with determining proper capitalization for dishes...

...such as Chhena Kheeri, Chhena Gaja and Chhena Poda, and other items in Category:Oriya cuisine. E.g., What is kheeri? It redirects to kheer, a rice pudding. If it's just an alternate name or spelling for a kind of rice pudding, then Chhena kheeri should be lower case. But, if Kheeri is the name of a person (a chef who created the dish), or a place where it originated, then Chhena Kheeri should be uppercase, as Kheeri is a proper name. See Talk:Chhena kheeri. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wbm1058 (talk • contribs) 19:43, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

I've been facing the same issue as I've been sorting all the dishes of Category:Indian cuisine into subcats. My general bias has been to lowercase everything unless there's clear indications it's a geographical or personal name. I've checked a few against GoogleBooks to make sure, and I don't think I've found more than one or two out of a hundred that actually needed any capitals. MatthewVanitas (talk) 13:54, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Indian Television Academy Awards

There is currently an AfD about the Indian Television Academy Awards and various daughter articles that is sorely in need of comment by editors who are familiar with Indian media. If anyone from this WikiProject wants to comment, it would be very much appreciated. Best regards — Mr. Stradivarius ^{(have a chat)} 09:44, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

Notability of Patiala Parveen Komal (journalist)?

The article Parveen Komal (journalist) was just posted (uncited and poorly composed, unformatted). It's up for BLP deletion, but on the off-chance he's WP:N (possiby in another language) just wanted to give him his fair shot. Found him on WP:UNCAT. MatthewVanitas (talk) 21:13, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Review aggregators

A discussion related to use of Indian review aggregator websites for determining critical response of films is taking place here. Please share your views. Amartyabag ^TALK2ME 04:07, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

Hyderabad India for FAC

Hi all, we are planning to nominate Hyderabad, India for FA, please let us know if article required any more c/e corrections or improvements to meet the FA standards. :)Regards --Omer123hussain (talk) 21:59, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

Great! a quick review: All opposers will cry out over news being used, calling them as lame, peripherally related sources to a city article and will demand more authoritative sources. Be brave to silence them.

Climate data is outdated. all of it is before global wrming got severe.

2 pics of legislature will be opposed. keep one.

Nominate soon. Hometech (talk) 21:07, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

Hi all, nominated Hyderabad, India for FA.

@Hometech, Thanks for your review and appreciation. Regards :)--Omer123hussain (talk) 21:56, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

Commons:WikiProject India

Hello,

I started a WikiProject India on Commons.

Please come and participate! Yann (talk) 15:39, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

Indian numbering

I notice that at WP:MOSIN it is suggested that the Indian numbering system be followed. Just wondering if this should be expanded to say that crore and lakh be wikilinked as these terms may not familiar to all readers. Hack (talk) 02:52, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

I always link the first occurrence when I see those terms. Of course, more often than not someone has beaten me to it. Just do it, is my advice. OTOH, he Indian numbering system is something that I find to be a pain - especially the commas in there - and I don't see why 20% of the world's population (but far less of English Wikipedia's readership) should prevail over the vast majority.

OK, I've lit the blue touchpaper and shall now find my bunker .... - Sitush (talk) 07:16, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Sitush, has it been very long for you to not be in any skirmish that you now want one? ||Dharmadhyaksha|| {T/C} 08:02, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

According to MOS:TIES, where an article is closely tied to an English-speaking nation, the local variant of English must be followed; crore and lakh are routinely used in Indian English (which I suspect you already knew). Hack (talk) 08:29, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

@Hack, you seem to have misread what I said. - Sitush (talk) 09:05, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

I think Sitush makes a good point. It is generally better to avoid the Indian numbering system (unless we're directly quoting something) because most of our readers will not understand it and all of our readers (including the Indian ones) will understand the global system. Perhaps we could recommend using commas in the thousands and millions and billions places and avoiding the use of crore and lakh unless necessary. (Now where did I put that hard hat?) --regentspark (comment) 16:50, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Mr/Ms Hack, Please use crore and lakh in a newly created Wikipedia that only uses Indian-English. For the regular English Wikipedia, let's stay with the conventional numbering system! Jonathansammy (talk) 21:24, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Sanjay Pugalia

This article is up for deletion if anyone cares to comment.4meter4 (talk) 16:38, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

please check article

Hello group, I have worked on the article Ribhus. It is no more stub but still unrated. If you mind please visit and rate it.--87.152.236.176 (talk) 19:35, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Alarming number/scale of Tamil Nadu edits by new user User:Muniyankaruppan

Could someone take a squint at Special:Contributions/Muniyankaruppan and judge whether he's doing greatly needed cleanup work, or just confusing things? MatthewVanitas (talk) 21:36, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

What is so alarming in it? I had a look at most of the edits. Although they the edits are not to wiki standards, they don't look inappropriate. --Anbu121 (talk me) 06:44, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

Requested move: Denotified Tribes

Discussion at Talk:Denotified tribes of India. --Redtigerxyz ^Talk 06:02, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

Commons:Commons:WikiProject India

A Wikiproject India has been created on Commons now. Feel free to participate as this will help coordinate efforts on images uploaded courtesy of many of the wikis. cheers. —SpacemanSpiff 12:01, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

Major cleanup in progress at Shivaji

The article Shivaji, the founder of the Maratha Empire, has been quite rough for a while. It's nigh-haiographic, lots of POV language, terrible slant towards turning a historical figure into a can-do-no-wrong comic-book hero. Plus a number of drive-by editors chucking in random poorly-formatted and uncited claims with no challenge, while earlier attempts to address the POV were tackled by outraged editors.

I've been doing the more technical and less-controversial cleanup bits first, and we're getting to the point where we can start excising sketchy POV sources and re-sourcing with proper academics and historians. For example, I removed 16 footnotes to a television serial, not even a documentary, but a costume drama (it does look pretty cracking on YouTube, I grant). There are also 29 cites to a writer who is clearly Notable, but appears to be a regionally best-selling pop-history writer rather than a serious academic. Generally speaking any book that has a title like "Shivaji, the Awesomest Hero Ever" and is published by a non-Notable non-academic publisher needs to be scrutinised.

There's also the issue that a lot of "negative" material (that is, material that doesn't reinforce the Legendary Heroic Narrative) has been whitewashed out; there's a neat historiography bit in Karline McLain (2009). India's Immortal Comic Books: Gods, Kings, and Other Heroes. Indiana University Press. pp. 121–. that picks apart a comic-book about Shivaji, noting all the missing bits, so that might be an interesting way to start checking for what facts about his life are commonly obscured by partisans.

I made a checklist at Talk:Shivaji#Cleanup_To-Do_list, and welcome any assistance cleaning up the article, or even just adding things to the list that need to be addressed. Thanks for any help tackling this high-vis article, which is #72 on WP:WikiProject India/Popular pages with 103,000 hits per month. MatthewVanitas (talk) 22:38, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

Help with an article?

Hi guys! I'm not part of the WikiProject, but I'd like some help with finding sources for an article that's currently up for deletion. There are some sources, but I'm not overly familiar with the sources in India and I'd very much appreciate people who are more familiar with the various papers, sources, and languages to look for sources to show notability. The article up for deletion is Trishneet Arora and while most of the coverage looks to be recent, there seems to be a lot of it. The users involved with the article are very new, so they also need someone to take them under their wing as well. Anyone interested?Tokyogirl79 (talk) 18:01, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

Just a note so that a non-project member does not feel that they are being ignored. I took a look at the article and the AfD stuff but, alas, pop culture really is not my thing, and if I am honest then Indic pop culture really blows my mind. It is just so incredibly complex. We have some regulars who are very good regarding movies/tunes etc and so perhaps something/somoene will turn up. My guess is that you are not being ignored here. Good luck. - Sitush (talk) 00:24, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

Cyber security and ethical hacking it is. Where did "pop" come in Sitush? It looks like you have really heard some Indipops. sorry for that harassment. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 04:12, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

Speaking of such, Indian pop is a terrible example-farm of drive-by editors just jamming their favourite names into a "Other famous bands include... [lists dozens of bands in sequence with no other context]." If anyone here is a big fan of the genre, at some point it'd be good to go through and remove any name that doesn't clearly emphasise how vital that particular performer is to an overall understanding of Indian pop. Otherwise we're just trending to listing every name in Category:Indian pop singers in the body of the article. MatthewVanitas (talk) 06:49, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

@Dharmadhyaksha - erm, no idea what happened there. "Pop culture" is different to "pop music" but nonetheless, I was way off the mark. Must have misclicked something somewhere. It was late. Apologies to all. - Sitush (talk) 23:14, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

File:Gsat10-5.jpg

File:Gsat10-5.jpg has been nominated for deletion. It appears to come from http://www.arianespace.com/news-mission-update/2012/942.asp so if you think it is important enough for a fair-use image, or can figure if arianspace allows for GFDL/CC-by-SA usage, it would correct some problems with the current licensing and information about the picture. -- 70.24.245.122 (talk) 21:38, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

Encyclopaedia Indica

The following is a question that I posed at User talk:SpacemanSpiff. Like me, SpacemanSpiff is of the opinion that references should be deleted as emanating from a copyvio source (something that applies in blanket form to works published by Gyan, which also mirrors our content, but in this instance the publisher is Anmol). I thought that I'd better just double-check here. I have come across some other copyvio works by Anmol in the past, btw.

--start copy--

I may have found another dodgy Indic source but can only see the stuff in snippet view. Using this search of GBooks, the results include Bamber Gascoigne's 1971 The Great Moghuls, showing

During the next eight years Aurangzeb remained viceroy of the Deccan, a post which he filled very successfully, being ... rank and allowance.4 His dismissal occurred during a visit to Agra in the summer of 1644 to see his elder sister Jahanara ...

The next entry in the search results is Encyclopaedia Indica (1999) and the snippet is

During the next eight years Aurangzeb remained viceroy of the Deccan, a post which he filled very successfully, being ... His dismissal occurred during a visit to Agra in the summer of 1644 to see his elder sister Jahanara, who had acted ...

That second source - EI - is presently used on 60 pages, if we allow for variant spellings. - Sitush (talk) 13:20, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

Of course, it could be that EI is quoting Gascoigne, but I doubt it. - Sitush (talk) 13:21, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

--end copy--

Of course, we do not know how extensive the alleged copyvios may be. Can anyone see the two books in full? - Sitush (talk) 13:02, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

Article Submission

I have just completed my first two wikipedia articles. i.e.

1. Lottery_(short_story)
2. Gajar Ka Halwa

So in which category, I request for its assessment? (a) Wikipedia:WikiProject_India or (b)Wikipedia:WikiProject Novels and Wikipedia:WikiProject Food and drink. I have confused because both the articles are India related.--ARUN SHARMA ¹⁰¹Talk | Email 15:36, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

An article may belong to multiple wiki projects. In this case, both article belongs to wiki project India. The halwa article also belongs to Food and Drink, and Lottery also belongs to Novels.--Dwaipayan (talk) 23:02, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

Freedom of Panorama in India

I'd like to ask for a clarification on the freedom of panorama in India. Commons:Commons:FOP#India states section 52 of the Indian Copyright Act, as:

52. Certain acts not to be infringement of copyright—(1) The following acts shall not constitute an infringement of copyright, namely:

...

(s) the making or publishing of a painting, drawing, engraving or photograph of a work of architecture or the display of a work of architecture;

(t) the making or publishing of a painting, drawing, engraving or photograph of a sculpture, or other artistic work failing under sub-clause (iii) of clause (c) of section 2 ["any other work of artistic craftsmanship"], if such work is permanently situate in a public place or any premises to which the public has access;

Then, the page states:

Note that this does not include copies of paintings, drawings, or photographs, as they do not fall under the referenced sub-clause (iii). They fall under sub-clause (i).

As far as I can see, this clarification is a misinterpretation of the law. It was added in this edit by a Commons admin. Searching for "India" in the talkpage archives gave no results, so there's probably been no discussion on this there either. I'm starting the discussion here instead of commons since there's probably a lot more chance of getting an Indian perspective on this here than on commons.

I think the question basically comes down to which one of the following the law intends to say:

• {(the making or publishing of a painting, drawing, engraving or photograph of a sculpture, or other artistic work) (falling under sub-clause (iii) of clause (c) of section 2)}, if such work is permanently situated in a public place or any premises to which the public has access
• {(the making or publishing of a painting, drawing, engraving or photograph of a sculpture), or (other artistic work falling under sub-clause (iii) of clause (c) of section 2)} if such work is permanently situated in a public place or any premises to which the public has access

If its the latter, paintings should be covered under FOP; if its the former, they probably won't be.

I believe that the latter interpretation is correct. I would appreciate discussion on this matter, and if possible, finding any SC rulings or other legal documents which provide a clearer view of this. Thanks--Siddhartha Ghai (talk) 21:14, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

My opinion is that neither of your interpretations is correct. Rather the following is the intended interpretation:

• {the (making or publishing) of (a painting, drawing, engraving or photograph)} of {(a sculpture), or (other artistic work falling under sub-clause (iii) of clause (c) of section 2)} [is not an act of infringement]

In other words, paintings, drawings, engravings, or photographs are the works which one is permitted to create and distribute. Sculptures and works falling under 2(c)(iii) are the works which one is permitted to create reproductions of. Indian FOP law is modelled on the same UK FOP law as the rest of the Commonwealth, and in those nations both Commons and every legal opinion I've seen has supported the above interpretation. Dcoetzee 21:25, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

For starters, discussions of Commons matters should take place on Commons. A discussion on WP:EN tends to disenfranchise the bulk of Commons users. Any conclusion reached here which has the effect of changing anything on Commons will have to be discussed again on Commons.

I agree with Dcoetzee. That reading is simply applying the rules of construction to the plain words of the statute -- for my clarity of thinking I have illustrated the same reading differently:

• the making or publishing of

• a painting, drawing, engraving or photograph of

• a sculpture, or
• other artistic work falling under sub-clause (iii) of clause (c) of section 2

• if such work is permanently situate in a public place or any premises to which the public has access.

The clarification which I added, "Note that this does not include copies of paintings, drawings, or photographs, as they do not fall under the referenced sub-clause (iii). They fall under sub-clause (i)." is correct.

Note that this reading is consistent with the law in all of Australia, Bangladesh, Canada, Hong Kong, Ireland, Jamaica, New Zealand, Singapore, UK -- all current or former Commonwealth countries with similar legal histories.

. . Jim - Jameslwoodward (talk to me • contribs) 11:13, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

Being a ip Consultant for EU and India, I would take this matter as subject of interpretation , Eventhough the initial law was of UK , there are considerable ammendments to make it into Indian perview.

as a rule of thumb you have to note that 1) India allows the use of any IP works for "educational" purpose, so if you interpret wiki as "encyclopedia" then there is no rule that really applies. 2) The Bylaws stated in your wiki links have been carefully seleted to get a OK , as their deeper significance is different.(not to go more ahead in law terms )

My take would be take it as OK as per statment 1 . so need to bother about how they got the ok.Shrikanthv (talk) 12:26, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

What you say is correct with respect to the law, but not with respect to use on either WP:EN or Commons. Both require that material be free for use for any purpose, including commercial use, so an exception which allows only educational use is not helpful in either place. The policy on Commons is correct as it stands. . . Jim - Jameslwoodward (talk to me • contribs) 13:51, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

AfD: Bismil Azimabadi

I've just created Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Bismil_Azimabadi but said there that I would mention it here because of a possible systemic bias issue. - Sitush (talk) 14:19, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Discussion of author Babasaheb Purandare at the Reliable Sources Noticeboard

There is a discussion at the RS Noticeboard as to whether Purandare qualifies as a WP:RS for the article Shivaji. Discussion posted here: Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard#Raja_Shivachhatrapati_by_Babasaheb_Purandare_in_the_article_Shivaji_.28Indian_history_bio.29. MatthewVanitas (talk) 00:49, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

This argument is going on far longer than I anticipated; I'd invite folks who'd not yet come yet to contribute. MatthewVanitas (talk) 02:10, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

Help at Yadav

User:BaazBahadur made a number of comments about possible changes to the Yadav article in June (at Talk:Yadav#This page is badly edited. Content is missing important information), but got no replies. Subsequently, they boldly made the changes they suggested - nothing wrong with that in itself, as the suggestions were uncontested. But looking at them I think they really do need discussion first (not least because some sourced content was removed). I've reverted the changes - can anyone help by commenting on the talk page discussion? -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 14:50, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

I thought that someone had replied. I'll go there and refer them to the archives because the points they mention have been discussed repeatedly on that talk page, at DRN and, IIRC, at ANI. - Sitush (talk) 15:27, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

Qwyrxian beat me to it. I think that the original query was ignored due to TLDR and some rather obvious dodgy claims but, yes, I for one should have picked up on it. - Sitush (talk) 15:33, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

"chopping block" or "butcher block"

Which is the more common term in India? I'm referring to the hunk of wood known at enwp as a butcher block. Is "cutting board" the right term? Are they all the same? I'm trying to figure if it should be called "chopping block", and Google isn't providing conclusive information.

See: Talk:Butcher block#Page move: Butcher block --> Chopping block

Many thanks, Anna Frodesiak (talk) 15:23, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Come on folks! Please tell us. If you are in India, tell us what the most common term there is and say at Talk:Butcher block#Page move: Butcher block --> Chopping block? Please. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 23:32, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

Help Gurjant_Singh_Budhsinghwala

Really pecular article and under achievments it writes about killing police personnels, can any one help it making in a neutral tone ? or meeting NPOV ? Shrikanthv (talk) 07:14, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

I've just cut out the vast majority of the article. Some of it was unsourced, some was allegedly sourced but not actually there when I checked the refs, and some was just plain POV. Qwyrxian (talk) 01:44, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

No article for goddess Shivai/Shivadevi?

I've seen some mentions of a goddess "Shivai" or "Shivadevi" - I take it "devi" means something like "goddess"? I haven't been able to find much information on this figure - is she somehow a female incarnation of Shiva, or what's the story? Any help in producing at least a stub would be greatly appreciated. MatthewVanitas (talk) 22:16, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

A good place to start is Diana Eck's India: A Sacred Geography available in limited view on Google books. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 00:10, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

Shivai is one way to spell a reflective form of Shiva. Deva is the Sanskrit word for God, devi is the feminine form. As an adjective it means "heavenly" or "divine". Moonraker (talk) 05:32, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

You may be better off searching for info on the Shivneri temple (Shivai is the presiding deity). I believe she was the family deity of Shivaji and is an incarnation of Sakthi/Parvati (though I could be wrong on this). —SpacemanSpiff 05:42, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Devi is a suffix meaning goddess. Shivā (शिवा) denotes the god Shiva's wife and is generally applied to Parvati, but sometimes also to others like Durga. Another Shivā is the shakti of Shiva; in this context applied to Maheshvari. Shivai is a regional Maharashtrian goddess, whom temples is on Shivneri and after whom, Shivaji is named. --Redtigerxyz ^Talk 05:52, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

Not to confuse things further, but I'm seeing references to Shivaji's home fort also having a temple to the goddess "Tulja". Is this a different name for Shivai? There's some spastic editing at Bhavani stating that Tulja is somehow related... and Bhavani is an aspect of Parvati (also known as Shakti?)... who is Shiva's wife. This is all very confusing with someone unfamiliar with Hinduism, though I have some basic familiarity with Indian social issues at large. Am I totally misreading here, or by some convoluted chain is "goddess Shivai/Shivabai" a particular avatar/incarnation/aspect of Shiva's wife? "Bai" appears to be some Marathi feminine name ending, so "Shiva Bai" being the wife of Shiva sounds logical. Is this even slightly correct, or is there no connection between Shivai and Shiva other than a resemblance of name? MatthewVanitas (talk) 02:15, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

"Shivaji's home fort"? Which fort do you mean by that? His birth-home Shivneri has the temple of Shivai. If you have references that talk about some other fort, we would have to see when that particular fort came under the ruler of Marathas.
The goddess Bhavani of Tuljapur, also called as Tulja Bhavani, is considered as an aspect of Shakti. The things is, pick any random goddess and there is very high probability that she would be the aspect of Shakti. Leaving Saraswati and Lakshmi aside, all major goddessess are aspects of Shakti. The legend has is that Shiva's first wife Sati (goddess) jumped in the yajna fire as her father Daksha had insulted her husband Shiva. (Thats also how the Sati (practice) gets its name.) Shiva, furious with his wife's death took her corpse and started the Tandava dance. The dance form is a vigourous form that started the destruction of the universe. To stop this, Vishnu used his Sudarshana chakra to destroy the corpse. The body parts fell in 4/18/51 different places and these are known as Shakti Peethas. All these have temples of some goddessess, aspects of Shakti, have their own legends and names. Tulja Bhavani is considered one of them.
For the main question of Shivai, i don't think you would find any info other than her temple at Shivneri and that Shivaji gets his name from her. The other legends that relate Tulja Bhavani with Shivaji say that she gifted him with his sword, called as Bhavani Talwar (Talwar means sword in Hindi/Marathi). Tulja Bhavai is also in general a deity of Marathas. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 03:56, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

Matthew, there is no direct relationship between Shivai and Bhavani. They are distinct goddesses, who should have different articles.--Redtigerxyz ^Talk 16:28, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

Matthew, Every marathi Hindu family /clan or for that matter, Hindu communities from other regions of India too, have their family deities ( A God and Goddess). In Maharashtra, the Goddess Bhavani in the town of Tuljapur is one of the top five family dieties. The others being Renuka of Mahur, Mahalaxmi or Amba-bai of Kolhapur, Saptashrungi of Vani Nasik and Yogeshwari of Ambejogai. Some of them including Bhavani are regarded as Manifestations of Shakti or Parvati. the wife of Shiva / Shankar /Mahadeo. Bhavani was the family deity or the Kuldevta of the Bhosale clan. Bhavani of Tuljapur is also called Tuljai or Tulja Bhavani. Legend goes that the goddess gave Shivaji a sword. Marathi people claim that this sword is currently in a museum in London. I have been to most of History Museums in London but did not see the sword. I hope this helps. Jonathansammy (talk) 03:55, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

Hi matthew, I guess it all false down to the language , as every language in India has it own accent and intonation if tranformed into english ,sounds wierd. so the word shiva is also siva ( in tamil nadu), or shivappa (in karnataka) and totally deferenet names in their own regions and di-elects. so there cannot be a standard name unless if you say i only accept hindi (delhi) as the right one. ( which cannot be right too) . its just "saying" jesus in russian, italian, german or in french are quite different. Shrikanthv (talk) 08:21, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

G. V. Desani

I intend cleaning up the G. V. Desani page to meet Wikipedia's requirements. My intent is to format it into sections, remove or relocate extraneous information and possibly add some more info. G. V. Desani's works are classics in Indian fiction and no amount of information on him is too little. I intend removing the "cleanup" flag after I am done. Somebody please guide me if I need to contact/inform anyone before embarking on this task. -- mowglee 13:51, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

Burning of three witches in Baden, Switzerland (1585), by Johann Jakob Wick.

A 1947 propaganda comic book published by the Catechetical Guild Educational Society raising the specter of a Communist takeover

No, you don't need to contact anyone. You can start cleaning up the article. The article needs lots of cleanup! Best, Tito Dutta ✉ 09:03, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

I can't find talk page link in your signature! --Tito Dutta ✉ 09:04, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

thank you. i have started formatting and editing and the page will be up to standards in a few days. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Mowglee/desani-sandbox do i need permission to remove "cleanup" flag? -- mowglee 10:32, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

Unsourced Exceptional Claims in Bengali film box office

Some users are continuously adding exceptional box office collection in some Bengali movies infobox. A regional film is earning more than a national film is an exceptional claim. They might be lovers of those films and want to show their dedication in Wikipedia by adding some "out of the world" information in those articles. The worse thing is they change the amount every day (sometimes after every few hours– always without sources)

Articles affected

• Paglu
• Paglu 2
• Khokababu
• Awara (film)
• Challenge (2009 film)
• Challenge 2

Additions

• Shotru

In short all new commercial new releases of Bengali language films are getting affected. Recently in 1–2 articles where the box office was too much to believe, and unsourced too, I have removed gross and budget parameters. I am attracting your notice towards this --Tito Dutta ✉ 03:09, 10 October 2012 (UTC) Addition signed Tito Dutta ✉ 08:02, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

• Things that aren't obviously vandalism and still incorrect are not the easiest to deal with. Consecutive warnings for disruptive editing and/or adding unsourced information and/or puffing up an article can lead to a block, but if you're dealing with a bunch of IP addresses that won't do you much good. My suggestion is asking for semi-protection, but make the case (at RFPP) that this is a long-term problem of edits that aren't blatantly vandalistic. Note: I looked at Paglu, and that's borderline (some admins might protect, I find it below the threshold), but Paglu 2 is now semi-protected (note the reason; that's the kind of language you can use). I can't go through the entire list right now, so try submitting a couple of them, or all of them. Good luck. Drmies (talk) 19:26, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

Persistent Ultra Nationalists and Persistent Cynical Anti Nationalists

Going through the talk pages of various India related articles , one often see the term "Nationalist" ,"Nationalist POV warriors" and such like attributed to by one set of editors vis avis others . There is really no rule I know of restraining someone being offhandedly labeled "Nationalist" . These accusations may or may not be true or valid , but can set off a chain reaction . Equally important is to recognize "Cynical anti nationalist" editing by editors on the same articles . It surely does no justice to India related Wikipedia articles neutrality , to give free reign to one set -the Ultra Nationalists or the Cynical Anti Nationalists .With Arbitrary sanctions in place it becomes easier to trait Heros and Zeros . Either way , given a free hand ,content labeled nationalist by a broad brush , can easily be deleted and entirely replaced by persistent anti nationalist or vice versa . I would be interested to read about other editors views on this observation .Intothefire (talk) 18:12, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

You've been around long enough to know that the intent is that we are neutral. If you want to give some diffs etc then perhaps there would be some point to your comment but otherwise this is just a stirring of the pot. And not a very subtle one, either. - Sitush (talk) 19:39, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

As one example, the tussle between nationalist attributions and Pakistani anglo Indian POV can be seen at talk:Caste.'OrangesRyellow (talk) 00:46, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

Can't see it. For a start, where is the Pakistani POV and the Anglo-Indian POV? Or are you saying that because some people do not accept the weighting towards a Hindutva position (dilution of a concept perceived as detrimental) that this means they must be Pakistani/Anglo-Indian? Give some specific examples, please, and perhaps refer to the recent ANI thread relating to that particular article before doing so - you were mentioned in it and the outcome is here. - Sitush (talk) 00:59, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

See the RFC and beyond. BTW, I was not saying Pakistani and Anglo Indian. Pakistani Anglo Indian. There, some were being seen as Natniolists POV and some as Pakistani Anglo Indian POV.OrangesRyellow (talk) 02:12, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

Where in the RfC? (I have been involved in it). And I still do not understand "Pakistani Anglo Indian" as being descriptive of a point of view. And even if you were correct, one article does not constitute "often, as Intothefire described the situation. Bearing in mind their broad-brush statement here, it might be instructive to look at the contribution history etc of Itf. - Sitush (talk) 02:18, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

It is near the start of the RFC. Pakistani Anglo Indians would be Anglo Indians with a partly Muslim POV. And the broad brush has been applied on so-called "Nationalists" in the RFC too. That would not be a cause for concern?OrangesRyellow (talk) 03:00, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

The "board brush" refers to Inthefire's sweeping, generalised statement that lacked examples; it was not a reference to a lack of definitions of POV. Of course, not being a holder of the Hindutva POV doesn't mean a person must hold this other, somewhat vague POV. Aren't the vast majority of experienced contributors in areas such as this actually doing what should be done, ie: trying to portray a neutral POV? If not, then you should consider collating the evidence and submitting it for community review. Which is exactly what happened regarding the Hindutva position on the article that you refer to. - 03:13, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

The following Wikipedia articles on Moral panic Witch-hunt and McCarthyism are related to my concerns here. Diffs can be provided but Id like to avoid them , lest a protective admin pops in to ban/block me under discretionary sanctions . My aim is to highlight an issue not battle individuals .I believe the instances of banning several India related editors on contentious articles will harm neutrality .For social issues Wikipedia articles are work in progress .Intothefire (talk) 03:36, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing towards the ANI thread. Looking into the RFC, the ANI thread and this thread too, it becomes apparent that the Hindu POV is being defamed heavily and then admin powers have been used to demolish any meaningful Hindu POV input into writing that article. Concerns about defaming by using "nationalist" etc. labels have been expressed in the ANI thread too. Writing India/Hinduism related articles by suppressing the Hindu POV/input is certainly non neutral, and deliberately so. They are not doing what should be done.OrangesRyellow (talk) 03:39, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

Although the label Nationalist may not be the cause of a block or ban it has preceded being hurled on India related editors ...now gone on more than the one article , before blocks/bans .If the prerogative is available to a few editors to call other editor nationalist warrior and is considered - not inviting censure, would it be fair assume calling editors notorious cynical anti nationalist and not invite censure ? Intothefire (talk) 11:13, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

You say that the "nationalist" label has preceded blocks and bans on more than one article. This strengthens my thinking that the label is the trigger for blocks and bans on those accused. This label is being hurled on opponents to "disappear" the opposition.OrangesRyellow (talk) 11:36, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

The "Hindutva POV" characterization too appears to have been for the same purpose.OrangesRyellow (talk) 11:51, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

Neutrality is compromised when there are glaring contradictions between what goes and does not ,if Cynical anti-nationalist POV is the opposite of the nationalist POV pumping up ,then there are glaring instances of trashing down with base comments , quotes . Period Books cant be used to quote , but can be used for archaic pictures ,better still authors may be objected by an editor and then used themselves elsewhere , should an admin maintain extraordinary scrutiny and extraordinary collusion ,then wikipedia is the looser .Diffs are available for all instances . Intothefire (talk) 18:30, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

Thingale

Could someone please have a look at this? It's not quite at the level of {{db-nonsense}} but it's difficult to work out whether it's about a place, a family, or a temple. PamD 09:51, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

Looks like a NN temple with some tangential sections below; temple articles are pretty hard to source unless they're reasonably famous, given how many tens of thousands of temples there must be in India. I wouldn't sweat it unless someone removes the prod tag; this one will probably just die once the prod deadline hits. MatthewVanitas (talk) 15:29, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

Indian Postal Service

Some simple copyediting and style improvement of Indian Postal Service is sorely needed. --Cybercobra (talk) 10:47, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

I wouldn't call it simple. I've spent several hours on it now and have so far roughly halved the size of the thing. It needed/needs a lot more than a copyedit and there is still a lot of pretty obvious copyvio in there. I dread to think what horrors lie in the linked main articles. - Sitush (talk) 14:25, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

India article - Image selection for the Economy section

Hi All,

The Voting Process has begun for selection of images for the Economy section of India article. The two images on the economy section will be replaced by two rotating eight templates. Please visit the article's talk page for voting. The Voting process ends on 15th November 2012. Thank you. --Anbu121 (talk me) 13:48, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

Rashmi Singh (author)

Please see to it http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Ananyaprasad/Rashmi_Singh Ananyaprasad (talk) 07:20, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

Why? This is a userfied version of an article that was recently deleted via WP:AFD. It seems little different from the deleted version. - Sitush (talk) 07:24, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

Yes it is. And I am asking so, if they can add anything into it. Why are you after me and not letting me to work?Ananyaprasad (talk) 09:04, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

NDTV program

Is NDTV's Prime Time an English-language program? Their website suggests otherwise and I am struggling to find sources for Ravish Kumar, which is an article that has twice been deleted this year. - Sitush (talk) 07:33, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

It's telecasted in Hindi, 9 p.m. IST. 117.211.84.74 (talk) 11:50, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

Great, thanks. That may explain the lack of Google results for the guy. - Sitush (talk) 11:57, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

Pallur Eman Nair

This article has been nominated for deletion and desperately needs a complete rewrite, preferably from a user or two familiar with the 19th century history of India. Google Books provided results but most of them appear to be insufficient to improve the article. Hopefully, other users with access to better sources especially those that may not be Internet-based, can help the article. SwisterTwister talk 06:55, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

I have requested Yang, Anand A. (November 2007). "Bandits and Kings: Moral Authority and Resistance in Early Colonial India". The Journal of Asian Studies. 66 (4): 881–896. doi:10.1017/S0021911807001234. at WP:RX. - Sitush (talk) 09:23, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

Guidelines and example articles for Indian villages?

Given how many thousands of low-quality (if well-intentioned) articles we have for Indian villages, do we have a guideline somewhere to help explain to folks what our minimum bar is for an article to exist? At the AFC Help Desk a user recently offered User:Niraj.bmsit/Amaithi (2), which had only a few sentences, so I added an infobox and some tags. I wanted to show him a good example of "how to write an article about an Indian village" but though I know there are some good ones out there, with a quick glance around all the ones I saw were unsourced, unformatted, etc.

For the next time this comes up, do we have any helpful guide like "So, you want to write an article about your village in India?" Further, do we have any good examples of a simple, basic, yet meeting WP:N village article that we can show novices as an entry-level example to aspire to? Thanks for any info, as this comes up all the time. MatthewVanitas (talk) 14:52, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

At the most basic, no co-ordinates and no reliable source (ie: not ourvillage.com etc) should mean no article. The problem is that populated places are inherently notable and I've had trouble seeing this basic existential tenet through when inclusionists are around. I hate that consensus but, as with schools, it is here to stay. - Sitush (talk) 14:57, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

Population per 2001 census can be found at www.censusindia.gov.in/PopulationFinder/Population_Finder.aspx . I don't have the link to the latest census. I don't think all villages are listed here. They ideally should have been. Hopefully they will be in the latest one. But last time i was looking for some village in Kerala and couldn't find it. Similarly now, i am unable to find this Amaithi in the proper tree (one has to search going down from State--District--Taluk--). There is however one Amtahi in Manigachhi block of Darbhanga district. Is that what the article is supposed to be about? §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 05:21, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

Spelling is often an issue. Sometimes there's minor differences in the spelling used by Census authorities compared to what the Taluk/District uses and it throws things off, I've noticed this a lot especially with the non-Hindi states, which leads me to believe that they translate to Hindi first and then to English and therefore some variations are lost. cheers. —SpacemanSpiff 05:29, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

Articles about bearers of hereditary titles

Succession lists need to be created for the Indian bearers of hereditary titles, such as the Raja of Bobbilli and the Raja of Panagal, not only for the major rulers, such as the Nizam of Hyderabad and the Maharaja of Travancore. Titular holders of the titles since Indian independence in 1947 should also be indicated as well. - (203.211.72.5 (talk) 00:50, 22 October 2012 (UTC))

Out of curiosity, is there any kind of centralised authority keeping track of these titles of nobility post-1947? As I understand it, the princely states acceded to India, and there was some period of semi-recognition and pensions, and then Indira Gandhi cut the pensions off. So not to put to fine a point on it, but how to we ensure we're getting "real" Rajahs and not citing "MatthewVanitasRajahofFoopore.com" as a source? Are these people still technically rajahs/mahaharajahs/princes on any particular level? Are they "officially" (somewhere, somehow) recognised as Pretenders? I'm not necessarily against it, just wondering how we would go about covering this. MatthewVanitas (talk) 05:01, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

The nobility system was abolished in the seventies, so there's no authority keeping track of it since then. e.g. Saif Ali Khan's "coronation" was entirely just something done by the locals who like the system, nothing more, nothing less. However, given that the system has been abolished, it's not like in the UK where a title is officially passed on to a successor, this is purely something that's done without any official recognition. —SpacemanSpiff 05:32, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Brihat Jataka

I am to draw your kind attention to my article Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Brihat Jataka which has been declined twice on ground of lack of notability. I have now been asked to seek assistance at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_India to see if I can get help from someone who both knows the topic, and knows Wikipedia procedures. The subject article is self-explanatory and therefore, I need not add anything else in its support. Kindly assist. Thanks.Soni Ruchi (talk) 02:37, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

Going to join in there! --Tito Dutta (talk) 17:44, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/ Ānanda (Hindu philosophy)

This article at is pending review. Even though I have responded to a comment but I think it cannot do without your assistance. Kindly assist. Thanks.Soni Ruchi (talk) 01:01, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

The page does not exist. I have started copyediting your other article and posted some comments in your talk page. Over to others. Tito Dutta (talk) 02:14, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

Tito Dutta Ji, the page Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/ Ānanda (Hindu philosophy) exists.Soni Ruchi (talk) 04:50, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

Content Dispute at A. Raja

An editor has been removing perfectly sourced content and edit warring. Help Needed Issue resolved. --Anbu121 (talk me) 17:56, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

List of cities in Uttar Pradesh

This is a Featured List candidate.♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 19:43, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

The map is wrong. Lucknow and Kanpur are not that apart. The distance between them is just 70 kms. --Anbu121 (talk me) 20:04, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

2012 Indian American infobox representatives open nomination period

You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Asian American#Indian American infobox representative nominees. RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 23:32, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

Unidentified Indian businessman

Hi everyone. This image: File:Unknown person during Russian president's India visit.jpg was uploaded to Commons from Kremlin.ru and shows a crop from an original image in which this unidentified man is speaking with Russian president Vladimir Putin in 2004. Kremlin.ru mistakenly identifies him as billionaire N.R. Narayana Murthy. Murthy is actually shown in the original photo at far left looking down next to Putin, while the man above is on Putin's right. I'm hoping someone can id him, as he would seem to be an important person since he's speaking with Putin. Thanks. INeverCry 20:33, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

Or just a guy who speaks Russian. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 03:51, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

It doesn't look that way to me. He's out front and speaking to Putin on his own with no other Indian gentleman speaking, and there looks to be a young Russian man between Putin and this gentleman who may be interpreting for them. INeverCry 22:32, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

He is surely not Murthy. I can see some other sites are doing the same mistake! --Tito Dutta (talk) 04:06, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

I think he is T.V. Mohandas Pai. -- . Shlok _{talk .} 09:03, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Looks quite similar to him. And here i was, asking some guys who have uploaded other Infy images. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 09:16, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Disruptive edits

May I draw your kind attention to the series of disruptive edits by User:Kmzayeem, where without any prior discussion in the talk pages, the user has nominated Bhasa Andolan, 2012 Fatehpur Violence, 2012 Hathazari Violence and 2012 Chirirbandar Violence for deletion. When I went to post a message to him, I found that their have already been several complaints against this user. So I thought it mind be helpful, if I posted it here. BengaliHindu (talk) 17:36, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

Here too I reported against him: Wikipedia_talk:Noticeboard_for_India-related_topics/Archive_50#Special:Contributions.2FKmzayeem. What he is doing now? --Tito Dutta (talk) 17:41, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

He also nominated 1992 Bangladesh pogroms for deletion. BengaliHindu (talk) 06:17, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

This comment by User:Kmzayeem also seems to imply that he thinks that Bangladeshi wikipedia editors could not have written articles written about human rights abuses in Bangladesh or about the plight of minorities in Bangladesh. He cannot know if the editors were Bangladeshis or not, but (per this comment) he seems to think that Bangladeshi wikipedians cannot be from a minority like Buddhist or Christian. --Trphierth (talk) 11:13, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Neem-Ka-Thana

The article says this is a "...city and a municipality...". How is it possible that we have no photos of this place? Can anyone please explain or provide an image? Many thanks, Anna Frodesiak (talk) 19:54, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

There is only one image in Commons at this moment, that's also an image of a(n) temple(idol) File:Shri Mansa Mata Mandir.jpg, which we can only add in notable places section if we have mentioned it. There is not any free image in Flickr too! --Tito Dutta (talk) 23:46, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

Bidsar

A little while ago, someone did a copy/paste move from Bidsar to Bidsar, Rajasthan, and redirected the former to the latter. This was reverted appropriately and the problem was explained to the editor - the discussion and explanation is at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bidsar, Rajasthan. But since then, an IP has been warring to reinstate the copy/paste violation version at Bidsar, Rajasthan. And they're not just reverting, as I deleted past revisions to prevent that, so they must be copy/pasting afresh. I have semi-protected both articles to stop this, but there's nothing to stop a registered account doing it again. The reason I'm bringing it here is because I'm trying to withdraw from admin activity (as per the notice on my user page), and I'm hoping that another admin might watch these pages and take over from me. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 13:08, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

WP:Articles for Creation - Backlog Elimination Drive

WikiProject Articles for creation Backlog Elimination Drive

WikiProject AFC is holding a one month long Backlog Elimination Drive!
The goal of this drive is to eliminate the backlog of unreviewed articles. The drive is running from October 22, 2012 – November 21, 2012.

Awards will be given out for all reviewers participating in the drive in the form of barnstars at the end of the drive.
There is a backlog of over 1000 articles, so start reviewing articles! Visit the drive's page and help out!

There is currently an elimination drive at AFC, which reached some 1200 articles last month and direly needed addressing. We've fought it down to the 200-500 article level, but could still use some more help. For those interested in India topics, about 5%+ of the AFC articles are regarding India.

The Drive is awarding some cool barnstars for participation, even as low as 5 articles reviewed, so your participation could really help chip away at the backlog. There is also the handy Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Helper script, no download required, you just turn it on in Preferences, which makes reviewing an article very quick, intuitive, and easy. I hope a few of you can come and help us out before the drive ends! MatthewVanitas (talk) 16:54, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Mass Deletion of Varanasi

An editor is blanking Varanasi article in the name of rewrite. Please have an eye on the article. --Anbu121 (talk me) 20:04, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

If you look at the recent history of Marrakech the intention was to do the same with Varanasi and do the same but I'm put off now. The guarding of the article has cost WP:India a good article, I'm not prepared to edit under that garrison and lack of trust.♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 21:57, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

Well, it is a pretty crappy article. For example, the lead should contain only the first para. A scalpel is not a bad idea though deleting everything seems a bit extreme. --regentspark (comment) 22:27, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

Misunderstanding!? Marrakech page is so long, it is not loading in my slow net, I'll try later, About Varanasi, ya, go ahead with copyediting etc work if that is going to be really helpful. --Tito Dutta (talk) 23:07, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

Comment retracted after reading User_talk:Anbu121#Varanasi --Tito Dutta (talk) 23:16, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

Yuck. I've retracted my comment too. --regentspark (comment) 01:58, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

Hi! I have a suggestion. I see Dr Blofeld has already copied the article to a user space of nvvchar. One great solution could be working and expanding the article in the user space, while leaving the article in main space as it is. When the expansion and improvement in the user space is complete, it can be copied to replace the existing Varanasi article. I hope, indeed am certain, that the expansion drive by Dr Blofeld will improve the article manifold.--Dwaipayan (talk) 23:12, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

(od) I must say Dr. Blofeld has a point about Indian articles on peripheral topics. I just looked through a few and they are all messes. Cleaned up Moti Mahal a bit but this is not going to be easy.--regentspark (comment) 03:01, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

Well, if we talk about all the ill-developed location/village articles, the scope becomes much much larger, beyond the scope of sporadic edits by a handful of editors. What may be done (though I don't know how) is a project-wide drive, akin to the assessment drive earlier this year. If Yuvipanda or someone else can come up with a software by which such articles can at least be provided with coordinates and population (sourced from census website and any other reliable source for coordinates ) , that would really be some achievement. I am technically challenged, so can not really plan any such thing! But I think it may be possible.--Dwaipayan (talk) 03:50, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

I would join such drive. Help should be taken from Commons:WikiProject India (which isnt really very active) and other Projects from Commons to make maps also. Maps of taluk/district on villages would be very helpful. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 04:33, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

I have added coordinates to around 1500 villages using AWB. I don't think that automated fetching of coordinates from Google maps by a software would be accurate. Google maps itself is not 100% accurate and disambiguation of names would lead to further inaccuracy. Although AWB can be used, some manual checking should be there. --Anbu121 (talk me) 04:39, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

The main towns are generally bad too. I cleaned up a few Kerala cities a year or so ago and have them on my watchlist. I'd like to see a drive on here to at least clean up district capitals. I successfully got us a new map for Uttar Pradesh, see the image I added to List of cities in Uttar Pradesh. Will try to get one for Himachal.♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 07:19, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

Cleaning

I have started cleaning these articles now with List of villages and towns in Thane district. I have taken this information from 2011 census data. Is this format okay? Or do people oppose listing such villages per WP:NOTDIRECTORY? §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 06:31, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

2011 data is fine. I would suggest a redirect to such lists for shorter stubs which are not really sourceable beyond population data and a summary column in a table maybe. This would be a great start. But the worst problem for me is not short stubs, its longer articles on towns which needs wiping clean to short stub level and writing again with sources.♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 17:09, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

What we need is an organized cleanup drive of the sort Dwai is suggesting above. We do have the articles tagged and categorized so it would be a matter of going through the categories and fixing articles. Stubs are fine and not a problem but the longer articles (Kanteikulia for example) need to be massively pruned, perhaps to the stub level as Dr. Blofeld suggested. --regentspark (comment) 13:19, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

Do we need such stubs when all the useful info in it can be available through such tables? These tables can further be modified to include some kind of map and thus geo-coordinates also. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 15:48, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

That's a good question. I do think that, at the minimum, we should have at least a stub for anything that is a place. For two reasons. First, we have an article to which material can be added and where an info box handily shows spatial information (cf. Baunsagadia). Second, we won't have to deal with redirects to table entries. These redirects tend to confuse the user. --regentspark (comment) 16:45, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

Keep the stubs clean but informative like Pal Lahara I say. For smaller villages with little info at present, yeah redirect would be best for now I think.♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 18:15, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

I find the list of villages and towns in Thane district (mentioned above by Dharmadhyaksha) pretty usable and good. It ventures to list the populated places according to Talukas (subdivisions) of the district, sourced from census website. Potentially, it can list all the populated places, as described in the census website. Such a list can work as an index.

There are about 650 districts in India. If we can make 650 such lists, following the same pattern, that would be good start. Then, based on those lists, individual place articles can be traced, worked upon or created. Personally I am against simply annihilating all bad articles. How would we identify the poor articles? By manually checking them, right? The manual checking process would be more easier and structured if we have a list to reference from.

So, my proposal for clean-up, in short is as follows. Creating list of villages and towns in X district for all the districts in India, according to the subdivisions, and sourced from census website. Next, checking the individual location articles, one by one, for quality. There will be some locations missing an article. Those can be created.

If this proposal ( or a variation of this) is undertaken, we would need a competent coordinator ( perhaps sriram, the great coordinator of the legendary assessment drive). Also if someone can make a software to ease the process, that would be of great help. Any thoughts?--Dwaipayan (talk) 15:52, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

I can prepare the list for TN and Puducherry - can subsequently take up for cleaning as well. Going with list of districts in India would be easy.Ssriram mt (talk) 16:49, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

As for as villages and community blocks with no notable information other than census data, a list would suffice. I have raised this a year or so back, but some of the members had divided opinion. Ssriram mt (talk) 16:55, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

Could you start some separate drive page? We can coordinate accordingly over there to have uniformity in format, title names, creating categories, etc. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 05:19, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

It looks like there are at least a handful of editors interested in this, more might join later. Yes, we need uniformity in format before undertaking such a huge project. I see that Dharmadhyaksha recently moved the article List of villages and towns in Thane district to List of towns and villages in Thane district. We can do that, since the census website follows that pattern. I see that the census website uses different abbreviations. What are Kh., Bk. and N.V.? Also, would we do wiki link in all the places ? ( some will appear in blue, some in red).--Dwaipayan (talk) 05:42, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

Yes! We can start advertising it later to other editors. Current editors can start with formalizing stuff. Tag & access drive members, & especially winners, would surely join. Aa.... Bk. probably stands for Budruk as in Kusgaon Budruk, Ghoti Budruk. Not sure. Will find out some reasonable source. Can't even guess for Kh and NV. As of now i am not giving any links, blue or red, as it would take time to find right wikilinks. Is there some bot who can do that? Or something in AWB? §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 06:31, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

Check the initial list of corporations/municipalities in here. The major work that is needed is preparing an index page based on giving lists leading to districts -> municipalities/Corporations -> Town Panchayats -> villages. Can someone volunteer co-ordinating these activities. I can contribute in TN articles. Also as mentioned by Naveen, census 2011 and uniformity in formats is needed. There are a few GA articles in TN, so that can be guideline for the municipalities and corporations.Ssriram mt (talk) 03:48, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

We have to think how well we can use Wikidata for Census 2011. Replicating same numbers in multiple places should be from Wikidata -- naveenpf (talk) 02:22, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

Aah ha! So its recently launched something. I will stop making those lists now. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 10:03, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

Deleting village articles and replacing them with lists would not do any good to WikiProject India if it had to rise up to the level of UK or US wikiprojects or taskgroups. I fear that such a move may also be used to settle scores. Anyway, at the same time, a word of caution on using 2011 census data. The official site says that those stats are only provisional.-Ravi_{My Tea Kadai} 18:11, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Yes, 2011 census figures should only be used if it is made explicit that they are provisional. This has been a bone of contention for some time at, for example, Madurai, where there is an obsession with A being the Xth largest village/town/city etc in country/state/tehsil. Frankly, and with no offence intended to those employed by the ICS etc (they surely could not do a worse job than the Brits), I'd prefer to stick with the 2001 figures until the 2011 stats are formally declared. The problem is, that is likely to be quite a long time away. - Sitush (talk) 02:10, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Expert needed: Barauli (Vidhan Sabha constituency) / Barauli (Vidhansabha constituency)

Hi guys. I need a subject expert to check these for me please; they don;t appear to be duplicates (one in ihar, the other Uttar Pradesh). Are there two Vidhan Sabha constituencies named 'Barauli' ? - TB (talk) 22:19, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Yes, one in Uttar Pradesh and other in Bihar. — Bill william compton^Talk 23:09, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. Is there an existing convention for referring to a particular one we can make use of to avoid confusion? - TB (talk) 23:51, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Resolved by Utcursch. — Bill william compton^Talk 05:29, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Brilliant. Thanks to you both. - TB (talk) 07:31, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Vinaypal Buttar

Hello. This article is missing interwiki links to Hindi or other language articles. This surprises me and makes me wonder if the chap is really notable. I'd be grateful if you'd review. Thanks. --Dweller (talk) 13:57, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Hi, I'm the creator. The subject is quite notable among Punjabi music industry and the sources verifying that but you can do what you want, but if you wish, I can translate the sources for an individual like you or any other responsible or if you could wait I'll translate it in the article's notes etc.. Thanks. --itar buttar [talk] 01:05, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Please do, as I have already requested on your talk page. It probably would be ok to do your stuff on the article talk page rather than in the notes, but I feel that we need something. There is far too much puffery,misinterpretation and plain falsity surrounding a lot of Indic content, some of which is unfortunately likely to be a systemic issue due to competence in translation. I am not suggesting that any of this applies in this instance but my antennae start twitching in situations such as this. Call me a cynic if you wish: I am aware that cynicism and WP:AGF are strange bedfellows! Nonetheless, my request is based on a fairly substantial experience of what goes on. As someone who has come over here from Punjabi Wikipedia, you may not yet be aware of the standards etc that apply here on the English version - a read of WP:GNG and Wikipedia:Notability (music) might be useful, depending upon how up to speed you are. - Sitush (talk) 01:16, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Argo and Lord of Light (Roger Zelazny)

Hello everyone!

Roger Zelazny 's Hugo-award and Nebula-award winning 1967 science-fiction novel Lord of Light uses Hinduism (as Zelazny's This Immortal used Greek pantheism).

The WP article on Lord of Light has no discussion of responses from Indian or Hindu writers. I would be interested in learning about such responses.

Lord of Light is topical because its film-rights are central to Ben Affleck 's 2012 film Argo. The new film Argo tells the story of the CIA's attempt to rescue hostages from Iran (after the 1979 Revolution) using a cover story of filming Lord of Light. (Comic artist Jack "King" Kirby drew some story boards.)

Sincerely, Kiefer.Wolfowitz 11:17, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Dharmaraya Swamy Temple of Bangalore

The subject article uses a featured image File:Dharmaraya Swamy Temple Bangalore edit1.jpg. But given the poor condition of the article, the image can not be published on the main page in the TFP section. It is hence listed in Wikipedia:Picture_of_the_day/Unused. As the article uses offline sources, someone who is familiar with the topic should kindly clean it. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 08:16, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for highlighting the state of the Dharmaraya Swamy Temple article. We will bring this up in the Bangalore meetup this weekend for discussion and try and find someone who can improve this article. regards Arunram (talk) 04:47, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured portal candidates/Portal:Bollywood

Portal:Bollywood has been nominated for featured portal candidacy (nomination page). Please leave your comments and help it to achieve featured status. Thanks and regards. — Bill william compton^Talk 15:29, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

User:Historylover123 creating numerous poor-quality India stubs

User:Historylover123 has been creating a number of stubs on India topics (focusing on Maharashtra) which are often only one or two sentences, no categories no sourcing or non-WP:RS sourcing, follow none of the standard formats for villages, films, etc. and is not using Edit Summaries nor replying to his Talk page.

Oddly, this account was reg'ed in 2007, made a few edits in the following years, had a pocket of revoked edits on one single school in 2010, but all of a sudden on 8 November became a prolific account producing dozens of edits and multiple stubs per day. The pattern is a bit suspect; might this be a "parachute account" for someone who was recently blocked?

I'd appreciate any assistance in trying to communicate with him/her and in PROD'ing unacceptable material as s/he creates it. MatthewVanitas (talk) 20:19, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

waste of time to go around cleaning his mess. he can be given a warning in simple and plain English before blocking. doesnt look like a net positive. --CarTick (talk) 01:14, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

I've done some digging and tend to agree. Unless someone is willing to spend a lot of time holding their hand, this looks like a lost cause. I may just be me but I've lost count of the number of net negative contributors who have the words "history" or "truth" in their monicker , although I don't give any weight to that in forming judgements, obviously - it is merely a passing thought. - Sitush (talk) 01:25, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Ha ha, amusing passing thought, Sitush!--Dwaipayan (talk) 01:30, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

There will be an exception to my rule ;) Perhaps even two! Although I am still trying to find the rule that states there is an exception to every rule and does not itself have an exception. That's philosophy for you! - Sitush (talk) 02:12, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

An example is here, which lead to this bit of banter. - Sitush (talk) 15:00, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

The dude is back, and though making a few reasonably helpful edits at Shivaji in popular culture (which he created), he suddenly decided to copy-paste it and start a new article Films about Shivaji Maharaj with the same content. I've CDS'ed the latter, but fundamentally this person never uses edit summary, won't ever communicate on Talk, removes warning templates on articles, and has a page-full of ignored user warnings. I don't necessarily want to ANI him since that would take a few days, but do we have an admin in the house who can take a glance?

It'd be great too if a few more folks can watchlist Shivaji, since both HistoryLover123 and some IP have been taking shots at it, including the IP reverting back to the "pre-sock" version, i.e. undoing a few weeks of NPOV and copyediting work I put into it, so I'm a little sore there. MatthewVanitas (talk) 17:24, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

It'd be great too if a few more folks can watchlist

Watchlisted.. I want to do some minor fmt and copy edit (like this). --Tito Dutta (talk) 17:41, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

Tito, hadn't meant to diss you by reverting your cleanup along with his edits, it's just that his long list of non-notable films shouldn't be there period, especially as we already have Shivaji in popular culture, and History has created yet another fork thereof. Cleaned up or not, piling dozens of entires back into the Legacy section is taking the article back to it's previous shoddy levels. Your motive is great, but fundamentally History is misbehaving and shouldn't be encouraged. MatthewVanitas (talk) 18:17, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

No, that is completely alight! That article was not in my watchlist.I went there after reading your post. And you know what runs in a Wikipedia editors mind when he sees something like this. The disappointing point is they have reinserted those after your edits, again wrong formatting! Ha! --Tito Dutta (talk) 21:46, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

I've used up my 2 reverts for the day, so just hope others Watchlist it too. I've ANI'ed him for disruptive editing and absolute failure to communicate. I'm hoping to get an indef block dependent on his actually checking in to talk to folks and explain himself. MatthewVanitas (talk) 22:09, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

Does he know use of redirect? Is there any chance that he is thinking he needs to copy paste the same content everywhere to block possible titles. Hm, he does not talk, I see! --Tito Dutta (talk) 22:15, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

I have reverted the edit. That's a popular article with 80,000+ monthly visits! Such inclusion decreases article quality! --Tito Dutta (talk) 22:23, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

Filed a complaint here: Wikipedia:ANI#Pattern_of_poor_edits_an_no_communication_by_User:Historylover123 (it's not quite anchoring right, so scroll up if it doesn't arrive at the right entry). MatthewVanitas (talk) 12:49, 19 November 2012 (UTC)