→Discussion: links and pings |
Fowler&fowler (talk | contribs) →Discussion: sad reflection |
||
Line 139: | Line 139: | ||
*# Recent [[Talk:Srinagar#The NPOV description of the capitals per 2019 consensus|discussion at Talk:Srinagar]] that led to this RFC. |
*# Recent [[Talk:Srinagar#The NPOV description of the capitals per 2019 consensus|discussion at Talk:Srinagar]] that led to this RFC. |
||
:Pinging {{ping| Fowler&fowler|Gotitbro|Johnuniq|Fayninja|Kashmiri|RegentsPark}} who had commented in the recent discussions, in case they miss the start of the RFC. [[User:Abecedare|Abecedare]] ([[User talk:Abecedare|talk]]) 18:32, 12 June 2023 (UTC) |
:Pinging {{ping| Fowler&fowler|Gotitbro|Johnuniq|Fayninja|Kashmiri|RegentsPark}} who had commented in the recent discussions, in case they miss the start of the RFC. [[User:Abecedare|Abecedare]] ([[User talk:Abecedare|talk]]) 18:32, 12 June 2023 (UTC) |
||
*This is what happens when editors with no history in the topic area rush into an RfC and then get all the versions wrong. There is only one version, the one that already appears in [[Srinagar]], [[Jammu]], [[Leh]], [[Kargil]], [[Gilgit]], and [[Muzaffarabad]]. It cites the best sources. |
|||
:I recommend that this RfC be closed immediately and that I be allowed to do this properly if there is a need for it. I have maintained that there was consensus for the wording already in the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Noticeboard_for_India-related_topics/Archive_69 August 2019 proposal]. I mean was I busting my behind and the other discussants (Kautilya3, Saqib, Vanamonde93, El_C, RegentsPark, Winged Blades of Godric, Sitush, MilborneOne, Chipmunkdavis, Abecedare, Drmies, Joshua Jonathan, Tamravidhir, DeluxeVegan, Gotitbro, Lingzhi2, Ceoil, SlimVirgin, Bbb23, Bishonen, Ms Sarah Welch, Moonraker, DuncanHill, Doug Weller, Philip Baird Shearer, Mar4d, Rjensen, HLGallon, Ragib, and Titodutta) theirs for nothing? Besides: |
|||
:*The nominator is known for their anti-Muslim and pro-Punjab-north-India-Hindu bias in articles (I can cite some instances: they were peddling the image [[:File:Woman at Gate of Mosque (No Ladies Allowed) - Hazratbal Shrine - Srinagar - Jammu & Kashmir - India (26770523561).jpg]] on some WP article(s); they made: [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=1947_Amritsar_train_massacre&diff=prev&oldid=1158485080 this POV edit] that I have not reverted.) |
|||
:*They had given me and an admin a hard time under a different username (that they acknowledged was theirs only a few days ago when their hand was forced and have still not fessed up on their user page as requested by the admin, [https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Pankykh&diff=prev&oldid=772836659 only blanking the old account] both in WP and Commons) |
|||
:*On the [[Himalayas]] page; they took umbrage at the sentence: "The sovereignty of the range in the Kashmir region is disputed among India, Pakistan and China." in both their incarnations So, lo and behold is there any surprise that in their third incarnation, they would like to stuff the "dispute" bit into a tiny footnote as they have been arguing ad nauseam on the talk page? |
|||
:*What will editors from WP Pakistan (who had taken part in the 2019 Consensus) think of this benighted inequity? Kashmir, remember, is disputed territory. It can't be reduced to a cloistered discussion in WT:INDIA initiated by someone who has no history in the topic area nor the least meagre goodwill in WP:PAKISTAN. Why would Pakistani editors touch this with a ten-foot pole when the nominator has a tainted history in their portfolio? I mean look at the care with which I have written the lead sentences and drawn the two maps in each of the articles [[Jammu and Kashmir (union territory)]], [[Ladakh]], [[Gilgit-Baltistan]], [[Azad Kashmir]], [[Srinagar]], [[Jammu]], [[Leh]], [[Kargil]], [[Muzaffarnagar]], [[Gilgit]], [[Kashmir division]], [[Jammu division]], [[Gilgit Division]], [[Diamer Division]], [[Baltistan Division]], [[Anantnag]], [[Anantnag district]], ... the discussions I have had with editors at MapFrame about the interactive maps, only so an editor can trip me in this fashion? I'm sure they'll have an answer, but I'm sick to my stomach. [[User:Fowler&fowler|<span style="color:#B8860B">Fowler&fowler</span>]][[User talk:Fowler&fowler|<span style="color:#708090">«Talk»</span>]] |
|||
{{reftalk}} |
{{reftalk}} |
||
Revision as of 20:11, 12 June 2023
India Project‑class | ||||||||||
|
Article alerts for WikiProject India |
Today's featured article requests
Did you know
Articles for deletion
Proposed deletions
Categories for discussion
Templates for discussion
Redirects for discussion
Files for discussion
Miscellany for deletion
Featured list candidates
Good article nominees
Featured list removal candidates
Good article reassessments
Peer reviews
Requested moves
Articles to be merged
Articles to be split
Articles for creation
|
This table is updated daily by a bot |
| ||||||||||||
|
Tau Devi Lal duplicates/confusion
Tau Devi Lal Stadium / Tau Devi Lal Cricket Stadium / Tau Devi Lal Stadium (Panchkula) help needed, appreciate 93.141.235.19 (talk) 18:56, 26 May 2023 (UTC)
- Responded at Talk:Tau Devi Lal Cricket Stadium. —CX Zoom[he/him] (let's talk • {C•X}) 14:53, 28 May 2023 (UTC)
Good article reassessment for Ilaiyaraaja
Ilaiyaraaja has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Onegreatjoke (talk) 21:28, 30 May 2023 (UTC)
CfD for Indian subcontinent descent categories
Please see Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2023_May_23#Indian_ancestors_by_region —Lights and freedom (talk ~ contribs) 00:39, 31 May 2023 (UTC)
Help for improving History section of Andhra Pradesh
I made an attempt to revamp History section of Andhra Pradesh, as it was not in a good shape. I request other history buffs to review and provide feedback or help improve it further. Arjunaraoc (talk) 11:33, 1 June 2023 (UTC)
Manipur pages
This article appeared in The Quint today:
- Suanmuanlian Tonsing, Manipur & Wikipedia: How Kuki-Zo's Digital Inequity Has Caused a Narrative Shift, The Quint, 1 June 2023.
It complains that the Wikipedia pages are getting filled up with majoritarian Meitei narratives, dominating the discourse about the Kuki-Zo people (traditionally tribal). The current violence is between these two groups.
I would like to request more editors to edit/vet the content of these pages and participate in the talk page discussions. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 18:54, 1 June 2023 (UTC)
- Pinging @Haoreima: since this article makes accusations of misconduct against them. I don’t know to what extent, if at all, these accusations are true—or whether the behaviour even qualifies as misconduct—but the editor should be aware of their existence. UnpetitproleX (talk) 19:38, 1 June 2023 (UTC)
- Hmm. I will go through his edits, sometime in the next month; have a feeling that mass-reverts are in order. TrangaBellam (talk) 09:21, 4 June 2023 (UTC)
The article Statue Junction has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
Doesn't meet the notability criteria, and hasn't been properly sourced since at least December 2009 according to the unreferenced template
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}}
notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}}
will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.
Suntooooth (talk) 21:59, 2 June 2023 (UTC)
Request for comment on source reliability
On the talk page of 1978 Sikh Nirankari clash [1]. This is regarding Ranbir Singh Sandhu's book. Kindly provide any comment or feedback on the reliability of his work. Southasianhistorian8 (talk) 05:02, 4 June 2023 (UTC)
Please comment there. Johnbod (talk) 10:17, 5 June 2023 (UTC)
Standardized Spelling
One issue I've come across again and again on articles about India/Indian subjects is that there is often no attempt to maintain anything approaching a standardized spelling, and it seems like an issue that should be addressed. Obviously, transliteration from Indic languages into English can be tricky because there are sounds that don't exist in the Latin alphabet, or that can be represented by more than one letter, but even so, I would hope that at least WITHIN a single article, there be some semblance of cohesion, if not across Wikipedia. For instance, on the Gaur Brahmins page, the word is spelled at least three different ways within the article itself, and I am reminded of the old Gurjar article, which has been substantially improved, but still needs work. Do you all think this is something deserving of a task force, or at least some form of concerted effort to remedy? Evansknight (talk) 14:51, 9 June 2023 (UTC)
- We place Template:Use Indian English at the top of the articles, some use User:फ़िलप्रो/script/EN-IN user script to assist with basic spellchecks. Transliterations are quite beyond the scope as they're not "[Indian] English". I'd say it's up to editors to investigate the correct usage or reach a consensus if there're multiple variations in use. Both the examples you mentioned fall into this. But yes, I believe MOS, don't remember which, recommends to use one variation across the article — DaxServer (t · m · e · c) 15:43, 9 June 2023 (UTC)
- I fully agree that a single article should use standardized spelling, and if anyone wants to undertake this thankless task, more power to them. However, we're hamstrung on the broader issue by regional and temporal variation in transliteration (Mookerjee vs Mukherjee, for a well-known example). Attempting to standardize across such variation is not, in my opinion, a productive use of editor time. Vanamonde (Talk) 20:59, 10 June 2023 (UTC)
Requested move at Talk:Venkateshvara#Requested move 10 June 2023
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Venkateshvara#Requested move 10 June 2023 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. UtherSRG (talk) 20:43, 10 June 2023 (UTC)
Comment to get consensus
I have run into some people who don't understand my point of view at Help_talk:IPA/Sanskrit#Consensus? and will appreciate your comments there (I am trying to build consensus).-1Firang (talk) 04:55, 12 June 2023 (UTC)
What should be the introductory sentence of the capital cities of Kashmir region related first-level administrative subdivisions? UnpetitproleX (talk) 10:54, 12 June 2023 (UTC)
A uniform format for the introductory sentences of six articles (Gilgit, Jammu, Kargil, Leh, Muzaffarabad and Srinagar) is sought. The following are the proposed versions:
Version A:
____________ is the (summer/winter/joint) capital of __________ (name of larger region), a portion of the disputed Kashmir region administered by India/Pakistan as a union territory/nominally self-governing entity and claimed by Pakistan/India.
Example: Muzaffarabad is the capital of Azad Kashmir, a portion of the disputed Kashmir region administered by Pakistan as a nominally self-governing entity and claimed by India.
Version B:
X is the (summer/winter/joint) capital <and largest city> of the Indian/Pakistani-administered (subdivision-type) of Z. [(in note)Z is part of the larger Kashmir region which is the subject of a long-standing dispute among India, Pakistan and China. X lies in the part of the region administered by India/Pakistan and claimed by Pakistan/India.]
Example: Leh is the joint capital and largest city of the Indian-administered union territory of Ladakh. [(in note)Ladakh is part of the larger Kashmir region which is the subject of a long-standing dispute among India, Pakistan and China. Leh lies in the part of the region administered by India and claimed by Pakistan.]
Version C:
Muzaffarabad/Gilgit/Srinagar/Jammu/Kargil/Leh is the capital/summer capital/winter capital/joint capital of Pakistani/Indian/Chinese-administered self-administrative territory/administrative territory/Union Territory of Azad Kashmir/Gilgit-Baltistan/Jammu and Kashmir/Ladakh/Aksai Chin in the disputed Kashmir region.
Example: Jammu is the winter capital of Indian-administered union territory of Jammu and Kashmir in the disputed Kashmir region.
Survey
- Version B for the following reasons:
- •It takes into account WP:DUEWEIGHT as reflected in WP:TERTIARY sources like Encyclopaedia Britannica for the dispute wrt the cities.[1]
- •It also reflects how these cities are generally described in wide-ranging recent scholarly sources.[2]
- •This proposal includes all the required context of the dispute vis-a-vis the cities, in the explanatory note prominently placed at the end of the introductory sentence. It highlights that there are three parties to the conflict—India, Pakistan and China—but also makes it clear where the city lies and who claims it (none of these cities lie in China or are claimed by it).
- •It also allows flexibility, the dispute/conflict/the larger region/non-administering countries can, ofcourse, be mentioned elsewhere in the lead and body wherever relevant and due.
- •It takes into account regional differences of the various cities. For example, Ladakh—whose two capitals are affected by this uniform format—has long asserted an identity distinct from "Kashmir" (a term which is associated with the eponymous Kashmir valley).
- —UnpetitproleX (talk) 11:01, 12 June 2023 (UTC)
Discussion
- Why is a uniform version sought? Such text should be part of the wider lead, which may be structured in different ways. In principle however, B seems to be the best, but the note is unnecessary. The early lead sentences should be establishing what the place is, which in these cases seems to be a city. That these cities function as capitals, which is something which reflects on administrative role and relative importance in its region, seems like useful context. The legitimacy of the area they administer etc. drifts off that topic, and there are likely better ways to address it. CMD (talk) 12:28, 12 June 2023 (UTC)
- Some background links:
- The 2019 RFCs that led to the current consensus
- An annotated description of the related discussions.
- Recent discussion at Talk:Srinagar that led to this RFC.
- The 2019 RFCs that led to the current consensus
- Pinging @Fowler&fowler, Gotitbro, Johnuniq, Fayninja, Kashmiri, and RegentsPark: who had commented in the recent discussions, in case they miss the start of the RFC. Abecedare (talk) 18:32, 12 June 2023 (UTC)
- This is what happens when editors with no history in the topic area rush into an RfC and then get all the versions wrong. There is only one version, the one that already appears in Srinagar, Jammu, Leh, Kargil, Gilgit, and Muzaffarabad. It cites the best sources.
- I recommend that this RfC be closed immediately and that I be allowed to do this properly if there is a need for it. I have maintained that there was consensus for the wording already in the August 2019 proposal. I mean was I busting my behind and the other discussants (Kautilya3, Saqib, Vanamonde93, El_C, RegentsPark, Winged Blades of Godric, Sitush, MilborneOne, Chipmunkdavis, Abecedare, Drmies, Joshua Jonathan, Tamravidhir, DeluxeVegan, Gotitbro, Lingzhi2, Ceoil, SlimVirgin, Bbb23, Bishonen, Ms Sarah Welch, Moonraker, DuncanHill, Doug Weller, Philip Baird Shearer, Mar4d, Rjensen, HLGallon, Ragib, and Titodutta) theirs for nothing? Besides:
- The nominator is known for their anti-Muslim and pro-Punjab-north-India-Hindu bias in articles (I can cite some instances: they were peddling the image File:Woman at Gate of Mosque (No Ladies Allowed) - Hazratbal Shrine - Srinagar - Jammu & Kashmir - India (26770523561).jpg on some WP article(s); they made: this POV edit that I have not reverted.)
- They had given me and an admin a hard time under a different username (that they acknowledged was theirs only a few days ago when their hand was forced and have still not fessed up on their user page as requested by the admin, only blanking the old account both in WP and Commons)
- On the Himalayas page; they took umbrage at the sentence: "The sovereignty of the range in the Kashmir region is disputed among India, Pakistan and China." in both their incarnations So, lo and behold is there any surprise that in their third incarnation, they would like to stuff the "dispute" bit into a tiny footnote as they have been arguing ad nauseam on the talk page?
- What will editors from WP Pakistan (who had taken part in the 2019 Consensus) think of this benighted inequity? Kashmir, remember, is disputed territory. It can't be reduced to a cloistered discussion in WT:INDIA initiated by someone who has no history in the topic area nor the least meagre goodwill in WP:PAKISTAN. Why would Pakistani editors touch this with a ten-foot pole when the nominator has a tainted history in their portfolio? I mean look at the care with which I have written the lead sentences and drawn the two maps in each of the articles Jammu and Kashmir (union territory), Ladakh, Gilgit-Baltistan, Azad Kashmir, Srinagar, Jammu, Leh, Kargil, Muzaffarnagar, Gilgit, Kashmir division, Jammu division, Gilgit Division, Diamer Division, Baltistan Division, Anantnag, Anantnag district, ... the discussions I have had with editors at MapFrame about the interactive maps, only so an editor can trip me in this fashion? I'm sure they'll have an answer, but I'm sick to my stomach. Fowler&fowler«Talk»
References
- ^ Lead paragraphs of Britannica article on:
- Srinagar “Srinagar, city, summer capital of Jammu and Kashmir union territory (Jammu is the winter capital), northern India, situated in the Kashmir region of the Indian subcontinent. The city lies along the banks of the Jhelum River at an elevation of 5,200 feet (1,600 metres) in the Vale of Kashmir.”;
- Jammu “Jammu, city, winter capital of Jammu and Kashmir union territory, northern India. It lies in the southwestern part of Jammu and Kashmir along the Tawi River, south of Srinagar (the summer capital), and to the north is the Siwalik Range.”;
- Leh “Leh, town, Ladakh union territory, northern India. The town is located in the valley of the upper Indus River at an elevation of 11,550 feet (3,520 metres), surrounded by the towering peaks of the Ladakh Range (a southeastern extension of the Karakoram Range).”;
- Gilgit “Gilgit, town in Gilgit-Baltistan, part of the Pakistani-administered sector of the Kashmir region, in the northern Indian subcontinent. It is situated in the Karakoram Range in a narrow valley on the Gilgit River at its confluence with the Hunza River and about 20 miles (32 km) upstream from its confluence with the Indus River.
- ^ For example, Leh is only described as the capital of Ladakh—and not in terms of Kashmir—in this 2021 book on Muslim communities of the Himalayan region which has multiple chapters involving Leh. The same is the case in this 2017 geological history of the Himalayan region. This 2022 work focused on the urban water issues of Leh, says in its book description, "The city of Leh is located in the high mountain desert of Ladakh in the Indian Himalayas …" See also this on the WMF website.
Exceptions to WP:INDICSCRIPTS RFC
There is a new RFC on carving out some exceptions to WP:INDICSCRIPTS that is likely to be of interest to project-members. Abecedare (talk) 18:03, 12 June 2023 (UTC)