Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 04:46, 17 March 2007

Archives
1 | 2

Role as a copyeditor

Hi Fowler&Fowler! We have a lot of articles on WP:FAC that need to be copyedited for "brilliant prose". As such, WP India does not have a dedicated copyeditor for such a process. Would you be interested in helping as a copyeditor? An average of 3 India-related articles are rolled out each month on FAC. Regards, =Nichalp «Talk»= 13:22, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

The FAC process works this way: An editor takes the lead and works on the article. After peer review and incorporating changes, the article will be more or less stable. At this point the editor requests a copyedit for grammar, choppiness, and removing redundancy. Once done, the article is submitted to FAC.

Unlike other FAC nominations, Indian articles usually see minor activity when on FAC due to the heavy-duty internal peer review which sorts out most issues. We also happen to be one of the most active wikiprojects in getting articles featured.

See Delhi. Though it passed FAC, the prose is not up to the mark IMO. =Nichalp «Talk»= 14:54, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Indian mathematics

Greetings, I no longer can keep up the pace. My exams will continue and after that I will be leaving, taking a few days off WP. I have reviewed my future with the Indian mathematics article, and have come to the conclusion that since I am under time constraints and am under such pressure in real life that adequate responses or editing actions on "Indian mathematics" are just not possible for me right now. I can't contribute to it in the manner that I usually would; it would be unethical to the extreme to ask the other editors, who have wished me well during my examination, to wait. The article is under the watch of many good editors and I see and hope that it's quality benefits from the present situation. Many regards, _{Freedom skies| talk}  02:03, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Talk:Takshashila University

I left a comment back on the Talkpage in regard to your past one. Steve 13:22, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Scharfe (2002) is miscited on the Taxila page as well. CiteCop 16:46, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

I redirected Takshashila University to Taxila ages ago, migrating over whatever verifiable content there was but IAF kept reverting it. I did a lot of the verification stuff myself, reading Education in Ancient India (both the Scharfe and the Altekar). Neither made the claim that Taxila was the oldest university in the world. CiteCop 18:59, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

We'll see how long it lasts before someone reverts it.

I used both Scharfe and Altekar to try to verify the "oldest university" claim. I figured if 2 books called Education in Ancient India wouldn't verify it, it didn't reflect the academic consensus on the matter. CiteCop 00:18, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Re Unre4L

Hey Fowler. Regarding your message. The decision has pretty much been reached. The Arbcom only considered banning the 4 Pakistani users who stood up to Indian Pov . No mention of any other user even getting a warning.
A 1 year ban each is in order. Apparently its a bigger crime to question Indian Pov than to make racist remarks against Pakistanis, Muslims and their Prophet, and hijacking articles. It was nice knowing you in particular. I wish you the best.
Here is the link to my last comments . --Unre4Lﺍﹸﻧﺮﮮﺍﻝ 13:58, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Reply

Thanks alot for your message Fowler.You can visit the main page of the case here.On the main page you can click the links to the workshop page,the evidence page and the proposed descision page.You can also visit the discussion pages of these sections to post any comments/evidence that you have.

The descision already seems to have been made.We are to be banned for one year.All four of us.The only question is which day the bans are due to be set.

Well Fowler most of my contributions to wikipedia were a good pastime hobby.During my one year ban (assuming I might decide to return after the ban,which does not seem likely anymore) I'll be switching to my old hobbies of reading books and going back on my flight simulator.I have flown on the cessna skyhawk 2 seater when about 2 years ago once for half an hour with an instructor.I was hoping to go back and do full time training and get my private pilots liscense by the end of the summer but it will have to wait until I get my studies done. Since I won't be able to go for a full time training,I'll just do the flight simulator for fun until I go back to full time training.

As for reading books,I don't know what your favorite literature is,but I love science fiction.Right now I am reading a book on Clark Kent.It's not really about Superman,but more about Clark Kent and how he's struggling with an ordinary life.That's why I enjoy television shows like Smallville as oppossed to any Superman movie or book.Smallville isn't really about Superman,but an extraordinary person trying to cope with human society.Actually you don't have to be a Superman fan (I'm not really a fan of any franchise except Star Wars) to enjoy Smallville.

I just love science fiction.I once bought the first issue of the Darkover series.I unfortunately wasn't able to get a hold of the direct sequel,but instead issues that go all the way ahead into episode #50.If I find the direct sequel,I'll be able to enjoy the series better and read them in chronological order.

So Fowler that's what I'll be doing for the next year or so to keep myself occupied aside from my studies during my pastime.If there's anything I can do for you,you can always email me but you must have your email adress in your preferences section to be able to do that.

All the best.--Nadirali نادرالی

http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/India-Pakistan/Proposed_decision — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.98.241.189 (talk • contribs)

Greetings

Happy Holi !!--Dwaipayan (talk) 06:09, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Re: FAC copy editor

Yup, I mean the brilliant prose clause for WP:FAC. There are no Indian articles on FAC, but Delhi which passed recently could do with a copyedit to reduce it's choppiness. We've listed it for a copyedit so that we can use the content to feature New Delhi. Regards, =Nichalp «Talk»= 06:56, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

India Demographics

Because of India's rich diversity, no one image can represent all of India's one billion people. That is why I propose selecting a new demographics image every three months. This would allow for a regional balance and would show India as a whole. Many people have agreed that this is the only way to represent India's rich and varied diversity. Since you have voted for a change in the demographics section, I wanted to update you on this proposal. I would love to hear your comments on talk:India. Thanks so much. Have a great day!

-Coollemonade 23:50, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Shahbag

Will you you take a look at the article Shahbag? Ragib thinks it may deserve a FA drive. So, where do we begin? Aditya Kabir 17:02, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. I think I understand what you are saying. But, can you show me an example? Something to do with a subject not generally interesting to all people, but the article is formed in such a way that it became generally interesting. Aditya Kabir 09:30, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

No personal attacks

Do not make personal attacks in edit summaries as you did here Sarvagnya 08:48, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Fowler, instead of using such edit summaries, this may be an option to handle the situation. Just keep your calm, and don't call someone a troll, regardless of the disruption :). Thanks. --Ragib 13:55, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Salwar Kameez

Hello Fowler&fowler, thanks for all your improvements to the Salwar Kameez article. I added the reference because it supported the sentence that stated that the Salwar Kameez is also referred to as the Punjabi suit (and why it is referred to as such). Please read the section titled Kurta Churdiar in the reference. I hope this helps! Thanks, Anupam 02:37, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Socks on India page

"ace sock-buster"? :) I will look into the matter. - Aksi_great (talk) 16:40, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

While I do think those group of users are one and the same, I suggest launching an RFCU for this to make sure. --Ragib 17:06, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Done - Aksi_great (talk) 17:41, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Looks like eliminating sockpuppetry has become a passion for me. The battle continues... - Aksi_great (talk) 10:10, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

New Delhi

Fowler, if you havent realized, the demographics of a region do not change if you go one kilometer away! If you would like to better my edits, please go ahead. But do not revert edits that benefit the article. Nikkul 14:13, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

History of Pakistan

Hi Fowler. Sure, we could remove the disclaimer if it could be properly incorporated into the lead. The lead leaves several serious problems which need to be resolved. An important one, for example, is the first sentence that says that Pakistan's pre-1947 history "overlaps" with that of Afghanistan, India and Iran. For this to happen, Pakistan should exist pre-20th century at least as an idea in somebody's mind. The word "overlaps" is cited from a book that has received several unfavorable critiques from reviewers for its "complete lack of objectivity", "dangerous narrative that it will not guide younger historians in Pakistan towards proper national self-criticism", "disquieting", "the official Pakistani point of view", etc. I think the exact situation needs to be explained much more explicitly. The best solution, however, is to follow the approach that reputed encyclopediae like Britannica follow on this subject. That's how their article begins: "This discussion treats the history of Pakistan largely since the country's founding. For earlier history, see India: History." deeptrivia (talk) 21:58, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Insofar as Encarta is concerned, you might find this interesting. The wikipedia article on it mentions people criticizing it for "pandering to local prejudices instead of presenting subjects objectively " If Encarta's version of Pakistan's history has to sound much like a chapter from Pakistan Studies for whatever reason, we perhaps can try to do a better job. Starting "History of Pakistan" from IVC (or any point prior to 1940) is inherently revisionist and POV, but if we have to do it anyway (but why?), at least make it clear to the readers what exactly we are doing. deeptrivia (talk) 23:11, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Anyway, the bigger issue of content could be discussed with more people on a longer time scale, for now let us try to work on the lead to make it less misleading. deeptrivia (talk) 23:14, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Well, I completely agree with the case for History of Nepal, and that for History of West Bengal to be merged into History of Bangladesh (to be named as History of Bengal. I completely agree with the point of having History of Punjab, History of Sindh, History of Balochistan, etc., but History of Pakistan is a very different case -- Punjab and Sindh, it can be argued for example, have been closer to Bengal and Assam than to Balochistan. So in what context would you put Pakistani Punjab and Balochistan together, but exclude Indian Punjab? All these references are coming from the same university (Saeed Shafqat is affiliated to Columbia, although he also seems to be the chairman of the Department of Pakistan Studies at the Quaid-i-Azam University, Islamabad; Ayesha Jalal was at Columbia too, where (as an aside) it seems she was denied tenure, which she blamed on an Indian conspiracy, only to be dismissed by the court). Let's try to find out if this idea is more widespread among scholarship. I think the reason we see these people cited everywhere is that these are the only people who are working on "History of Pakistan" as being separate from the History of rest of the region, so whenever an encyclopedia editor looks for authors for national histories, s/he finds them for Pakistan, regardless of whether they are the best people to write the history of that region or not. Sorry, if I am sounding too skeptic here. If you agree, we can focus on the correcting the lead for now, about which the argument remains the same regardless of the bigger issue of content. I think that issue would be much easier to sort out. deeptrivia (talk) 03:19, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

By the way, when you said you are not on any side of this "dispute", I didn't quite get it :) Which dispute? deeptrivia (talk) 03:28, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

I've been trying to see which universities do it which way. Here's what I found out till now: Columbia, Berkeley: this vs. this, yale, ..(more to come). deeptrivia (talk) 03:51, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

I agree with much of what you said. One problem with presenting a history of Pakistan, as I mentioned earlier, is that putting up histories of these disparate regions together gives an impression of isolated regions like Baluchistan and Pakistani Punjab being more related than other parts of the same region (Indian Punjab). Such an impression becomes inherently misleading. To give a perhaps silly example, a general article on Anatomy of Mammals makes sense. Articles on Anatomy of Cows, Anatomy of Rabbits, Anatomy of Deers, Anatomy of Whales, Anatomy of Echidnas, Anatomy of Horses, Anatomy of Bats all make sense. But a separate article on "Anatomy of Cows, Bats and Echidnas" sounds out of place. Anyway, reading Ayesha Jalal's "Conjuring Pakistan: History as Official Imagining" right now. It's quite nicely written. Read it if you get some time. Cheers :) deeptrivia (talk) 04:35, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

I've been proposing renaming History of India to "History of the Indian subcontinent", and having regional articles for Punjab, Sind, Gujarat, Bengal, Nepal, etc. Reasons are twofold: (1) Even as a 12 year-old, I read it that way in my Dorling Kindersley's Children's Illustrated Encyclopedia (There was one "History of the Indian subcontinent", Pakistan article was only post 1947, India article corresponded to History of the Republic of India), and (2)South Asia is less specific, although the term is a popular replacement for "Indian subcontinent" in Pakistan, and is common in USA as well, the article suggests it could be confused with a lot more regions - almost certainly Afghanistan, and probably Iran and Tibet as well, while Indian subcontinent is less ambiguous, and refers almost exactly to the region we want to be talking about. deeptrivia (talk) 05:01, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Taking cue from Nichalp...

Hello Sir. It would be great if we can have you as a copyeditor for Indian articles that are in FAC or are being readied for FAC. Nichalp has told you, Indian articles usually see minor activity when on FAC due to the heavy-duty internal peer review which sorts out most issues. However, lately there have been some India-related FACs that did not go through this usual process of internal reviews. For example, right now Partition of India is in FAC and it was not being worked upon by any user or workgroup. It is almost bound to fail the FAC.

The India-related activities can be found in Misplaced Pages:Notice board for India-related topics, though some parts of the notice board are backlogged. Still, FACs and Peer reviews are usually updated on a regular basis. You can check the notice board and work as you please. Thanks for taking interest in Delhi and copyediting. Regards.--Dwaipayan (talk) 16:38, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Re:Delhi copy edit

Hehe! I saw that "stupid" edit, and understood why you wrote that :) Anyway, I'll try to clarify that medium of instruction bit. And you just go on copyediting, and ask me or any other else (like Nichalp) if you have any question. Many Indian articles need somebody to copyedit them. We are grateful that you have obliged. Thanks a lot. Regards.--Dwaipayan (talk) 12:12, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

In fact, if needed you can leave embedded comments in the text, and mention that in the edit summary. Anyone stumbling over the article can try to clarify the query. Regards.--Dwaipayan (talk) 12:16, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Hey

Hey Fowler&fowler, please look at my comment on Talk:History_of_India#Renaming_.28again.29. Your opinion is crucial and much appreciated. Regards, deeptrivia (talk) 23:11, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration#Freedom skies

Hello,

I've requested an arbitration regarding the conduct of Freedom skies.

Can I trouble you to write a brief statement at Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration#Freedom skies recounting your interactions with him and your impressions of his conduct as an editor?

Thanks.

JFD 04:46, 17 March 2007 (UTC)