Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 05:50, 22 October 2013

I can understand that people want to feel special and important and so on, but that self-obsession seems a bit pathetic somehow. Not being able to accept that you're just this collection of cells, intelligent to whatever degree, capable of feeling emotion to whatever degree, for a limited amount of time and so on, on this tiny little rock orbiting this not particularly important sun in one of just 400m galaxies, and whatever other levels of reality there might be via something like brane theory  ... really, it's not about you ... Do try to get a grip of something other than your self-obsession. How Californian. The idea that at all costs, no matter what, it always has to be all about you. Well, I think not.

Archives

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30 31, 32, 33

This page has archives. Sections older than 14 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present.

Kayastha

Dear Sitush, I agree that I should have discussed. And I must tell you that not much has changed since the last agreed upon version. But you will agree that nothing is static and there is nothing like the best possible version. Therefore, there's always scope for improvement. What was going on were minor tweaks and aligning more closely with source. I sincerely believe that whenever even minor changes are made, you and other active editors/admins are there to ensure that quality of this article is not compromised. While aligning a particular statement with source, I observed that it was meant mostly for Kayasthas in Northern and Western India. And I discovered another relevant statement meant for Bengali Kayasthas in an existing reliable source. And I felt that my revision history explanation would clarify. Anyway, please go through the modification, especially the statement on Bengali Kayasthas, and that the existing statement ends with Kayasthas of 'Northern and Western India' in the source. Needless to say, our common goal is to improve the article or enrich it with more facts. You will probably agree that the statement mentioning 'well-knit sub castes' is not meant for Bengali Kayasthas, and it is categorically mentioned in the source itself. Please go through, and share your valuable opinion. Sorry, but the change was never meant to be unilateral. Rather, I thought, it would help the existing information align more closely with source. Please suggest. Thanks. Ekdalian (talk) 06:52, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

Awaiting your response! I sincerely believe that a logical and rational person like you wouldn't stick to an incomplete statement, anyway please do share your opinion. Ekdalian (talk) 18:47, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

I would like to add that you have reverted to an incomplete statement (current version) saying "In the beginning, they were recruited from the Brahmin, Kshatriya, and Vaishya castes, but gradually developed into well-knit subcaste communities." but missing the vital ending part i.e. "in northern and western India". Also, the alternate statement for Bengali Kayasthas is cited (from an existing reference), and not only complements Tej Ram Sharma's comments, but also describes in one single statement the evolution of the Bengali Kayastha community. Regards. Ekdalian (talk) 04:58, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

Ekdalian, I cannot deny that I'm getting a bit fed up of all this pedantry regarding Bengali vs other Kayasthas but right now I'm not in a position to address either your valid points or your less valid ones - I've got IT problems and am using all sorts of different PCs in an attempt to find a decent solution. The issues that you raise will have to wait for a bit: please note that the article has been stable for some time prior to your changes and is reasonably well-sourced - there is no rush. Especially since the Kulin Kayasthas have their own article anyway. Please don't let's end up in a India vs Bangladesh nationalist mess about communities that have existed for centuries before the recently-created national borders. - Sitush (talk) 03:38, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

I understand that you are busy with other issues including IT problems. Do take your time. But please, don't compare this with India vs Bangladesh and all, this is a gross overstatement. This is not even about Bengali vs other Kayasthas. It is just about stating the facts, as available in source. And, you know, none of us are supposed to be experts. We are simply quoting or stating from the source. You are also aware that the caste system in Bengal evolved differently. As responsible editors, our only concern would be better sources and more relevant information. That's all. And please, Kulin Kayastha (though related) is a separate article, covering a particular clan among Bengali Kayasthas. And when we talk about one particular article, I believe we should focus on it, not related ones. Though its good to see that a related article is in a better shape now. These minor but relevant modifications are obviously aimed at taking another step towards making the content more accurate and informative. Please take your time, and share your views, so that we can handle the issue I have raised. Thanks. Ekdalian (talk) 04:58, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

Honestly speaking, I have great respect for you, and there is no doubt about your contributions. But, I have always observed, that a brilliant editor/contributor like you, at times, is too keen to defend existing content of some articles. Since you are actively editing many other articles on a regular basis, I would like to request you to spare 5 mins, and go through this issue. I had just completed an incomplete statement as per source, which anyone would consider a minor change, but, with an impact, since it changes the meaning of the statement. And had incorporated an additional statement regarding the origin of Bengali Kayasthas, from an existing reliable source only. And I believe, both of these conform to all our policies. Would request you once again to share your views. Thanks. Ekdalian (talk) 09:31, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

Unlike you, I deal with a lot of articles. I also have had genuine problems here and am playing catch-up. In the scale of things, the Kayasthas are really pretty minor. I've not forgotten the issue and will get round to it ... but it is going to take a lot more than five minutes because there has been some ridiculous pov-pushing on that and related articles and if it is still going on then it will have to be stopped, which will likely take several days. - Sitush (talk) 19:00, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

I 'll put in my best efforts to re-write this part combining both the sources, avoiding copyright violation. Please let me know your views, in case you have any concern. Or else, once done, you may edit the same, or suggest me any further change. Thanks. Ekdalian (talk) 11:02, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

Sitush, please advise if the following sources are allowed in the Kayastha article:

• Community Warriors: State, Peasants and Caste Armies in Bihar, by Ashwani Kumar
  
• Concrete Steps By Indian Industry On Affirmative Action For Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes, by Ambedkar
  
• Calcutta Review, Volumes 100-101 (this is imo the most exhaustive research into Kayasthas, please note quotes from mitakshara (which incidentally was composed around 12th century AD), please read from page 113 to page 149)
  

Thanks.--Mayasutra (talk) 15:42, 30 September 2013 (UTC)Mayasutra

September 2013

Your recent editing history at B. R. Ambedkar shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. It has been observed that you had reverted back the article B. R. Ambedkar more than five time on 18 september 2013.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. Premknutsford25 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 10:56, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

3RR does not apply to copyright violations. Retaliating in this way is childish. - Sitush (talk) 14:54, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

I've given Premknutsford25 a warning for his use of this template as a reply (by him) to your warning. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 14:56, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

How come that someone who's been editing since two days, and made only 14 edits, knows about NPOV-policy? Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 14:59, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Vishwakarma (caste) may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s and 1 "{}"s likely mistaking one for another. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• that refer to smiths and sculptors belonging to the ''Vishwakarma ]'' (]}. Prior to the Raj period, these communities were referred to names such as ''Kammalar'' in present-
• and these five had five sons Sanaga, Sanātana, Ahabūna, Pratna and Suparņa<ref>name="Sathyan">{{cite book|last=B. N.|first=Sri Sathyan|title=Karnataka State Gazetteer: Bangalore District

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 21:03, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to K. A. Mammen may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• worker, a leader, a friend for his colleagues, one of the founder members of ] (Political party in ]. Living in a village, he extended himself to transform the villages

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 15:16, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

List of Indian Christians

Thanks for picking up where I left off on List of Indian Christians. Did you get all of the way through, or do more sections need checking? Qwyrxian (talk) 14:48, 24 September 2013 (UTC)

I've been picking away at it for months. There is more to do and I intend to add sources available in the linked articles in those few instances where there is actually something there. - Sitush (talk) 06:10, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

Sounds good; I only jumped in because an editor was unhappy that I was stripping info out of a parallel article based on WP:V and WP:NLIST. Qwyrxian (talk) 21:16, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) I saw that article. Funny, I can't recognize any of the names. The famous ones are not there. I'll list a few on the talk page (what I can dredge up from my aging brain.) Fowler&fowler«Talk» 14:36, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

RevDel

Hey Sitush, next time you need something RevDel'd, just go to WP:RFO and request it there. The same people at RFO can also RevDel something and it is kept out of the public eye on ANI.

Just go to WP:RFO, click on "Using this form if you have a Misplaced Pages account with Misplaced Pages email enabled, send an internal Misplaced Pages email" and use the form. Don't forget to the subject from "Misplaced Pages email" to something more descriptive like "RevDel needed at <Insert Page Name>". The folks there should get back to you in an hour or so (they are pretty busy). Take Care...Neutralhomer • Talk • 16:39, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

Just to note: Oversight can be requested at the same form (in case you didn't already know). - Neutralhomer • Talk • 16:40, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

I know about that, thanks., It is because they are usually "pretty busy" that I didn't go down that route. It needed shifting quickly, in my opinion. You mean well, I'm sure, but you really do not need to teach me how to suck eggs regarding how to send an email etc. I presume this must be some standard personal template that you use. - Sitush (talk) 16:42, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

And it wasn't an oversight matter - that is mentioned at the top of ANI anyway. - Sitush (talk) 16:43, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

Nah, typed all that out myself. :) I always like to give people benefit of the doubt when it comes to all the different WP pages we have here. I didn't know about WP:RFO until about 2 years ago and I have been here for 7 years now. :) When they created RevDel, they started taking RevDel requests at WP:RFO, I think that's when they started getting busy over there. That and we are constantly losing admins around here. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 16:54, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

We are? I know that RfA is a mess and there are periods when nothing happens there, and I know that there is a scarcity of admins willing to take a prolonged interest in India-related stuff, but has the total number of admins actually changed much of late? Have the existing admins - or, at least, the ones that actually do administrate - become less active? - Sitush (talk) 17:00, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, we have lost a good many great admins. They either burn out or are sick of the hypocrisy sometimes. RFA is a big part of why we have less admins and there are some who are becoming less active. Still others have kinda backed away from their admin role and are editing more (which is good). The admins that make it through RFA (and the ones we have left) are less experienced than the others. I used to have a good many admins popping up on my watchlist all the time, now not so many. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 17:33, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

Need your Help

Hi, Sitush i need your help... i am new to Misplaced Pages can please tell if i have proof that certain person is there in film and all link as reference... but still people are editing it can please tell me what to do as i feel your are the right person from whom i can take help... even few people... my ID is blocked and i don't but few days back my company is facing problems from few ppl... who were editing our film because of which it got deleted. so if you can help me then please reply in this article only... will be waiting for your reply...

(talk page stalker) Hi 113. The criteria for includiing someone in an article on a film are outlined at WP:CASTLIST. Unfortunately, IMDB doesn't count as a source because it doesn't have an independent verification process. Take a look at the link above and then explain how Pooja Welling satisfies the criteria on the talk page of Jeena Hai To Thok Dhal. Given your history, I'd suggest coming up with a strong case because you've been trying this for a long while (and are socking right now but never mind). --regentspark (comment) 13:14, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

Hi, Sitush good morning as i was new to Misplaced Pages i didn't knew many thing i thought that people are bully as we face few problem in the page before i never new that sitush and u or any others were in administration... so it was like we planned to take legal action so later on we came to know from concerned person that u guys are in admin... but then i was busy with work... later i got to know about it... the time you wrote Reema returns it actually sound like mummy returns... please guide and help me... for the same... i have valid link to it if you still feel that the link are not reliable then its fine with me.... 1. http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2012-07-13/news-interviews/32663040_1_shiv-sena-film-songs-akshay-bardapurkar 2.http://www.mid-day.com/entertainment/2012/sep/010912-Pooja-Welling-and-sister-Reema-to-work-in-Ravi-Kissens-upcoming-film.htm if you feel this are not reliable source then please let me know what is reliable source...

Brahmin article

Sitush, asked for references in the Brahmin article (please see talk page). The article quotes blogs and sites such as Hindujagruti.org. These are not academic sources. Kindly take a look at the article and follow up please. Thanks.--Mayasutra (talk) 15:24, 30 September 2013 (UTC)Mayasutra

Sorry for the delay - I missed your message for some reason. I have been picking at that article and will continue to do so. It is a bit of a mess but we're getting there. - Sitush (talk) 17:28, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

October 2013 AFC 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 1st, 2013 – October 31st, 2013.

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 1700 articles, so start reviewing articles! Visit the drive's page and help out!

This newsletter was delivered on behalf of WPAFC by EdwardsBot (talk) 15:32, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

Backward classes

I've come here rather than replying at DRV. I had indeed looked at the article and list talk pages and at the post-AFD discussion with Black Kite. I haven't looked at discussion at related articles, nor do I have any knowledge of the subject.

From an editorial point of view I agree we would be better off without this list and that the readers of Other Backward Class should be referred off-site for this sort of detail. However, that is merely my opinion. At DRV I must put on an utterly different hat and ask "was the AFD conducted properly and was its close within administrative discretion?". Having thought about it a lot (and bearing in mind I tend to favour "merge" in a polarised keep/delete "notability" debate), I reluctantly but firmly came to the answer "no". Even if "merge" was a good close, I don't see what has happened since as being anything like a real merge.

I also thought about your contribution to the post-AFD discussion here. What you say to me makes editorial sense but I do not see that as being merge either. I am sorry to say I personally think the list article is hardly any use and it would be best left to gather dust (and, I expect, worse). I doubt whether DRV would have endorsed an WP:IAR delete close but it might just have turned a blind eye. All round a sorry situation. Best wishes! Thincat (talk) 12:39, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

But this is what I mean: it is dogmatism on both sides. Warden is being rather silly in adopting what seems sometimes to be almost the default ARS membership position that "sourced lists are ok, regardless", and he has consistently demonstrated the same lack of clue regarding caste as did the topic-banned Doncram and others. On the other side of the discussion. people are being too dogmatic in compartmentalising issues. I do understand that it is intended to be a procedural forum but rules are made to be broken. The list is wrong, unwieldy, almost impossible to maintain, out of date, potentially a magnet for problems at some point in the future, adds nothing to what is available off-wiki ... and thus serves no useful encyclopaedic purpose. I've just begun to draft this, not as a replacement for the list but as a sort of brief essay. I realise that you feel constrained by the nature of the forum in which the discussion is being held but that list is going and I do not give a stuff if I get blocked for edit warring or whatever in order to achieve it.

It isn't often that I say "I'm a wiki-expert on the subject" but there are occasions when the community should give additional weight and, yes, I am among a small group of people here who probably so have distinctly more expertise in the sphere than the rest. I can't canvass but if a few others among that small band were to turn up somewhere and start citing IAR and COMMONSENSE then, surely, the community should listen. Especially since some of the wider community do in fact agree in principle but won't commit precisely because of the rules. If you think that it should not exist, as seems to be the case, then say so and bollocks to the policies. No-one is going to take you to ANI for adding such a statement to that which you have already said at DRV. Warden needs to know. - Sitush (talk) 12:58, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

We are different in temperament! I keep complaining about WP:CSD#G4 speedy deletes where there have been substantial changes to the article. I do so even when I think the revamped article would (and should) fail AFD. Thincat (talk) 13:38, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

Well, add that list to your watchlist because if it is retained then I will be nominating it for deletion yet again. Maybe you'll suffer a pang of conscience as your wikilawyer head conflicts with your gut but in any event I'm going to get my way here and I'll canvass if I have to. One note at WT:INB should do it. - Sitush (talk) 13:43, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

It's a deal! Thincat (talk) 13:55, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

October 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to The History of India, as Told by Its Own Historians may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• Press |year=2004 |url=http://www.oxforddnb.com/view/article/7991 |accessdate=2 October 2013}}} {{ODNBsub}}

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 06:03, 2 October 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Bhogal may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• }}

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 13:42, 2 October 2013 (UTC)

Editing kadapa page

hi situs,you have reverted my contributions to kadapa wikipedia article saying that there were copyright violations.As i'm new to wikipedia editing,can you please tell me the exact reason for the rejection.Is is because 1)I copied some text directly from these cited websites? 2)I cited some websites that i think are not in free use license? 3)of both of above reasons? And will it be accepted if I cite those websites but present the same information in my own words.If i capture a photo of 'kadapa' myself and upload it to its wikipedia aricle then do i need to consider any copyright issues? Thanks Rpratesh (talk) 16:14, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

Hi, it is good that you are asking these questions. You were copying text directly from the websites, although I think you changed the order of a couple of sentences. You need to use your own words and you need to be wary of close paraphrasing also. If you are not sure about close paraphrasing, which can be quite tricky to deal with, then it can sometimes help to draft what you want to say in your sandbox or on the article talk page and ask people if they agree with it.

If you want to use photographs taken by yourself in an article then there is no problem with doing so but please do be aware that when you upload your photos to Misplaced Pages they are then effectively available for use by anyone in the world, anywhere (book, website, newspaper etc) and in any manner that they choose: the license that you have to grant offers you more or less no rights at all over the images that you create.

I've simplified things above because I know that you are new. You're not going to get into trouble for making honest mistakes: we're all new here once and we do encourage people to be bold, although not reckless, in their contributions. I hope that you enjoy helping us to improve our coverage of Kadapa and, indeed, any other subjects that interest you. - Sitush (talk) 17:18, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) I think it depends on what Rpratesh means by "capturing" a photo and uploading it. Saving a photo from a website to your hard drive and then uploading it to WP is not okay unless it meets copyright standards. Posting your own photos, taken by your camera, is fine and Sitush offers some good advice. Liz 00:21, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

Stand Church

Without me jumping in the car to go and have a look, am I right in thinking the the sign outside Stand Church says 'All Saint' Church, Stand'? see: . Richerman (talk) 16:55, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

I can't remember but have texted the vicar. She is a customer of mine: it seems that her Employer is less good at fixing IT issues than creating things. ;) - Sitush (talk) 17:27, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

Poking my nose in.... which is its correct name. J3Mrs (talk) 17:55, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

Never trust a signwriter with an apostrophe ;) Or a proofreader who is merely a member of a church congregation etc. Of the latter I speak with some experience: I've had to rescue a fair few documents generated by various groups involved with that church and, well, they seem unlikely to have attended the school that once existed across the road from it. - Sitush (talk) 17:59, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

I don't think the sign needs an apostrophe, but I'd have added a comma. J3Mrs (talk) 18:17, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

I wonder if the spelling etc matches that which is located near to the war memorial on the eastern side? Despite passing the thing at least three or four times a week, I'd not even realised that they had replaced the sign on the north side.

I've not been in the church since my schooldays, when attendance at carol service was compulsory unless you were Jewish (I guess that the need to think of other non-Christian faiths did not exist then). It used to be the highlight of the year once one reached a certain age: the service was a combined jobby with the girls' school and was the only such meeting of the schools in the year. You could almost cut the adolescent sexual tension with a knife. I think that we did once share a speech day at the Free Trade Hall but the only one of those I can recall with any clarity involved shoving a lot of fireworks in a nearby red pillar box and destroying the thing. We only meant to blow the bloody door off ;) Happy days. - Sitush (talk) 18:47, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

Indian English

I saw in your edit summary that it had recently been discussed on WT:INB that there is no "Indian English". Could you point me to that discussion? I see this from 2011, but that resulted in a consensus to keep IE and BE separate. A result which I would personally support unconditionally; speaking from issues in my field (teaching ESL), there is little doubt that there is a separate dialect known as Indian English. I think it's correct that in most cases, in writing, there is little or no discernible difference, but, at the same time, denying/accepting a language/dialect is a big deal. Oddly, most governments and educational institutions would probably prefer to deny the existence of a local dialect; the Singapore government, for example, has gone to a lot of effort to try to eradicate Singlish. I wouldn't be surprised if the government of India would also prefer that there were no "Indian English" and that everyone there just spoke "real English". But, of course, defining one dialect as "real" and another as a "foreign" variant is pure colonialism/imperialism/racism.

Anyway, what I'm trying to ask is, was there a more recent discussion? Because I'd personally recommend maintaining the use of the template, despite the difference not being so significant for the type of writing we do. Qwyrxian (talk) 22:28, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

There has been a more recent discussion than 2011. It involved RegentsPark and some others (SpacemanSpiff or Fowler&fowler, perhaps?). Dialect doesn't affect the written word, in so far as we would never accept such dialect anyway. Otherwise I'd love to write in the Lancashire dialect for which, oddly enough, I think some dictionaries do exist! In any event, I'm not removing that template where it already existed, merely not seeing the need for it where it doesn't already exist. You are going to cite MOSTIES at me now but if the thing already contains only British English or US English, which are well-defined, then there is no point in changing that template for an ill-defined variant that cannot even decide whether it is "cops" or "police", "-ise" or "ize" etc. Consistency in writing, presentation etc is the primary goalof MOS, not massaging egos or faux empathising even when no such consistency exists. I'll try to find the thread tomorrow - late here & I've just spent too long typing this because I'm struggling to find words that won't offend one group or another. - Sitush (talk) 23:17, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

Well, I don't know about more recent than 2011, but noticed that I have been quite voluble in Talk:Indian_English#General_remarks and then, apparently forgetting what I had written, I say more (something different?) in a section below. Yeah, mulling this over in 2013, I don't know what to say. I think there are a few scholarly articles on "South Asian Englishes" now (which analyze the syntax, phonology etc.) The Indian government has too much on its plate (and India is too linguistically freewheeling with 28 official languages, in contrast to tiny Singapore) for them to standardize anything or discourage anyone from speaking their English in the way they want. But I don't think spoken Indian English is developed enough linguistically (in terms of sheer vocabulary) for it to be anything like a standard English like Australian, Irish, South African or West Indian English. For most Indians, even the very cosmopolitan and anglicized, it remains a second language. Even those children whose parents speak to them at home in English, live in a social environment which is not English speaking. It is changing though ... Fowler&fowler«Talk» 00:05, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

As F&f mentions, IE hasn't developed the way the Australian or Irish variants have developed, but that is actually the main point here. e.g. the original editions of Wren & Martin are used widely even now (I used a hand me down copy from my mother who got it from her mother). Spelling sees no variation from BE, but phraseology is closer to Victorian era BE. Vocabulary, other than the standard loan words that have been adapted to general usage in modern English there are also many unique terms in IE that are reflected in spoken and written communication. You'd hardly read about someone dying, just about them passing away, men carry purses just as much as women, mean wear dresses just like women -- only their dresses would be called shirt and trousers in the west, we pass out of classes and not just from drinking, women are never pregnant they just happen to be carrying for about nine months, and so on. There are some scholarly works on this but I given that it isn't developing in the manner of the other primary language variants there isn't much interest of course. A simple way to figure out the differences between IE and BE would be to read an R. K. Narayan novel from the 80s and then read God of Small Things or The Inscrutable Americans and you'll see the significant differences. Laws and government documents continue to be in IE (a reading of the latest Food Security Bill or the Rape victims bill would show you the stark difference between legalese IE and legalese BE), court cases and judgments are also mostly in IE. Even today you'll notice some of the travel approvals in government offices would use OCS to mean On Company Service to indicate pre approvals for travel plans of junior officers! Since the late '90s / early '00s English usage has become more Americanized, and you'll find that out while reading many of the English newspapers -- exclude the ToI which doesn't appear to have a MOS etc, but when you pick up a copy of The Hindu you'll notice that world news and major domestic news will be in current BE but domestic news and local news will be reported in IE. Business news generally follows AE/BE. And then there are people like me who mix multiple variants in everyday communication causing a horrendous mishmash! That said, from a MOSTIES perspective I would say that anything related to government should be in IE, scholarly works articles should depend on context -- e.g. it would be absurd to have Tishani Doshi's works classified as IE but something by Mulk Raj Anand should be held that way. —SpacemanSpiff 04:14, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

A quick note before I dig around for something since 2011. Yes, dialect such as "passed away", "expired" and "breathed his last" are the common way to say "died" in IE, causing a conflict of sorts between MOS and WP:EUPHEMISM. And if we start deploying MOS:TIES as lawyers woulf argue we should then we'd have to use crore/lakh etc everywhere and that is absolutely a recipe for disaster: most in the west probably do not even know that alternate system of counting exists and they'll be forever moving commas around. - Sitush (talk) 08:12, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

And that's where I disagree completely, crore and lakh are common uses and they should be used in IE articles per MOS:TIES. We don't remove purely American or purely British terms from articles because others won't understand. If this should change then MOS:TIES should be changed to say that only Western variants are allowed. —SpacemanSpiff 08:21, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

The difficulty is that, again, there is no consistency. I have no problem with using crore/lakh if it is used throughout the article but Indian sources use both that system and the western version, which can cause problems with quotations. And, as I said, ignorant people from the west - who are the majority of our readership - will seem a population figure expressed as 1,00,00,000 and start moving the commas. It happens, as I am sure you will have seen. - Sitush (talk) 08:27, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

Threads at WT:INB. I've not actually read the things yet, although I will have participated in some of them since 2011.

• May 2007
• November 2011
• June 2013

There was one at MOS earlier this year but I was not aware of it - was in hospital at that time. See here.

There is at least one thread on numbering, evidenced here. I've not really searched for that - it just popped up my my search for "Indian English". - Sitush (talk) 08:37, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

Expression such as "passed away" (which is still used in AmE, and in my view much better than "passed," which is more common), "breathed his last," or "expired" are fine. They certainly shouldn't be removed. From my perspective, not enough Americans are reading older books, the classics, even of AmE, let alone BrE. Classics in America (in middle school or high school) these days are "Catcher in the rye," "My Antonia," "Where the red fern grows," "Rascal," "To kill a mockingbird," "Grapes of Wrath," etc and not the older "House of seven gables," "Billy Bud," "Huckleberry Finn," "Last of the Mohicans," etc So, when someone in India says "expired," which an American should understand if they'd read a little, they think of cream cheese in the fridge. I think the problem in India right now is that IE is not stable enough, and often in newspaper stories, an awareness of the "linguistic register" is not there. So, it's hard to figure out what is Indian English, what is newspaper-ese, what is slang picked up from AmE, and what is plain incorrect Here is a random story from The Hindu, (which I believe is the best Indian newspaper) that I just looked at. The unusual expressions are in italics; my comments are in parentheses:

"YSR Congress President Y S Jaganmohan Reddy on Friday (universal newspaper-ese, ie. adverbial of time in mid position) said that he would undertake an indefinite fast (IE? for "hunger strike") here from Saturday against the Centre’s decision to divide Andhra Pradesh. A delegation of the YSR Congress Party will go to Delhi to meet the President and others to highlight the injustice being meted out (IE? the expression is used in BrE/AmE but has a meaning closer to punishment/sentence/injustice applied to people, but I could be wrong here) to Coastal Andhra and Rayalaseema, Jagan told reporters here. The agitations (IE? for "public demonstration" or "strike") being organised by his party would continue across the state, he said. He wondered how the state could be divided without the important issue being taken up in the Andhra Pradesh Legislative Assembly, which has been the well-established practice. (Sentences like these which involve dangling modifiers and lack of coherence occur in all written Englishes, i.e. how many times has the state been divided for it to be the well-established practice?) Highlighting the dispute between states like Karnataka and Tamil Nadu, he asked how the water would be shared post (IE? for "after") the bifurcation (IE? "division;" bifurcation typically means "branching") of Andhra Pradesh. He also highlighted the problem of revenue for the residuary (legalese or formal for "remainder" or "remaining portion") state of Andhra Pradesh without Hyderabad, from where major chunk (too informal for a sentence that has "residuary") of revenue comes."

At least this is what I notice (besides a few missing words, probably typos). I preferred the older IE, where there was more consistency. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 10:48, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

I agree with your assessment of The Hindu as the best of the Indian newspapers. I'm less sure about the usage of euphemisms, although I agree that they are time-honoured ones. Your example is fairly mild evidence of the IE problems but even that is not well-written English, regardless of national ties. We really, really should not be allowing our articles to go down this route. As a stickler for the language, Eric Corbett might have something to say, although he is probably not familiar with examples in IE. BTW, have any of the many "fasts unto death" that have recently received major news coverage actually resulted in a death? They've all had the appearance of hyperbole. - Sitush (talk) 11:06, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

Well there are lots of expressions of British and American English that don't literally mean what they say. After all, "hunger strike" doesn't usually involve a "strike," and "strike" itself has come a long way from "striking (lowering) of yards by mutinous sailors" to "striking of work" to "striking." I'm guessing in Indian English it is understood that a "fast unto death" is simply "a fast until demands are met." If we go down that path, we'll have to throw out half the words in the language. It is probably better to link fast unto death. I agree that the plain bad writing shouldn't be allowed. But, in spite of what I might have said on Talk:Indian English, I think Indian English expressions should be allowed provided they are linked and not too outlandish (as "breathed his last" would be in a WP article), but I would allow "passed away" and "expired." After all we allow "likely" in AmE (for "probably" or "very likely" in BrE) or "torch" in BrE (for "flash light" in AmE.) etc etc. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 12:21, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

NB, I've just created Agitation (South Asia), because it has made it to OED! Speaking of NB (still widely used in India?), I don't know that too many Americans understand it, given that the link also gives "not bad" and "northbound," but they used to a generation or two ago. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 12:21, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

My main problem with IE is the lack of documentation. Unlike AE and BE, there are no dictionaries and no well defined style guides. We'd end up with people arguing over what is correct or incorrect in Indian English and those arguments will be based solely on what our editors think (which, as we all know, is not at all reflective of what the world thinks!). On Misplaced Pages itself, IE has mainly been used by POV pushers to correct great wrongs or to Indianize article titles and I haven't seen instances where stylistic or grammar issues have been raised (would love to see some examples and I admit I've only scanned the above discussion). Given all this, I'm not sure this is something we should be pursuing at all. --regentspark (comment) 12:39, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

I must admit although I know about the existence of the Indian numbering system, I am basically ignorant of it and have to continue looking it up. It's use is always going to be confusing to most Westerners, who do indeed change the commas to make sense - I've seen that happen also. I'd also prefer to follow WP:Euphemism which I agree is used in western English as well (which is one of the reasons we have the guideline I believe). Dougweller (talk) 13:00, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

I had forgotten about WP:Euphemism. So thanks for the reminder, Dougweller. So, we could get rid of "fast unto death" on the grounds that it is a euphemism (or hyperpole), but what about "indefinite fast," "agitation" (street protest), "post" (used as an adverb to mean later (in time), not later (in the text) as it is sometimes used in legalese), "bifurcation" (to mean division), ... from my sample paragraph above. Those are not euphemisms. If the best English-language Indian newspaper is using them, then many editors from India will be using them too. We can't outlaw those expressions. It is probably better to have a list of commonly used IndE expressions (gleaned from The Hindu for example, not contributed by individual editors) in the India style guide (if there is one). Also, RegentsPark is right. POV-pushers will keep using the excuse of IE to attempt to change "Ganges" to "Ganga" etc. So this is not an easy issue to resolve. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 13:57, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

I used the word 'bifuracted' today - and I'm not bothered with 'post' or 'bifurcation' used the way you describe, I don't even see them as particularly Indian usage. Scholarly, maybe. Dougweller (talk) 14:54, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

"Bifuracted"? Perhaps we now need {{Dougweller English}} ? ;) - singed the mass-producer of the tyop, Sitush (talk) 15:16, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

Interesting discussion! But all theory/principles aside, I would be interested in knowing what norms you all actually follow when editing India-related pages (Irrespective of what the current guideline pages currently say on the topic). For example, here is what I (try to) follow for "Indian English" articles:

• Use British English spellings, ie, with a u in "colour", "favour" etc; -ise instead of ize; ...
• Use SI units except for human heights, for which use feet-inches. Allow, but don't enforce, use of lakh and crore (but not arab, kharab, ...!)
• May use some India-specific jargon for which there is no perfect Western substitute. Examples from articles I have read or edited recently: bandh (public strike?), lathi-charge (baton-attack?), sati (self-immolation/self-immolator?). In such cases, the term should always be wikilinked on first use, and preferably the literal meaning, or at least context, provided in accompanying text.
• I never (consciously) mould (aha!) the grammar or style to conform to Indian English usage, however that may be defined or ascertained.

Do any of you do anything more (or less) ? Aside: Typical India and Hinduism related articles are so badly written (ie, in terms of spelling, capitalization, punctuation, and grammar; not just style) that we should be pretty happy if we can ensure simple comprehensibility, in whichever English variant that may be. :-) Abecedare (talk) 15:07, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

• I don't have any patience for these "Indian English" or "South African English" arguments, and "passed away" is just plain silly. Good English is good English, end of story. And it would be ridiculous to allow that Indian numbering system in WP articles, as it would only lead to confusion. I'm not even happy with tolerating the differences in spelling between British and American English, and I simply won't tolerate archaic expressions such as "gotten", but I accept my position may not be shared universally. Eric Corbett 15:10, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

• @Abecedare,
• I use whatever spelling is already dominant. If there is a real mess then I opt for BrE because it is my belief that BrE spellings are more commonly used in India. I would prefer to see BrE throughout for that same reason but there is a limit to how much fighting I can handle.
• Use {{convert}}
• Explain/link terms such as lathicharge (baton charge) and bandh (general strike), although I'd prefer to see lathicharge gone just as much as I would prefer to see crore gone - same proviso as previously re: fighting
• Just fix the grammar: it is usually poor and while there are differences between English variants, eg: use of commas), they're really not significant when compared to the other horrors that I see.

More generally, I'm coming round to the dialect point: words such as lathicharge and indefinite fast are in current usage in India and they are generally unusual elsewhere. I'm still not convinced that they should be used - it reinforces differentiation and makes things less comprehensible to your average English language reader - nor that this necessitates a style tag. If people are not likely to understand a term then the solution is to change the term, not tag the article. - Sitush (talk) 15:58, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

@Abecedare @Eric Corbett @Sitush: I tend to agree with many of the things said above, but here's what I worry about. People living in India contribute to WP. As I demonstrated above, the best English-language newspaper in India, The Hindu, uses expressions (which are not euphemisms or slang) but nonetheless not common in other Englishes. Further, when I type "Indian English" in my OED on-line advanced search I get over a hundred entries which use "Indian English" and many more which use "South Asia". For example:

• the sixth entry for "academic, n, adj" says, "U.S., Canad., and Indian English. In pl. Reading, thinking, and study as opposed to technical or practical work."
• the third for "accomplish (trans)" says, "To make complete or perfect; to fit out or equip. Also with with. Now chiefly Indian English." It even gives two examples from Indian authors (1992 H. L. Chopra in V. Grover Polit. Thinkers Mod. India XVII. lxiii. 488 His insatiable thirst for knowledge accomplished him with all modern standards of scholarship.)

That means Indian editors will be using those expressions, especially if the OED recognizes them, but more importantly because they already have over a hundred year history of usage in India. Don't get me wrong: I'm not talking about poor writing, which should be anathematized, or words such as "gotten," which I agree should be avoided, or even "lathi" or "bandh," which are loan words, specific to India, which are OK, but academic/scholarly writing in Indian English. I believe the best thing is to have a page similar to: List of British words not widely used in the United States, List of words having different meanings in American and British English: A–L, List of words having different meanings in American and British English: M–Z. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 16:23, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

PS Even "euphemisms" can be tricky. I just searched the usage of fast unto death. I have a feeling, though I can't be sure, that Gandhi might have first used the expression in the late 1920s. In the 30s it was being used in the House of Commons and without quotes. It has a slightly different meaning than "hunger strike." Is it a euphemism or hyperbole? (Now) I'm not so sure. I think it is an expression of Indian English with a specific cultural meaning (which includes "high-principled," "spiritual," albeit much abused today). In other words, you might go on "hunger strike" in prison to get better food, but Gandhi went on "fasts unto death," to promote peace between Hindus and Muslims. You can't use "hunger strike" there. But I agree that most India-related articles don't rise to levels that allows them to be subjects of such discourse. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 16:23, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

I think that such a list would be borderline WP:OR and almost certainly WP:DICDEF. And without linking to it from every India-related article that is or "should" be tagged, it probably would not assist us. OTOH, it is of more use than the List of Other Backward Classes (now at DRV) that I want to see gone per WP:IAR! I think that the same IAR rationale for excluding that OBC list might validate having this words list. - Sitush (talk) 17:16, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

:) Me and my fancy ideas. But, but, how do we have those British and American lists? Fowler&fowler«Talk» 17:43, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

Because the rules are being ignored? - Sitush (talk) 17:49, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

:) I just saw the OBC list. How did they get to the Andaman Islands (which I thought only had the Jarava tribals who threw poisoned darts at you with deadly aim, per Sherlock Holmes (in The Sign of the Four?))? I'm impressed that you know so much Wiki and India lingo! I still can't remember the rules after 7 years. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 17:59, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

(edit conflict) I think F&f has explained this point better than I could. The thing is we have around 1.5-2M (note: I don't use lakhs/crores normally) page views per month from India, about 90% of them on en.wiki and the remainder on the vernacular ones and this is within the top 5 country-page views on en.wiki. Most of these readers (albeit ESL) are most familiar with the language used in The Hindu, The Hindustan Times, the Toiletpaper of India, etc and using that kind of style/vocabulary shouldn't be a problem at least as far as articles specific to the readership goes. In the case of something like Pavitra Rishta, Vanniyar, or S. Janaki that would be imperative, while in the case of Tishani Doshi or India that wouldn't be ok as the readership of those articles is more universal and we should strive for the lowest common denominator for vocabulary while sticking to BrE for spelling (which is IndE spelling). As far as articles on Upanishads etc, the use of IndE should be avoided because scholarly works on those articles are not in IndE but either BrE or AmE. Likewise, the lakh/crore thingy -- it's very common in election reports, budgets etc and when someone comes in to look at the history of Category:State Assembly elections in Maharashtra they are most used to those terms and it would be a disservice to them if we use anything else (during the last general elections even the NYT --and I'm not sure about the WSJ, just don't remember -- used lakhs and crores in their reporting in the print versions, '000 and M in brackets)

The New York Times usually reports the figures they are given, with US equivalents in parentheses. So, for example, the Times would say 37,113 crore, or 37.1 billion rupees ($7.3 billion approx.). (Interestingly, it did this as far back as 1900.) We should always do the same thing because no one outside India understands those measures. But, that's not the same thing as requiring the use of Indian English because (1) the equivalent is also included and (2) the original numbers were, presumably, in crores and lakhs and therefore that's how they should be reported. How about this for a biographical article in IE: Shri X, a crorepati and a compounder (Roorkee University) who passed out in 1970, passed away in 2012.--regentspark (comment) 18:20, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

You forgot to tell when Shri X came into this world. Abecedare (talk) 18:31, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

"It is with great sadness that I must mention that I was not able to meet the gentleman before his expiring as I was always wanting to give him a new dress and purse when he accomplished himself with his double MA in zoology and compounding. I am hoping to meet his missus at the betrothal of his third cousin's brother-in-law's niece and offer my deepest sympathies." would be the first talk page post after the WP India banner is added. —SpacemanSpiff 18:41, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

Incidentally, if yawl really want to meet the Indian readers where they are, you should be editing List of Bollywood films of 2013, which uses the Indian number system for domestic box-office numbers, the "US number system" for worldwide grosses, and cleverly avoid all other English variant problems by talking almost exclusively in proper nouns. :) Abecedare (talk) 18:29, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

Back to the serious note, in response to RP's comment above, I didn't realize that the NYT did that as a matter of practice, good for them. Now getting to business news, just looking at the front page of today's The Economic Times, the count of words/articles: crore(s) - 11/5, lakh(s) - 1/1, billion(s) - 2/1, million(s) - 0/0, so apparently I was wrong about the skew toward million/billion usage which it seems is the case only for Forex issues. Likewise, on checking the Annual Reports Reliance Industries and Tata Motors I found that the former uses lakh/crore almost exclusively while the latter has an eclectic mix of lakh/crore and million/billion which has apparently happened after the LR/Jag acquisition. —SpacemanSpiff 18:58, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

Indians may of course do as they wish, but this is the English Misplaced Pages, not the Indian Misplaced Pages. Eric Corbett 19:51, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

What these Indian newspaper examples etc are proving is that we shouldn't use them as an example of how we should write. It is self-evident that they do not know how to do so themselves and desperately need a style guide. Consistency and comprehensibility go hand in hand. I am surprised to see US newspapers using crore/lakh etc and I cannot recall ever seeing the same in, say, The Times or The Guardian in Britain - maybe I've missed it, maybe it reflects prejudices of some sort. - Sitush (talk) 20:24, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

Well, I just checked.

The Writer's Barnstar

I, Fowler&fowler, award this barnstar to Sitush for his prodigious contributions to Misplaced Pages, for his unflagging commitment to the Misplaced Pages principles of verifiability, no original research, and the neutral point of view, and for his extraordinary ability to remain unruffled in the face of pettiness and churlishness displayed by others. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 22:43, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

Hello, Sitush. You have new messages at Vigyani's talk page.
Message added 13:26, 15 October 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Bhagat Singh. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing.
Dear Friend Sitush, on Your 3 Revert (18:01, 21 October 2013) , I would like to provide You some suggestions.