Talk:Ram Kishore Shukla/Archive 1

Do not discuss apart WP:TPG

Please avoid to put information on talk pages or anywhere on Wikipedia, that is unacceptable and falls under

Wikipedia:No personal attacks

WP:NOTPROMOTION

WP:PRIVACY

for more awareness about how to behave at talk pages, please go for WP:TPG - Dr.pragmatist (talk) 16:43, 14 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirm neutrality

Addition of controversial facts, are not stated in the article like circus massacre occurred in 1980s when people were got killed allegedly by his own sons pistol bullets and later some got wounded in police firing, government stalled actions. --Pmpbot (talk) 17:52, 14 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Bhagwati Prasad Shukla

Please add about Bagheli creations by Bhagwati Prasad Shukla, he was a prominent writer of Hindi and Bagheli. Prabhatbaghel (talk) 15:32, 17 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Is he family? If so, add to Shukla family (Beohari). --J (t) 16:40, 17 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Can you tell me how to edit. --Prabhatbaghel (talk) 02:37, 18 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed merge

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

The result was keep due to obvious lack of consensus.

I propose merging Shukla family (Beohari) into Ram Kishore Shukla. A separate page for Shukla's family seems excessive to me. Tdslk (talk) 01:31, 18 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

~~Oppose~~ Strong oppose – the Shukla family is a political family that has more politicians than just Ram Kishore. --J (t) 01:35, 18 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's pretty rare to have a separate page for a family unless it has many prominent members. So far as I can tell, only one other member of the family has a Wikipedia page (and that page has been flagged for notability). The Shuklas are no Nehru–Gandhi family. Tdslk (talk) 02:03, 18 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Two others, actually. And that's pretty notable, so I oppose. In fact, I just changed it to Strong oppose. --J (t) 02:37, 18 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Who is the second? The only link I see on the Shukla family page is to Santosh Kumar Shukla, who seems to have run once for a seat in a regional political body, and lost. Tdslk (talk) 03:00, 18 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Three other members are not mentioned in the Shukla family (Beohari) may be because of unavailable sources, as neither print nor electronic was active then. --Prabhatbaghel (talk) 03:28, 18 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Strong oppose, family has notable members with sufficient inline citations, like Judges, Politicians, Poets, Writers, commissioners, Secretaries. To create them separately as a stub will not be a good idea. On the other hand if merger takes place the original subject i.e. Ram Kishore Shukla will loose its importance at once and length of article will also go on increasing, nonsensically. --Ballisticizer (talk) 09:21, 18 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Strong oppose, the subject has a very much identity of his own and it is because of him that this family tree is known. At the same time, the other article has different thing to discuss and hence should not be merged. VIVEK RAI : Friend? 09:30, 18 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support. There is no indication that the Shukla family or any of its members other than Ram Kishore Shukla is notable, so, if there is any usable content that is not already included, both Shukla family (Beohari) and Santosh Kumar Shukla should be merged into the "Personal life and family" of this article. Phil Bridger (talk) 18:26, 18 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose, both articles seems to have separate subjects to discuss. Although, i am concerned if creator of Shukla family (Beohari) can add members if they are missing also creating red links. Dr.pragmatist (talk) 05:37, 28 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

What happened to older, better version?

I'm copying a conversation here from the likely-to-be-speedily-deleted Ram Kishore Shukla (politician):

This looks similar to an earlier version of Ram Kishore Shukla, right before most of the text was deleted, apparently for copyright violations. This article needs to be merged with Ram Kishore Shukla since they're about the same person, and while the text here is better it can't be used if it violates copyright. Tdslk (talk) 04:34, 18 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please, mention the factor of copyright, that is from where. --Kishorekalamandir (talk) 04:41, 18 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The edit immediately after the one I linked to had as its summary: "Remove text copied without ORTS persmisson from http://www.docstoc.com/docs/123497115/A-biography-on-Pandit-Ram-Kishore-Shukla---BDSharma". On the other hand the link given is dead now, with a note saying "The document "A biography on Pandit Ram Kishore Shukla - B.D.Sharma" is no longer available on docstoc.

It has either been removed by the original owner of the document or by the docstoc staff due to copyrighted or inappropriate content."

So maybe the text at docstoc was lifted from Wikipedia, and not vice versa. If so then there's no copyright issue. Tdslk (talk) 05:01, 18 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Does anyone know any more about why so much of the article was abruptly deleted? I'll leave a note at the talk page of editor who did the deleting, to see if (s)he can comment here. Tdslk (talk) 05:16, 18 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've just reverted the article back to a stub to remove the content copied from docstoc.com again. Although the content may no longer be hosted there, without clear evidence that B.D. Sharma lifted the text from Wikipedia we must assume that the text was copied from his article. The fact that the article is no longer online is irrelevent - if Sharma originated the text, then he owns the copyright on it, whether it's available or not. Yunshui 雲‍水 12:13, 18 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The B.D. Sharma biographical essay was formerly used as a source for this Wikipedia article, so whoever cited it as a source must have thought that Wikipedia was taking information from Sharma, rather than Sharma copying Wikipedia. I also found another posting of the Sharma article dated "04/09/2003" at the end, eight years before this Wikipedia article was created. Furthermore, the Sharma essay had many errors of punctuation, capitalization, word choice, etc., so we would not want to copy it wholesale anyway. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 13:33, 18 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This issue can be very easily resolved just by re writing the article. I shall request other fellow Wikipedians to help it construct in a positive manner without any copy vio problems. Even minor inputs from many people can get this article go. Be generous everyone. Cheers! VIVEK RAI : Friend? 16:01, 18 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Expansion

If there are certain conditions which my article was deleted, i agree but now i am going to expand the article here only, please discuss here if there are any objections and provide assistance. --Kishorekalamandir (talk) 08:31, 18 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Why any one will have objection, you should have expanded it before only creating another one instead. --Ballisticizer (talk) 09:25, 18 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. You're free to go ahead and edit the article in a constructive way. Just keep in mind that there is no copyrighted text present in the article. I meant do not directly copy paste anything from any external website as it will lead to very unnecessary problems (as I have encountered myself before). If you need any type of help regarding editing, feel free to post. VIVEK RAI : Friend? 15:56, 18 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Move of Talk:Ram Kishore Shukla to Talk:Shukla family (Beohari)

Is there any reasonable explation for this move? The discussion was about this article, not the family's article, so I don't see how it can be justified. I asked at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ram Kishore Shukla what the objection was to that talk page content, but got no reply. Please can those who objected be straight with us and explain rather than look for ways to hide the content. Phil Bridger (talk) 19:00, 18 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Respected sir, i was puzzled if you read all my contribution on any justification page, you will find mistakes and mistakes only, i was never that fluent as you people, the main reason was that talk page was empty and this talk page was big so i transferred it, thought that both article are nearly same, i wrote them with my user accounts and some times from ips, this article is about my maternal grandfather, the situation got complicated day by day, and the talk page was also became a battle ground due to me and one other user who never find it notable and always ready to propose it for deletion. If you think i must be banned please do, but have already committed at article's copyright page that i will never repeat these kinds of act here , please pardon me, or Ban, but i have contributed a lot(photos etc) to my maternal grandfathers article with my user accounts and ips

Ballisticizer, I hope that you don't get banned, either. You're learning quickly about Wikipedia copyright policy, perhaps no other issue is taken as seriously around here. One other policy you may want to read about, if you haven't yet, is conflict of interest, which discusses how to edit articles when one has a personal connection, as you do to your grandfather. Tdslk (talk) 04:44, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]