Talk:Vidya Bharati
Appearance
Shishu Shiksha Samiti, Assam was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 17 July 2017 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Vidya Bharati. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here. |
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Vidya Bharati article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1Auto-archiving period: 3 months |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Copyvio?
[edit]JamesBWatson, The current version is virtually the same as what I wrote years ago [1]. I am curious what copyvio's you have found. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 15:52, 18 April 2018 (UTC)
- Haven't really checked the whole article yet, it seems the section on Cultural education seems to have borrowed a lot from Fundamentalisms and Society: Reclaiming the Sciences, the Family, and Education. D4iNa4 (talk) 17:19, 18 April 2018 (UTC)
- Virtually every quote that I copied and pasted into Google turned up in other web pages. Some of them were clearly copied from Wikipedia, and others may have been, but many of them did not appear to be. A few examples of pages which contain some of the same text as the Wikipedia article and don't look as though they are copied from it are rksvn.com/mission-vision/, ssvnmulayankavu.com/Profile.html, ssmbhowali.in, rksvn.com/core-philosophy, ssvnmulayankavu.com/Profile.html. However, quite apart from the copyright question, the article was very heavily biased towards presenting the organisation's own view of itself. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 19:47, 18 April 2018 (UTC)
- Yes, there are two paragraphs in the Ideology and Objectives section which are of this kind. Somebody did a COPYVIO check before I got involved. So I trusted that they did their job. Those paragrahs give me goose pimples anyway. I am happy to get rid of them.
- But the rest is all sourced to scholarly sources. I am sure the other sites copied our text, e.g., http://rksvn.com/mission-vision/. These school teachers treat Wikipedia as a textbook and think it is meant to be copied. :-) -- Kautilya3 (talk) 00:25, 19 April 2018 (UTC)
- Maybe you are right. It is very difficult to tell for sure in situations where content which has been in a Wikipedia article for years is also found elsewhere. If you wish to restore content which you are confident does not infringe copyright I won't quarrel about it. However, it would be better to be selective, and not restore promotional content. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 07:36, 19 April 2018 (UTC)
Sanskriti gyan paper 2020
[edit]2020 paper class 7 sanskriti gyan 2409:4052:E07:87A4:0:0:ACC8:1F08 (talk) 04:00, 12 December 2021 (UTC)
Categories:
- C-Class India articles
- Mid-importance India articles
- C-Class India articles of Mid-importance
- C-Class Education in India articles
- High-importance Education in India articles
- C-Class Education in India articles of High-importance
- WikiProject Education in India articles
- WikiProject India articles
- C-Class Hinduism articles
- Low-importance Hinduism articles
- C-Class Discrimination articles
- Mid-importance Discrimination articles
- WikiProject Discrimination articles