Wikipedia talk:WikiProject India/Assessment

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the WikiProject India/Assessment page.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Inclusion to FA-class India articles

I think for the FA class, we can directly add all the India related FAs from bolded articles in selected articles or Indian Notice board. We still need to judiciosly select them as some might be disputed (like Jinnah in WP:INWNB and Norman Borlaug in WP:PINSA). — Ambuj Saxena (talk) 15:56, 11 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If there is dispute/doubt, check WP:FA. If it is found there, then it is featured. - Ganeshk (talk) 15:59, 11 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am not talking about the fact whether the article is featured or not. What I am pointing out is the fact whether the article comes under the purview of WikiProject India. — Ambuj Saxena (talk) 16:13, 11 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. I understand what you are saying. - Ganeshk (talk) 16:33, 11 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Importance scale

Is the rating on importance at the discretion of the reviewer, or there is a formal process of getting an informed decision on it. I am eagerly waiting for this answer as this question is preventing me from adding the details to over a couple of dozen pages. — Ambuj Saxena (talk) 16:24, 11 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia:WikiProject_India/Assessment#Importance_scale. - Ganeshk (talk) 16:33, 11 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Importance standards section under Wikipedia:WikiProject_India/Assessment#Importance_scale explains a bit. If the article falls out of those, it is left to the descretion of the reviewer. There is a request section if you want to let others decide. You do not have to include that tag if in doubt. - Ganeshk (talk) 16:36, 11 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, currently most articles are not under the ambit of any Wikiproject. Should we add "orphan=yes" to all of them? — Ambuj Saxena (talk) 16:38, 11 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds right. If not sure, just add {{WP India}} with no tags. That will add them to unaccessed. - Ganeshk (talk) 16:42, 11 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It looks from the general arrangement of assessors that the assessment is absolutely arbitrary and any two members may assess the same article differently. I feel the original writers be consulted while assessing any article to know that view point. Importance of an article varies as per the view point of the reader. Pathare Prabhu (talk) 06:56, 19 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Importance is a measure for Wikipedia - not for the reader; it does not reflect on the quality of the work written by editors/article-writers. On the rare occasions where an article's importance is assessed differently by two reviewers, it won't be significantly different as there are clear standards. The same can be said for the quality standards except that the quality is dependent on the editors work and it can be constantly changing. However, the importance of an article is independent of editors - it doesn't matter how much work an editor does, the importance of that article will (pretty much) stay the same. Hope that helps. Ncmvocalist (talk) 13:36, 19 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Assessing articles

I have found that quite a few articles (like Kochi and Ladakh) are either above or equivalent to {{GA-Class}}. However, the assessment procedures prohibit such an assessment unless the articles are listed as good. Noting that they are seriously in line for the FAC soon, how should we go ahead while assessing them? — Ambuj Saxena (talk) 09:49, 12 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A-Class I think. - Ganeshk (talk) 13:51, 12 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Assessment of Indian States

I have assessed all Indian states' articles as per the guidelines given. On importance scale, I have marked all as "Top". — Ambuj Saxena (talk) 09:53, 12 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have marked some states. All of the ones I marked were 'B'. - Ganeshk (talk) 13:52, 12 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Some north-eastern states have very poor articles. I have ranked Manipur and Mizoram as start-class. Haryana has been marked stub-class. — Ambuj Saxena (talk) 13:56, 12 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

11 July 2006 Mumbai train bombings

Ganeshk assessed this article as Mid-importance. Nobleeagle re-assessed it as high importance. I feel that though this might be a top priority article now (because of its visibility), a few months down the line, very few people will be intereted in it. Apart from the fact that this article made breaking news, there is no long-term importance of this article for WikiProject India, and hence should be rated as Mid-importance. — Ambuj Saxena (talk) 10:44, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Politics assessments

While assessing politics articles, I am rating them of high importance if they are concerned with national level politics. For regional, I am rating mid and for local/federations etc, I am rating as low. -- Lost^(talk) 07:04, 17 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

For politicians, PM/ Union Cabinet Ministers = Top importance, CM/ governor/ MPs = High, MLA/ Ex CM etc = Mid/ Others = Low -- Lost^(talk) 08:19, 17 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Would lists classify as non articles

Would the lists classify as Non Articles for the purpose of assessment? -- Lost^(talk) 15:44, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I initally thought they were NA. But was told otherwise. :) - Ganeshk (talk) 16:10, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Examples: This is NA. This is an article. - Ganeshk (talk) 17:18, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thanks..-- Lost^(talk) 17:32, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

HOI articles

I have begun assessing HOI articles and am using the following rationale for importance:

Top Importance: events/persons/places that had a very high impact on present India/ Indians
High: Events that were very high impact when they happened but may not be so relevant today
Medium: Had a moderate impact
Low: Low or no impact

Please let me know if there is disagreement on this -- Lost^(talk) 15:32, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wars of India

Major wars that have an ongoing impact on India = Top importance
Major wars in the history but with little impact on current India = High importance
Minor wars and battles as part of a war with little current impact = Mid importance
Minor skirmishes with no impact = Low importance

— Lost^(talk) 15:21, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WP1.0

All those assessing articles, please see Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/MartinBotII — Lost^(talk) 08:49, 5 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bodhidharma, the martial arts, and the disputed India connection

This article may have various quality issues. Please review the article and provide your feedback. See also Foreign influence on Chinese martial arts. _{Freedom skies| talk} 13:02, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

== Alert -- very strange importance rating given ---> Rabindranath Tagore: High, but Aamir Khan: Top! ==

I believe there are instances of gross inaccuracies in the rating of some Wikipedia articles by importance.. I point out the following example: Aamir Khan has the highest importance rating ('top') and the article for an established and important Indian icon such as Rabindranath Tagore has an importance rating one notch lower ('high'). I strongly call for a review of the ratings of these articles. One would think that Rabindranath Tagore's article merits a 'top' importance, while Aamir Khan's would be at 'mid'-level importance. AppleJuggler 06:20, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

why can't they both be top level? Rating isn't exactly a comparison. --h y dka t 11:33, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The India project is a massive project and we have many subprojects working as part of one. My advice would be to see if the article falls under a subproject (e.g. Aamir Khan under Indian cinema and Rabindranath Tagore under Indian politics), and create some sort of standards for each sub project and list them here. Generally our definitions should fit the global definitions of what is top/high/low importance. — Lost^(talk) 11:57, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with lost. If seen as an Indian, Tagore would be "top" importance and Aamir would be "medium/high" importance; but since WP:INDIA combines number of diverse workgroups, it becomes difficult to decide the criteria for rating. While Tagore would remain "top" importance irrespective of the criteria, Aamir's article would have to a "top" importance article if evaluated for Indian Cinema articles. A combined rating does have a conflict of importance rating between workgroups, and using rating based on other workgroup consideration should not be recommended. One solution that comes to my mind is to have a general importance rating as India-related article, and separate (optional) rating parameters for workgroups if their own rating is different. For the time being I have went ahead with changing the importance of Tagore's article as "Top". For the changes to template, I think Ganesh can help implementing it. Should we ping him? — Ambuj Saxena (☎) 13:25, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ganesh has updated the template. I think this resolves the whole issue. — Ambuj Saxena (☎) 12:40, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Good solution! — Lost^(talk) 13:11, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Workgroup-level statistics table for WikiProject Indian television

Since WikiProject Indian television is the newest workgroup there needs to be a statistics table for it because there are hundreds of articles on the Wikipedia mainsapce that fall into the category of Indian Television. I need someone's help to arrange this for me. Thanks - Bhavesh.Chauhan 18:55, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

History Of Madhapuram Khammam

Address

Madhapuram (Post) or Madapuram Tallampadu (Via) Mudigonda (Mandal) Khammam (Dist) Andhra Pradesh (State) India Pin code : 507170

Madhapuram Population Data

Households: 625 , Total Population: 2,560 , Male Population: 1,298 , Female Population: 1,262 , Kids Under 6 Yrs: 312 , Boys Under 6 Yrs: 167 , Girls Under 6 Yrs: 145 , Total Literates: 1,300 , Total Illeterates: 1,260

Web Map/Driving directions http://mapmyindia.com/embed_preview.jsp?x=-1097103.375&y=4914701.5&z=9&width=800&height=400

Land Records http://apland.ap.nic.in/DistPahani.asp?dcode=22&mc=41&vc=1&mname=MUDIGONDA&dname=Khammam

School Information

M.P.Primary School http://projects.cgg.gov.in/dsemis/School.do?&mgtcode=1&schlcode=2241001&count=1

Z.P.High School http://projects.cgg.gov.in/dsemis/School.do?&mgtcode=1&schlcode=2241601&count=1

MPTC Election Result Winner = Morthala Hanimi Reddy (INC) , Runner = Annem Gurava Reddy CPI(M)

SARPANCH Election Result

Winner = Maddineni ?? (INC) , Runner = Annem Gurava Reddy CPI(M)

DISTRICT WISE BEST BI-VOLTINE FARMER AWARD ON THE EVE OF SANKRANTHI 2007 in Sericulture Sri. M.HanimiReddy

DISTRICT WISE BEST MULTI-VOLTINE FARMER AWARD ON THE EVE OF SANKRANTHI 2007 Sri. Gopireddy Rami Reddy

FREEDOM FIGHTERS 1) Linga Reddy Yarabolu (S/o Atchi Reddy) , 2) Rami Reddy Sareddy (S/o Obul Reddy )

Please enclose if you have any additional information.

Bye Hanimi R Mortala

Atlanta

Retrieved from "http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/History_Of_Madhapuram_Khammam" —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hanimi m (talk • contribs) 00:53, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Constitution of India

I have edited the Constitution of India article significantly. I am currently running low on material and ideas. I am inviting and requesting help from anyone who can help expanding this article. Thanks. Sumanch (talk) 09:09, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I think expanding part would be a nice idea. There could be an introduction to each of them atleast and depending on user contribution, each can be detailed and expanded. In fact I notice that for some of these parts there is no wiki reference at all. Priority can be given to those. Cheers. Tarun2k (talk) 10:55, 21 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Assessment needed

Ramakrishna Mission Vidyamandira and Ramakrishna Mission Residential College, this two articles need assessment. Nobody is objecting there.--NAHID 10:20, 21 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Assessed them without comments. Cheers! Mspraveen (talk) 16:32, 21 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Indian Project Members help out pls

There is a registered book Brhmaand Pujan written in 1999 from a well known writer of India Naresh Sonee. Notability issue could be sorted/verified out from this site-

http://brhmaandpujan-news-reviews.tripod.com/ . Acquainting you here, Wikibin engine had captured these two sites from Wikipedia. They are as

http://wikibin.org/articles/brhmaand-pujan.html

http://wikibin.org/articles/naresh-sonee.html

However one can come across infinite hits on search engines about Naresh Sonee or Brhmaand Pujan

Your good selves can go through the same and verifiy for assertments. The author has introduced a self based unique logical philosophy one of it's kind. Presently, how can I re put some information again on wikipedia. As time & again it get deleted on bias by a certain community in wiki ? Can you put my case/cause across wikiIndian portal members or Chairman of wikipedia? Or if possible can you put the same pages again by editing them as required picking up from wikibin promoting the sames. Regard --Dralansun (talk) 10:48, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Introduction of class C and B criteria.

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

Defns available at Wikipedia:WikiProject Hinduism/Assessment. Please update the {{WP India}} template.--Redtigerxyz (talk) 11:16, 20 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WP India Assessment Dept. will not be considering any new classes or significant changes to criteria until the end of the assessment drive, and will definitely not implement any changes until next year. It will definitely not be updated until 2009, sorry. Ncmvocalist (talk) 15:03, 20 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It is not a WikiProject Hinduism/Assessment decision, but that of Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Assessment, also restrictions on B class, now apply to all articles.--Redtigerxyz (talk) 14:33, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProjects are independent of the Editorial Team (you can go ask the editorial team if you like) - their changes do not apply to all articles. Ncmvocalist (talk) 16:01, 22 July 2008 (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.

C-class articles

Discussion is ongoing at WP:India on the introduction of C-class for assessment. Please weigh in at Wikipedia talk:Noticeboard for India-related topics#C class articles. Thanks! =Nichalp «Talk»= 08:27, 2 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

About participating

I changed the method of participating. See it on the page itself.--Ankit Maity 07:09, 28 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Team has often seen that articles are being assessed incorrectly by temporary or newer editors so we want users to make notes of what assessments they've made on the list - that is, we want to see if they have a firm grasp of what's going on (and if they are hanging around for more than just a couple of months after putting their name on the list). This system of double checking can help us identify weaknesses and improve those prospective members understandings of how articles should be assessed (particularly if they haven't been on Wikipedia for too long or are not experienced enough). Ncmvocalist (talk) 07:24, 28 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Importance rating: The Doon School

Hi. Could someone from your assessment team please drop by and apply your rating for your project work on importance scale at Talk:The Doon School. At WP:WPSCH we currently have this article, a recently failed GA, rated as Top Importance, but of course not all projects are obliged to accord the same importance level withing the scope of their work. Thanks. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 05:47, 9 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

DoneHas a long list of alumni. Has verifable sources. Rated B-Mid.--Ankit Maity ^{Talk • contribs} 08:48, 21 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Update of examples in the Assessment Chart

Can any one update the examples in the Assessment Chart with latest Indian articles? Most of the examples are of 2007, when the criteria was much loose. Amartyabag ^TALK2ME 14:00, 14 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Unable to request an assessment

I have been trying to request an assessment of article Verinag for a period of a week. Every time i edit this page for requesting an assessment, an error occurs. The details of the latest error are as follows: Request: POST http://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_India/Assessment&action=submit, from 208.80.154.9 via cp1018.eqiad.wmnet (squid/2.7.STABLE9) to 10.64.0.142 (10.64.0.142) Error: ERR_READ_TIMEOUT, errno [No Error] at Sun, 13 Oct 2013 08:51:13 GMT Akshey25 (talk) 08:53, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Same Goes for me too while adding the article Santosh Trophy 2005–06 to the list. Still unable to add the article.Can't any One fix this. And there is no response to this problem. KAS^(talk) 16:36, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

where are the admins of this page? Still not able to add a request. Same problem for last three months. Akshey25 (talk) 12:07, 28 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Errors in editing this page

Judging by the above posts, I'm not alone in experiencing errors while making edits to this page. This happened to me some months ago on this very specific page, I wonder what's wrong with it? -Ugog Nizdast (talk) 09:16, 4 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Removed plenty of transcluded taskforce templates

The page information warned that there were too many templates transcluded here. Removed. Apparently that was causing the errors. Ugog Nizdast (talk) 23:30, 11 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Page updated

From Wikipedia talk:Noticeboard for India-related topics/Archive 59#Wikipedia:WikiProject India/Assessment proposal and possible revival, {{WP INDIA}} was modified and the way of manually assessing was agreed to be removed. Will update this page and post here. -Joel. Ugog Nizdast (talk) 22:47, 11 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

RECEIVED INTERNAL DAMAGE PRODUCT

IT WAS MY BIG MISTAKE THAT I TRUSTED FLIPKART. 103.210.67.223 (talk) 11:33, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Business Forum Assessment Methodology

Hi, Open your business forum now.Just Say "EE" abbreviated from SeTswana means "Yes"/"EE".Amooketsi from South Africa . — Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.113.190.248 (talk) 19:40, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]