Talk:India: Difference between revisions

3,501 bytes added ,  1 month ago
m (Archiving 1 discussion(s) to Talk:India/Archive 50) (bot)
::It's often easier, or at least more beneficial, to improve the relevant parts of the specialized article first - here [[Climate of India]], then boil it down for the top-level article. [[User:Johnbod|Johnbod]] ([[User talk:Johnbod|talk]]) 16:33, 30 November 2020 (UTC).
:::Might as well do that first. [[User:Femkemilene|Femke Nijsse]] ([[User talk:Femkemilene|talk]]) 19:53, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
::::On second thoughts, it is probably better to write a section on Climate and environment, from my point of view, that is. But before you do any of that, we may need input from the many editors who generally edit this page about what is the appropriate topic to add. This typically takes time. I can't guarantee that people will respond as no one knows you. There are of course articles [[Climate of India]] and [[Environment of India]]. If you try to improve those first, be aware that no one is going to be watching your edits there. So any summary of your edits from there will not get an automatic pass here. They will need to be discussed and vetted sentence by sentence in the usual fashion here. The usual system on this page has always been: fix the highest level, ''i.e.'' the section first; then use it to write the lead of the parent article of that section; and finally use the lead to expand the parent article. The system goes back to 2007. Please also note that DUE generally requires on [[India]] by a longstanding convention that the sentences be sourced in the first instance to tertiary sources (''i.e.'' widely used undergraduate or first-year graduate-level textbooks published by academic presses; review articles in companions (Oxford Companion to ...) or guides (Cambridge Guide to ...) or handbooks (Blackwell Handbook of ...) (other encyclopedias are generally discouraged); in the second instance to monographs and review of the literature in journal articles; in the third instance to journal articles; and in the fourth instance to well-written newspaper articles in well-known internationally known newspapers and magazines. I think the first thing we need here is a discussion and consensus with a critical mass of input from others (of which I am highly doubtful in my absence. Call it arrogance, call it knowing the history of this page, but those are the facts.) Editors work very hard to get one sentence in. There is no reason that you, or anyone editing in response to your post now, should be cut any slack. It is not fair to others. In fact, I don't even know if you have any right to come galloping in and leave a FAR talk page notice here given your likely level of ignorance about India. That typically is best decided by people who do the hard work of editing and maintaining this page. The last FAR was done in precisely such fashion. I am generally getting irritated and I'm sure many others are who in a New York minute could clean the clock of your India-related knowledge. Do you even know the regular editors here? There are some 30 or 40, some log in once a month. Be aware that this page receives 30 to 40K views a day and has 4,600 watchers. That is a lot more than [[Earth]] or even any other country FA. I'd be a lot happier if someone such as {{u|RegentsPark}} or {{u|Vanamonde93}} or {{u|Sitush}} or {{u|Bishonen}} or {{u|MilborneOne}} or {{u|Chipmunk Davis}} or {{u|Kautilya3}} or {{u|Johnbod}} or {{u|Abededare}} or {{u|SpacemanSpiff}} or {{u|Ms Sarah Welch}} or one of the FAR coords actually made this post. I'd say come back in the summer of 2021 and we'll try to fix this if we haven't fixed it already ourselves by then. In the middle of a pandemic, with people stressed or absent as it is, what is your grand game plan here? [[User:Fowler&amp;fowler|<span style="color:#B8860B">Fowler&amp;fowler</span>]][[User talk:Fowler&amp;fowler|<span style="color:#708090">«Talk»</span>]] 04:10, 1 December 2020 (UTC)