Wikipedia

Talk:Bareilly

Latest comment: 5 years ago by Rajatbindalbly in topic Establishments in Bareilly
Learn more about this page

Original Research

edit
Latest comment: 16 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Regarding this diff, I have reverted it twice now. The first time was because it was a lot of new information that had no references at all. At face value, the information looks sound, but one of Wikipedia's core policy is that of verifiability and it lacked references - I made a friendly note on the editor's talk here, this editor was not logged in at the time. My reversion was then undone by user M.chohan, with a note "I'm currently writing an article on the Mutiny of 1857 and this is an extract, please comment on lack of cite references". Well, to promptly comment, I think that if that is truly the case this constitutes clear original research and is not appropriate for Wikipedia without the proper citations. Tanthalas39 (talk) 22:35, 9 January 2008 (UTC)Reply

Style

edit
Latest comment: 12 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I have done a clean up on this article today to bring it more in line with the Wikipedia:Manual of Style and its associated manuals, including:

  • removed repeated links an link to plain English words per WP:OVERLINK
  • removed incorrect boldfacing per WP:BOLDFACE
  • fixed the capitalisation of headings per WP:HEAD
  • fixed the formatting of dates and numbers per WP:MOSNUM

I encourage editors to become more familiar with the Manual of Style before reverting my edits. Thanks. Ground Zero | t 15:09, 18 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

The Lead section is excessive, so I am going to have a look at it and will look at grammar etc. also. --Soulparadox 23:19, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Edited the "Ancient History" section, removed repeated statements, put in some links and moved one general content paragraph to the summary section (how do I quote a part of the article?). I'm not too sure about this, though. So if someone thinks it should be replaced/edited/removed, please go ahead! Sudo23 (talk) 04:30, 2 September 2012 (UTC)Reply

File:IDS.jpg Nominated for Deletion

edit
Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
  An image used in this article, File:IDS.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests July 2011
What should I do?
A discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. If you feel the deletion can be contested then please do so (commons:COM:SPEEDY has further information). Otherwise consider finding a replacement image before deletion occurs.

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 05:53, 14 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

File:Priyanka chopra at filmfare launch.jpg Nominated for Deletion

edit
Latest comment: 12 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
  An image used in this article, File:Priyanka chopra at filmfare launch.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests April 2012
What should I do?

Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.

To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:Priyanka chopra at filmfare launch.jpg)

This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 15:36, 28 April 2012 (UTC)Reply

copyedit

edit
Latest comment: 11 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Copyedited this. Comments:

  • The population #s don't make sense. It's not possible that the total pop is 898,167 and the 0-6 pop is 669,681. Also, the gender ratios don't make sense. There can't be 883 men per thousand people.
  • "The experiment in non-monarchical form of Government in Panchala". This needs a better explanation. What experiment? What form?
  • I switched to Ahichatra, as in the WP article on the subject. If that's incorrect, the other article needs to be renamed.
  • Commented this out: रवि प्रभाकर फ़तेहगंज प0
  • Added some {{clarify}} tags.

Cheers. Feedback encouraged. Lfstevens (talk) 07:58, 6 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

Assessment comment

edit
Latest comment: 16 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Bareilly/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

Not a single Reference in the article. Can't be rated as B-class article. Reassigning rating of Start-Class.--Rohit Saxena (talk) 18:13, 9 July 2008 (UTC)Reply

Last edited at 18:13, 9 July 2008 (UTC). Substituted at 08:58, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

edit
Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Bareilly. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:18, 21 July 2016 (UTC)Reply

edit
Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Bareilly. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:33, 27 October 2016 (UTC)Reply

edit
Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on Bareilly. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:58, 4 May 2017 (UTC)Reply

Establishments in Bareilly

edit
Latest comment: 5 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion

You have not added establishments of Bareilly which are of national importance. For example : Indian Vaterniary reserch Institute, NE Railway workshop, Rohilkhand university.Rajatbindalbly (talk) 16:30, 23 February 2019 (UTC)Reply

I feel history of Bareilly as PAnchal Pradesh need be highlighted and needs more text.Rajatbindalbly (talk) 16:30, 23 February 2019 (UTC)Reply

Add topic
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Bareilly&oldid=1258762683"