Talk:Padma Shri

Untitled

Hi, Does anyone know how are Padma Shri's selected ?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.224.105.200 (talk) 14:17, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Hi, This is Srihari (Sysop of telugupedia.com) form Hyderabad, India. I have updated the awards for 2007. A part of the information I have updated. I am interested for updating full information of this page. Let me know can we take information form india.gov.in website for reference? - Srihari Raju, 4 October, 2007 ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2405:204:E788:6FEE:DC39:F2BE:9EFB:8172 (talk) 10:31, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

List of awardees

• The list has to be formatted right, then the clean-up tag can be removed I think. I do not doubt the correctness of information cited. Thanks for anyone who might be interested in helping clean-up: Pournami 09:52, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

• Although I have updated the awards for 2006 in all Padma categories, I am new to wiki and am unable to participate in cleanup. Thanks in advance to someone who knows what she/he is doing.- Jovaidy

• My opinion is that instead of listing the awardees, i think this article should concentrate more on the history and significance of the Award. The list can be linked to the Government of India's web site where this information can be obtained from. Your views please - kulashekar

If you wish to extend or re-write the introduction section please do so. If the new flowing prose gets too long then the list of award winners can be split off into a separate list. It would not make sense to completely remove the list or leave future access to it in the hands of a government website. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 09:27, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Too long

The article is too long and may be difficult to read on some computers. Maybe we can create an article per decade. This article will only present the prize, but not give the list of awardees. Cenarium (talk) 19:57, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

I agree with this observation, probably we can create sub-pages (the way archive folders are created) under this article per decade, whereas leave main page should contain details of awards and any unusual event related to awards.

However, use of subpages in mainspace is disallowed ([1] 3.). But it's possible to give a name like List of Padma Shri recipients in 1950s, and create a template box.Cenarium (talk) 20:08, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

We may create a navigation box of this kind. I'm not sure for the names right now. Cenarium (talk) 01:23, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Agreed, articles that are too long to be properly navigated or displayed need to be split up.Hekerui (talk) 20:07, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Division

Isn't it better to separate the tables into years/decades in new daughter articles? Shahid • ^Talk2me 18:17, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

I proposed this just above. How do you think we should name the articles ? Cenarium^Talk 14:06, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Format

This page lists the names in the format in which the Home Ministry announces the names. For example, Prakash Padukone appears as "Shri Prakash Ramesh Padukone". Do we need to retain this format ? My opinion is that we could change the names to the better known versions, and strip off all the Shris, Miss/Ms, Profs and Drs, and retain only the Army titles and names like "Guru Hanuman" where the person is always known with the title. Pointy haired fellow (talk) 02:35, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Edit to lead section

Hi Vivvt, I noticed my recent edit to the lead section was reverted. I was wondering why, since I think the edit improved the grammar and removed one sentence that was repeated twice. Thanks! Enterprisey (talk!) 04:59, 9 July 2018 (UTC)

@Enterprisey: Ranking is not defined based on the frequency with which the awards are given. So pushing it from fourth to third just because Bharat Ratna is given rarely is incorrect. - Vivvt (Talk) 05:02, 9 July 2018 (UTC)

Hmm. I read the sentence as "it is the fourth highest, among the awards that are given annually". If we're going to state its ranking among all the awards, we should remove the sentence altogether, as we already do that in the first sentence. Enterprisey (talk!) 05:04, 9 July 2018 (UTC) and ping: Vivvt Enterprisey (talk!) 05:06, 9 July 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for fixing it! Enterprisey (talk!) 05:20, 9 July 2018 (UTC)

Do we consider all awardees notable

Hey everyone, I was wondering if we consider all people awarded this as notable for Wikipedia. Is there some discussion that I can refer to?

Palmsandbeaches (talk) 04:27, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

Palmsandbeaches, No. WP:NOTINHERITED would be applicable here. Notability is not inherited, you'll need reliable secondary sources with significant coverage of the subject to justify an article. Prolix 💬 08:53, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

Hey >Prolix, thanks for clarifying. It of course makes complete sense. I asked because I was on this page Kanwal Singh Chauhan - a recipient of the award. He has coverage but most of it is around the same award. Hence, I was on fence if I should put it on AFD. What's your take?

Palmsandbeaches (talk) 12:36, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

Palmsandbeaches, I'm no expert when it comes to Notability guidelines for people but as WP:ANYBIO states, being a recipient of a well-known and significant award is a criteria for notability but simply meeting one of those criteria may not be enough and the significance of the Padma Shri can certainly be questioned. Also it could be debated if the person in question meets WP:GNG in the first place. I suppose the quickest way to determine if the article deserves to stay is to nominate it for deletion and let a discussion pan out. Given the fact that the article has various maintenance templates and many of them have been there for years with no significant improvement to the article I think it should be AfD'd. Prolix 💬 14:58, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

Incomplete Information on Citizenship Requirement

The article states that the Padma Awards were instituted in 1954 to be awarded to Citizens of India, but mentions nowhere that that these awards are now being given to foreign citizens of Indian origin also. That needs to be corrected. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:600:8D00:5650:6DDB:EC06:4DB5:2D6 (talk) 16:09, 2 February 2022 (UTC)

Double entries

Multiple entries in the list obviously seem to be doubled. 93.198.54.59 (talk) 13:56, 5 August 2024 (UTC)