Jump to content

Talk:P. V. Narasimha Rao

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Kkm010 (talk | contribs) at 19:06, 3 July 2015 (updated tags). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Former good articleP. V. Narasimha Rao was one of the History good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
March 10, 2007Good article nomineeNot listed
April 21, 2007Good article nomineeListed
January 23, 2010Good article reassessmentDelisted
Current status: Delisted good article

Economy

The Indian economy began to bloom within days of discarding several of the old protectionist measures as the GDP and economy grew by an average of 6.5%, a growth rate that was sustained over the entire decade for the first time in the Indian economy. Rao's advocacy of further economic reform lessened by mid-1993.

It's unclear to me over what period the 5.5% average GDP growth rate existed. Ground 21:16, 23 Dec 2004 (UTC)

See Hindu rate of growth. 1950-80's saw India having growth of 3.5%.

GA on hold

Please put retrieval dates and titles on your URLs. The titles make them look nicer and the retrieval dates are helpful when links go dead so that you or someone else can get it back via the Wayback Machine. I didn't really look at it aside from that.--Rmky87 03:04, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK done.--Shahab 07:15, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I took it off of hold.--Rmky87 19:06, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Failed GA

The referencing is okay, but please see the WP:LoCE about the prose. It looks strange, the sort of strange that I can't name. Maybe someone else can.--Rmky87 17:10, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sathya Sai Baba devotee

If reliable references can be found, it may be appropriate to have small "personal" section about his devotion to Sathya Sai Baba. I happen to know that Rao is an SSB devotee and I can get some of SSB's speeches where he praised Rao's political actions, but I guess it call comes down to reliable references. Ekantik talk 15:55, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

GA review

I think the lead can be improved per WP:LEAD to include a better review of this article, including person's achievements, "corruption", "later life", and where he died --Rayis 12:08, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

GA on hold

Sorry if my review overlaps with the person above, but no one marked that they were reviewing this article so took it. Anyway, it is almost there, but I would like to see some things fixed within the next few days:

  • There is a lot of stylistic but grammatically incorrect comma usage. Examples are the first sentence and the sentence and "He was a polyglot and could speak 13 languages, including Urdu..." and "When the Indian National Congress split in 1969, Rao remained loyal to Prime Minister Indira Gandhi, and stayed so during the Emergency period (1975 - 77)." Commas are only appropriate to separate clauses when the clause after the comma is a complete sentence.
  • It is not clear from reading the article or the citation provided why he is in the Guinness Book of World Records.
  • The National security, foreign policy and crisis management heading needs to be prose, not a bulleted list.
  • The Corruption items read too much like legal briefs - please just write paragraphs about each case.
  • Too many primary sources - for items like his being kidnapped by Kashmiri terrorists, you should find news stories or books instead of articles of parliament.

That's it for now. --Mus Musculus (talk) 05:04, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent work, thanks for addressing these issues. The article is now listed. --Mus Musculus (talk) 18:20, 21 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Anyone who knows Telugu or can translate from Telugu wiki

Can anyone who knows Telugu please translate the table at the the Telugu version of the Narasimha Rao article to English. Cheers.----Shahab 05:26, 24 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Quotes

The quotes section at the end seems rather churlish and trivial, besides being unsourced. I would suggest deleteing it. Amit@Talk 17:29, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

One of the most important...

"He led one of the most important admistrations" - isn't this POV? Amit@Talk 17:32, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I suppose so. But being POV doesn't exclude being NPOV.--Shahab (talk) 04:26, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, Mr. Smartypants :P Amit@Talk 11:25, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speculation...

"It is speculated that he was in the running for president" ... This shouldn't be in wikipedia; besides obviously being "speculative", it is weasely, and has been sourced from a newspaper editor's blog. I suggest we remove this line. Amit@Talk 17:42, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Great power

This is unencyclopaedic : "This can be considered as the launching of India's emergence as a great power." IMHO we should remove it. Amit@Talk 17:46, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Noone watching?

Is noone watching this article? I came here after learning from the India Portal that it's the current Indian collaboration of the week, and did some cleanup and made some suggestions. Can someone please comment? Thanks. Amit@Talk 15:14, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

One can use this article for data-mining. Ekantik talk 18:30, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

GA Reassessment

This discussion is transcluded from Talk:P. V. Narasimha Rao/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the reassessment.

Starting GA reassessment as part of the GA Sweeps process. Jezhotwells (talk) 19:40, 23 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Checking against GA criteria

GA review (see here for criteria)

To uphold the quality of Wikipedia:Good articles, all articles listed as Good articles are being reviewed against the GA criteria as part of the GA project quality task force. While all the hard work that has gone into this article is appreciated, unfortunately, as of January 23, 2010, this article fails to satisfy the criteria, as detailed below. For that reason, the article has been delisted from WP:GA. However, if improvements are made bringing the article up to standards, the article may be nominated at WP:GAN. If you feel this decision has been made in error, you may seek remediation at WP:GAR.

  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose): b (MoS):
    the use of first names or popularly known as names are deprecated in MoS, pleae use Rao consistently throughout.
    Economic reforms: the list needs to be turned into prose
    Corruption scandals: Some of the more prominent examples were: Bad prose, as if introducing a list. Please rephrase.
    Legacy: turn into prose
    Overall: the whole artcile could do with thorough copy-editing.
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
    There are a number of dead links [1]; and there are citation needed tags which need addressing
    citations need to be consistently formatted, I recommend using the appropriate citation templates.
    ref #13 [2] was to a blog not RS - now a dead link
    ref #15 [3] is a blog
    ref #17 [4] is to geocities, not a RS
    can you demonstrate that ref #21 [5] is a RS?
    ref #25 [6] is a blog
    can you demonstrate that ref #30 [7] is a RS, likewise ref #37 [8] and ref #41 [9]
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
    Controversy after death: For one thing, the Gandhi dynasty’s penchant to bury non-dynasty leaders as immaterial has kept PVN in the forgotten category. POV statemnet
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
  6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:
    I am going to delist this artcile as it needs more work than can be done in a few days. Jezhotwells (talk) 20:13, 23 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    Major contributors and projects will be notified. Jezhotwells (talk) 20:27, 23 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Rise in separatist movements

By the time PV was into PM position all insurgencies were at their peak (all these were peaked in 1980s). PV solved one of the biggest insurgency facing the country that time (Punjab). Also military has neutralized most of North eastern insurgents. He did to calm the J&K which was aggravated by preceding Rajiv and VP Singh govenments. But the article showing contrasting to the fact none of the references supports the article. Mghori (talk) 08:00, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Any reliable references that support the changes you have made? You have completely turned the section around , that too by removing references. --Deepak D'Souza (talk) 17:14, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

None of references mention the escalation during PV's regime hence removed.Mghori (talk) 01:55, 13 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You havent mentioned any sources at all for your edits. It is the duty of the editor making the changes to justify your changes, which you havent. Fell free to cite any sources you have here. Till then the existing content will remain. --Deepak D'Souza (talk) 03:45, 13 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

OK. I will add with referenced. But current content is clear OR. Hence removed. Mghori (talk) 06:26, 13 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Unless you can come up with references to the contrary you cannot claim that it is OR. Your content is more suitable for the OR tag than the current content. --Deepak D'Souza (talk) 07:17, 19 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There is no relation to escalation during Rao's period hence it is unrelated. I observe you use different standard for my reference for Karkare. Mghori (talk) 04:28, 23 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You have promised to come back with references which you havent. Instead you are now trying to link up two articles which have no relation. The only "reasoning" that you have provided seems like a tit-for-tat reversal. Sorry , doesn't work that way. --Deepak D'Souza (talk) 07:07, 23 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The current content is clear OR. Hence removed.219.95.36.157 (talk) 06:47, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Narasimha Rao.JPG Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Narasimha Rao.JPG, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests February 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:Narasimha Rao.JPG)

This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 08:15, 10 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]


Regarding Hindu muslim riots

Regarding the line, "Rao's term also saw the destruction of the Babri Mosque in Ayodhya which triggered one of the worst Hindu-Muslim riots in the country since its independence.", in the introduction. The proof that there were hindu muslim riots has not been quoted. BBC report does not in itself refer to any statistics of people dead or injured and thus this sentence cannot be used. In addition the BBC report quotes it is the worst riots which has not been substantiated. BBC is not a legal constitutional body whose reports can be quoted regarding riots without statistics. I would suggest that this sentence be removed and only the incident of Babri masjid demolition be presented where the reference is made to a legal proceeding. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sailpra (talk • contribs) 19:30, 3 March 2012 (UTC) Prasanth@Sailpra (talk) 19:35, 3 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:P v narasimha rao.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:P v narasimha rao.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations
What should I do?

Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.

  • 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.
  • If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Commons Undeletion Request

To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:P v narasimha rao.jpg)

This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 19:38, 27 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

removing babri masjid rear view

This picture does not belong here. This is a biography of a former prime minister very well known for other reasons than being the PM when the mosque was torn down. Even if it was the only best known fact about him, which is most obviously not, mentioning the issue in the article is sufficient. If there are no other concerns I will go ahead and delete the pic from this article in a week.Lone.Wolf (talk) 14:32, 8 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
removedLone.Wolf (talk) 16:21, 15 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Talk:P._V._Narasimha_Rao&oldid=669816519"