Talk:Mahendra Chaudhary Zoological Park

India: Punjab / Protected areas Mid‑importance

	India portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Punjab portal This article is supported by WikiProject Punjab (India) (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by the Protected areas of India workgroup (assessed as High-importance).

Zoo

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Zoo, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics related to zoos, aquaria, and aviaries on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ZooWikipedia:WikiProject ZooTemplate:WikiProject ZooZoo articles

Grammar

There are many grammatical mistakes in this article. Please refrain from deleting any content and try to fix the grammar. Wikiexplorer13 12:54, 7 June 2016 (UTC)

Uppercase-lowercase argument fixed in addition to few minor changes in sentences. Article is in no way whatsoever written in promotional tone. You deleted wildlife schedule act for no reason. Please reference 100 enclosures. You deleted "African buffalo". Important words "but not limited to" removed from sentence without no apparent reason. "The zoo remains open 6 days a week except mondays." makes perfect sense. Do not make unnecessary changes to the article according to your personal likings by specifying "grammatical mistakes" even if they fully conform to the english grammar.

Unencyclopedic material

@Wikiexplorer13: the addition you're making is your own personal commentary on the zoo, and is quite promotional. It also violates WP:CITE. Quasar G ^{t - c} 08:17, 20 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Article cleaned up and fixed, official sources cited. Please avoid deleting whole section of an article without assessing if the data is considered promotional material or general information. Also, consider keeping vocabulary up to the mark with english grammar in your future edits.

@Wikiexplorer13: it's a little ironic that you complain about my English grammar, but you inserted capital letters where they were not required in the list of species, as well as using statements (such as the zoo remains open 6 days a week except Mondays) which simply don't make sense. I appreciate that you have referenced the article a little better, but let's try to avoid promotional statements like those you put into the 'History' section. Thanks – Quasar G ^{t - c} 16:47, 22 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Uppercase-lowercase argument fixed in addition to few minor changes in sentences. Article is in no way whatsoever written in promotional tone. You deleted wildlife schedule act for no reason. Please reference 100 enclosures. You deleted "African buffalo". Important words "but not limited to" removed from sentence without no apparent reason. "The zoo remains open 6 days a week except mondays." makes perfect sense. Do not make unnecessary changes to the article according to your personal likings by specifying "grammatical mistakes" even if they fully conform to the english grammar. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikiexplorer13 (talk • contribs) 14:12, 25 April 2017 (UTC) (content copied from Quasar G's talk page).[reply]

@Wikiexplorer13: I will explain my changes.

I removed "African buffalo" purely by accident.
I don't mind you removing "100 enclosures" as I cannot find a reference.
"The zoo opens 6 days a week except Mondays" does not make sense. "The zoo opens 6 days a week, remaining closed on Mondays" or "the zoo opens every day except Mondays" would be good alternatives.
The mention of the wildlife schedule act seems unnecessary, especially considering it is not referenced and the average reader will not know what this act is.
"Not limited to" is not necessary in that sentence because "including" already implies that you are not giving a full list. This seems inconsequential, however, so I will leave it as it is.

You appear to be blind reverting my edits, which is not particularly helpful. I would like you to explain each of these changes:

You keep un-bolding the article's first two words, "ChattBir Zoo", which should be in bold as per MOS:BOLD.
You changed [[Guwahati Zoo]] to [[Assam_State_Zoo_cum_Botanical_Garden|Guwahati zoo]]. These link to exactly the same page; why use the longer link?
The phrases "it groomed through the time as the largest zoo in Northern India" and "It was designed in such a manner that the natural look and floral richness of the forests were fully utilized" are promotional, and violate WP:NOTPROMO. I can get someone else's opinion on this, if you don't believe me.
The heading for the species list should be "List of species", rather than "List of Species", per MOS:HEADCAPS.
"The zoo consists of 369 mammals" doesn't really make sense: an establishment like a zoo cannot 'consist' of anything, but it can house animals. What's wrong with "The zoo houses 369 mammals"?
The reference you added to the phrase "the reptile complex is open to public in the summer season" doesn't even mention a reptile complex.
In the caption for the image of white tigers, you keep changing white tigers ([[white tiger]]s) to white tigers ([[white tigers]]). The latter links to a disambiguation page, which should be avoided as per WP:INTDAB.

I do not intend to edit-war over this, but it's a little frustrating when you revert all my changes without adequately explaining why. I will seek another form of dispute resolution if we cannot agree on this. Quasar G ^{t - c} 17:22, 25 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

As I've already mentioned, please do not judge what is "necessary" or what is "not necessary" as per your own personal opinion! I'll keep on adding what is important to the article as per Wikipedia policies. I've addressed most of your concerns as per your explanation above. You're welcome to make any minor changes but DO NOT destroy this article. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikiexplorer13 (talk • contribs) 08:03, 2 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on ChattBir Zoo. 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:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111021205725/http://kuchbhi.com/india/61-articles/258-list-of-zoos-in-india-from-1800-until-now.html to http://www.kuchbhi.com/india/61-articles/258-list-of-zoos-in-India-from-1800-until-now.html

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) 21:43, 3 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you bot! -Casktopic_say 16:52, 19 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Image gallery

@Casktopic: Hello, Casktopic. I see that you've restored the image gallery, with an edit summary that suggests WP:IG is not an appropriate citation for discussing image galleries. I find this assertion bizarre. I'm also puzzled at your statement that the images in the gallery should be placed next to "relevant text". This is puzzling because you didn't do that yourself when you restored the gallery and, in any event, it isn't clear what that "relevant text" might be.

If you wish to maintain the use of an image gallery here, the burden is on you to demonstrate that its use satisfies WP:IG. You haven't yet done that. I look forward to your response. NewYorkActuary (talk) 10:49, 20 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hello NewYorkActuary. Clearly your edits are more destructive than anything constructive. You removed information and held another user accountable for something which had an alternative solution. WP:IG explicitly states that there can be galleries if it can illustrate the aspects of the subject which in this case is the location where these images were taken and are directly related to the zoo not the individual animals. Relating to your "puzzled" statement, the image policy states "Images are typically interspersed individually throughout an article near the relevant text". Now if you don't know what or where relevant text is, it does not give you authority to destroy an article! Please read WP:MOSIMAGES for further information.
Also note that you falsely accused me of saying "WP:IG is not an appropriate citation for discussing image galleries" in your response above. -Casktopic_say 13:10, 20 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The image gallery has once again been removed. Please take this opportunity to demonstrate that its use here conforms with WP:IG. NewYorkActuary (talk) 14:00, 9 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]