Jump to content

Talk:Ramesh Prasad Mohapatra

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

Permission is also given on the contact page at [1]. Each permission extends only to that tripod site. I am not sure if there is anything from other sites there, though. Stifle (talk) 08:23, 3 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Permission or no, there is nothing that establishes the content from the 'tripod' web page as being a reliable or neutral source. Further passages are copied from the book flap of the doctor's publication, and from commercial web site descriptions of the book [2], [3], [4]. These tend to be the most promotional passages, and questionable as reliable sources. This, by the way, has been explained to the article's originator via numerous discussions. JNW (talk) 16:53, 4 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Information from preface of the original work is not reliable? then what I can refer? I can not control any one copying the same content from the book or my copyright site for their site as is shown in the example provided by esteem JNW.[5], [6], [7]

I think, I have provided enough refernece that can prove the point. Please read gather information, just do not search through google only to prove your point. I suggest please spent quality time in reading in library and searching the information from original work not just conclude in a quick manner by doing a word search in google only. This will create a healthy impression on wikipedia and attract people to contribute valuable information to further enrich Wiki. Just do not try discourage but encourage like some good people already doing same thing on Wikipedia.

Please visit again the page spent some time change it if you feel some thing not neutral in stead we involve in making a noise that is not increasing any value at all.--Tikoo s (talk) 18:17, 4 July 2009 (UTC)--Tikoo s (talk) 18:21, 4 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I would dearly appreciate the help of an administrator, for this seems to be a circular and unending discussion: WP:SOURCES offers guidelines re: acceptable neutral references:
Articles should be based upon reliable, third-party published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy.[nb 3] Reliable sources are necessary both to substantiate material within articles and to give credit to authors and publishers in order to avoid plagiarism and copyright violations. Sources should directly support the information as it is presented in an article and should be appropriate to the claims made: exceptional claims require high-quality sources.
The text copied from your own website offers no claim to being a neutral or reliable source. Copying and pasting text from the books being described does not establish their notability; it does possibly violate copyright laws. That being the case, please do not remove the copyright template placed on the article. JNW (talk) 19:10, 4 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I have asked for help here [8]. JNW (talk) 19:30, 4 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Article issues

[edit]

Dear JNW,When you last read this article spending some quality time? Can you pls let me know instead of doing a key word search on Google!! By copying from the article and pasting on Google search. I think its good idea to contribute collaborative manner, so do that please if you have a feeling you can enhance the value of article.

I think you just have a look when it was started. Even I put a hangon you are not bothered to wait and started so much noise on my article. Every body improves as they go on. I have modified and try to improve upon based on other peer and administrator's advice. Every one suggesting constructively. That is what i feel lacking in your talk. I see a lot of noise we are making rather than doing anything constructively.

I also dearly request to administrators please have a look into the article and suggest how we can close this kind of looping. so that I can able to do good contribution rather than just wasting every one valuable time.--Tikoo s (talk)--01:13, 5 July 2009 (UTC)--Tikoo s (talk) 01:15, 5 July 2009 (UTC)--Tikoo s (talk) 01:18, 5 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Although I am not an administrator, I perhaps can still offer some advice. Tikko s, you should have a look at other biography articles for academics on Wikipedia and try to model this article on those. The style and wording of the current article is not at all encyclopedic. You should avoid using words like "monumental", etc. For an article on another archeologist to use as an example, see, for instance, Pahor Labib. Happy editing! --Crusio (talk) 19:03, 6 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot for the suggestion and help --Crusio (talk). I will definitely read through the article and use it as an example to improve my article. Truly appreciate your help Crusio--Tikoo s (talk) 02:45, 7 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Crusio (talk) I have try to improve my article as per your suggestion. request you to please have a look when you get some time and let me know if you have any further suggestion.--Tikoo s (talk) 05:02, 7 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Administrator I have improved my article as per the suggestion from esteemed peer and admins. I dearly request please re visit my article and please remove the tags that no more stands good. Else let me know so that I will work further to improve and substantiate it. Note: I am still working in a continuous manner to add more value to my article. Appreciate your review and help.--Tikoo s (talk) 05:02, 7 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Dear Tikoo s, I'm afraid that the article still is not where it should be. I'll edit the lead a little bit, so that you can see in which direction it should be going. I also think that the article could be shortened a lot. --Crusio (talk) 09:21, 7 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Crusio, I will work on the suggestion.--Tikoo s (talk) 13:44, 7 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Appreciate your help Crusio(talk)in fixing the info box and lead section Crusio(talk)--Tikoo s (talk) 14:20, 8 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Tikoo s, the article is really progressing well and getting much better, good work! I'm not sure the tags should not have stayed a while longer, but I won't put them back. I have two questions for you. First, all sources seem to be print sources. There's nothing wrong with that, of course, but if you would have some online sources, that would be even better. Second, what is meant with being "attached" to the royal family? Was he related to them or was he a follower of them? Happy editing! --Crusio (talk) 00:21, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

PS: in biographies one usually does not give an exhaustive list of publications, but only 3-5 of the most significant ones. Perhaps you could select some and remove the rest? --Crusio (talk) 00:23, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Crusio(talk) I got the right direction from you. I also take this opertunity to convey my regards to you. We collectively made this happen.

I will look into the suggestion and edit the research article section to shorten further. Actually he has more than hundreds of article written both in English and Oriya. I took some of them and I think you are right I need to remove some of them.

As per online sources I will try to include. I think some reviews of his work published in Indian Historical Review and Indian Historical Quarterly, Journal of Asian Studies I see them online only snippets in google but not the entire content available. I think its only available to members.

I have included some sites from wikipedia on see also section that references his work. Many scholars refer his work and cite as source in artcles published by them. Can I include that in see also section or external resource section? I was not knowingly put them in the article. I have included one external site on the artcles external sources section though.

His Father and Grand Father were high dignotaries in Dhenkanal. His Father was Zamindar (Head of the village). They have a prominent relation with the King and their family and was sought by the Kings for any important functions or occasions. Ramesh Prasad Mohapatra was good friend of the King of Dhenkanal though the kingship is no more prevalent in India. Because of his royal relation he got a lot of first hand information on Military system that really helped him a lot to write Military History of Orissa. He collected a lot of offensive and defensive weapon from the royals of Orissa and Dhenkanal during his collection drive. He organized the Armoury Gallery in Museum and was in charge of it. (Mentioned in the preface of Military History Book).

Thanks a lot again for your constructive suggestion and genuine help for improvement of my article. I really appreciate that. --Tikoo s (talk) 02:00, 10 July 2009 (UTC)--Tikoo s (talk) 02:04, 10 July 2009 (UTC) --Tikoo s (talk) 02:57, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • My pleasure! It's very nice to work with someone as enthusiastic as you and I value your willingness to accept well-meant advice! I hope you like your WP experience and will continue contributing after this article has been done. There's still a lot of work to be done at Wikipedia! --Crusio (talk) 14:58, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hi Tikoo s, you are "overlinking" the article. According to the manual of style, only the first occurrence of a wikilink should be linked, not the subsequent ones. Also, I see that you numbered the articles, that's quite a work. In future, you should know that you can do this much more easily by putting an "#" at the start of each line, the wiki software will then number the items automatically. --Crusio (talk) 09:26, 13 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi --Crusio (talk) I will work on that. Thanks again for the number format suggestion. It is really cool. Appreciate your review. By the way I just added to that sentence mentioned good contact with royal of dhenkanal... at the end it had that helped him in his later work. I added the military history of Orissa just to be specific. Thanks,--Tikoo s (talk) 14:42, 13 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi --Crusio (talk) I tried putting the "#" at the begining of each line, but wiki software not convering it into a number. Thanks in advance for your suggestion.--Tikoo s (talk) 15:03, 13 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • It should be put plainly, without the nowiki tag and the "" marks. But I just tried it out and it looks like it doesn't work inside a table. Sorry about that! --Crusio (talk) 16:01, 13 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It only works if it is the very first character of a line, otherwise it's just rendered as the # symbol, same goes for * for bulleted lists. – ukexpat (talk) 16:53, 13 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot --Crusio (talk) and ;ukexpat (talk) I appreciate your prompt reply to my queries. --Tikoo s (talk) 18:21, 13 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

--ukexpat (talk) I have changed as per your suggestion. Please have a look and let me know if it is appropriate now. Many thanks.--Tikoo s (talk) 00:26, 23 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion

[edit]
I vote in favor of speedy deletion of this article.

Lots of people can scrape through the eligibility criterion for notability. Every building in every American university is named after some person, whose names do not find mention in Wikipedia. In Orissa, there are many people I know personally that have received a lot more recognition than R. P. Mohapatra. I don't think they are eligible for a wikipedia page.

The section "Selected Research Articles" lists 39 research papers written by him. Every faculty in every university publishers that much, and in more significant forums. Not one of those articles was actually published in a peer-reviewed journal. If they were, I invite Tikoo_S to provide the impact factors of those journals. Books published by unknown publishers like "Cosmo Publications, Delhi," or "D. K. Publications, Delhi," are unknown. There are hundreds of such books that are much more current and up-to-date.
If R. P. Mohapatra's earning doctorates from relatively unknown universities, like Utkal University, is shown in the introductory paragraph of page, it only goes to reflect the person's insignificance.
I hope my negative comments are not misconstrued as attacks. Tikoo_S has been citing those entirely unknown publications everywhere:
There are more...
These are topics that are not even closely related. A person whose expertise covers this wide a range, must be quite someone!
Either that or Tikoo_S is spamming, which I strongly believe to be the case. In fact ALL that Tikoo_S has contributed to in wikipedia is adding stuff on R. P. Mohapatra everywhere possible. I am almost certain that Tikoo_S, whose last name is also "Mohapatra", is none other than R. P. Mohapatra's son.
In December 2007, I had placed a warning in Tikoo_s's talk page. Frankly it was a headache to undo all the advertising that Tikoo_s had done

SDas (talk) 14:11, 20 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Ramesh_Prasad_Mohapatra&oldid=1209123390"