Talk:Unification of Karnataka

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Unification of Karnataka article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

A fact from Unification of Karnataka appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 29 November 2006. The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that parts of Karnataka gained independence after its Unification, a year later than most of India?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2006/November.

Wikipedia

India: Karnataka / Politics 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.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Karnataka (assessed as Top-importance).
	This article is supported by the Indian politics workgroup (assessed as High-importance).

untitled[edit]

Ill-comments against other languages and states should be removed. the article is wrote in 'emotional' tone rather than encyclopedic. i will be deleting them in coming period. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.95.36.228 (talk • contribs)

Hi 59.95.36.228, you seem to be very new to Wikipedia. I request you to please spell out your concerns in more specific terms, so I can correct it. And in any case, deleting/blankin content is not the way to go about dealing with parts that concern you for the 'tone' used. Please feel free to ask me for any clarifications. Sarvagnya 18:27, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Tag[edit]

{{editprotected}} Like I mentioned in my edit summary the first time the tags were added, pretty much every section lacks any hint of citation. I would like the admin to add the "citations missing" tag to this article. Lotlil 03:36, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Added {{unreferenced}} tag. This seems totally justified for this type of article. Nishkid64 (talk) 17:35, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Okay now since you've added the tag, how about unprotecting the article so I can add exactly what you're asking for? Sarvagnya 23:33, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And one more thing. How is the {{unreferenced}} tag justified? There are already couple of references in the article and once of them describes in fair detail the subject of the article. Sarvagnya 23:35, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There are a total of three references to an article that appears to be on a sensitive topic. The tag was justified. All I need was you to say that you weren't going to add any text, and I would have unprotected. You said that now, so I acted on my word. Nishkid64 (talk) 23:48, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. So how many refs before the tag is removed? Because, based on this, there may be dozens of articles that I need to tag. Last time I tried doing that a certain admin had the gall to troll on ANI that I was 'disrupting'. Its another matter that his case got thrown out. Sarvagnya 01:02, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

First of all, someone needs to add in-line citations, common sense can be used to determine where citations are needed and where it's not. Once it's reasonably cited tag can be removed. Now, the article also has tons of weasel words. Any seasoned editor should be able to help clean it up. I'm adding the weasel tag as a reminder. Lotlil 14:20, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Language Fundamentalism[edit]

This article is full of Language fundamentalism.Abusing other languages in Wikipedia is prohibited.This article is written in strong emotional mood.I would rather suggest to merge this article with Karnataka or delete it.

ARUNKUMAR P.R (talk · contribs) 09:58, 14 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The tone of this article reads like an essay. It seriously needs to be rewritten. --vi5in^[talk] 19:38, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotect[edit]

I have unprotected this page. It was fully protected on June 22 and hasn't received an edit at all since. For this reason, and the lack of discussion on this talk page, I think whatever issue was present at the time of the protection has been resolved or has been forgotten. If vandalism begins again, please request for page protection at WP:RFPP. But, in general, articles should not be protected unless there is a reason for it, and right now, I am not seeing a reason. Besides, this article needs work and its not going to get that as long as its fully protected.↔NMajdan•talk 22:15, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Needs comprehensive rewriting and citations[edit]

Just 2 citations for a mammoth article. Please add reliable sources. Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources — Preceding unsigned comment added by Happy sage (talk • contribs) 13:48, 15 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]