Talk:Politics of Bihar

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

Bihar under Lalu Prasad Yadav[edit]

bihar may have deteriorated uder lalu prasad yadav but of late there have been winds of change.i guess u need to go to patna to see this.rather,feel this. 12:28, 7 February 2008 User:59.95.75.213

Requested move[edit]

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: page moved, with histmerge. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 05:30, 27 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Bihar's Politics → Politics of Bihar move together with a history merge

Transferring a nom from AFD, with the original rationale copied below. For my part, I note that a speedy tag would be declined for any redirect with a non-trivial history, which this one certainly has. No particular opinion on deletion. UltraExactZZ Said ~ Did 20:18, 24 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You have this completely backwards. Bihar's Politics should be at Politics of Bihar. This is a housekeeping delete to move it back to its original proper name. --Chris (クリス • フィッチュ) (talk) 04:05, 25 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Original Rationale from Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Politics of Bihar follows:

had speedy-tagged this redirect, as Politics of Bihar is the proper naming for the article per WPMOS, now at the incorrectly and badly named Bihar's Politics. Speedy was declined because "redirect has a long history", which is meaningless if the article needs to be occupying that space. Chris (クリス • フィッチュ) (talk) 14:37, 24 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep - we don't delete RDs with history without a very good reason. However, if you wish to move the page then go to WP:RM and ask for a move together with a history merge. Bridgeplayer (talk) 20:41, 24 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The very good reason is to move it back to its original proper name. This issue has now been moved around three times, it shouldn't be this troublesome. Wikiocracy at its worst. --Chris (クリス • フィッチュ) (talk) 04:10, 25 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Loknayak.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion[edit]

An image used in this article, File:Loknayak.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

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 10:14, 4 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Request for a thorough review of the article.[edit]

I am quite surprised by the tone that has been used in the article. This article takes side which should not happen on Wikipedia. Only the facts should be given and people should be allowed to make their own views. For example, in the section -"Bihar movement & Aftermath: 1975-1990", the authors writes that " Bihar got an anti-establishment image." Such a comment is completely a thought that many people may hold but is still not a fact. Hence, should not be here. Furthermore there has been no citation for it. The article might be needed to be completely rewritten.

Ankit Saini 14:53, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

Hello[edit]

Hi @Sitush: i have reverted this article to last best version edited by you as the latest edits were disruptive.But still the problem persists as some of the cited source dont work at all.As i know that edits by a sockpuppet should be removed.But , going through edits that the banned user did.....i found some genuine refrences....so can i revert it further back while checking the verifiability of the sources of banned user....as it will make my work easier since writing is an arduous task and i m busy in other articles right now.Recently created two articles too.Heba Aisha (talk) 11:45, 31 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • This article lacks authentic sources right from source 2.....its not working and a number of cite needed template.I will improve it in coming days.Heba Aisha (talk) 11:56, 31 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Edited it[edit]

Given a final look almost all sources used were not working at all.But now i have added good sources.It needs further expansion which i will do in coming months. Heba Aisha (talk) 18:08, 31 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Major chronological re-arrangement[edit]

I found many portions of this page to be non-compliant with the Wikipedia guidelines of factual accuracy and non-opiniated content. I have cleaned as much as I could. I have also put the sections of Post 1990 politics in the History section, where it belongs, rather than having it as separate sections. Only the latest updates should be kept as a separate Heading, which is at the bottom. I found the Political violence section to be quite relevant and moved it downwards as a independent section, from a sub-heading.

Overall, this page needs more work on the Post 1990 elections. It has a lot of content that is very opiniated and needs to be cleaned to bring it to the encyclopedic format, from the Opinion Piece it currently reads like.

If you are planning to make changes in the page, kindly consider these factors.

Hparashar1520 (talk) 15:52, 27 July 2021 (UTC) Harsh[reply]

Hparashar1520, i have not done edits in pre 1990 period but every fact in post 1990 is supported by source and i see you have removed sources too by your edits. Let's discuss the changes you find opinated, which in your view are not supported by source. Bring the issues you found, one by one. Heba Aisha (talk) 12:49, 31 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 13:06, 30 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Politics_of_Bihar&oldid=1204818526"