Talk:UDAN

Issues and Enhancements
The content is poorly structured, likely added by several editors in stitch together manner. I have taken the liberty to clean it up.
 * Significant addition of content, with "all you need to know" details, neatly organised, details on airport development component as well as RCs component, levy, etc.


 * added infobox
 * introduced subheadings for better readability
 * introduced additional references

FURTHER ENHANCEMENTS you can help with
 * 1) Add details of cities connected (by phase) under this scheme
 * 2) Add details of routes connected (by phase and city .. or just by phase) under this scheme
 * 3) See also: add more entries here for similar schemes from India (to put it in wider context) or elsewhere (for comparison)

I am willing to mentor and help new and frustrated editors who feel they are being run off by fellow editors (they too feel the same...lol) or feeling lost at user-unfriendly wikipedia. Comment below for the specifics of this topic, for help leave a message on my talk page. Let us together create a better and happy wiki. Thanks. Being.human (talk)


 * While I was spending several hours to add major chunk of the text, some of my minor edits were revised/enhanced/corrected by the two fellows editors/friends. Now, I am unable to save due to edit conflict and it is huge chunk of text. With apologies, I am replacing the whole text, the current tiny stub with a larger chunk, the new text incorporates the old text but appropriately reorganised within the larger text. Please take time to review my edit, and make changes accordingly to fix the issues. Many thanks in advance. Being.human (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 14:42, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

Copied material
Some material seems to have been copied. See this comparison. —  Insertcleverphrasehere (or here)  05:40, 18 December 2017 (UTC)


 * I am one of the contributor who have worked on this article for few months. I kind of have an idea how old various passages in the article are and I am willing to put effort to fix any issues. It seems the source was published very recently only 4 weeks ago on 15 December 2017, whereas the passages flagged by the tool as copyvio have been in the article several months prior to the publication of the source. Seems the source mentioned here might have plagiarised from wikipedia, and later the source might have been used in this article (if that is the case) in some different context. 202.156.182.84 (talk) 10:11, 21 January 2018 (UTC)
 * I am not very familiar with this tool. I will also try to play with it next week to find and fix any flaws here, bit busy today. Do me a favor, In the meantime please rerun the tool with the above in mind. If you find something objectionable, I am willing to have a go to rephrase and fix this stuff (assume I am dumb, leave the message in simple but blunt terms). To let me know please leave the similar comment here as your OP and then post on my talkpage to ask me to come visit here. I am not using any other registered account. Thanks for your help in improving this article. 202.156.182.84 (talk) 10:11, 21 January 2018 (UTC)