Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur

Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur
Peer Review

I have been working on this article for quite some time, and now find it good enough to be a featured article. The article uses some text from the Indian Institutes of Technology article (another FA that I had major contribution in writing). I have tried to use as less text from it as possible, at the same time making sure that the article is comprehensive enough to stand on its own. The article uses several self-published sources as its reference, though I have made every attempt to make sure they are used only in the capacity self-published sources are allowed as a reference. Recently, the article had a lot of its references for trivial claims removed, so arranging for missing references won't be a problem. The article uses only free images, with the exception of the institute logo. — Ambuj Saxena (talk) 15:13, 18 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Strong Support excellent work. It has incorporated the criticism from the FAC of the IITs. Rama's arrow  15:18, 18 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Object:
 * Get rid of the inotes; they're utterly useless from the reader's perspective, and have been deprecated for some time.
 * The "Student life and culture" section is somewhat lacking in citations.
 * Footnote #19 is pretty cryptic. What does "Water Works Section, IIT Kharagpur" mean in this context? Kirill Lokshin 15:32, 18 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Reply. I have taken care of the footnotes. They weren't useful from reader's perspective, but have utility for explaination just like footnotes/endnotes. Since none of them were critical, I have removed them completely. Can you please point out which sentences would require citations. As I said in the first paragraph above, a lot of references for trivial (undisputable) claims have been deleted recently, so restoring them back won't be a problem. The footnote #19 refers to the briefing given by the Head of Water Works section to the students. Any suggestions on how it should be re-written for clarity? — Ambuj Saxena (talk) 15:45, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Update. I have added seven refs in the "Student life and culture" section. Please let me know if there are any other outstanding concerns. — Ambuj Saxena (talk) 15:55, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
 * That seems fine. I'm not certain to what extent the "briefing" is acceptable as a source, though.  Are there recordings or transcripts of it that you could cite?  If there's no permanent record, it probably doesn't qualify as a verifiable source. Kirill Lokshin 15:59, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Update. Removed as ref. — Ambuj Saxena (talk) 16:03, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
 * You forgot to remove the second reference to it, so now there's a blank footnote #21. More to the point, though: removing the citation but leaving the statement in the article seems like an utterly senseless thing to do in this case, as it leaves the article containing statements that cannot be verified from a suitable source. Kirill Lokshin 17:21, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Reply. Cleared the mess. I left the sentence as it is as I thought it wasn't a claim big enough to necessiate a reference. It seems that you think so. So, I have removed the sentence. — Ambuj Saxena (talk) 17:32, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Are there any other issues that I can address? I see you are still opposing the FAC, though all the objections raised have been addressed. — Ambuj Saxena (talk) 19:13, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Nope, no more objections per se. I still think the article is under-cited, but that may just be personal preference rather than something actionable. Kirill Lokshin 06:32, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the update. As I said above, at some point of time, the article had as many as 15 more references compared to current revision. The consensus among the editors was that the article is over-cited, and hence nearly 20+ references were removed as trivial. Some of them have been reinstated on your request. — Ambuj Saxena (talk) 08:21, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

A significant improvement over earlier IIT articles: Overall, it's in good shape. Sandy
 * (Would like to see this cited in the lead, so I don't have to go looking for the cite.) "IIT Kharagpur is widely regarded as one of the best engineering institutions in Asia."  I found this later, but it's not clear they are saying the same thing?  "In the Shanghai Jiao Tong University's Academic Ranking of World Universities, IIT Kharagpur was the only IIT listed among the top 500 universities worldwide.[12]"
 * (Committee, or is there a word in India I don't know? All four institutions, or all the four institutions?)  The interim report of the committe urged the speedy establishment of all the four institutions
 * (Common course structure seems awkward: a common course structure, or common courses?)  The first year of B.Tech. has common course structure for all the students.
 * Would like to see notable alumni referenced: don't want to open the door to other FAs which don't cite notables.


 * Reply. Thanks for the compliments, though there have been only one IIT article before at FAC. I have taken care of your objections. For the first point, I have changed the sentence to "....IIT Kharagpur is regarded as one of the best engineering institutions in India", and provided a ref for it. I have fixed the minor spelling mistakes in second point, and rephrased the third. I have also added five refs to the Alumni section. Please have a look and tell if more are needed. — Ambuj Saxena (talk) 14:57, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Support. Sandy 19:38, 26 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Possible issues. Sorry for listing so many:
 * "Indian educationalists Humayun Kabir and Jogendra Singh constituted a committee". Were they the only two members?  If you mean "formed", try that instead.
 * The word "committee" is used four times in one short paragraph (first of the history section)
 * "persuaded Jawaharlal Nehru... to establish the first institute in West Bengal, that had the highest concentration of industries at the time." Poorly formed sentence&mdash;"which" in place of that would be an improvement, but recasting it entirely would be preferable.
 * What's a "fresher"?
 * Flow issues, especially in the second paragraph of the history section (near the end). The part on the name and inauguration is completely unrelated to the info on the historical building (and that part could use some work... tell a story, not just a sequence of facts)
 * The use of italics seems excessive... "director", "deputy director", "board of governors", "wardens"; these are all extremely common and undeserving of special attention.
 * Could we link to the currency in the Administration section?
 * "comprises of" sounds clumsy; "consists of" is better. Or reverse the order and just use "comprise".
 * "with a cumulative cumulative grade point average"... spot the redundant word =).
 * In the Campus section, "township" is a little strange&mdash;that word to me implies something official, as in a political entity. Is that the case?
 * "There are 18 hostels along the Scholars Avenue, that extends from the institute gate to the B." Same problem as before (3rd point)
 * What's "defence staff"?
 * What's "PGDIT"?
 * What's a "lecture class", and why is it different from a normal class?
 * "two big auditoriums on either sides." --> "two big auditoriums on either side".
 * Is it "guest house" or "guesthouse"? I prefer the former, but be consistent.
 * "it would wean them from the benefits they enjoy from the amenities provided by the institute." How about "it would hinder their access to amenities provided by the institute"?
 * In "Admissions and academics", shouldn't the reservation policy stuff be together?
 * "The first year of B.Tech. has common courses for all the students. The common courses include the basic courses from various departments." The second sentence is almost entirely worthless.
 * "from their respective departments, that are known", "programs, that integrate", "engineers and scientists, to learn new technologies"&mdash;comma problems.
 * What's "worth Rs. 41.70 crore"?
 * Words like "indiscipline", "ragging", and "rusticated" need to be replaced.
 * Conversion needed for "a height of 20 ft" and other measurements. --Spangineeres (háblame)  01:31, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

'' -- cpedit needed --Anon 23:31, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Reply. Thanks for the detailed review. I have addressed nearly all your concerns. Here are the ones that need special mentioning.
 * I have reduced the occurances of "committee" to twice (as against four times).
 * The word "township" is used in the institute's history page. Does it still requires replacement? PS: the page has outdated statistics.
 * I have restricted use of "lecture" to only "lecture halls". "Lecture classes" are now called "classes".
 * I have clarified that its revenue worth Rs. 41.70 crore.
 * I have replaced "indiscipline", though I couldn't see why it would be wrong to use.
 * I have explained "ragging" for worldwide view, though still mention the word in braces as this is the way it is referred to in the sub-continent.
 * I have provided conversion of units to nearest whole numbers.
 * Please let me know if there are any more issues. If anything improves the article, we should be thankful for it, not feel sorry :) Regards, — Ambuj Saxena (talk) 10:00, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
 * I don't understand "Rs. 41.70 crore". I presume it's currency, but why the "crore"?  Indiscipline is a word, but isn't used much in my experience.  Using it later that paragraph is fine once the context is established, but leading off with it is a bit jarring to me.  I would still drop the use of "township" unless there's an explanation somewhere of what it actually means.  It's a vague term, making it less than helpful.  As for units, which are more common--English or metric?  The article goes back and forth: there are km of roads, acres of land, and feet of width.  I'm not sure what the convention is for India-related articles, but I expect that it should be metric first, with English in parenthesis. --Spangineeres  (háblame)  16:59, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Reply. Thanks for pointing it out. I have been hunting the wrong animal! Anyway, I have corrected it. I have also eradicated the word "township". The units error was a serious one, I admit, but I have fixed that too throughout the article. — Ambuj Saxena (talk) 17:43, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
 * I have addressed all the issues. Are there any more? — Ambuj Saxena (talk) 17:27, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
 * I now support. Only suggestion is that references be added for the Vision 2020 fundraiser, the second paragraph of the Undergraduate education section, and the information at the end of the Student life section (Rangolis, etc.).  Some prose improvements could be made, but overall, nicely done. --Spangineeres  (háblame)  17:47, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
 * I have added references as asked. — Ambuj Saxena (talk) 12:53, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
 * I got the article copyedited by a renowned English professor. The article's language is much better now. — Ambuj Saxena (talk) 07:25, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Support looks good. KnightLago 02:27, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Support. No issues. --Antorjal 13:14, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Support.--Dwaipayan (talk) 11:26, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Oppose Comments --
 * (the then Chief Minister of West Bengal) -- remove brackets
 * (2,100 acres) remove brackets, convert to rounded equivalent metric and put imperial in brackets.
 * ''IIT Kharagpur is particularly famous for its Illumination and Rangoli festival, in addition to Spring Fest, its social and cultural festival and Kshitij its technology festival.
 * The first image in =History= needs to be aligned right. The next can be left aligned.
 * (USA) --> in the United States
 * remove "" and flow with sentence
 * 120km plz follow MoS
 * Imperial equivalents needed.
 * 1990-2006, nothing eventful has happened?
 * ''is linked to the other IITs' --> linked? odd wording
 * (professors, associate professors, and assistant professors) --> flow
 * Noticed many such sentences. Please flow as serve as a break.
 * Rs. 100–200 --> all currency related topics need to be linked to US$ for international compatibily coversion. Make sure that in the footnotes you have ..As of...
 * The classes are usually held between 7:30 a.m. and 5:30 p.m IST. -- trivia, remove
 * Locator map needed. Cannibalise & modify from the one at IIT
 * The classes are usually held between 7:30 a.m. and 5:30 p.m IST.
 * for SC and ST students -- makes little sense for non Indian readers
 * Hijli Shaheed Bhawan image conflicts with the =Civic amenities= heading. Right align.
 * Avoid left aligning images at the start of a section.
 * = Sponsored research and industrial consultancy= long title. Shorten
 * Government agencies --> government...
 * Stub red links


 * Hi - thanks for your input. I've fixed most points you raised, but (1) Rs. to USD is not necessary or advisable. Its just something the reader has to figure out, especially as the currency exchange rate keeps changing. For this article we must employ Indian English and this the metric system. The first picture cannot be aligned right as the infobox is in the way. Rama's arrow  00:32, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Replying to your post: I strongly disagree with your above statements that my suggestions should not be implemented. 1. INR to USD is not necessary? Articles on wikipedia should cater to the international reader, the USD is the closest thing to an international currency today. Instead of making a reader hop on to various sites to figure out the equivalent, our job is to present the facts and information right here. And for the fluctuation of currencies, I have stated above that where the equivalent is given, a footnote should be added to mark the date of conversion (As of). To reinforce my point, this is mentioned in Manual of Style (dates and numbers), and Indian featured articles such as Indian Railways have implemented it. 2) Secondly, nowhere does it say that Indian English and equivalent imperial units are incompatible. As mentioned above, it is helpful to a reader unfamiliar with the system metric. It is also uncontroversially used in Geography of India. See Manual of Style (dates and numbers) 3) The picture and the infobox cause a squeeze in the text at the centre. The infobox is not the issue, if both conflict, the image is placed directly below the infobox. I have made the necessary adjustments myself. Regards, --Anon 16:57, 30 September 2006 (UTC)


 * I'm afraid there will be a lot of disagreement about the status of USD - why not the Euro or UK pound? Apart from the conflict, this information (INR = USD) is irrelevant to this article, which is why I'm not concerned whether the reader has to hop a few sites to find the USD rate. As it is an Indian institution, the data will be only in INR. I request you to implement the imperial unit substitution, for I'll only get to it tomorrow. Rama's arrow  22:32, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
 * I still disagree with the above statement. I continue to maintain: the USD is the closest thing to an international currency and a lot of international monetary statistics are calculated using the USD rather other currencies such as Euro. If your concerned with the others, please do remember that stats like GDP, GNP, Balance of payment etc. are all stated in USD. Well, anyways this is not the appropriate forum to discuss the correct currency. Secondly, the INR-USD onversion has been relatively stable, and can be easily updated every six months or so without too much of a change. I hope the nominator can implement these changes. Regards, --Anon 02:27, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
 * GDP, GNP etc. are economic data where such conversions are deemed vital - its ok to provide USD when discussing the Economy of India. But this article merely discusses fees and donations. There is no need to add irrelevant data which has to be changed periodically - for the trouble editors here have to take, the reader can find out the USD value in less than 1 min thru Google. Rama's arrow  17:47, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
 * I have changed to Object: And who determines if it is ok to provide data to articles such as the Economy of India and not here? There is no definitive statement or policy here on wikipedia that states where such conversions are not applicable. My opposition has merit as it mentioned in the Manual of Style. I repeat, the conversions are not volatile that merit frequent updates. Anyways in such cases we never convert to the exact equivalent figure, but the nearest approximate round figure. And a reader should not jump to google five or six times in an article if he wants to find out an equivalent. A featured article should be helpful to a reader, not the other way round, and is in no certain ways "irrelevant". And besides, conversions are cheap, don't cost more than half a kb. --Anon 00:28, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Including conversions here would be redundant, requiring that more than one article (Indian Rupee and this one) be updated every time the exchange rate changes. I have linked two of the Rs. abbreviations to Indian Rupee, where exchange rates to several common currencies are given.  The "cost" of a conversion isn't the number of kbs, it's the amount of time spent updating.  Also, regarding GDP etc., those numbers are usually fixed (once the 2005 GDP is calculated it doesn't change) and thus a direct conversion to 2005 dollars (which are also fixed for all intents and purposes), for example, is appropriate.  Here, however, the Rs. values can fluctuate, and the exchange rate can fluctuate, because we're referring to a general time period.  As such, a simple link to the currency should suffice. --Spangineeres  (háblame)  01:02, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Well, updation of content is what wikipedia is noted for as time progresses. Having dynamic (but non volatile) equivalents does not impede the readability of articles, nor can it be called redundant. I don't see why we should be afraid of updation for a single article which aims to set itself amongst the encyclopedia's best. If that was the case, articles such as Economy of India should never be put up on FAC as it calls for too many variables and figures to be updated. On a related topic, there are also many featured articles that quote the nominal value of the dollar some time in history, with the current equivalent of the same amount. (eg. Glacier National Park (US)). This is extremely helpful to a reader to gauge the metrics as of today. I'm not asking for anyone to do a daily or monthly update of the rates, a biannual or annual update should be more than enough as long as we quote the date the conversion was done. --Anon 03:09, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
 * If every page that uses a semi-obscure currency contained a conversion to dollars or euros or whatever, the number of pages that would have to be updated regularly would be exceedingly high. Editors' efforts can be more useful in creating new content, rather than updating information that is already present in regularly updated articles on the currency itself.  Wikilinks make the exchange rate available just one click away.  The example of Economy of India isn't analogous&mdash;it is a central article that of course must be updated with new information that is directly related to the economy of India.  IIT-KGP, however, is a completely distinct subject from the exchange rate between Indian Rupees and USD, and thus the information should be linked to, not included. I would make the same argument for the Glacier National Park case, assuming that a chart exists somewhere on WP that demonstrates how the value of a dollar has changed through history.  However, I don't see such a chart anywhere, and thus assume that the conversion was directly pulled from a source, not calculated based on an "exchange rate", and as such it's fine as is. --Spangineeres  (háblame)  03:44, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry that you choose to object on a trivial point but I respect your opinion. Rama's arrow  00:42, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry if you saw it that way, but I changed to object as none of my comments were taken care of, or replied to after two days. I have not stated that I am objecting on this particular point. Regards, --Anon 03:09, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
 * I have addressed all the concerns raised by you (Anon), except for the locator map. It could be easily arranged, but I am not sure if it is needed. Locator maps are needed for cities/towns, and not for institutions. A quick look at some of the institutes/buildings like University of Michigan, Cornell University, or even Buckingham Palace drew a blank. I went through WikiProject Universities, and that too does not mention placing locator maps. The article already has . Now coming to the "missing" history. I have added some more history. Here's something I wish to discuss before adding. Since 1990, IIT Kharagpur started offering dual degrees. I can mention that if you wish. The IIT's golden jubilee celebration in 2001-02 is also very famous, but I feel it would be too much trivia to add (this can be added if you find it important). — Ambuj Saxena (talk) 17:30, 8 October 2006 (UTC)


 * weak support. Rama's is correct. And I think the US dollars in the text should be removed and that objection is not actionable: adding the currency conversion makes the article unreliable. Besides, the fact that some very poor 3rd world countries uses US dollars, does NOT mean it is an S.I. unity on currencies, it is very far from that. I don't know what makes you think like that, you should travel more. The article needs better style (layout, wikilinks, make the pictures more colourful, etc.) that is why my support is weak. -Pedro 19:35, 9 October 2006 (UTC)