Talk:Kuno Wildlife Sanctuary

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Wikiproject Protected areas of India This article is within the scope of WikiProject Protected areas of India, an attempt to create informative and well-written articles on biosphere reserves, national parks, wildlife sanctuaries, forests and other protected areas in India. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.
WikiProject_India 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.
Stub This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the quality scale. (add comments)
This article is maintained by the Indian geography workgroup.
More information about this article...
This article has been automatically assessed as Stub-Class by WikiProject India because it uses a stub template.
  • If you agree with the assessment, please remove {{WP India}}'s auto=yes parameter from this talk page.
  • If you disagree with the assessment, please change it by editing the class parameter of the {{WP India}} template, removing {{WP India}}'s auto=yes parameter from this talk page, and removing the stub template from the article.
This article is part of WikiProject Protected Areas, a WikiProject related to national parks and other protected areas worldwide. It may include the protected area infobox.

Contents

[edit] lions extgernal links

External links to lions can be used as notes but they should not be in the external links. This pages is far too focused on the lions. It is supposed to be about the Sanctuary David D. (Talk) 21:00, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Just putting all these links back does not address any of the issues with respect to this page having too many links. Mutliple people have told yout that you should cite the references in the article and keep the most relevant ones for external links. Wikipedia is not a resource to collect as many links as possible on a particular topic. You need to identify the important ones. David D. (Talk) 04:43, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] External links Asiatic Lion, Kuno Wildlife Sanctuary, Asiatic Lion Reintroduction Project, etc.

I noted that the articles you have been working on have far too many external links. There should be a minimal number of "important sites". If there are articles etc. relevant to the article then they can be referenced in the text as notes. A sea of external links is practically useless since the important ones are diluted. David D. (Talk) 21:13, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Hi David the Extra "External Links" in the Wildlife articles I have been working on and the Extra External links you have been removing

Hi David

First of all let me thanks you for helping with the wildlife articles I have been working on

Asiatic Lion, Kuno Wildlife Sanctuary, Asiatic Lion Reintroduction Project, etc.

I know you have been removing all the external links I had added in all these and other articles, but you see I am not an experienced writer on Wikipedia, all the external links that I added are actually what I read before writing of editing the article,

  • Hence they should have been included in the "References" section that I didnt make, and I didnt add a "Further Reading" section, wher all the links should have been added.

If you now see the inbreeding section in Asitic Lions, references have been correctly added as an inset within the article, like you were also suggesting, ..... you might want to see how that section was written after pressing edit, also see what appears after pressing edit on "Cited References", if done prperly the "Wikipedia software" automatically tabulates references under the "Cited References" heading, please see when you get time.

All external links will have to be added in "References" section and under "Further reding" sections which were missing, my mistake.... I have been not getting much time to comtribute on wikipedia.

Thanks again

Atulsnischal 06:25, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Hi Atulsnischal, sounds like you are getting the right idea. I'll help out with formatting as I see these come up on my watchlist. David D. (Talk) 04:34, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] See also

Atulsnischal 13:09, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] References

Atulsnischal 13:09, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] External Links

Atulsnischal 07:03, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Comments removed from main articles and listed here

  • 1

"Lions were spread at many place across the Asia. As per local sentiments it is only people of Gir and their tolerance who preserved the lions on cost of their cattle and even human lives. As per the Hindu traditions, the lion is the vehicle of Hindu Goddess Ambaji. Ambaji has high importance in traditions and religious faith of people of Gujarat. Also being widely vegetarian society, It is common faith in Gir locality to consider animal killing as a sin. As per the Gir people these are the reasons behind survival of lions in this place. Even Government of Gujarat and its forest department has put large efforts behind growing the lions count from 20 to 360(+/- 10). Hence they are reluctant to leave their exclusiveness."[1]

  • 2

"The relocation of Gir lions faces opposition from local people. Gir lions has remain issue of prestige for people of Gujarat. As per the local sentiments it is the tolerance of Gir people who preserved lions, even after loosing their cattle on regular basis. There are cases of even human death by lions. Also it is unacceptable for them to leave their exclusivity. Hence the Indian central government's move to shift them, attracted oppose in Gir localities as well by the state government of Gujarat. One argument against the lions shifting is that Kuno Wildlife Sanctuary also houses tigers. The tigers being slight stronger than the lions, are potential threat for survival of lions."[2]


References for above:

Above comments have been removed from the main articles and listed here by me.

Atulsnischal 16:15, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] removed refererences

I removed these references below because they are not formatted correctly and there are redundant links. There is too much informatiojn too. We due not need the address and telephone number for the authors institution unless there is some good reason i am missing here? Can't we just narrow this down to three really good references rather than throwing so many in without much thought? More is not always better. David D. (Talk) 18:34, 8 November 2007 (UTC) [1] [2]

  1. ^ R. J. Rao and Faiyaz A. Khudsar (2005) Proposed re-introduction of the. Asiatic Lion in the Kuno Palpur. Sanctuary, Madhya Pradesh, India. Re-introduction NEWS: No. 24 April pg 13-14
  2. ^ Dionne Bunsha (2005) A kingdom too small, Frontline, Vol 22 (10) May 07 - May 20
    Lions in Gir look for new territories as the sanctuary is not large enough for their population.

[edit] WP:STALKING Comment also copied here from discussion pages Genetic pollution and Genetic Erosion

How can you expect to not have problems with the POV section that you have cut and pasted into multiple articles? At present you have refused every opportunity to discuss this matter and just revert my edits accusing me of stalking. This is hopeful on your part, and you seem to think that if you say it enough it will become true. If you keep refusing to dicuss this issue i will remove that section from every article you have placed it. It reads like a political scree and is not neutral enough for wikipedia. You need to discuss how this section can be made more neutral, an opportunity that hs been present to you on at least two different talk pages. I am within my rights to remove this section if you choose to ignore all discussion. David D. (Talk) 04:30, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

I have already made it neutral enough, i spent days on it, your POV accusation is based on previous POV comments on Genetic pollution discussion page which came when I started the article and wrote two lines on it, i spent a week on it afterwards finding and using references and nuteral enough language, it states the truth. Definitely you have stalked me to my other articles over the months so there you go, I am busy now with other stuff in life. Kindly dont stalk me and bother me and do some constructive contributions instead to wikipedia. Please dont leave comment after comment for me on my talk page it has been bothering me, you are definitely causing stress, and my WP:STALKING accusation for you holds true. Atulsnischal (talk) 18:19, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
Your stalking accusations are unwarranted. I have been a long time contributor to GMO and biology topics here. Why shouldn't I take an interest in genetic erosion-type articles? Why do you think I even noticed your edits in the first place? Show me evidence of my edits not being constructive; almost all my edits have been to help your articles grow. You just can't see it in this case because you happen to disagree with my opinion (one that others share too).
When were those discussions and collaborative edits that led you to improve the POV of this text? To date, I have seen no evidence that you have been willing to receive independent input on this topic.
It’s a shame that you are unwilling to discuss this content dispute and instead try to change the subject and avoid any dialog. Is this your way of informing us you are unwilling to discuss any on the content you have inserted into multiple articles? Your input would be welcome but not necessary. David D. (Talk) 18:44, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WP:STALKING

So by changing the title of this topic and the subsequent removal of the dialog is your way of informing us you are unwilling to discuss any on the content you have inserted into mulitple articles? Your input would be welcome but not necessary. David D. (Talk) 18:29, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Listen I have Archived our previous conversation - it is in my talk page Archives [3], your edits are based on and motivated with WP:STALKING me on Wikipedia which you have been doing since the last year or so, outcome can not be healthy and I dont want to argue with you. Please do not go to my contributions page for following me from there to articles I have been working on, that is called stalking. Please dont get into ego clashes and personality clashes with people, just find articles randomly for contributing.

Hope it makes sense, also I did inform that I am busy with other stuff in life.

Best wishes, hope you will leave me alone.

Atulsnischal (talk) 21:28, 24 November 2007 (UTC)