Template talk:Narendra Modi series

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Narendra Modi series template.

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

	India portal This template 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
	This template is supported by the Indian politics workgroup.

Politics

This template is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics

Discrimination

This template is within the scope of WikiProject Discrimination, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Discrimination on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.DiscriminationWikipedia:WikiProject DiscriminationTemplate:WikiProject DiscriminationDiscrimination

Rendering the Prime Minister's name in Hindi underneath the Romanization

Hello. I am adding the Hindi rendering of Narendra Modi immediately below the Romanization. I've noticed this is the standard practice for many leaders from East Asia. I think this will help bring some attention to internal wiki links to the Hindi page. Thoughts?Svabhiman (talk) 21:42, 3 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Remove horizontal version

I propose to remove the horizontal version of the template, since its not used anywhere. -- Pankaj Jain Capankajsmilyo (talk · contribs · count) 13:34, 9 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Request for comment on using official Government policy names

The RFC is based on an entirely non debatable topic where little (if) any contentious-ness exist.WP:TEA is a far more appropriate place to raise such issues.Procedural close.Light^{❯❯❯ Saber} 13:22, 26 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

I am requesting for a concern of usage of Indian Government policies, their names, and writing about them. It sounds a bit copyright violation of using copyright policy names, and writing about them, which can harm WP:COPYRIGHT, not many of us as contributors, have the permission from Owner of such policies. If content on template here is violating copyright of GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, i request to remove the contents. Unfortunately, I have contributed, two articles, and would get them deleted by Self nomination, if the concerns are correct.Junosoon (talk) 12:30, 9 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comment : Adding possible Government websites which need copyright request from them. [1], [2].Junosoon (talk) 14:34, 9 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Discussing a government's policies is not a violation of that government's copyrights. There are many reasons for this. First, governments generally do not hold copyrights to their policies or laws, otherwise they could charge newspapers for discussing them. Second, discussing a copyrighted work is a permissible use, it's not stealing the value of the work. That's why you can write a review of a movie, and sell that review, but you can copy a clip of a movie and sell that clip. Third, using a title of a work is not copying a significant portion of that work, hence it is not sufficient to be considered copyright violation. I would recommend withdrawing this RfC. Thanks Chris vLS (talk) 04:52, 12 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The claim that discussing the policies of a government constitute a copyright violation is laughable, and this RFC is either borderline disruptive, or indicates competence issues. Please remove that tag at the top of this page. Vanamonde (talk) 05:29, 12 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Using this template

Request all editors using this template to use this template only in article directly relevant to Narendra Modi. Using this template, for example, in article pertaining to bills pending in parliament, and/or Acts passed by Parliament, is not correct in my opinion. However, if the Act is known by a different popular name, this template may be used. ChunnuBhai (talk) 04:46, 28 January 2017 (UTC) Attention collaborators (Sitush—Kautilya3—Dharmadhyaksha—Capankajsmilyo)[reply]

If government programs/policies Modi is responsible for are going to be listed in the navbox, then the navbox should go in those articles. Vanamonde (talk) 07:21, 28 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

the template documentation does not say that. it says that the template is for "listing information regarding narendra modi". for programs and policies, there is already a category Modi administration initiatives.ChunnuBhai (talk) 09:14, 28 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Then remove them from the navbox, too. Vanamonde (talk) 16:29, 28 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Emblem of India

The use of emblem of India should not be at the bottom of the template but it should be on top of the template.-- . Shlok _{talk .} 17:56, 29 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Shorter version

How do we use a shorter version of this template? DTM (talk) 13:16, 2 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I am removing the template from Atmanirbhar Bharat for now. It is literally the size of the entire article when viewed on a desktop. DTM (talk) 16:20, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

GoBackModi

The GoBackModi mentioned in the controveries section appears to be not of same importance as some of the other issues such as the Farmer Protests and CAA protests, I think that it holds WP:UNDUE weightage by being in the same section as them and potentially dimishes the severity of the other issues and controveries. I believe it should be omitted from the template. Opinions? Xoocit (talk) 15:08, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]