Talk:Kokrajhar

Guideline

• Those who are interested in developing this page are requested to follow the norms laid down in Wikipedia:WikiProject India/Cities. Please provide a proper reference or source for whatever you add to this page, in order that others can verify the facts from that reference. Matter without reference is likely to be deleted. There are separate pages for the city and the district. -- P.K.Niyogi 18:07, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Kokrajhar. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060504181808/http://archive.eci.gov.in/se2001/background/S03/AS_ACPC.pdf to http://archive.eci.gov.in/se2001/background/S03/AS_ACPC.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:18, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

Inlusion criteria for schools

Arjayay, why do you insist on schools being notable to be included? Kelob2678 (talk) 21:01, 30 September 2026 (UTC)

Kelob2678 - it is a standard requirement for lists, that they only include notable entries, and a large number of schools lists include that, or very similar, hidden texts. The standard warning template, (which I did not post on your talk page, as per WP:Don't template the regulars) is {{subst:uw-badlistentry}} which would have issued you the following warning:-

Hello. Your recent edit to Kokrajhar appears to have added a non-notable entity to a list that normally includes only notable entries. In general, a person, organization or product added to a list should have a pre-existing article before being added to most lists. If you wish to create such an article, please first confirm that the subject qualifies for a separate, stand-alone article according to Wikipedia's notability guideline. Thank you. - Arjayay (talk) 21:21, 30 September 2026 (UTC)

Some lists include only notable entries, others list everything. WP:CSC#3 provides one of the common selection criteria as Short, complete lists of every item that is verifiably a member of the group. This is a relatively small town and all schools can be included. Another issue is that during AfDs, schools are regularly redirected to towns and the presumption there is that they do not have enough coverage for a separate article, but can be covered at the town's page. Kelob2678 (talk) 21:26, 30 September 2026 (UTC)

In before we want an unending list of non-notable schools/collages . The case with Indian cities/towns is quite different. We have a lot more schools proportional to the population, many of which are run from small buildings, two rooms and some of these only exist in papaers. And no, those can't be included and we certainly do not want different standards for different settlements of India. There are separate list articles like this for many states/cities where we have non-notable institutes included. Perhaps we can adjust these or create one for them. A lot of the AfDed institutes get deleted from the main settlement articles, the ones redirected will also be removed or adjusted. That's what we have been doing in Indian articles. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 21:51, 30 September 2026 (UTC)

Different standards for different settlements is normal, because settlements differ. Inclusion of only notable schools in some cases would result in the removal of a section on education as a whole. It is hard to believe that this town with roughly a 30,000 population can have more than 10 colleges overall and that all of them cannot be included. With schools, based on your link, the situation is more complicated (there are roughly 60 of them in the second file), but we can include only high schools, which I also assume are not that many. What happens in Indian articles is just a form of WP:LOCALCONSENSUS, which mostly disagrees with consensus that is usually formed at AfDs. Kelob2678 (talk) 22:05, 30 September 2026 (UTC)

"the situation is more complicated (there are roughly 60 of them in the second file), but we can include only high schools" - Why include only the high schools? Why the double standards? That's why I said, and had been discussed multiple times at WP:INB (yes local consensuses are important and trumps global consensuses in many situations), it is better to have a common standard in main settlement articles. Move them non-notable to listicles supported by RS. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 22:15, 30 September 2026 (UTC)

Because high schools are more often covered in sources, this is why their inclusion should be prioritized compared to other schools. Which discussion at WP:INB established that consensus? There are somewhat related discussions, but not quite what we need. Kelob2678 (talk) 22:39, 30 September 2026 (UTC)