Talk:Order of British India

message: I have again reverted a number of inaccuracies to spelling, grammar, punctuation, capitalisation and order of precedence for post-nominals. "OBI, IOM" is the correct order in accordance with the Order of Precedence). Additionally, I have also re-removed unjustified biographical material for recipients in the list. The list of recipients is not an appropriate place for providing detailed biographical information on recipients. As a guide, in the main list, the title, name, postnominals and principle military unit with which the recipient is associated and date of award are, in my view, appropriate (although some may think even this is an excessive level of detail - it is certainly more than on many other similar lists on Wikipedia). In the absence of a linked article for notable recipients, it may be appropriate to provide very brief details of the recipient's orders and decorations (but not campaign and commemorative medals) and of noteworthy event(s) related to their appointment to the Order of British India or that are otherwise particularly notable (eg participation in a coronation contingent). All recipients should have a footnoted source reference. Notable recipients should have their own article and in this instance, the footnote should only list the reference since the article should provide the extended detail on orders, decorations, medals, etc. Detailing award of the titles 'Bahadaur' and 'Sadar Bahadur' is overkill as the article already mentions that these are automatically awarded to recipients of the Second Class and First Class of the Order respectively. For those that have been editing the article recently, please pay attention to detail, constantly having to fix mistakes in spelling, grammar, punctuation and order of precedence after you revert my corrections is becoming very annoying. For example
*"1897 , OBI" should be "1897, OBI" - there is no space before a comma;
*"Class)with" should be "Class) with" - there is a space between a closing parenthesis and the next word;
*"meritorious and gallantry services" "should be meritorious and gallant services" - "gallantry" is the noun, "gallant" is an adjective, since we are describing the type of services it is an adjective that is required, not a noun; and
*"five men contingent" should be "five-man contingent", as an adjective compound with an ordinal number, it requires a hyphen to connect the ordinal number to the adjective - men is a plural noun, man is the adjectival form.
Cheers, AusTerrapin (talk) 16:26, 1 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Please stop reverting corrected information to an error riddled form 

message: Were all of the recipients of this award, Indians ?  Or just the ones listed.  Did long-serving english employees of the East India Company, and its army,  get some other award ?Eregli bob (talk) 15:53, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recipients 

message: (Copied from User talk:Nitinthapa23--RegentsPark (comment) 01:19, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: The archive that you point to just includes him in a long (very long!) list of people who are officials. There is no mention of an Order of British India. --RegentsPark (comment) 01:07, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

text: I think it is dubious but I won't revert you. --RegentsPark (comment) 16:17, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: FYI, I've removed your addition of who added the entry. That's not allowed. --RegentsPark (comment) 16:19, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Your edit on [[Order of British India]] 

message: https://archive.org/details/in.gazette.e.1937.6
This is another document which is an original citation for KPM where it clearly states his previous act due to which he was conferred with the title of Sardar Bahadur ie OBI 1st Class Nitinthapa23 (talk) 03:52, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Conferrment of Sardar Bahadur title to Tiku Singh Thapa