Talk:High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh

Skip to table of contents

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

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

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

On 9 September 2021, it was proposed that this article be moved to High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh. The result of the discussion was not moved.

Date of establishment

OK, so this short article manages to assert or imply three different dates on which the court was established:

28 August 1943
26 March 1928
10 September 1943

I'm guessing part of the confusion is down to the difference between the date on which a legal instrument was issued, and the date it took practical effect. But clearly this needs sorting out by someone with access to some decent source material!

Andrew Gwilliam (talk) 20:00, 28 November 2011 (UTC).[reply]

Requested move 9 September 2021

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. Although the nominator was blocked during this discussion, the oppose comments have been unanimous. (closed by non-admin page mover) ASUKITE 16:11, 17 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

~~High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh → High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh – Correction in name Hindu108 (talk) 06:28, 9 September 2021 (UTC)~~[reply]

Strong oppose - Clause two of the The Jammu and Kashmir Reorganisation (Removal of Difficulties) Order, 2021 which formally renames the court refers to the court as the "High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh" with the word "and" and not an ampersand (&) as suggested by the proposer of this move. Please see - https://egazette.nic.in/WriteReadData/2021/228337.pdf - for the full text of the order.Cordyceps-Zombie (talk) 15:13, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

** Comment:Cordyceps-Zombie. i would like to show you the official website of High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh, at the very top of website it clearly uses "&" instead of "and" and in the whole website's content, "&" is being used instead of "and". Hindu108 (talk) 07:59, 11 September 2021 (UTC) [reply]

- - issue in nut shell is, officially we can use "and" and "&" both, now in day-to-day life i think we should consider "&". it has two reasons, first website,as i mentioned earlier and second is that this high court has jurisdiction on two union territories one is "Jammu & Kashmir" and other is "Ladakh", if we use "and", then a person with less knowledge may get confused between jammu & kashmir being two different territories and can think that high court has jurisdiction over three territories "Jammu" "Kashmir" "Ladakh"so for not creating this confusion we should use "&" to differentiate between two territories and two "words" in name of one territory.Hindu108 (talk) 08:09, 11 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per WP:COMMONNAME and MOS:AMP. "High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh" (229 hits) is used as commonly as "High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh" (167 hits), if not more. Would have supported the move had the sources consistenly used "&". As that's not case, I'm inclined to retain the present title. -- Ab207 (talk) 16:20, 14 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

** Comment:Ab207 I dont which search engine you are using but i have google and it shows 9,29,000 results for "High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh" and 7,97,000 results for "High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh". similarly in "News section" see High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh has 51,800 results and High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh has 53,700 results, so clearly WP:COMMONNAME favours move. Hindu108 (talk) 18:39, 14 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

- - Google search includes all mentions in the web, regardless of their reliability. Therefore, news section is comparitively a better measure. Also, we need to go the last page to get an accurate number, else we get massively inflated results. As I said earlier, when both "and" and "&" are used in reliable sources, "and" is preferred per MOS:AMP. -- Ab207 (talk) 05:52, 15 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. We generally expand ampersands on Wikipedia. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:32, 15 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
OP turns out to be a sock, see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Sanjay Kumar Tiwari20, striking through their edits. Doug Weller talk 14:30, 17 September 2021 (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.