Talk:Indian Forest Service

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Indian Forest Service. 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 http://web.archive.org/web/20160111233456/http://www.ignfa.gov.in/IndianForestService/tabid/56/language/en-US/Default.aspx to http://www.ignfa.gov.in/IndianForestService/tabid/56/language/en-US/Default.aspx

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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) 11:58, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Indian Forest Service. 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/20160818230053/http://www.ignfa.gov.in/IndianForestService/tabid/56/language/en-US/Default.aspx to http://www.ignfa.gov.in/IndianForestService/tabid/56/language/en-US/Default.aspx

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) 08:03, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

Proposed merge of Principal Chief Conservator of Forests into Indian Forest Service

Subject fails WP:GNG. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 14:08, 2 December 2019 (UTC)

ok--61.3.99.170 (talk) 13:59, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

  Y Merger complete. Klbrain (talk) 18:07, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

Use of the "IFS" and "IFoS" initialisms

It will become apparent to any frequent observer of this page, or of Indian Foreign Service (or indeed many other pages relating to the civil services of India), that there is general dispute over which of the two has the better claim to the initialism "IFS", as played out by a slow-time edit war in which various combinations of "IFS", "IFoS" and the full names of both organisations are swapped out over and over, in a prime example of Wikipedia:WRONG.

I have tried without success to source an "official" answer to this question - but even if there was one, it seems that the common usage is fairly contested regardless. As we seem to be seeing an increasing number of edits concerned solely with the initialism "IFS", I propose the following compromises are observed in respect of the two organisations in any articles relating to them (including, but not limited to: Indian Foreign Service, Indian Forest Service, Civil Services of India, Civil Services Examination (India), Central Civil Services, All India Services and IFS).

• Compromise #1: We will not use the initialism "IFoS" on either IFS page.

Rationale: "IFoS" seems to be used principally by proponents of one organisation to refer to the other, and equally seems to be rejected by proponents of each organisation to refer to their own. Aside from some references on the UPSC website, there doesn't seems to be significant common usage of it elsewhere on the web to refer to either organisation. When used on one of the two pages, it should be assumed that the initialism refers to the organisation about which that page is concerned, so distinguishing between the IFS and the IFS is unnecessary.

• Compromise #2a: We will avoid the use of "the IFS" on either IFS page, and instead use either "the Foreign Service" or "the Forest Service".

Rationale: It seems unlikely that leaving the initialism "IFS" on either page will go unmolested for long. Neither "the Foreign Service" nor "the Forest Service" are particularly unwieldy, Wikipedia is not a paper encyclopedia and so using 13/14 characters rather than 3 is not a problem.

• Compromise #2b: We will avoid the use of "IFS" or "IFoS" on any articles that refer to the organisations. Instead, we will use either "the Foreign Service" or "the Forest Service", or avoid the initialism altogether.

Rationale: Including either initialism after one of the organisation's name rarely adds anything and just seems to provoke edits that solely vary it to the other.

• Compromise #3: We will not remove or amend the initialism "IFS" on either IFS page, should it appear.

Rationale: This is more of an attempt to prevent edit warring. When used on either Indian Forest Service or Indian Foreign Service, there is no doubt that "IFS" refers to the organisation about which that page is concerned, and multiple, repeated edits that solely seek to change this initialism are not constructive. Hopefully, if we move away from using "IFS" on the two IFS articles, this will stop being much of a problem.

In a nutshell: #1 stop using "IFoS", #2 don't use "IFS", but instead use the organisation's short name, #3 don't edit solely to change "IFS" to something else.

I hope this can provide something of a way forward for these two articles that is a little more constructive that the current situation. I am mindful that seeking to establish consensus in relation to such a large number of articles isn't easy, so I have linked to this discussion from the talk pages of the articles listed above, and at Wikipedia talk:Noticeboard for India-related topics. ninety:one 23:44, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

• Comment It would be a good idea to clarify that there's another service that goes by the same initialism, preferably by a note. Based on what is presented, referring to either service by IFoS should be avoided, as it may amount to picking sides. --Ab207 (talk) 07:33, 8 October 2020 (UTC)

Major Concerrns and reforms

I have overviewed the Wiki-Pages of various bureaucratic services which are referred as Top Echelons of Indian Bureaucracy i.e. IAS, IPS, IFS (Foreign), IFS (Forest), IRS, IRS(IT) &IRS(CIT) etc. It is very clear that all of these are not of common standard. Also it is seen that most of these sections are very poorly written in majority of cases. I propose to modify these sections in all pages as mentioned above. Your suggestions in this regard are solicited for better content, references and organization. JPskylight (talk)