Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Indian history

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This page is within the scope of WikiProject India.

Quality: rating not applicable

More information about this page...

Shortcut: WT:HOI

/archive1

[edit] A war waged with Gandhi caps

dear friends i have recently joined this project i am here with giving you the link of this caption this is regarding indian history khilafat movement kindly look into this

[edit] Photo of indian assembly parliament members dated 1937

i hope this may help us we may add the link to this photgraph of the members who are in the photo

Image:Umar_alisha_members_of_legislative_assembly_dated_1937-03-05.JPG

Pingali 15:38, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

http://www.hinduonnet.com/thehindu/mp/2002/10/14/stories/2002101401180300.htm

regards

Pingali 11:05, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Workgroup-level quality statistics

Please read. Regards, Ganeshk (talk) 08:02, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Ahom history

Found this article through the cross-namespace links and thinking it quite a good start I wikified and organized it the best I could, being that Indian history is not my forte. I'm just bringing it to your attention so it can be reviewed and expanded beyond the Ahom-Mughal conflict, or whatever you want to make of it. Dracontes 14:15, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Project directory

Hello. The WikiProject Council has recently updated the Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Directory. This new directory includes a variety of categories and subcategories which will, with luck, potentially draw new members to the projects who are interested in those specific subjects. Please review the directory and make any changes to the entries for your project that you see fit. There is also a directory of portals, at User:B2T2/Portal, listing all the existing portals. Feel free to add any of them to the portals or comments section of your entries in the directory. The three columns regarding assessment, peer review, and collaboration are included in the directory for both the use of the projects themselves and for that of others. Having such departments will allow a project to more quickly and easily identify its most important articles and its articles in greatest need of improvement. If you have not already done so, please consider whether your project would benefit from having departments which deal in these matters. It is my hope that all the changes to the directory can be finished by the first of next month. Please feel free to make any changes you see fit to the entries for your project before then. If you should have any questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me. Thank you. B2T2 15:14, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Maps

I'm interested in making free svg maps. Please drop me a note on my talk page if you need any. =Nichalp «Talk»= 09:20, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Category:Indus Valley sites

This pak as been untagging indus valley with the indian tag on it. Could use some help on this. Szhaider (talk · contribs) seems to be behind it. He takes the tag off harappa civilization and other indic historic sites as well.--D-Boy 21:41, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Chola kings

Can someone please look at the stray little stub Rajarajan that's been created recently. Am I right in guessing that name should redirect to an existing article like Rajaraja Chola I?? --Mereda 17:31, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] A little help, please?

Can someone have a look at the latest entry at Taj Mahal (disambiguation), please? Is Veena a vandalism entry? It looks odd to me. --Nemonoman 05:25, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

I've fixed it. Thanks Parthi ^{talk/contribs} 05:39, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

== Please dont steal Pakistani history == before 1947 there WAS NO pakistan OR india. it is the creation of British. Serious note. Dont make a joke out of this. I will take this matter further.

    Mistaken Definition of Ancient India

We have all seen the term Ancient India before. On first thought you would think it applies to the Ancient History of India. Well, you are wrong. This term applies to the Ancient History of South Asia.

For decades, Indian historians have written the history books according to their own liking. And because of Pakistanis being ashamed of their non-Islamic past, their jobs had been made so much easier. To understand what has happened in the region, you have to be open minded. Everything written here is backed up with facts, logic and common sense. The logic applied to this argument makes sense.

Before India became an English colony sometime in 1800's or perhaps earlier, there was no such thing as India that we see today. The subcontinent was very much divided into many parts ruled by various dynasties. After independence in 1947, many of the states in the subcontinent were united into two single countries. The Republic of India and Pakistan. The Republic of India was not supposed to claim the name 'India'. This was a political agreement broken in 1947 which has lead to a lot of confusion in modern times. India, just like Pakistan was born in 1947. Prior to this, the region which is now India, Pakistan and Bangladesh, was known as British India. When the region was partitioned, Republic of India claimed the title of 'parent state' of British India, as they received the larger land mass for their country. Along with this title they also claimed the History of the region which was British India in ancient times.

This region was only ever united when Britain invaded. Prior to that, the region was scattered with dynasties. Logically, it doesn't make sense that India can claim the history of people and land which never belonged to them. The old argument of 'Pakistan not existing prior to 1947, therefore there is no such thing as Ancient Pakistan' is flawed. The same logic can be applied to India. There was no such thing as a country, India prior to 1947, and prior to the 1800s; the South Asian subcontinent was never united in anyway. So the current definition of Ancient India is flawed. Ancient Indian history is the history of Republic of India in Ancient times. This doesn't include any region outside of their own borders.

Therefore, grouping the history of the entire South Asian subcontinent, which has never been united prior to the 1800s and passing it on to a country which came into existence in 1947, doesn't make sense. Indian Historians have ignored these arguments and pretended that India has existed for 1000s of years.

Let's talk about Indus Valley for example. The region in question is now located in Pakistan. The people of the region have always been living there. However the history of the region is claimed by India, who is in absolutely no way related to the Pakistani people, neither have they ever had claim over the land which is now Pakistan. Indus Valley settlements are located all over Southern Asia. These include, Iran, Turkmenistan, Afghanistan, northwest India, and of course Pakistan. However, the Main IVC cities, aswell as the majority are in Pakistan. The main ones being, Harappa and Mohenjodaro. The Indus Valley history should be called Ancient Pakistani. Any history which took place in what is now Pakistani should be known as Ancient Pakistani history. This includes the Kushun empire aswell.

The Pakistani identity is being stolen because Historians hide the fact that South Asia has never been united prior to 1800s.

It is incorrect to even label IVC as Ancient South Asian history. South Asia is home to 1.6 billion people, which is way too broad to describe the people of Indus valley, which is now Pakistan. Sure this is no harm in mentioning the settlements outside of Pakistan (India, Iran, Turkmenistan, Afghanistan and Kashmir), however one has to remember that Pakistan is the home of it.

User:Unre4L

Wikipedia is not a soapbox and we aren't required to listen to fringe blogs.Baka man 03:55, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Um...pakistan didn't exist before 1947. This is not a joke.--D-Boy 09:52, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

India didnt exist before the 1850s Thats not a joke either mate. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Unre4L (talk • contribs) 22:06, 19 December 2006 (UTC).

May I suggest a few message boards or blogs where this discussion will be better appreciated, User:Unre4L? deeptrivia (talk) 22:56, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Republic of India and Pakistan both didn't exist before 1947. True. However, historians and other scholars (not just Indian, includes Western) don't use the term "Ancient South Asia." They stuck with "Ancient India." Blame them not us. Gizza^Chat ^© 23:55, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

This has been discussed so many times before... Nobleeagle ^[TALK] [C] 05:26, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Unre4L is a member of the forum that he quotes...in fact he is responsible for more than 50% of the output of that forum...so this evidence of his may as well be OR. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 05:29, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Here's another point Unre4L. The Indus civilisation, even when considering the modern post-1947 borders, isn't completely in Pakistan. See Image:IVC_Map.png. Lothal, for example is in the Republic of India. Gizza^Chat ^© 08:29, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

That's beside the point. Harappa is in Pakistan, and we won't tag Harappa as "Ancient South Asian" but Banawali as "Ancient India". The 1947 border is irrelevant for articles on the Bronze Age. see the {{mergefrom}} on this page. It would be best to create a sub-project "WP IVC" and use a template specific to that. dab (𒁳) 14:59, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

True after independence the Republic of India claimed exclusive rights over the usage of name 'India' which was previously used to denote British India.But there was no 'British Pakistan' or anything like that prior to the partition.Parts of present-day Pakistan too were considered to be and officially referred and marked in maps as 'British India'.In fact, your argument seems absurd. Does not the river 'Indus' which gave India its name run through Pakistan! As far as Indus sites are concerned,there are sites such as Lothal,Ropar and Kalibangan in India which are as important as Harappa and Mohenjodaro.Please dont make a political issue of this.The stuff in Wikipedia might please some, it may not please others.However, articles are based on facts and not on opinions -Ravichandar84 15:13, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Category:Indian history stubs

This category has become very large. I think we should focus on expanding/merging these stubs. Do we need a subproject for that? deeptrivia (talk) 06:59, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Make an indian military stub. there's project for it.--D-Boy 11:46, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Oops.. didn't quite get what you're saying. deeptrivia (talk) 18:20, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Indian military history task force--D-Boy 05:58, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

The question is, what do we do with the hundreds of Indian history stubs. A large number of them are not related to military history. deeptrivia (talk) 09:46, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

I can help with clean-up and copy-editing of any merged stubs. It would be good if we can save as much content as possible, and not undo hard effort. I watch this page infrequently, so shoot me a message on my talk page if my services can help. You can also email me, and sometimes catch me on IRC Wikipedia. Nina Odell 13:46, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

I found Serfoji II in the 'pages to be expanded' list and have added additional information.Is there any task or editing work remaining to be done with the page or shall I strike off 'Serfoji II' from the pages to be expanded list. Regards -Ravichandar84 15:04, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Hello, The civilizations in the Indus valley are as Indian as they come. Tomorrow if pakistan breaks up into a further two staes, and one calls itslf talibanistan (or whatever they wish)..then will the 'new people' lay claim to it as well? Absurd man!! It is an Indian civilization, regardless of the fact that the northern part of what was India is now called pakistan.. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rabbanikov (talk • contribs) 13:10, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Tipu Sultan spelling

On the talk page of the Wikipedia article Tipu Sultan I have been having a conversation with Kanchanamala about the spelling of Tipu Sultan. He has changed all the references within the article to 'Tippu'. I would be interested to hear comments from other members of WikiProject Indian History. Thank you Mick gold 09:14, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia Day Awards

Hello, all. It was initially my hope to try to have this done as part of Esperanza's proposal for an appreciation week to end on Wikipedia Day, January 15. However, several people have once again proposed the entirety of Esperanza for deletion, so that might not work. It was the intention of the Appreciation Week proposal to set aside a given time when the various individuals who have made significant, valuable contributions to the encyclopedia would be recognized and honored. I believe that, with some effort, this could still be done. My proposal is to, with luck, try to organize the various WikiProjects and other entities of wikipedia to take part in a larger celebrartion of its contributors to take place in January, probably beginning January 15, 2007. I have created yet another new subpage for myself (a weakness of mine, I'm afraid) at User talk:Badbilltucker/Appreciation Week where I would greatly appreciate any indications from the members of this project as to whether and how they might be willing and/or able to assist in recognizing the contributions of our editors. Thank you for your attention. Badbilltucker 20:35, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Pakistani history

Please see Talk:History of India and present your opinions as to whether India has any ownership over the history of the regions around the Indus. Nobleeagle ^[TALK] [C] 03:29, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

All that's happening there is simple trolling. Same (hilarious) arguments are being presented over and over again. The best thing is to ignore it, and just revert any vandalism. deeptrivia (talk) 06:56, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

We are presenting arguments which make sense, and please dont tell people to ignore the arguments. How can India lay claim over a region which never belonged to India, and isnt even inside your borders? Unre4Lﺍﹸﻧﺮﮮﺍﻝ ^UT 23:29, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

How can the Islamic republic of Pakistan lay claim to a proto-Hindu civilization that is considered "kaffir" ? Baka man 21:20, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Taj Mahal RFC

I've filed an RFC relating to the Taj Mahal at Talk:Taj Mahal#Request for Comment: Inclusion of minority points of view. Your comments would be most welcome. Joopercoopers 18:27, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Deletion of all references to BB Lal, Jane Mcintosh and SP Gupta in IVC articles

User:Fowler&fowler is deleting each and every reference to these three archaeologists in Indus Valley Civilization -related articles, seemingly for "political" reasons. Input on the talk page of the IVC article would be appreciated. Talk:Indus_Valley_Civilization#Fowler.26fowler.27s_deletion_of_all_references_to_BB_Lal.2C_Jane_Mcintosh_and_SP_Gupta --RF 16:58, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Vandalism of Main Project Page

Friends this profile has been involved in altering the contents of the Indian History Main Project Page

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Saurav_Basu2007&action=edit

As a result of which the participants list got deformed.

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Indian_history&diff=116251684&oldid=115011791

As I could not understand the head or tail of the changes that have been made instead I undid the revisio n made by this individual. -Ravichandar84 02:52, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

______________________________________________________________________

FROM UAE DUBAI. ziauae@gmail.com Comments will be welcomed by email.

It is realy useful to have a conversation about india, indian history is whateve, the future is not going towards good. all the region what was a golden bird before 1700 is now looking as a war zone for the people of india with no benifits. It is realy unwanted. no body like to put his house in flames at the time when he is living there, but here it is being done by so called educated rulers just for nothing, so please get the truth other wise it will get you.

[edit] Governor-General

Governor-General of India has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. DrKiernan (talk) 15:28, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Sorry for mistake

I was trying to put my name into the participant section and it copied by username bio. onto it. sorry. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.160.134.156 (talk) 10:47, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] WP:INDIA Tagging with TinucherianBot

TinucherianBot can automatically tag articles with {{WP India}} Banner as {{WP India|class=|importance=}} to the talk page of articles without the project banner. It can also add the workgroup paramaters like "|kerala=yes|kerala-importance=" etc ,if needed. The currently supported workgroups are Kerala, Maharashtra, Andhra pradesh, Tamil Nadu, Gujarat, Bengal, Goa, Himachal Pradesh , Karnataka , Punjab,cities, Cinema, Literature, Protected Areas of India, History, Politics, states, Geography,Maps,Districts and Tamil.

If you need so, you need to provide me with the Categories to run the Bot. Due to some technical issues, the Bot will not run recursively to sub-categories. The requester should kindly verify that there are NO non-related articles in the category.
You may request for the bot run on my talk page... Thanks -- TinuCherian ^{(Wanna Talk?)} - 06:39, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Watchlists

To help this workgroup patrol existing articles for vandalism/recent changes, Ganeshbot has created the Wikipedia:WikiProject Indian history/Articles page. This page will be updated on a regular basis. Please do remind me if I forget. :) It contains articles that were tagged with the India banner and fall under the scope of this workgroup. Please let me know in case of any questions. Thanks, Ganeshk (talk) 11:35, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Categories: Non-article India pages | WikiProject India articles