Q4: Why aren't there sections on science and technology, education, media, tourism etc?
A4: New sections require talk-page consensus. In archived discussions, it was decided to keep them out. Consider expanding their respective daughter articles, such as History of India, instead. See WP:WPC.
Q5: Why was my image or external link removed?
A5: To add or remove images and links, start a thread on this page first. See WP:FP?, WP:IMAGE, and WP:EL.
Q6: The map is wrong!
A6: The map shows the official (de jure) borders in undisputed territory and the de facto borders and all related claims where there's a dispute; it cannot exclusively present the official views of India, Pakistan, or China. See WP:NPOV.
Q7: India is a superpower!
A7: Consult the archives of this talk page for discussions of India's status as a superpower before adding any content that makes the suggestion. See WP:DUE.
Q8: Delhi is a state!
A8: To create an Indian state, the Parliament of India must pass a law to that effect—see Articles 2 through 4 of the Constitution of India, full text here. The Sixty-ninth Amendment, which was enacted in 1991, added Article 239AA to the constitution. It proclaimed the National Capital Territory of Delhi, gave it a legislative assembly, and accorded it special powers that most union territories lack. But Delhi was not made a state. Several crucial powers were retained by the central government, such as responsibility for law and order. Delhi also does not have a governor; instead, a lieutenant governor presides. Unlike Himachal Pradesh, which gained statehood in 1970, and Goa, which gained it in 1987, Delhi continues to be listed as a union territory by the First Schedule.
Q9: Add Hindi as the national language/hockey as the national sport!
A9: Hindi is the official language, not national language. There is no national language, but there are constitutionally recognized languages, commonly known as Schedule 8 languages. English also serves as a subsidiary official language until the universal use of Hindi is approved by the states and parliament.
This article is written in Indian English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, analysed, defence) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Asia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Asia on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AsiaWikipedia:WikiProject AsiaTemplate:WikiProject AsiaAsia
This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia
This article is within the scope of WikiProject South Asia, which aims to improve the quality and status of all South Asia-related articles. For more information, please visit the Project page.South AsiaWikipedia:WikiProject South AsiaTemplate:WikiProject South AsiaSouth Asia
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Socialism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of socialism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SocialismWikipedia:WikiProject SocialismTemplate:WikiProject Socialismsocialism
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Countries, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of countries on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CountriesWikipedia:WikiProject CountriesTemplate:WikiProject Countriescountry
This article was copy edited by Twofingered Typist, a member of the Guild of Copy Editors, on 21 September 2019.Guild of Copy EditorsWikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsTemplate:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsGuild of Copy Editors
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Spoken Wikipedia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles that are spoken on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Spoken WikipediaWikipedia:WikiProject Spoken WikipediaTemplate:WikiProject Spoken WikipediaSpoken Wikipedia
Warning: active arbitration remedies
The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. This article is related to India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan, which is a contentious topic. Furthermore, the following rules apply when editing this article:
You must be logged-in to an extended confirmed account (granted automatically to accounts with 500 edits and an age of 30 days)
PLEASE READ BEFORE POSTING AN EDIT REQUEST ABOUT CHANGING THE COUNTRY NAME If you have come here to post that the country name should be changed from India to Bharat, please note that we use the commonly-used name (common name) to determine article names, even when a country changes its name. For an example, see Turkey, where the official name of the country (Türkiye) is noted in the lead sentence and the infobox, but the article remains at its common English name.
Other talk page banners
This article has been viewed enough times to make it onto the all-time Top 100 list. It has had 151 million views since December 2007.
The rationale behind the request is: "Featured article, and one that may have a higher-than-average proportion of readers who are English language learners".
This is the problem with random statistics in the lead....There is a debate if we where here before the Youngest Toba eruption as outlined at Clarkson, Chris; Harris, Clair; Li, Bo; Neudorf, Christina M.; Roberts, Richard G.; Lane, Christine; Norman, Kasih; Pal, Jagannath; Jones, Sacha; Shipton, Ceri; Koshy, Jinu; Gupta, M. C.; Mishra, D. P.; Dubey, A. K.; Boivin, Nicole; Petraglia, Michael (2020-02-25). "Human occupation of northern India spans the Toba super-eruption ~74,000 years ago". Nature Communications. 11 (1). Springer Science and Business Media LLC. doi:10.1038/s41467-020-14668-4. ISSN2041-1723...... The debate should be removed from the lead and explained in the article in detail...... As the number 55 seems to be a synthesis of sources with an average guess compiled by Wikipedia editors.Moxy🍁 01:24, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Dear IP, The earliest identified anatomically modern human remains found thus far outside Africa are in Australia. That has been known for a very long time. But the human migration out of Africa is based on modern DNA marker evidence, both the mitochondrial which came to be analyzed with a fair level of certainty by the late 1980s and the Y-chromosome which did by early 2010s.
What appears in this article is only material that has appeared in introductory-textbooks, i.e. has been vetted for due weight. See WP:TERTIARY for the role of these text books in due weight.
The first book we have cited (in the sentence about human migration in the lead) is a first-year-graduate level textbook written by Michael Petraglia and Bridget Allchin, leading physical anthropologists. Naturally we give it primacy as their subject of specialization is most closely associated with human migration into South Asia. These authors say, "Y-Chromosome and Mt-DNA data support the colonization of South Asia by modern humans originating in Africa. ... Coalescence dates for most non-European populations average to between 73 and 55 ka." (where KA or KYA stands for "thousand years ago.")
The other two citations are also to textbooks, one the major historical demographer of South Asia, Tim Dyson,'s Population History of India, published by Oxford University Press in 2018, and the other the environmental historian, Michael Fisher's Environmental History of India, published by Cambridge University Press, in 2018. All three are cited in the lead, and all three citations have generous quotes.
We have not averaged out the various estimates, as @Moxy: has conjectured; rather, we have relied on the scholarly tertiary sources to do so for us. In particular, Tim Dyson says, "It is virtually certain that there were Homo sapiens in the subcontinent 55,000 years ago, even though the earliest fossils that have been found of them date to only about 30,000 years before the present." (as opposed to Australia, I might add, where the earliest fossils have been dated to 47 KYA).
So the fact that two leading physical anthropologists, Petraglia and Allchin, one of the human migration out of Africa and the other of India, and the leading historical demographer, had all three picked 55 KYA, is what clinched that particular date for us. Note we say, "By 55KYA ..." That means they might have come earlier, but no later.
Also for us, Nature Communications (cited by Moxy) whose average turn-around-time for first notice of acceptance is 8 days is not the best choice for supporting or discrediting the settled broadscale view of this article. Best regards, Fowler&fowler«Talk»20:09, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sould drop 55 from the lead as its simply a Wikipedia guesstimation. And say in the body that there are two different answers:"Tthe 'early version' states that they came from Africa through the Arabian peninsula 74,000 to 120,000 years ago, bringing Middle Stone Age tools for hunting, gathering food, and making clothes. The 'late version' claims they arrived later, about 50,000 to 60,000 years ago. By 50,000 B. C. , tools were made in large numbers with organized workers and established communication routes for distribution."Joseph, T. (2018). Early Indians: The Story of Our Ancestors and where We Came from. Juggernaut. ISBN978-93-91165-95-6. Should also link the articles we have on the topic so other can read about the debate Peopling of India.Moxy🍁 20:38, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Good Afternoon to all my respected editors, I have a suggestion that I want to add India's house speaker and chief justice name in the page because many countries has their house speaker and chief justice name in their wiki page like USA so as an Indian I want to add their names in the wiki page so what's your thoughts about this? Roni0102 (talk) 08:08, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
So I want that permission for that because internationally India is now more popular so why not everybody needs to know who is India's chief justice and House Speaker Roni0102 (talk) 16:07, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
India is a featured article, or FA. That means its layout, lexicon, syntax, and style conform to featured article criteria and the article has had at least one major community review (WP's most rigorous) and likely more for older articles. Moreover, there are only eightnine country FAs on Wikipedia, of which India is the oldest, now 20 years old. If you examine those eight FAs, the other major ones—Australia, Canada, Germany, and Japan—have but two offices listed under government and they are not the speaker. Cameroon and Bulgaria do have longer lists, but I have not looked at their page-histories to see if they were changed after the community review. Nauru (around whose perimeter my late parents had once walked many moons ago) does have the speaker listed, but among only two in the list. Best regards, Fowler&fowler«Talk»16:39, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Loveforwiki, Once again, it has nothing to do with democracy. It all depends on the article quality. India is a featured article, one of the oldest of it's kind. Hence, it follows that guideline. @Roni0102, Wikipedia works on consensus. You need to start a discussion in this talk page, demonstrating the need of inclusion of the speaker and CJ in the infobox, followed by proper rationale and guidlines. Then the editors of the page will decide via consensus if that inclusion is needed. Once again, I urge you both to go through WP:FA page to understand what a featured article is and how it is different from other pages on various (democratic) countries. Happy editing :) — — Benison (Beni · talk) 16:34, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.
Wikipedia's claim that "Jana Gana Mana" is in Hindi is totally fake. Jana Gana Mana has been written by Bengali Nobel Literate Kabiguru Rabindranath Tagore in Sandhubhasa or Sanskritised Bengali. The Jana Gana Mana as it's sung is the original one not a translation of Hindi. Please kindly change it soon. 106.221.114.3 (talk) 17:14, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
My understanding is that the original song is, of course, in Bengali, but the Indian national anthem is the Hindi "version" of it ("version" being the choice of word of the Constituent Assembly of India in the later 1940s when the discussion took place. By "version," apparently what they mean is this: As the song was written in Sanskritized Bengali, the choice of "Hindi version" by the Constituent Assembly of India was mainly to set the pronunciation of the Sanskrit words when singing, i.e. the anthem has "vidhata" and not "bidhata," which it would be in Bengali, or the Hindu pronunciation "jan" instead of "jono" in the Bengali. Fowler&fowler«Talk»22:45, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
PS Compare, for example, the transliteration in Tagore's original Bharoto Bhagyo Bidhata and in Jana Gana Mana. Tagore's original, besides, has an apt name for the song, for according to his translation it means "Dispenser of India's destiny." But the official title (or popular title) now is the first three words of the song, "Jana Gana Mana," which in (Tagore's song's AI overview) means: "People (Jana) group (Gana) mind (Mana)" which doesn't tell us what it is about.
Unfortunately, this does happen in popular and official culture in a lot of places.
Regional turns of phrase, for example, are disappearing in many Western countries. It probably happened a little more in a multi-cultural, multi-ethnic post-colonial state such as India, where the Hindi speakers (perhaps from being speakers of the largest spoken language) attempted to turn their language into at first a national language, but failing that to the official language of the union. (see Hindi Day). Something similar probably happened to other Modern Indian Languages, many of which were regional languages, and Urdu, also, which was not regional. Thus Iqbal's children's song, Tarana-e-Hindi became Sare JahaN se Achcha. Even then, only five rudimentary couplets from it are sung in India's popular culture.
I just saw now that India's vice president name was removed from there?? Why this position also internationally known so why it's removed so please add that name Roni0102 (talk) 15:32, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
NNot done: Good to simply add Head of State and Head of Government.Position of VP isnt that notable in parliamentry democracies like India Edasf«Talk»17:12, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Change in CPI score and India's rank as per the latest report by CPI
Corruption in India is perceived to have increased during the last decade. According to the Corruption Perceptions Index, India was ranked 78th out of 180 countries in 2018 with a score of 41 out of 100, an improvement from 85th in 2014, but has increased during the last decade as India now Ranks at 95th out of 180 countries listed with a score of 39 well below the global average of 42 as can be seen at this
https://www.transparency.org/en/cpi/2023/index/ind
@Khassanu: Please read WP:OWN#Featured_articles. It is very helpful when editors look at this article with fresh eyes and correct errors. But we all have to play by the same rules: Minor, factual edits are fine, but anything substantial requires a discussion and renewed consensus on this talk page.