Talk:Northeast India

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Suggested Edits[edit]

 Not done Note: this page is not currently protected. — xaosflux Talk 14:30, 3 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Not done: The page's protection level has changed since this request was placed. You should now be able to edit the page yourself. If you still seem to be unable to, please reopen the request with further details. Flow 234 (Nina) talk 09:47, 5 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

To be added[edit]

RenZutↂ 08:18, 21 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Merger Proposal[edit]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
The pages should be merged with proper redirect from 'Seven Sister States' post merge.RenZutↂ 06:09, 12 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest we merge Seven Sister States to this article. A combined article would be better and less redundant than having 2 different closely related articles. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 10:50, 30 December 2012 (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.

Proposed merge with Seven Sister States[edit]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
The pages should be merged with proper redirect from 'Seven Sister States' post merge.RenZutↂ 06:09, 12 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Given that the only difference between the Seven Sister States and Northeast India is the inclusion of Sikkim, it seems redundant to have two articles covering almost entirely the same territory. The Northeast India article could cover it all, and could include a short section noting that the states excluding Sikkim, the ones that are completely to the east of the channel between Bhutan and Bangladesh, are known as "The Seven Sisters". Largoplazo (talk) 10:30, 6 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Right, there does not seem to be any historical importance to the term 'Seven Sister States'. The articles could be merged.Renzut
There is no consensus on this. Please look above. Chaipau (talk) 23:04, 7 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Chaipau: The last vote was in 2013, and it was certainly mixed. There's no reason to assume the consensus is to keep the articles separate either. Other users should continue to share their opinions. I personally am of the opinion it should be merged. DA1 (talk) 10:10, 4 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@DA1: I agree with you and @Renzut:. Please merge. Chaipau (talk) 10:28, 6 September 2017 (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.

Assam - Ahom[edit]

Bhaskarbhagawati Please do not use this article to get into a discussion on the theories on Etymology of Assam, please use the article created for that purpose. Chaipau (talk) 22:06, 24 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, i invite you to do so, 'Etymology of Assam' was prepared by you as per many previous discussions, and here you get its reflection only. Reply, if you want there. Thanks. भास्कर् Bhagawati Speak 09:03, 25 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The explanation that the origin of the name Assam is in Sanskrit has been rejected by Edward Gait in History of Assam. Chaipau (talk) 10:06, 25 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
There are two explanations given when we consider the origin of Assam as a Sanskrit word. One, as "uneven" land, which you mention; and two, as "un-paralleled" Ahoms. Why did you choose to pick the first explanation and so oppose the second? Also, both explanation are rejected by Gait. Since the exact explanation is still contested in this Wiki, why don't we use it according to the evidence? Do you have any evidence of the use of Assam as "uneven" from historical documents? Chaipau (talk) 14:22, 25 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Kindly take it to talk:Etymology of Assam. भास्कर् Bhagawati Speak 07:03, 26 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Please do not make changes. I have inserted two citations from Masica (1993) and Kakati (1962), two leading linguists. Masica agrees with Kakati is attributing the name to the Ahom people. Chaipau (talk) 17:01, 26 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I have also added 'Ahom people', it is put forwarded by many authors like Banikanta Kakati (1941); but for sack of neutrality you are supposed to include 'Hacom' too along with other theories, if any. Banikanta also added that it took Sanskrit form meaning 'unequalled', 'peerless' or 'uneven'. भास्कर् Bhagawati Speak 04:06, 27 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
What is asserted here is the evidence that the name is associated with the Ahoms. In the quote, please note the word "attested". This means evidence. Hacom is a theory on how the name Assam came about. There are many other theories. The rightful place to discuss them all is Etymology of Assam. Chaipau (talk) 18:40, 27 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
So, 'literal meaning' can be shown as unclear or ambiguous. भास्कर् Bhagawati Speak 08:59, 28 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

The following discussion 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.

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on North-East India. 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:

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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 05:25, 15 October 2017 (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.

Requested move 7 November 2017[edit]

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. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: page moved. (closed by page mover) GeoffreyT2000 (talk, contribs) 02:29, 15 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

North-East India → Northeast India – This is not a new name. The name should be reverted back to earlier as all related pages are constructed this way, making it easier to list in Disambiguation and other places. This way it is more consistent and easier to find. RenZutↂ 05:52, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support with no prejudice against North-east India; whatever is most common in English-language sources published in India. "North-East" is just wrong, because we don't capitalise after a hyphen unless what follows the hyphen is an independent proper name (as in post-Soviet).  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ >ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ<  16:16, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment [1] is a government site that uses "Northeast" and "North East India". @Swift User 72: who appears to have made this move with no discussion at all. power~enwiki (π, ν) 06:50, 13 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The following discussion 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.

@GeoffreyT2000: this move above was wrong - it should be North East India, per commonwealth English usage, not Northeast India. Thanks  — Amakuru (talk) 09:58, 15 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Northeast is not wrong. Besides, we are only trying to bring it back and revert to earlier. If there is a need for a change, please start a new section and cite credible references.RenZutↂ 19:15, 15 November 2017 (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.

18 to 70 year old history reported as current information[edit]

I moved history dating from 1947 to 2000 to "History." However, another editor reverted this back to current information with no edit summary. See https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Northeast_India&diff=prev&oldid=830574163. This should be moved back IMO. Student7 (talk) 17:15, 17 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This part being referred to '21st century separatist unrest' and others have been correctly put under the section called 'Administration and political disputes'. The header already reads ... political disputes and therefore the change was reverted to earlier. RenZutↂ 07:59, 26 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Geography section mistakenly split up[edit]

In this article, geography has been split up into two sections, "Geography" and "Wildlife". I tried to correct this, but was reverted. See https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Northeast_India&diff=next&oldid=830913629.

But see Featured articles: Australia, Bangladesh, Cambodia, Geography of India, and the only project with a clear, specific outline, Wikipedia:WikiProject_Cities/US_Guideline#Geography, which is why it is often used for other projects, though "US cities" may not be involved. Student7 (talk) 20:17, 19 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This is big move. To be true, Wildlife In Northeast India is supposed to be a separate article (pending under my project list at the moment). Given the importance and the breadth of the content, not including it in Geography may be better. RenZutↂ 08:02, 26 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Largest cities by population[edit]

The population numbers given for a lot of cities don't match the census numbers given in the citation. For example, Guwahati, Agartala, and Dimapur numbers are off by 3 lakh, 1 lakh, and 2.5 lakh respectively from the numbers in 2011 census on urban agglomerations. Pease check this and make corrections, if necessary. Kekamohan (talk) 13:08, 15 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Could you please cite the source? RenZutↂ 07:24, 3 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion[edit]

The following discussion 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.

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 19:52, 22 September 2018 (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.

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 11:53, 15 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 23:24, 10 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Move discussion in progress[edit]

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:North India which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 10:32, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Tripuri/Kokborok[edit]

@Kwplai: Though the language is listed as Tripuri, it is called Kokborok by linguists. We should prefer such updated names even if an older version is used in official documents. For example, Lalung is the name of an ethnic group used officially, but this name is considered derogatory and the people prefer Tiwa. A similar situation prevails for the Mising. Chaipau (talk) 10:38, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Kwplai: Your edit summary is misleading. Kokborok is the name of the language that constitute many different dialects. This is from Jacquesson (2007) A Kokborok Grammar (Agartala dialect) Agartala, Kokborok Tei Hukumu Mission p6:

Kokborok is spoken in the Indian state of Tripura (Twipra), in North-Eastern India, and in the adjacent regions of Bangladesh. It belongs to the Tibeto-Burmese wide group of languages, and more precisely to the Bodo-Garo subgroup. The language has several dialects, the most divergent of which being Riang, also called Bru, which seems transitional with Boro. These dialects differ in many respects, specially phonetics.

Kokborok is not a single dialect but a language. Jacquesson is a well known linguist.
Chaipau (talk) 10:35, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Fylindfotberserk: I think we should keep Kokborok as the name of the Tibeto-Burman language in Tripura, not Tripuri. What do you say? Linguists give it that name, and Kokborok is also mentioned as one of the official languages in Tripura 52nd REPORT OF THE COMMISSIONER FOR LINGUISTIC MINORITIES IN INDIA p23 Official Languages of the State: The Official Languages of the State are Bengali, English and Kokborok.
What do you say?
Chaipau (talk) 20:03, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Chaipau: Yes, we have to follow the linguist given name in Wikipedia → Kokborok, a name which is also the official language of the state. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 09:01, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Kokborok includes only one dailect that is spoken in Western Tripura. There are other dailects which includes Reang, Jamatia, Noatia, Uchoi, Kaubru, Kaurung total 9 dailects, with the confluence of all the dailects Tripuri standard dailect was formed for Tripuri literature by the Tripuri language experts group.
According to the Tripuri literalist and Intellects Kokborok is not the meaningful name of Tripuri language, which literally mean Human language. Kok (language) and Borok (Human). They pointed that all the humans around the world speak Human language, therefore they concluded that the name of the Tripuri language can't be termed as "Kokborok". They also pointed that the origin of word Kokborok is very recent. Before that the language was known as Tipra kok/ Tripuri, which is the appropriate name of the language.
Also in "Census of India 2011 - Languages and Mother tongues"[1] the language is termed as Tripuri and under Tripuri the dailects Kokborok, Reang etc was mentioned. Hence the name of the language should be "TRIPURI" which is the appropriate term according to the native speakers of this language. Kwplai (talk) 13:45, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Therefore the term Tripuri should be used. Kwplai (talk) 13:48, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
You have provided no source to defend your claim. The Census of India link does not work. Chaipau (talk) 08:34, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  1. ^ Census of India 2011 - Languages and Mother tongues
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Northeast_India&oldid=1194773823"