Talk:India

Image voting

Image rotation for Indian military

Newer inclusions

• 
  Jointly developed by Sukhoi and Hindustan Aeronautics, the Sukhoi-30 MKI "Flanker-H" is the Indian Air Force's prime air superiority fighter.
• 
  HAL Dhruv of the Indian Air Force Sarang helicopter display team.
• 
  The first test launch of the Advanced Air Defence missile in 2007. India is one of the only few countries to have successfully carried out missile interception test.
• 
  The Indian Army's Arjun main battle tank developed by DRDO and manufactured at Heavy Vehicles Factory.
• 
  The Shivalik class frigate stealth frigate of the Indian Navy
• 
  The Indian Army operates about 700 T-90 Bhishma main battle tanks and Heavy Vehicles Factory aims to manufacture 1,000 more for the Army by 2020.

Comments

1. It makes sense to have the various branches of the military represented in the section, rather than just the air force. --Nosedown (talk) 11:23, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Those in favor

1. --Nosedown (talk) 11:23, 29 March 2010 (UTC)
2. Good EV. --Redtigerxyz ^Talk 05:27, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
3. Agree but certain changes is required. Instead of the Su-30 MKI image which is of poor quality, File:Indian air force dhruv helicopter j4042 arp.jpg image of the HAL Dhruv will be better. Also, the stealth ship, INS Shivalik image can be added.Bcs09 (talk) 02:16, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Those not in favor

• Terrible quality images. Not worthy on a Featured Article like India. Poor image quality and subject coverage. Nikkul (talk) 03:54, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

Images should be shot in India

Newer inclusions:

• 
  Regarded as the "queen of Indian flowers", the Lotus is the national flower of India and is considered sacred by Hindus and Buddhists.<ref>{{cite book
• 
  Regarded as the "queen of Indian flowers", the Lotus is the national flower of India and is considered sacred by Hindus and Buddhists.<ref>{{cite book
• 
  The Indian marsh crocodile is one of the three crocodilia species found in India, the other being the gharial and the saltwater crocodile.<ref>{{cite book
• 
  The Bengal tiger is the national animal of India.<ref>{{cite book
• 
  The common kingfisher is found throughout the plains of India.<ref>{{cite book
• 
  The blackbuck is common in portions of northwestern, central and peninsular India<ref>{{cite book
• 
  The blackbuck is common in portions of northwestern, central and peninsular India<ref>{{cite book
• Found mainly in the forests of India, the Great Indian Hornbill is the largest member of the hornbill family.<ref>{{cite book
  Found mainly in the forests of India, the Great Indian Hornbill is the largest member of the hornbill family.<ref>{{cite book
• 
  The Olive Ridley is the most common type of sea turtles found in Indian waters. Their habitat mainly includes the shallow coastal waters of India on the eastern seaboard. Of the eight species of sea turtles found worldwide, five occur in Indian coastal waters.<ref>{{cite book

Comments

1. There are several species which are not endemic to India and these include the Bengal tiger, Nelumbo nucifera, etc. I cannot understand how someone can agree to have images of these species shot in some other country included in the India article. For example, the only thing in common between that Bengal tiger in a Florida zoo and India is that some distant relative of the tiger happens to roam in one of India's tiger reserves. Lack of concern by other Wikipedians towards this issue just showcases complete disregard for the credibility of this article. The Flora and fauna section must only include those images which depict Indian living organisms in Indian natural environment. And point is, when we have high quality images of these creatures shot in the natural Indian environment, then why borrow an image which was shot in a Florida or Munich zoo? Beats common-sense. --Nosedown (talk) 11:34, 29 March 2010 (UTC)
2. I agree, images shot in India are more representative of India. --Redtigerxyz ^Talk 05:29, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Those in favor

1. --Nosedown (talk) 11:23, 29 March 2010 (UTC)
2. --Redtigerxyz ^Talk 05:30, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Those not in favor

• I would rather have Featured Images of Indian animals (original rotation) than have bad quality images (above) of animals in India Nikkul (talk) 03:56, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

Many of the images above don't even show the full animal! Nikkul (talk) 03:56, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

Removal of Konark image

Comments

1. There has already been a discussion on this - Template talk:Indian image rotation#Shabby additions. --Nosedown (talk) 11:23, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Those in favor

1. --Nosedown (talk) 11:23, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Removal of Mysore Palace image

Comments

1. What a bad image. Does not give the full view of the structure and there are too many distractions including grass and a notice board. --Nosedown (talk) 11:23, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Those in favor

1. --Nosedown (talk) 11:23, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Those not in favor

• Nikkul (talk) 04:10, 11 May 2010 (UTC) Please wait for consensus before removing these images!

Addition of Meenakshi temple image

• One of the fourteen gopurams of the Meenakshi Temple complex in Madurai, Tamil Nadu. Dedicated to Hindu God Shiva and his consort Meenakshi, the temple is considered to be the foremost religious and cultural center of Tamil people<ref>{{cite book
  One of the fourteen gopurams of the Meenakshi Temple complex in Madurai, Tamil Nadu. Dedicated to Hindu God Shiva and his consort Meenakshi, the temple is considered to be the foremost religious and cultural center of Tamil people<ref>{{cite book

Comments

1. The caption says it all -- perhaps one of the most important structures in southern India. And a beautiful image too. --Nosedown (talk) 11:23, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Those in favor

1. --Nosedown (talk) 11:23, 29 March 2010 (UTC)
2. -- There should be at least one PERMANENT Hindu temple image in this section. Hindu temples revolve around lives of Indian masses and any article on India is incomplete without Hindu temple Picture. Holy Ganga ^talk 16:26, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Those not in favor

• Nikkul (talk) 04:11, 11 May 2010 (UTC) There are already 3 temple images!

Addition of Oddisi image

• 
  A dancer performing Odissi, one of the eight principal Indian classical dance styles. Odissi was developed in the state of Orissa in 2nd century BC<ref>{{cite book

Comments

1. Again, the caption says it all and another beautiful image. There is not even a single image in the template on Indian dance. --Nosedown (talk) 11:23, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Those in favor

1. --Nosedown (talk) 11:23, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

• Nikkul (talk) 03:57, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

Replacement of Lotus temple image

Replacement:

• 
  Designed in the pattern of a lotus flower, the Bahá'í House of Worship in Delhi is noted as one of the "most outstanding structures of the twentieth century" and attracts millions of visitors every year.<ref>{{cite book

Old version:

• 
  The Lotus Temple, the Bahá'í house of worship in Delhi

Comments

1. The older one has too much contrast and is of inferior quality. --Nosedown (talk) 11:23, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Those in favor

1. --Nosedown (talk) 11:23, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Those not in favor

• Nikkul (talk) 04:12, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Replacement of Akshardham image

Replacement:

• 
  The Swaminarayan movement is closely associated with the culture and the linguistic traditions of the Gujarati people.<ref>{{cite book

Old version:

• 
  The Akshardham Temple is a Hindu temple in New Delhi

Comments

1. The proposed image is of the front view and hence better IMO. --Nosedown (talk) 11:23, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Those in favor

1. --Nosedown (talk) 11:23, 29 March 2010 (UTC)
2. --Nikkul (talk) 18:21, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Other views

• If you're going to rotate images on a regular basis, please do the associated discussing on some dedicated sub-page, not on Talk:India. Imho, rotation of images is an exceptionally bad idea because it ties down lots of man-hours desperately needed elsewhere. --dab (𒁳) 12:33, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Image voting results

It has been more than two months since the voting was posted and no one has opposed the suggestions apart from Nikkul. I believe there is a clear consensus to incorporate the suggestions posted above. --Nosedown (talk) 16:55, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

You need to have CLEAR WP:Consensus. No one voted FOR most of your image changes either. You need clear consensus to change images on Wikipedia. This is wiki policy Nikkul (talk) 18:11, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

2010 data

Why do people use 2010 data for GDP instead of 2009? We are not even half way through 2010, and every country's using 2009 data, stop this childish and ridiculous behaviour. This information is not about "look better".

Name

I thought 'indo' was a latin word for 'south', like, we say Indochina and whatnot.. and 'indies' .. was there ever an overarching ancient name for the country used by the people in it? Or did they never have that fully developed sense of geography? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.11.36.165 (talk) 16:47, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

see names of India. --dab (𒁳) 14:07, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from Iamswapniljadhav, 20 May 2010

{{editsemiprotected}} in the paragraph which descibes that poverty, corruption, healthcare, and malnutrition are issues in india(or india is lagging in these aspects), please add caste system and oppression of SC/ST's in rural areas, as this is the single biggest reason in Indian masses social and economic backwardness.

Iamswapniljadhav (talk) 13:25, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

According to whom? Requests to edit semi-protected articles must be accompanied by reference(s) to reliable sources.

 Not done — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chzz (talk • contribs)

please sign your posts. Iamswapniljadhav is making a reasonable proposal, but you should ask them to provide an actual suggestion of text to be inserted. "SC/ST" refers to Scheduled caste/Scheduled tribe. The reason they are "scheduled" in the first place is that they are (or were) disadvantaged. This is positive discrimination, and ironically, castes are now clamouring to be considered "backward" because they want to benefit from the positive discrimination.

The main articles for this are Healthcare in India and Poverty in India. Iamswapniljadhav, these are not semiprotected, and you are welcome to work on them. Once you have produced a clean account in these articles, you can ask for inclusion of a summary here. --dab (𒁳) 13:56, 20 May 2010 (UTC) India is suffering by terrorist activities so far.......but India is a very peaceful country.This is held by some neighbouring countries. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.240.169.63 (talk) 12:46, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

About democracy

I found it strange that u reverted my edits, you that and every body knows that India is the largest democracy in the world. So why did u reverted my edit? And 2ndly the most populous term have been used many times in other articles too therefore its better to change and make it as the largest democracy.--Kkm010^as© 13:07, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

Largest has multiple connotations, in this context, most populous is the correct term. —SpacemanSpiff 16:30, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

Agree. we will be then endlessly arguing what "largest" means.--Sodabottle (talk) 17:41, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

Editing request for the GDP

In the brif introduction section on the top left, the GDP data is for 2010. I request to edit it back to 2009 data, because we are not even half way through 2010, and the 2010 data is not out yet from IMF, and it is only estimate data. Plus all other countries are using 2009 data. talk 18:24, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

Intro needs reworking

I believe the introduction needs reworking. There are lots of links but none of them are to the religions. There is recentism in that the only ruler mentioned is the British East India Company and the economic reforms of the nineties are mentioned as significant when they are nothing compared to the whole scale of history. And the negative aspects, here such as corruption and poverty are not normally put in the intro of country of articles. You don't see United States leading with "It has a high wealth disparity and a high homicide rate, do you? Munci (talk) 18:10, 26 May 2010 (UTC) Specifically I propose removing the part "however, it still suffers from poverty, illiteracy, corruption, disease, and malnutrition." and adding in wikilinks to Hinduism in India, Jainism in India etc. I'm not entirely sure how to balance the history more about pre-18th century history though. The other bits is enough for now. Any objections? Munci (talk) 00:04, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Changing Nano with Reva

The Nano image need to be rotated with images of other automobiles from India like the Reve electric car.Bcs09 (talk) 02:34, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

I agree. Reva is the world's largest electric car maker, and has significant sales in Europe. Anyone oppose rotating the Tata Nano image with Reva NXR image? Nikkul (talk) 18:33, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

• 
  The REVA Electric Car Company is the world's largest manufacturer of electric cars. Shown here is the Reva NXR

Did you seek consensus before making the change Nikkul? Tell me, how many people in India drive Reva? In what way is this particular vehicle even remotely significant to the Indian economy section? --Nosedown (talk) 18:48, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

consider changing pic military section randomly

Like in flora section consider changing su-30mki,Hal tejas,Arjun tank,ins viraat,ins shivina,T-90,Akash SAM,Nag missile,Agni missile series etc at regular interval.--59.94.131.202 (talk) 17:18, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

We need to have top quality pics before we place them on the main page. Right now we don't have such great pics Nikkul (talk) 17:02, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

You might take a look at these pics:=

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Agni-II_missile_%28Republic_Day_Parade_2004%29.jpeg http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:IA_Dhruv_Berlin-08.jpg http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Brahmos_imds.jpg

And i could post more pics which are top quality and so consider them for rotation.--59.94.135.209 (talk) 03:53, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

Introduction

The introduction needs a serious overhaul. That India is being considered a potential superpower by many analysts, that we are active members of groups like BASIC, BRIC, United Nations G20, G8+4 need to be stated. And why should things like poverty, and malnutrition be mentioned in the introduction? China too is suffering from more or less the same problems as India but I don't see anything being mentioned in the introduction of China.

Also, a mention should be made of the recent UN report in the 'economy' section which praises India for taking giant strides in terms of slum development.

Someone make these necessary changes as soon as possible. Otherwise questions would arise about the credibility of a Wikipedia article which ironically has been termed as one of wikipedia's bests despite containing so many discrepancies as stated above. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.242.184.93 (talk) 09:14, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

See the section above "Intro needs reworking". Munci (talk) 09:17, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

I've added a sentence about potential superpower since all other potential superpowers have this states on their page (China, Russia, etc.). Nikkul (talk) 17:04, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

Taj Image

New Taj Mahal Image

I would like to switch the existing Taj Mahal image with this better image. What do you guys think? Nikkul (talk) 06:43, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

I don't think the proposed new image is better than the existing one in any way - it is a low-resolution image, of poor quality (unclear), with an excessive blue tint. In contrast, the existing image is a clear, high-resolution featured picture, which means that it has been rated as one of the best pics available on Wikipedia (and on Commons as well). Therefore, I see no reason for substituting the existing image with the proposed replacement. Regards, SBC-YPR (talk) 12:57, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

Agree, the existing one looks beter. --BwB (talk) 08:34, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

Problem about Federation

In general "Federation" means a country formed by separate states that have given certain powers to a central government while keeping control over local matters and "Constitution" means the system of beliefs and laws by which a country, state, or organization is governed. Previously you said that both are same while its not true. Therefore I thought its worth mentioning it.

2ndly you removed a vital point that is (It is a constitutional republic and representative democracy, "in which majority rule is tempered by minority rights protected by law) it must be mentioned what kind of democracy does India follows there two type of democracy one direct democracy and other representative democracy, & India maintains a representative democracy and in what way.

3rd In (Indian federalist system) the term should be mentioned why because commonly there are two type of gov one is "Unitary sate" other run as "federal structure". It should be clear that in Indian federalism the preamble of the constitution defines India as a sovereign, socialist, secular, democratic republic. Generally Unitary states are like UK, Canada or Japan whereas federalist gov are like Brazil or USA etc.--Kkm010^as© 06:51, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

The constitution says India is a "Union of States". So we can safely say it is "federalist" in nature. (We already have a Federalism in India article)--Sodabottle (talk) 06:58, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

In regard to this edit by User:Kkm010-

"The Constitution of India, the longest and the most exhaustive federation of any independent nation in the world, ..." . What does that mean?

"In Indian federalist system, the preamble of the constitution defines India as a ....." . The federal system in India is a product of the constitution. In that sense, this sentence is misleading. Arjun^codename024 08:29, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

I have copy edited the first point to makes its meaning clear. the second one too needs work to make it clear.--Sodabottle (talk) 08:39, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

I have now copy edited the second point as well to address Arjun's concerns. It now merely states "indian state is federalist in nature".--Sodabottle (talk) 10:49, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

If you guys think that Indian federalist system won't fit then you can write as (In Indian federalism) but it must be mentioned because any body can say that the county is run as unitary state which is not. So there should be flamboyant idea in what way and how the system is run.

Another thing I didn't get why Sodabottle removed the term federation instead of constitution pls make it clear. I explained earlier whats the difference where Arjun was stating both are same.--Kkm010^as© 10:14, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

KKM, it is a grammatically wrong to say "the constitution of india is a federation". a country can be a federation, while a constitution can only be federalist. It is a purely grammatical correction.

Actually i accept the india is a federation as the constitution says we are a "union of states". I only differ from you in how to phrase it.--Sodabottle (talk) 10:42, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

Constitution is "federalist" and and the state/system is "federal". Just to point out; Kkm has to look out for grammatical errors- one big reason i went for this revert. Arjun^codename024 13:31, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for correcting my error I'm happy that you guys have written it correctly with all the important points mentioning. But one thing i would kindly draw your attention that is (It is a constitutional republic and representative democracy, "in which majority rule is tempered by minority rights protected by law) you have not mentioned the India as "constitutional republic" rather mentioning it only as a representative democracy! Why?--Kkm010^as© 15:30, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

Global Peace Index

wonder how much credibility Institute for Economics and Peace have and if this is an information worth adding. --CarTick 12:33, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Global Peace Index already has an article but it would undue weight to mention anything about it here. try adding mention of that The Hindu article in Global Peace Index instead. Munci (talk) 14:35, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

what kind of weird response is this? --CarTick 19:21, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

What's weird about it? The index might be notable enough that it has an article but it is not notable enough that you make it one of the first things you say about a country. Munci (talk) 19:38, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

when did i say "one of the first things"? and why would be important to add India has x ranking in Global Peace Index article --CarTick 19:58, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

Sorry I may misinterpreted your intention. I thought you had wanted add information about the index to this article. Munci (talk) 20:50, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

i dont advocate its inclusion just because it is out there. i find it interesting, but, like i said, i am skeptical about the credibility of the organisation and the aptness and accuracy of the methodology used. I am also not sure if their data is adjusted for regional variation. --CarTick 00:42, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from 92.8.202.26, 11 June 2010

{{editsemiprotected}} Where it says that India is in the vicinity of Sri Lanka and Maldives in the Indian ocean, please add ", and its Andaman and Nicobar Islands are also in the vicinity of the Indonesian island of Sumatra in the Andaman Sea."

92.8.202.26 (talk) 19:19, 11 June 2010 (UTC)  Not done

I'm sorry, but requests to edit semi-protected articles must be accompanied by reference(s) to reliable sources.

I suggest you get an account, then you can help us improve articles. Chzz  ►  00:58, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

Here is a suitable reference . I have also added it to the sentance I would like added. About creating an account here, I unfortunately have too many passwords to remember, so for now I think that I will continue editing with my IP address. Many Thanks. --92.8.202.26 (talk) 19:55, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

Fair enough; done, thanks. Chzz  ►  06:33, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

 Done

Unprotection

This article, while highly visible and important to Wikipedia, has been indef-semi-protected since Nov. 2007. Quite a long time... I believe it may be safe to unprotect the article, at least on a trial basis. I had asked on WP:RFPP, and was advised to ask for public opinion here. I think it's a good idea to give casual editors a chance to contribute. :) Thoughts, comments? ^Avicenna_sis @ 05:41, 30 Sivan 5770 / 12 June 2010 (UTC)

• i does not support this as this article is a hotspot for vandalism and it should be remain protected [Rahulchoudhary 09:55, 12 June 2010 (UTC)] —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rahulchoudhary003 (talk • contribs)

Language Categories

Is it not unbalanced to have the English category without the one for Hindi? As long as we stick to only the union languages rather than the regional ones, it won't make too many categories. The Eighth Schedule languages would instead fit on the various states. As for it being named Hindustani rather than Hindi, I'm sure it's so that both Hindi and Urdu are included. Would the title 'Category:Hindi and Urdu speaking countries and territories' be better? Also, I'm not entirely sure what "somewhere between 25 and 30 on the priority list of categories based on languages". Could this please be explained? Do you mean there are 25-30 languages more important for which to have such a category? Munci (talk) 16:10, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

Hindi and English are not union languages - they are just official languages of the union. The cat says "countries speaking language x". so by extension, if Hindi is included, then similar categories for the other 30 odd major regional languages will have to be added - thus "category overkill". IMO even the English cat to should be removed.--Sodabottle (talk) 16:27, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

Hmm if there were 'union languages' what would this be like then and how would this differ from 'official languages of the union'? I am sure the purpose in the language categories is to mean official languages though, especially considering Cameroon, Puntland and Papua New Guinea are currently part of the English-speaking countries category. Perhaps renaming is in order to make this clear? Removing both categories could be fine though. Munci (talk) 13:58, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

well, i assume the category is all about categorising a group of countries speaking a certain leanguage. i dont see any problem in adding the category. I would also recommend adding . --CarTick 14:17, 15 June 2010 (UTC)