Jump to content

Talk:India: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Line 94: Line 94:
I know that there are abundant accurate references in this article, but perhaps, in order to make it even better and even more trustworthy, there need to be some more accurate ones.[[User:Johnsmithcba|Johnsmithcba]] 14:58, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
I know that there are abundant accurate references in this article, but perhaps, in order to make it even better and even more trustworthy, there need to be some more accurate ones.[[User:Johnsmithcba|Johnsmithcba]] 14:58, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
: John, can you point out any specific instance that you think can/should be improved ? Thanks. [[User:Abecedare|Abecedare]] 15:24, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
: John, can you point out any specific instance that you think can/should be improved ? Thanks. [[User:Abecedare|Abecedare]] 15:24, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

: I appreciate your contradictions, but there are a few instances where this article would perhaps need cleaning up. In fact, I can find several points where references are required. For example, there is a reference where it states that Mumbai is the largest city in India, but not when it states that New Delhi is the capital, which is right above the Mumbai statement. Also, the dates given about India's independence should be referenced. Also, if this article was an academic paper, references would be mandatory for the several figures of population, GDP, etc.
: I appreciate your contradictions, but there are a few instances where this article would perhaps need cleaning up. In fact, I can find several points where references are required. For example, there is a reference where it states that Mumbai is the largest city in India, but not when it states that New Delhi is the capital, which is right above the Mumbai statement. Also, the dates given about India's independence should be referenced. Also, if this article was an academic paper, references would be mandatory for the several figures of population, GDP, etc.
[[User:Johnsmithcba|Johnsmithcba]] 18:14, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
[[User:Johnsmithcba|Johnsmithcba]] 18:14, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Revision as of 18:15, 12 April 2007

Featured articleIndia is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
Main Page trophyThis article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on December 3, 2004.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
September 16, 2004Featured article candidatePromoted
May 6, 2006Featured article reviewKept
Current status: Featured article
Guidelines for editing the India page
  • The article is written in summary style in Indian English.
  • All sections are a summary of more detailed articles. If you find any points missing, please add it in the section's main article rather than on this page to keep this page size within reasonable limits.
  • Only external links pertaining to India as a whole are solicited here. Please add other links in the most appropriate article.
  • India-related matters should be discussed at Wikipedia:Notice board for India-related topics.
  • See the FAQ section before posting a topic on the page.

Indian States? Federal Republic?

India isn't just a republic or a sovereign country, the constitution defines it as a federal republic comprising a number of states. The states enact the majority of laws, and although the trend since independence has been toward greater centralization of power, this system is not unlike the US, Canada, or Brazil. I believe this is a defining feature of India and deserves to be mentioned in the first few paragraphs. The current opening paragraphs seem to reinforce the (especially Western) notion that India is a monolithic country governed by the center, which is false. The second line states that India is a "sovereign" country but not that it is also a 'federation', which is a more relevant political description.

Follow up of Edit in "History" section

This is a follow up of the topic Edit in "History" section which has now been archived (Talk:India/Archive 23). The mention of revolutionary organisations in the Indian independence movement in "History" section was the point of discussion. Citing respectable mainstream historians was demanded. So far, no such citation could be provided. So, as an interim measure, the mention of revolutionary organisations is being hidden (blanked out), with a citation needed tag (that would appear only in the edit mode). Since I do not have any mainstream or equally significant books/historical reviews, it will take some more time for searching proper reference. Regards.--Dwaipayan (talk) 05:09, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Last Paragraph in the Lead

Hi guys Well, while reading the last paragraph, I noticed it mentions " India has made rapid progress in the last decade, especially in information technology". Now, this may have been a fair reflection 3-4 years back, when companies like Infosys & Wipro represented the new face of Indian economy. They still do. But the past couple of years of so, have exhibited in abundance the growth in almost every sector, be it Automotive or steel. The recent global take-overs, be it the 12 Billion USD take over of Corus (formerly British Steel), or the take over of Daewoo's truck divisions, are a couple of examples. And this trend continues. Given this fact, I personally feel, we should rephrase that line to be true to the present state, where IT isnt the only shining gem anymore.AJ-India 13:36, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Better Pictures

If you feel better pictures can represent this page, please add them here


Sure! Great pics why don't you add them? --59.182.23.178 12:56, 11 April 2007 (UTC) Kalhans[reply]

confirming european standard [ce]

as an visual interpretor i would like to know more about urbanization and its effects in india. because this country has its own growth with lot of factors so do we really need to change our cities like any other european/ ameriacn cities if it is then why and what are the possibilities make it its own way where middle class can be acommodate very well. because that is one huge area which cant deny . == —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 122.163.214.21 (talk) 02:23, 11 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Image in demographics

new image

Have placed a new image in Demographics. Quality is somewhat inferior. However, license is acceptable. Please see. Regards.--Dwaipayan (talk) 12:06, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

a thumbnail of thumbnails is utterly pointless: should be replaced with a link "click here for a gallery". dab (𒁳) 12:20, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
population growth, from 443 million in 1960 to 1,004 million in 2000
Thanks but we should really try putting an actual visual of demographic information like most other country's articles do, rather than arbitrarily chosen pictures of people that aren't exactly relevant to demographics. The Behnam 14:24, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Like the growth pattern?--Dwaipayan (talk) 14:42, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, or a pie, or a map, stuff of that sort. That is actual demographic information, and a number of users agreed to its appropriateness in principle. You should probably look at the previous discussions in the archives for more background. The problem was that we couldn't agree on a sufficiently information-rich form, and people weren't receptive to adding a new map. However it is undoubtedly the most appropriate type of visual for the demographics section so it remains a concern to be addressed. The Behnam 14:48, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Collages are unencyclopedic. =Nichalp «Talk»= 14:49, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Since the collage seems not be justified in the "Demographics" section, I have re-inserted the Apatani tribal woman image. Regards.--Dwaipayan (talk) 16:33, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Sansad bhavan pic not good

The parliament pic needs a more close-up. --59.163.2.161 07:19, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

More Detail Required on Some Subjects

I think that more detail is required on some subjects in this wonderful article, especially the "flora and fauna" and about the freedom in the current Indian government. This page is one of the best pages in Wikipedia; lets make it the best !! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Johnsmithcba (talkcontribs) 14:54, 12 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

More References Required

I know that there are abundant accurate references in this article, but perhaps, in order to make it even better and even more trustworthy, there need to be some more accurate ones.Johnsmithcba 14:58, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

John, can you point out any specific instance that you think can/should be improved ? Thanks. Abecedare 15:24, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I appreciate your contradictions, but there are a few instances where this article would perhaps need cleaning up. In fact, I can find several points where references are required. For example, there is a reference where it states that Mumbai is the largest city in India, but not when it states that New Delhi is the capital, which is right above the Mumbai statement. Also, the dates given about India's independence should be referenced. Also, if this article was an academic paper, references would be mandatory for the several figures of population, GDP, etc.

Johnsmithcba 18:14, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]