Talk:Gujarat

---

"If it was a nation it would have been 67th richest nation above many European and Asian economies like China and Ukraine." quoted from the article. this seriously needs a reference. Jeroje 23:17, 17 July 2007 (UTC)jeroje

People header

The ethnography of the people of Gujarat needs attention. At the very least, it needs to be cleaned up and expanded. Also, jats in Gujarat? Sounds fishy... --Sakredfire 00:14, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Surat

Surat is by no means a clean city. It is where the Plague breakout of India (in the early 90s) started from. Additionally, I have been to Surat. It is rotten: there is garbage all over the place.

I would like to know the source of the voting that the author/editor claims.

• Here are some sources
  • [[1]]
  • [[2]]

Alren 15:08, 22 Oct 2004 (UTC)

• Been there too. people squatting in the Streets at dawn. It's a Horrible place. It is not as rich and wealthy a place as this article makes out. --Irishpunktom\^talk

Been there too, a couple of times: and it was indeed remarkably filthy prior to the plague outbreak. Since then, its cleaned itself up spectacularly, so I have no problem with the statement's accuracy. Hornplease 21:30, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Removed the following comment

Removed the following comment :

"Modi himself, explained the reasons behind the riots as an issue of "action and reaction"."

Since the above is unconfirmed and no reliable sources/references point to that statement.

Abhijna

It is not unconfirmed. He is on film saying that in Anand Patwardhan's Akrosh, shown on Doordarshan following a Supreme Court order. Hornplease 04:19, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Reverted the edits made by "Alimustafakhan". Please stick to NPOV. Terms like "Ethnic Cleansing" is a very very loaded word and further inflammatory. Also please update the discussion pages with your updates. Otherwise it looks like a particular POV is being pushed.

Regarding the Godhra train firebombing episode, the Justice Banerjee commission was a single person commission which was setup by the rail ministry headed by Mr. Laloo Prasad Yadav just prior to Bihar election where he rules by proxy via his wife Ms. Rabri Devi. The objectivity of the Justice Banerjee commission itself was in question from the outset.

Abhijna 22:08, 12 Apr 2005

Sticking to NPOV "Abhijna" have conviniently accused Muslims as barbarians in burning the carriage, and cause of all trouble. But when it comes to extremists in his own religious group the scenario is different. How can "Abhijna" say that Justice Banerjee commission is biased? If NPOV means that I quote somebody else, somebody in authority then that is exactly what I did, I quoted Justice Banerjee. It is Abhijna and Gujarat Govt. finding which are strict NPOV. Everybody else is biased, is it like that Abhijna??? It was not me but "Abhijna" who did not stick to NPOV. His bias for Narendra Modi and his government is clear. Even though "Abhijna" might be a secular but Mr. Modi is not. Today itself on BBC's website there is a reportof how Gujarat Intelligencr Chief witness against Narendra Modi and his Government. I would wait for you response before I change the text.

Alimustafakhan

Dear Mr. AliMustafaKhan,

1. You accuse me of accusing "Muslims as barbarians"!

First I refute it. I have never made such an accusation and the above construct is your own making!!

2. You say that "How can "Abhijna" say that Justice Banerjee commission is biased?"

If you follow the history of the commission, you would know that. Anyway, it was a commission instituted by Railway ministry. The official commission is of Justice Nanavati and you can quote from that.

3. BBC's website there is a reportof how Gujarat Intelligencr Chief witness against Narendra Modi and his Government.

You cannot be both the judge and the jury. The officer was giving an interview, and was not speaking under oath in a court of law. That interview cannot constitute as the sole official version of the events. Particulary when the person against whom he is speaking has not got a chance to present his case.

4. Ali, Regarding your own NPOV :

Here are some of the comments made on your user page by another wikipedian :

<QUOTE>

Your recent bout of edits

Ali, I rephrased your edit to List of founders of major religions and reversed your edits to Islam. I will also be looking over the many other Islam and Pakistan related edits you made recently.

It seems to me that most of your edits have moved the articles towards a more overt Muslim piety and a Pakistani-patriotic view of events -- at least in the viewpoint of those of us who are neither Muslim nor Pakistani. While it is not my intention to remove those viewpoints from Wikipedia -- they should be represented -- it is not NPOV (neutral point of view) to present them as if they were objective truth. Usually we try to step back and say "X believes this and Y believes that", or some such neutral presentation.

It would also be a good idea to be much more circumspect in editing articles like Islam that have a long and controversial edit history. They are the result of years of debate and compromise. I know the directions say "be bold", but there's bold and there's foolhardy <g>. What seems to work best, in dealing with controversial articles with many editors, is to make changes gradually, accompanying each change with a notice on the talk page explaining why you made the edit you did. If you're proposing large changes, it seems to work to post the proposed revision on your talk page and then invite the editorial community involved with that article to visit and comment.

I should perhaps add that I've learned all this the hard way, by treading on various toes and being criticized for my clumsiness. So I'm NOT saying that you're a bad editor or that you shouldn't keep contributing -- I'm just cautioning you to avoid my dumb mistakes. Zora 17:02, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC) [edit]

Jinnah

A very good addition you made to Mohammad Ali Jinnah about Jinnah's secular credentials. I have expanded it a bit. What do you think?—iFaqeer (Talk to me!) 01:14, Apr 8, 2005 (UTC) Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Alimustafakhan"

<END QUOTE>

Honestly your other contributions were found biased and foolhardy in other articles. Particularly, Ali, note that your own edits in the article of Islam was reverted since it was found "more overt peity and pakistan-patriotic view of events" by Zora.

The fact is that 59 Hindu Piligrims including 14 children were burnt alive. What followed uprooted and killed more innocent people, Muslims and Hindus alike. The atmosphere was further vitiated by Media. And crimes were committed against Humans by Humans in the name of religion.

I have removed your edits. I suggest that you carry out your discussion in the 2002 Gujarat Violence article.

Abhijna

Modified the sentence regarding arts/sciences and entrepreunerial spirit. Added link to Vikram Sarabhai.

Mr. Abhijna, You said they were pilgrims, I say they were troublemakers. Their agenda was to go against the ruling of Supreme Court and do a havan and start constructing temple. The purpose of visit was to perform an illegal action; which in itself is not right. And you did not inform the audience of how many Muslim Women and Children died in the carnage later. Probably you have not seen the video of carnage. I have. Like the ones in Train, here too people including children burnt alive. But there was a differential treatment for women, they were raped, there breasts cut off and for pregnant women, something better. Their feutuses were pulled out in front of them and then they were later killed. If you want the video I can post it on the net. The destruction to Muslim property and life was 50 times the damage to Hindu life and property. Not that all Hindus are bad, certain Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes people helped lots of Muslims by risking their own lives. This is a very debateably issue hence I am going to edit the text, removing anything which may cause a certain reader a negetive attitude towards any community.

Alimustafakhan

Mr. AliMustafaKhan,

If you have proof/evidence of whatever you have said above then do please contact Justice Nanavati and submit your evidence there, hiding evidence is crime. Also note that spreading rumours without evidence is very wrong. I do hope that atleast you will follow the right path and turn over the evidence you have to the authorities.

And in the above comments of yours you also mention that certain Scheduled Tribes people helped lots of Muslims by risking their own lives... am I suspecting another insuniation based on Caste? How do you know that each and every member who helped belonged to only a Scheduled caste or a Scheduled Tribe and not to anyother caste? Did you forget the Backward castes?

And why did you remove the attack on Akshardham? Any particular reason?

Given your POV, I guess you are better off contributing to other articles on Wikipedia like articles on Taliban or Pakistan.

Abhijna

Have I missed something?

Having read this article I see no Mention of the riots in Gujarat. Are we to pretend it did not happen? That riots occoured in Gujarat is fact. That these riots were religiously motivated is fact. That Muslims were the prilary victims is fact. That Hindus were also Victims is fact. That it was caused by a Fire on a train in Godhra is fact. Now, to be NPOV we need to point out that the Train Fire was controversial, as Some people believe that the massacre on the train was caused by a Muslim Mob, angry at the occupants for destroying a 16th century Mosque, and for their attempts to build a Hindu Temple in its place - this is a view supported by the BJP, others believe that it was caused by a Fire initated on the train - This is a View suppored by the ministry of the railways. This can further be dealt with in it's own article, but most certainly needs a mention in this. --Irishpunktom\^talk

Check out wiki page 2002 Gujarat Violence. All the cause and actions leading to that event and consequences post that event can be discussed there.

It should still be mentioned here. --Irishpunktom\^talk

The Gujarat page just like the pages on Ireland, England or United States or Pakistan or Saudi Arabia describes Gujarat State. Any specific event should be offlined. Adding here will be tantamount to saying that OBL was a saudi and putting it in the Saudi page or General Niazi was the butcher and murderer of several thousands of people in now what is present day Bangladesh and put it in the Pakistan page or take about the effects of imperialism in the Ireland or England page.

The point is that it does not belong here. --User:AllieMustafaKhan

I agree to AllieMustafaKhan. The riots were a sad event and shouldn't have happened. Hope the perpetuators are brought to jusice. But an article about the place has nothing to do with the events there. --kunjan1029 20:59, May 31, 2005 (UTC)

The riots were one of the most Major events in the recent history of Gujarat, and indeed of India, and of course it warrants a mention here, however brief. The Ireland page mentions the terrorism in northern Ireland, the Gujarat page should mention at the very least the Riots in 2002.--Irishpunktom\^talk 16:32, Jun 1, 2005 (UTC)

I second the above comment. A large number of people will navigate to Gujarat seeking information on the earthquake of 2001 and the riots of 2002, and links to appropriate articles should be prominent in the first paragraph. The correct comparison is Northern Ireland. Hornplease 21:29, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I navigated to the Britain main page and did not find the brutalities and genocide information committed under imperialism. I navigated to Saudi Arabia page and did not find that OBL was a saudi. Infact, did not find any information about wahabism and its connection to Jehad and its role in Islamic terrorism. I navigated to the Pakistan page and did not find information about its terrorist links in Kashmir. I navigated to the India main page and did not find any links of IPKF. I have a suggestion, let us fix the Saudi and Pakistan page first and list everything in a single page. If you look at the edits on Gujarat and particularly the above discussion of riots, the discussion has been extremely biased. Hence that needs to be rooted out. If you are concerned about the gujarat violence, they can search on the wiki search and search for "gujarat + violence". Also if the Godhra violence has to be mentioned, why was the Akshardham terrorist killings removed? AllieMustafaKhan

(1) If the Pakistan page does not mention that it is alleged to provide comfort and support to terrorist groups in Kashmir, then that has to be fixed too, and I intend to see it done ( I am busy enough with the Kashmir page currently). About the Saudi page, I do not know enough. But the Northern Ireland page mentions the Troubles VERY prominently, and that is the correct comparison. As I said, most people interested in Gujarat are going to be interested in the riots. There should be a link prominently placed for them, if there is no discussion on this page.

Then please fix the Pakistan and Kashmir page first and ensure that they remain fixed. After that only you can edit this page regarding the violence and the numbers to be quoted should be from government resources. The media based numbers are completely untrustworthy. And when you mention the violence, do please mention the terrorist attack on Akshardham to make it balanced. One without the other will be a completely biased POV and hence will be removed. Again, fix the Pakistan page first. I will be watching over your edits.

I have no intention of being told which page I should fix to be NPOV first. Do it yourself if it concerns you, and I will support you wholeheartedly. I have just fixed the Kashmir page, with quotes from the indian govt to balance quotes from Amnesty Intl. I will do the same on this page. The very thought that Akshardham 'balances' the riots is POV. I have no intention of quoting anything about the riots other than two balancing views of the bald numbers and a link to the riots page. That is not POV at all. Hornplease 04:17, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Dear Hornplease, it is your reading that Akshardham balances the riots. However, did not Akshardham also occurred in Gujarat in the same year the riots occurred and the perpetarators blamed the riots for their act? So should not that be mentioned or should that be edited out? And please get the figures right. And get the source for the figures and definitely not from the biased English media. For proper numbers also look at the local media! Till that time your edits are useless.

You said that a mention of the riots should be 'balanced' by a mention of Akshardham. That, in my opinion, is not appropriate. They are not events of the same magnitude. If you wish to mention the attack on Akshardham, that is your prerogative, and I will not edit it away. If it is implied that it is an event of the same magnitude, then that is POV, and I will edit it away.

Further, getting the figures 'right' is beyond me, as I am not a fact-finding commission. I will merely report the latest central government figures, and also whatever figures Amnesty International has claimed. That neatly avoids the 'biased media' problems, and allows people to make up their own minds whether they trust the government or Amnesty more. Satisfied?

Lastly, I am not accustomed to being told when and where my edits are 'useless'. Please remain civil. Thank you. Hornplease 04:09, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Question is why are you so hell bent on putting the Gujarat Violence all over the map on Gujarat page? Did you know that there were riots in 1947, 1969, 1988-89, 1992 as well? Want to put them there? Along with the figures? Why those ones are not mentioned? Were they less "horrific"? Anyway, I would appreciate if you restrict your edits to the Communal harmony or discord section instead of putting it all over the map. If you need to mention it, do mention it properly at the same time this is not a sounding board of your "POV".

I have no opinion on their intensity. I merely am aware that a large number of people will navigate to this page seeking information on the riots, and it should be mentioned prominently. It is not all over the map, it is in the introduction, and in the appropriate section. Would you expect the part about economic growth in the introduction to be deleted, as there is a section for it? Hornplease 06:57, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)

And bubonic plague? Where did it come from in recent years? Was it all spread all over Gujarat? How many died? Or was it confined to Surat? And what was the aftermath of that? What is the intent in mentioning it when it actually occurred in 1994!!! More than a decade back!!! Is that recent? Define recent? 6 months? 1 year? Does such edits help? Are they useful? It might be worthwile if you check this out http://www.media-watch.org/articles/1299/50.html even befor classifying it as plague.

Very well. I do not think it is necessary in the introduction. However it should be mentioned somewhere in the article. I cant imagine why you want important events like this left out. Hornplease 06:57, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)

The suppossedly "plague" was a natural calamity which was confined mostly to Surat. It was called Surat "Plague" and not necessarily Gujarat "Plague". It can go into the Surat section with discussion on how Surat recovered from it spectacularly. BTW, 23 persons perished in that "plague". But again it does not belong to Gujarat. Also what was the cause to the "plague"? Hint: Rapid urbanization in Surat. Two industry took off post 1991 - textiles and diamonds and both of them required human labour. In 1992, I have documented @15,000 workers from AP working in the textile mills of Surat. Another reason to introduce a direct train to Ahmedabad from Hyderabad in the late 80's! If you really want to write an article on "plague" - do that, but it goes in Surat section and please research the topic. Gujarat faced other calamities as well - major/minor and before and after the "plague".

The reference to the plague has been removed from the introduction. If you wish to put in these details about why you think the plague was caused, please document them and put them in. Theyre doing no good on the talk page. Hornplease 05:58, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Dear Mr. Hornplease, *you* put in the reference to the plague and *you* took them out when it was pointed out that it was a slip-shod job. The discussion of that remains in the talk page.

Also indicating "223 persons reported 'missing'" as compared to "223 persons reported missing" would be good. The former indicates a slant. Please refrain from such.

How does it indicate a slant? It is a euphemism for 'unable to produce a body'. Like most euphemisms, it should be in inverted commas. Does anybody else want to jump into this one? Hornplease 06:57, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)

That is the point, putting in euphimisms veers away from your avowed quoting of bland figures. Further note that all 223 persons reported missing need not be dead or their bodies missing. There are always cases when people are declared dead by their kin just to get the relief money! It happens everywhere and more so in India.

I am not the one putting in euphemisms. Quote marks draw attention to the fact that the euphemism is already there. People can interpret it how they please once their attention has been drawn to it. Is that not satisfactory? Hornplease 05:58, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I am leaving the rest of your edits as they were, pending discussion. However, I am reintroducing the link to riots in the introduction. Compare the Northern Ireland article, which mentions the Troubles, and the Kashmir article, which mentions the dispute prominently, and in the introduction as well as in a separate section. Is the section itself satisfactory in your opinion? Hornplease 06:57, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)

It will remain away from the introduction. Not all pages are comparable, the Northern Ireland and Kashmir disputes have a very long history some dating back few hundered years and hence are prominent. Not so the Gujarat, its history is merely 50 years old. Coming to the section, it is still unsatisfactory! Did the riots happen in a vaccuum? Was there a cause to it? And also when the Akshardham happened, why did not the riots follow that? Think about it. BTW, whenever somebody mentions Godhra train fire as precursor to the riots, it is swiftly edited away! Check the history of the page out. That is the whole reason why the discussion had to go off the Gujarat page in first place.

The point is not the longevity of the 'dispute' but the fact that the violence was a major and recent event. Many people across the world unfortunately heard of Gujarat for the first time when reports of the violence were broadcast; a link to a page discussing it should be prominent. If you have anything to add to the context of the violence, it should be on that page. Surely the Godhra incident is also covered by the phrase "2002 communal violence"? As the Godhra fire is part and parcel of the whole unhappy event, surely you have no objection to that being discussed on the proper page as well. The numbers given on the page include that of the Godhra victims. I dont see the problem. We are not telling the story of the riots, merely indicating the magnitude of the event, and linking to a page that discusses it. Thus the discussion remains NPOV. Hornplease 05:58, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)

The Gujarat page should be modelled on the Maharashtra Page. That is the closest comparison. Comparisons with North Ireland and Kashmir are invalid. Maharashtra : Babri->Riots->Mumbai Bomb Blasts, Gujarat : Godhra->Riots->Akshardham. Please see how it is handled in Maharashtra page. BTW, the numbers do *not* include the Godhra victims!

First of all, please get an account of you mean to enter into a discussion, so that we know who says what. It is easier. OK, now about the comparison: I am afraid I do not agree at all. I have taken the liberty of reverting your deletion, as I specifically asked that we discuss it on this page prior to modifying the article page. Your point, about the comparison to Maharashtra is invalid in this case; please note what I said above, about many people across the world having heard of the Gujarat violence (and not the Mumbai riots) recently, and thus a link to the page should be prominent. Can you please tell me why you think the link and mention of the violence is controversial? If a mention of Vikram Sarabhai is permissible in the introduction, then the violence certainly is, as that is why Gujarat was in the news across the world. Hornplease 22:57, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I agree with the initial delete. One cannot compare the mention of Vikram Sarabhai with the violence. Gujarat was also the place of devestating earthquake, which all over the world had heard. It would be better to mention that. Just because you think that many people across the world have heard of this and not that that does not mean it's worth a mention or not. I do not see Tin. square in China, of 1984 riots in delhi or 9/11 in US page. Alren 19:06, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Capitals of Gujarat

Capitals of Gujarat. Anyone want take a look at this page? Rd232 22:37, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

Narmada Bachao

I think the Narmada Bachao andolan part of the article only provides one sided view. It only focuses on the issues raised by the Andolan but misses how Sardar Sarovar project is beneficial to the state struggling with accute water crisis and multitude of opportunity in renewable hydro power.

Further check out the map of India. Its with half kashmir only. do you think any Indian can use such a map? it means that website may be prepared out side India. What does this reveal ? May be - Involvement of some foreign hand in the same.

British East India Company factory

"The British East India Company established a factory in Surat in 1614" - I made "factory" link to Factor (agent). This is corect, right? (It was a trade facility, not a manufacturing facility?) -- Writtenonsand 20:59, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

Rann of Kutchch

"The Rann of Kutchch covers a large portion of western Gujarat .... Only 500 years earlier, the area was the Arabian Sea." - Rann of Kutch says: "The area was a vast shallows of the Arabian Sea until continuing geological uplift closed off the connection with the sea, creating a vast lake that was still navigable during the time of Alexander the Great." (Alexander the Great 356 BC - 323 BC). What are the facts here? When was this area actually part of the sea? -- Writtenonsand 21:05, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

It is correct that Rann of Kutch is a raised land of recent times due to drought and lack of rain. An inference to this effect can also be found in the research of Indus Valley Civilization - e.g. Lothal, about 30 km inland today, was on the coast of Gulf of Khambhat during this period. Also, in some of the historical atlases (like those of 17th centuary or before) the whole area is sometimes found dipicted as an island. Will be able to provide more info after further research. --ΜιĿːtalk 12:15, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

The place is a sanctuary for an endangered species has this been mentioned?? Kaushal mehta 11:46, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Military?

I'm guessing that there should be a noticeable military presence in Gujarat. (Cf. Pakistan.) Anybody care to add anything on this to the article? -- Writtenonsand 04:14, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

Gujarat indeed has military presence, but compared to J&K, Punjab and Rajasthan, its is not as significant as one might think. To best of my knowledge, Jamnagar has an airforce base (which also covers the oil refinery there); Bhuj and towns around Little Rann of Kutch have small army bases; Vadodara and Ahmedabad has military units - but only at par with other major cities of the country, Vadodara however has a major Radar and remote sensing unit. Towards north of Ahmedabad, south of Vadodara and south of Rajkot, one hardly finds any military at all. --ΜιĿːtalk 11:56, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

Article standard

Comparing this article with some of other states on Wiki surely raises doubts about the current level. There is a lot of room of improvement, with propoer formatting and by expanding the stubs with citable sources. Will appreciate your cooperation in the exercise. --ΜιĿːtalk 12:20, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

Why remove the Talkheader?

User:Tobias Conradi, why the heck did you remove the Talkheader?? Do you have some objection to "Please respect Etiquette, assume good faith and be nice"?? It seemed to me that this advice might be helpful to some of the people posting on this page. -- Writtenonsand 04:41, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

it consumes space and users have to scroll more to get to the TOC. I have no objections to "...etiquette, AGF and be nice" but this isn't somthig that should be posted on 1 000 000 talk pages. Tobias Conradi (Talk) 04:55, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

It appears to be necessary on thousands of talk pages. :-) Have a good one. -- Writtenonsand 00:02, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

I believe things of that nature shouldn't be removed unless they are wrong, harmful, out of context or no longer necessary. Removing things from pages- even ones as harmless as talk pages (some would say especially from talk pages)- is a step that should not be taken lightly. DevanJedi 00:12, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

of which nature? Tobias Conradi (Talk) 01:27, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

"things of that nature"=simple messages on talk pages. I don't think my message was that hard to follow. DevanJedi 03:58, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

which message? Tobias Conradi (Talk) 05:51, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

( copied from talk page of User:Tobias Conradi ) ([3])

Are you trying to be deliberately juvenile on the Talk:Gujarat page? I believe the Talkheader is actually required; precisely for people like you. DevanJedi 06:08, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

You may want to extent the talkpageheader then, stating "don't ask Devanjedi any questions. He will not answer or if he does he will add phrases that try to put you in the bad/stupid guy corner." Or something similiar, because I am once again not clear what you mean. This time: "people like you". I would prefer if you talk more precise. Thanks. Tobias Conradi (Talk) 06:17, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

So we agree that the Talkheader is required? :) This time "we agree" means that we both have reached the same conclusion. "is required" means that it is necessary and "the Talkheader" is the piece of this page that you removed which is under discussion. That leaves the word "that"; I'm sorry if my inability to explain "that" leaves you confused. ;) Sorry for all of my mindless banter! DevanJedi 15:26, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

Seriously, getting back on topic- I think the Talkheader should be kept because at the very least, they are harmless and at most, they will actually be helpful to new wikipedia editors. DevanJedi 15:26, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

Infobox

What is the correct format of the infobox? It has been changed from Infobox State IN to India State infobox. DevanJedi 00:58, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

User:Tobias_Conradi has resolved this; apparently Infobox State IN is the correct format. DevanJedi 05:14, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

IMO all Infoboxes should be named "Infobox Something" with something starting with capital letter. That's kind of standard naming and codified at Wikipedia:Infobox templates. - Tobias Conradi (Talk) 05:42, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

Only a very small portion of the Info Box is actually displaying. For instance, there is no population shown, no ranking, none of the several items that appear when you open Edit this page. I was going to add at least population, but I see it is actually there in the formatting, just not on the final page. ???? Wlegro 15:03, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Guzarat?

Someone has edited the page Gujarat to add an alternate name Guzarat and that it was named for people called khazars. I have lived in Gujarat for 16 years and have never heard of this; any confirmation or sources on this? DevanJedi 01:08, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

I found this [4]. Any other sources?

That source is from a revisionist evangalical website.

yes, Guzarat

There aren't many who pronounce Gujarat as "Guzarat" "Khazarat", but in some dialects, and especially those of the Muslim communities, most of Gujarati's J sounds are replaces with Z. Guzarat has become somewhat of an obsolete name for the state. Here is an old map that uses the term: http://www.thetreasuremaps.com/asia/Bellin,Perse1770.jpg

External Links

The external links include 3 "non-profit portal" links added recently; should these be here? And are they really non-profit (they have advertisements)? DevanJedi 23:23, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

Removed. --ΜιĿːtalk 09:54, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

this needs to be added

Guzarat is an obsolete term for the most part, but it should still be recognized because that is how most Westerners pronounce it. Khazarat , khazar is turkish for sanskrit:gujjar i add these terms only to help the article, but someone has the need to remove them. why? edit: hello, okay i will hopefully find the citations and link it here sometime. thanks. If you could provide citable references for the above on the talk page here, it can surely be considered for inclusion. Also, may I suggest if you get a user-name and sign your comments please (by using ~~~~ at the end)? --ΜιĿːtalk 09:28, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Riot mention should be in history, NOT demograchics

Why is the mention to the riots in demographics?? Their should a line or two about it in history and thats about it. It should not be in introduction, it should not be in demographics. It should be in HISTORY. For example, "Gujarat has suffered from sporadic communal riots in recent times with the most recent being the Godhra riots." Is that so hard? This is so juvenille. Gujarat article is never going to reach featured stage as we have two idiotic sides: One side wants to equate Gujarat and its history to the riots and the other side wants to put their heads in the sand and try to hide it as much as possible. GET OVER IT. Life goes on. Bad things happen everywhere and to everyone. --Blacksun 21:07, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

The riot mention you speak of is a couple of sentences. They're not as idiotic as you make them out to be. I agree we need more info about post-independence Gujarat History in the History section; maybe something akin to the mention of the riots in Vadodara? DevanJedi 21:45, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

I was addressing both sides including some of the previous talk messages. Yes, history section of post-independence pretty much sucks. Their are tons of good things to say about Gujarat's history and also some blots to talk about. It should all be mentioned. Lets not indulge in rewriting of history as it does nothing. It would be a great achievement to get this article to featured status. However, it is going to be a great challenge. One that needs to be faced.--Blacksun 23:41, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Kutch and Drinking water

There is acute shortage of drinking water and it seems that Gujarat Government is neglecting for the same. for further reading see many articles in Gujarati Language

• http://www.kutchmitradaily.com vkvora 04:58, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

MAP

There are no scales on the map i.e how far is it from Ahmedabad to Bharuch

Removed Commercial link

i have removed commercial link below from the description~~

Calling to Gujarat

• www.alosmart.com/India-Gujarat-calling-card-293.asp Calling Cards to Gujarat

The lead

The lead doesn't seem to have a coherent first sentence, and doesn't even mention that it's a State of India, which is silly. It was what I was specifically checking the article to find out - whether it is a single administrative region or primarily a geographical term. I suggest vital bit of information should be in the lead somewhere towards the start? TheGrappler 17:46, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

The opening sentences did mention that it is a state of India, but I have clarified the opening line further. DevanJedi 18:04, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

My mistake, I apologise. Having said that, this is a lot clearer now, thank you. TheGrappler 20:59, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

AMUL

It is strange that this page has no mention of Amul which is really worth more space than the gujarat riot. Kaushal mehta 11:46, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Hi Kaushal, have changed the Amul entry - corrected it to founder being Tribhovandas Patel (please refer to http://www.amul.com/1994hits/page3.html for confirmation) - Verghese Kurien was hired by Tribhovandas after he had already set up the venture, with the blessings of Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel. You can get more info on this from a rare docu made by Amul on its own history. Have also deleted the line about Operation Flood. That was based on learnings from many co-operatives, and is defintely not directly (legally/financially) linked to Amul or the Kaira Co-operative. wildT 20:36, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

• Well I didnt add the info, just enquired if anybody could put it, thanks anyways. Kaushal mehta 05:55, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Labour Laws applicable in Gujarat??

What are the different kinds of labour laws applicable in the State of Gujarat... Please provide a link if anyone knows... Please help... A S

Indian labour laws are mainly fedrally decided so its probably pretty much the same as the rest of India 70.50.193.238 19:41, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

politics

I believe chimanbhai patel of janata dal came to power before the keshubhai patel government. the statement is false that after congress bjp came to power. before 1995 janata dal came to power._{the above unsigned comment was made by}Kaushal mehta

Is it important to put politics on this page? One or another government is always going to rule in the state. What way it is significant for those who want to learn about Gujarat? For non-Indian reader Amar, Keshu or Chiman, they all sound a like. harish 01:36, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and hence such content is relevant. Where there is a state there is politics it is a part of life.Kaushal mehta 16:41, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

I agree with you that politics is significant part of an identity of place or community but I believe present paragraph about politics nowhere captures that significance. It just mentions boring dates. If one is not from Congress or BJP, I am sure he/she wouldn't bother to look at. I would have rather more appreciated mentioning of "Nav Nirman Andolan", "removal of chiman bhai patel (way back when he first time became chief minister)", "removal of Madhav sinh solanki", "agitation against resevation in 80s" as politics, that is where exactly aspiration of people of Gujarat dramatically visible. harish 02:44, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

• Be bold as wikipedia says it and go ahead and make the changes. I will try to help you with this, by the way, sorry for the unsigned first comment. --Kaushal mehta 12:14, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Spelling of Gujarath

Many South Indian languages transliterate "t" endings as "th" but that does not legitimise "Gujarath" as another spelling, given that the official spelling has always been "Gujarat" and it equates to the name in the Gujarati language. This is akin to allowing "America" to be spelt as "Amrika" just because most of the Middle East and South Asia use that term. Similarly, "Gujrat" is a misspelling. Recommend removing "Gujarath" as an alternative spelling. --Ash 12:00, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

I agree with Ash and recommend removing "Gujarath" as an alternative spelling since people of Gujarat themselves never pronounce or spell in that way. harish 22:13, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Done. - Aksi_great (talk) 11:57, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Language?

Someone please provide a source that Hindi is an official language along with Gujarati. Tuncrypt 17:19, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Harijan

Article mentions that Mahatma Gandhi provided the name Harijan to Meghwal. I think mediaval age poet Narshinh Mehta first used this word. Mahatma Gandhi popularise its use. pruthvi 20:00, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Jadeja royal family tree

Can anyone provide input on the deletion discussion for this thing? There seem to be some problems with verifiability which someone with local knowledge could help with Kappa 23:26, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Gujarat genocide?

In this article, there claims to be harmony between hindus and muslims in gujarat. that is bullshit. There is no mention of the gujarat genocide, or of Modi's pogroms. This article definetly needs to add facts about gujarat, not just opinions of some Modi supporters. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 72.80.237.20 (talk • contribs) 04:35, 31 Jan 2007 (UTC)

Strangely, there seems to be no mention of the riots in the entire article. Wonder why. It used to be in the lead. Hornplease 04:47, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

There still isn't. Anyone willing to put it in? I will do it myself otherwise. Hornplease 00:53, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Photograph needed

The copyleft pictures of Indian Wild Ass is needed. It is pride of Gujarat! --Nirajrm ^{talk ||| sign plz!} 00:47, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Bias?

this article seems a little bit biased "The people of Gujurat are family oriented and decent people" this is a totally useless sentence for an encyclopedia, and should be deleted Kashyap3 03:13, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

A recent revert

I removed a great deal of information placed in the article mainly by a new user which was terribly formatted and probably non-notable. Since some of it may be salvageable by more experienced editors, I encourage everyone to look at the diff of my revert here: [5]. Hornplease 04:44, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Modified to meet wiki standards? Hopefully (18th March 07)

Modified some text. Changed the order Improved the sections Ensured a smooth flow

Just made sure that the quality of the article is improved. More stuff needs to go in, probably a few more Pics.

The deshgujrat links at the bottom seem like advert to me, but I have not removed them, just changed the text a bit.

What say guys, do we need more work before we remove the improvement tag???

Yessrao a.k.a Sushanth 00:05, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Demographics

I had edited first paragraph of demographics to read following but was removed. I believe that entire section need to be re-written since there are lots of discrepancies. Only higher caste are vegetarian not all Gujaratis. Also, I never heard of Jats in Gujarat.

Here is the first para that I had edited. Its official and primary language is Gujarati. The religion of the majority of its residents is Hinduism, in addition to significant percentages following Islam, Jainism, Zoroastrianism and Christianity. Most of the higher caste Gujarati are strict vegetarians. The interaction of higher caste who were the only one to interact with people outside Gujarat till few decades ago have created a perception that all Gujaratis are vegeterian while in reality more than 70% of the Hindu Gujarati regularly eat meat and fish. Amongst Hindus the deity of Krishna is famously worshipped in His form of Shrinathji throughout Gujarat. Gujarat is birthplace of Ghandhiji. Gujarat is also the birthplace of the Swaminarayan sect of Hinduism. Beside Swaminarayan movement, which is now split into several groups, Swadhyay, Gayatri Parivar, Asharam movements and number of other movements are equally popular among Hindu Gujaratis. Dcpatel 14:03, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

Demographics

File:100d 0384.jpg

Welcome sign in Gujarat.

A picture is a thousand words, if not less!

I like the welcome sign - but hey this is a billboard! And is it a coincidence that the present CM is also on it? I shall assume good faith, but it being election season here in Gujarat, what with large cut-outs of the CM on the net and off it, I wonder whether we could do without some surrogate advertising.

For starters, can we have a non-political (read "neutral") welcome sign without mention of how vibrant Gujarat is or not?

Just asking.

--Sumov 16:37, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Vandalising information

I have recently gone over the information about my home state of Gujarat and have noticed that some fellow wikipedia user has gone through the trouble of changing all the statistics related to industrial output amongst other facts. These stats have been changed to insult the state. Can someone please restore the truthfulness of this wikipedia page so others may learn about Gujarat and obtain accurate information. As for the user who made the changes, I suggest users like you should be banned to keep the collect of information progressing forwards rather then backwards.