Wikipedia talk:Featured article review/India/archive2

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

This is a talk page for detailed FAR critiques of the text in the India page. Each editor offering such a critique should make an independent section and place it below the last such section, but above the References section. Thank you. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 11:58, 10 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Fowler&fowler's comments[edit]

Culture[edit]

  • India's culture is marked by a high degree of syncretism[1] and cultural pluralism.[2]
    • This is a sentence that was first composed by an editor based on his or her POV about India's culture and then a search for its references was mounted. The references are quite obscure (Bangladesh Journal of Sociology) for such a basic summarizing lead sentence for the culture section. A better approach for an opening sentence is to look at widely-used textbooks and see what they say, independent of our POV.
  • India's cultural tradition dates back to 8000 BCE[3] and has a continuously recorded history for over 2,500 years.[4]
    • Both citations are to obscure books. That means again that the editor who composed this sentence first constructed the sentence in consonance with his POV, and then went looking for the references. As for the first part of the sentence, the neolithic culture of Mehrgarh, which dates to 6000 BCE, which is now in Pakistan, had more links to similar neolithic cultures in Iran and Mesopotamia than to anything contemporaneous in India. Similarly, for the second part, "continuously recorded history" is a charged word often employed by nationalists to emphasize the antiquity of Indian culture. But history per se was not emphasized in that culture. To be sure, historians have extracted history from religious collections such as the Rig Veda, but very few historical texts exist and those are invariably written by foreigners. The earliest of these goes back to soon after Alexander's invasion of India, i.e. approximately 2300 years ago.
      • Removed cultural pluralism and syncretism. Not necessary in what should be a more factual rather than opinionated summary article. Also removed the word continuously as that isn't quite correct. I think the length of the cultural history is fine because we don't really want to be in the business of portioning culture between this region or that. --rgpk (comment) 18:48, 13 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • With its roots based in the Indus Valley Tradition, the Indian culture took a distinctive shape during the 11th century BCE Vedic age which laid the foundation of Hindu philosophy, mythology, literary tradition and beliefs and practices, such as dhárma, kárma, yóga and mokṣa.[5]
    • The first part of the sentence is problematic, especially as the Hindus nationalists claim that the Indus Valley Civilization was really made by the same people who made the Vedic Age, the so-called Aryans, who, it is further claimed, are indigenous to India. The reference sounds like a travel book. Surely we can do better for such a basic sentence!
  • It has managed to preserve established traditions while absorbing new customs, traditions, and ideas from invaders and immigrants and spreading its cultural influence to other parts of Asia, mainly South East and East Asia.
    • This is not quite accurate, although this is a widely-held conceit in India. Obviously, India didn't manage to preserve the established traditions of Buddhism, or for that matter of the Historical Vedic religion. The first became extinct, the second was transformed; neither was preserved. An encyclopedia should not be insinuating such sentiment.
  • Indian religions form one of the most defining aspects of Indian culture.[6]
    • I don't know if this statement is true or not, but I would feel more comfortable if the reference used was a widely used history text, than a book on Indian religions, which, naturally, would emphasize religion.
  • Major dhármic religions which were founded in India include Hinduism, Buddhism and Jainism.
    • Does an average uninformed Wikipedian, who bravely wades though all the previous sections to get to this one, really know what "dharmic" is? Why bother with such a confusing distinction in an introductory section? Are there any "dharmic" religions that were founded outside of India? Or any un-dharmic religions that were founded in India? Where is the mention of Sikhism, which likely has more adherents within India than either Buddhism or Jainism? Is Sikhism un-dharmic (whatever that is)?
  • Considered to be a successor to the ancient Vedic religion,[7] Hinduism has been shaped by the various schools of thoughts based on the Upanishads,[8] the Yoga Sutras and the Bhakti movement.[6]
    • Rephrased. Also dropped Buddhism from the list since the section is on culture rather than on history of Indian religions. Added Sikhism. --rgpk (comment) 15:29, 14 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • A "successor?" Considered by whom? By the source that has been cited, which reads, "Stietencron, Hinduism: On the Proper Use of A Deceptive Term, pp.1–22!!" And why does a average uninformed Wikipedian, who barely knows anything about Hinduism, care about Hinduism's antecedents? Notice too that the link has been subtly changed: [[Historical Vedic religion|ancient Vedic religion]], emphasizing antiquity again. This tendency to over-emphasize the antiquity of things Indian is a major issue with Wikipedia's India-related edits and editors.
      • I got rid of Dharmic and dropped the 'successor' statement. The source does not say that (and implies that Hinduism is largely non-vedic in character anyway). --rgpk (comment) 17:59, 13 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • Also, I note that there the shaped by contains two parts with different references. If this is not OR, only the complete statement needs a citation. Will try to research this. Meanwhile I've added the complete reference for stietencron. --rgpk (comment) 21:48, 18 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Buddhism originated in India in 5th century BCE and prominent early Buddhist schools, such as Theravāda and Mahāyāna, gained dominance during the Maurya Empire.[6]
    • Buddhism was founded in the 6th century BCE (That at least is the consensus among most historians). Furthermore, it was founded in the old India (i.e. on the Indian subcontinent); the historical Buddha was born in present-day Nepal. Also, why are we introducing the Mauryan Empire here, when it was one of the emperors of that empire, Asoka the Great, who promoted Buddhism? And "prominent early Buddhist schools, such as Theravāda and Mahāyāna?" What was the third prominent early Buddhist school, and what were some un-prominent early Buddhist schools? Again this seems like nonsensical jargon introduced by some overreaching editor.
  • Buddhism entered a period of gradual decline in India 5th century CE onwards,[9] it played an influential role in shaping Indian philosophy and thought.[6]
    • By the time of Xuanzang's visit in the 7th century CE, Buddhism has already declined quite dramatically. I don't know I would add the "gradual," which again seems like an editor's POV. And what is the reference "Merriam-Webster, pg. 155–157??" A dictionary? An encyclopedia? What year? ...
      I got rid of this. This section is about culture, not history. --rgpk (comment) 15:29, 14 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

and so it goes (I will annotate the rest later). I think it is this kind of POV and "listy" sentence construction (which only gets worse in the later subsections) that needs to be corrected. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 11:46, 10 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm with you on this one: indigenism, primordialism, etc. See Indigenous Aryans for specifics. Tijfo098 (talk) 12:05, 10 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Culture (continued)
  • Indian architecture is one area that represents the diversity of Indian culture.
    • We haven't said anything yet about the diversity of Indian culture. (We have about syncretism and cultural pluralism) Do we mean "Indian architecture is diverse?" Or does Indian architecture somehow better exemplify this diversity than the other arts? Do we really need, "is one area that?"
  • Much of it, including notable monuments such as the Taj Mahal and other examples of Mughal architecture and South Indian architecture, comprises a blend of ancient and varied local traditions from several parts of the country and abroad.
    • Do we need to single out the Taj Mahal and make the sentence unwieldy?
    • Much of it? How much? Do we just mean Mughal architecture and South Indian architecture?
    • "comprises a blend of ancient and varied local traditions from several parts of the country and abroad" This is so general that pretty much the universe is included in it.
  • Vernacular architecture also displays notable regional variation.
    • "also?" What else displays notable regional variation? We haven't said that Mughal and South Indian architecture display notable regional variation.
  • Considered to be the earliest and foremost "monument" of Indian literature, the Vedic or Sanskrit literature was developed from 1,400 BCE to 1,200 AD.[10][11]
    • Why "monument?" I understand the pun (transitioning from architecture), but works of literature spanning 2,600 years (1400 BCE to 1200 CE) can hardly be considered a monument.
    • Are the Vedas considered literature?
    • If the span being considered is so wide, how are we calling the literature "Vedic?" (The Vedas had all been composed by the mid-first millennium BCE.) Best to just call it Sanskrit literature.
    • "was developed from?" That's a strange passive construction. Sounds like it was planned, and its developers very deliberately stopped developing it in 1200 CE.
  • Prominent Indian literary works of the classical era include epics such as Mahābhārata and Ramayana, dramas such as the Abhijñānaśākuntalam (The Recognition of Śakuntalā), and poetry such as the Mahākāvya.[12]
    • After claiming that the literature spanned 2600 years we are giving examples from only the "classical era."
    • What is the classical era in Sanskrit literature? The Sanskrit literature link seems to suggest it is 3rd century CE to 8th century CE. In other words, both the Ramayana and the Mahabharata are not really from that era (but of one slightly earlier).
  • Developed between 600 BCE and 300 AD, the Sangam literature consists 2,381 poems and is regarded as a predecessor of Tamil literature.[13][14][15]
    • 2,381 Do we really need that kind of precision? Why are we saying 600 BCE, when the sources we cite themselves say (in the quotes we supply) that the literature begins somewhere between 1st century BCE and 1st century CE?
  • From 7th century AD to 18th century AD, India's literary traditions went through a period of drastic change because of the emergence of devotional poets such as Kabīr, Tulsīdās and Guru Nānak.
    • That's a long period of drastic change. Do we mean that there was continual drastic change during these eleven hundred years? Or do we mean that the cumulative change registered during these eleven hundred years was drastic?
    • "India's literary traditions?" At least three of the four examples we give are from north India.
  • This period was characterised by varied and wide spectrum of thought and expression and as a consequence, medieval Indian literary works differed significantly from classical traditions.[16]
    • This is not only an ugly sentence but utterly meaningless as well. Throw and it and say something meaningful.
  • In the 19th century, Indian writers took new interest in social questions and psychological descriptions.
    • We haven't mentioned anything earlier either about social questions or psychological descriptions. What do we mean then by "new interest?"
  • During the 20th century, Indian literature was heavily influenced by the works of universally acclaimed Bengali poet and novelist Rabindranath Tagore.[17]
    • Really, all 20th century Indian literature can be reduced to the universally acclaimed Tagore? Sounds drastic.
      Agree that this section is a mess. Also, I notice an attempt to provide continuity by expanding the Bhakti poets all the way back to the 7th century. The Tagore statement is odd and there is nothing about the many contemporary Indian writers writing in English (which would be of more interest to readers anyway). I'll attempt a rewrite. --rgpk (comment) 16:02, 14 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

More later. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 22:23, 10 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Society and traditions[edit]

{{Indian image rotation|culture}}

  • Traditional Indian society is defined by relatively strict social hierarchy.
    • What is "social hierarchy?" It is a euphemism for the caste system? Or is there some other kind of hierarchy at play in traditional Indian society as well?
    • Is this true? If so, I'd like to see a mainstream sociology textbook type source.
    • And what about non-traditional Indian society? What percentage of India's society is traditional?
  • The Indian caste system describes the social stratification and social restrictions in the Indian subcontinent, in which social classes are defined by thousands of endogamous hereditary groups, often termed as jātis or castes.[18]
    • Why has the text suddenly expanded to the "Indian subcontinent?" The caste system in Muslim-countries such as Pakistan and Bangladesh is very marginal and nothing as entrenched as it is in India. This part should really be about the Republic of India.
    • Why such a theoretical and abstract definition?
    • Nothing about the sins of the caste system?
  • Several influential social reform movements, such as the Bramho Shômaj, the Arya Samāja and the Ramakrishna Mission, have played a pivotal role in the emancipation of Dalits (or "untouchables") and other lower-caste communities in India.[19]
    • I know there is a "however" coming in the next sentence, even so, this is a strange kind of "good news first" sentence. These three reform movements did very little as far as I can tell, certainly not a pivotal role. Only Gandhi and later the Dalits themselves (under Ambedkar) did anything worth mentioning.
  • However, the majority of Dalits continue to live in segregation and are often persecuted and discriminated against.[20]
    • There is too much jargon in this section. "Live in segregation" "persecuted and discriminated against?" True, there are links there, but more evocative descriptions are needed for people who choose not to click on the links. "Live on the outskirts of villages?" "Live in urban slums?" and so forth.
  • Traditional Indian family values are highly respected, and multi-generational patriarchal joint families have been the norm, although nuclear families are becoming common in urban areas.[21]
    • The reference, An American's Guide to Doing Business in India, is the best we can come up with?
    • "Traditional Indian family values are highly respected" What are "traditional Indian family values?"
    • (Minor) Needs a grammatical fix ("have been the norm, although ...")
  • An overwhelming majority of Indians have their marriages arranged by their parents and other respected family members, with the consent of the bride and groom.[22]
    • What is overwhelming? Better to have a rough percentage here.
    • "and other respected family members?" In contrast to family black sheep?
    • "with the consent of the bride and the groom?" Shouldn't it be, "with their consent?"
  • Marriage is thought to be for life,[22] and the divorce rate is extremely low.[23]
    • This seems to be based on a survey. It is better to present the results of that survey broadly.
  • Child marriage is still a common practice, more so in rural India, with about half of women in India marrying before the legal age of 18.[24][25]
    • Change "more so" to "especially."
  • Many Indian festivals are religious in origin, although several are celebrated irrespective of caste and creed.
    • Do we need [[Public holidays in India|Indian festivals]]? Why not simply many public holidays in India are religious holidays?
    • "Cast and creed?" This either needs to be explained or rephrased. In Indian usage "creed" refers to religion (in contrast to its more secular meaning (i.e value system, philosophy) elsewhere).
  • Some popular festivals are Diwali, Ganesh Chaturthi, Ugadi, Thai Pongal, Holi, Onam, Vijayadashami, Durga Puja, Eid ul-Fitr, Bakr-Id, Christmas, Buddha Jayanti, Moharram and Vaisakhi.[26][27]
    • "Popular?" Do we mean "widely celebrated" or "widely observed?" If so, the latter two descriptions are more encyclopedic. Regardless, that is still a long list of holidays. Can we reduce their number by attempting a more qualitative description?
  • India has three national holidays which are observed in all states and union territories — Republic Day, Independence Day and Gandhi Jayanti.
  • Other sets of holidays, varying between nine and twelve, are officially observed in individual states.
    • "Other sets of holidays?" Why not simply say, "Other holidays, varying between nine and twelve, are observed independently by individual states?"
  • Religious practices are an integral part of everyday life and are a very public affair.
    • Is this still true? Sounds dated to me. Regardless, I'd like to see a mainstream reference for this.
    • "are a very public affair?" I thought Hinduism did not stress group observance.
  • Traditional Indian dress varies across the regions in its colours and styles and depends on various factors, including climate.
    • Again this seems like a everyday truism introduced merely as an excuse for the link "Indian dress." Surely, we can say something more meaningfully "Indian" about Indian dress.
  • Popular styles of dress include draped garments such as sari for women and dhoti or lungi for men; in addition, stitched clothes such as salwar kameez for women and kurta-pyjama and European-style trousers and shirts for men, are also popular.
    • Seems slightly dated as well. It seems, according to reports I have, in urban areas of North India, at least the large metropolitan areas, almost no women under the age of forty are wearing saris. That seems like a startling kind of change similar to the one (with rising hemlines) that took place in Europe right after World War I. There should be some mainstream source that speaks to these recent changes.

More later. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 04:55, 11 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Music, dance, theatre and cinema[edit]

This section is a little listy, and the prose needs to be improved, but there are few POV issues here. Once the prose has been polished, and the references added, it should be good to go. More soon. One question: why aren't literature and architecture also in this section (rather than in a section above)? Fowler&fowler«Talk» 05:40, 11 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Cuisine[edit]

  • Indian cuisine is characterised by a wide variety of regional styles and sophisticated use of herbs and spices.
    • Doesn't this also apply to French cuisine, Italian, Spanish, Chinese, Japanese, even Thai, Greek, ...? Can we say something that is a little more India-specific?
    • "Sophisticated use?" Does any international cuisine have unsophisticated use?
  • The staple foods in the region are rice (especially in the south and the east), wheat (predominantly in the north)[34] and lentils.[35]
    • Are we sure these are the staples? If so, why do we need two sources? I ask because other sources say that millet is a staple as well, especially in central India. It would be easy enough to check on this from a third mainstream source.
  • Spices, such as black pepper which are now consumed world wide, are originally native to the Indian subcontinent.
    • Although this may be true, why is it such a notable feature of the cuisine that it merits mention in contrast to the techniques of Indian cooking such as tandoor, etc.?
  • Chili pepper, which was introduced by the Portuguese, is also widely used in Indian cuisine.[36]
    • This too, an interesting history of food tidbit, is really less about the cuisine than about an item used in the cuisine. Why is the section so short? Alternatively, if this is all we have to say about Indian cuisine, then why is it an independent section? More later. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 05:53, 11 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sport[edit]

Main article: Sport in India
Cricketers in a game in front of nearly-full stands.
A 2008 Indian Premier League Twenty20 cricket match being played between the Chennai Super Kings and Kolkata Knight Riders

This finishes the culture section. I will write a critique of the History section next (but after a day or two). Fowler&fowler«Talk» 07:06, 11 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

References[edit]

  1. ^ Das, N.K. (2006). "Cultural Diversity, Religious [[Syncretism]] and People of India: An Anthropological Interpretation". Bangladesh e-Journal of Sociology. 3 (2nd). ISSN 1819-8465. Retrieved 27 September 2007. The pan-Indian, civilisational dimension of cultural pluralism and syncretism encompasses ethnic diversity and admixture, linguistic heterogeneity as well as fusion, and variations as well as synthesis in customs, behavioural patterns, beliefs and rituals {{cite journal}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors= (help); Invalid |ref=harv (help); URL–wikilink conflict (help); Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)
  2. ^ Baidyanath, Saraswati (2006). "Cultural Pluralism, National Identity and Development". Interface of Cultural Identity Development (1stEdition ed.). New Delhi: Indira Gandhi National Centre for the Arts. xxi+290 pp. ISBN 81-246-0054-6. Retrieved 8 June 2007. {{cite book}}: Unknown parameter |nopp= ignored (|no-pp= suggested) (help)
  3. ^ Arnett, Robert. India Unveiled. Atman Press, 2006. ISSN 9780965290043 0965290042, 9780965290043. {{cite book}}: Check |issn= value (help)
  4. ^ Sharma, Shaloo. History and Development of Higher Education in India. Sarup & Sons, 2002. ISSN 9788176253185 8176253189, 9788176253185. {{cite book}}: Check |issn= value (help)
  5. ^ de Bruyn, Pippa. Frommer's India. Frommer's, 2010. ISSN 9780470556108 0470556102, 9780470556108. {{cite book}}: Check |issn= value (help)
  6. ^ a b c d Heehs, Peter. Indian religions: a historical reader of spiritual expression and experience. C. Hurst & Co. Publishers, 2002. ISSN 9781850654964 1850654964, 9781850654964. {{cite book}}: Check |issn= value (help) Cite error: The named reference "Heehs" was defined multiple times with different content (see the help page).
  7. ^ Stietencron, Hinduism: On the Proper Use of A Deceptive Term, pp.1–22
  8. ^ "Advaita Vedanta: A Philosophical Reconstruction," By Eliot Deutsch, University of Hawaii Press, 1980, ISBN 0-8248-0271-3.
  9. ^ Merriam-Webster, pg. 155–157
  10. ^ Hoiberg, Dale. Students' Britannica India: Select essays. Popular Prakashan, 2000. ISBN 0852297629, 9780852297629. {{cite book}}: Check |isbn= value: invalid character (help)
  11. ^ Sarma, Srinivasa. A History of Indian Literature, Volume 1. Motilal Banarsidass Publ., 1996. ISSN 9788120802643 8120802640, 9788120802643. {{cite book}}: Check |issn= value (help)
  12. ^ Johnson 1998, MacDonell 2004, pp. 1–40, and Kālidāsa & Johnson (editor) 2001
  13. ^ Kamil Veith Zvelebil, Companion Studies to the History of Tamil Literature, p.12
  14. ^ George L. Hart III, The Poems of Ancient Tamil, U of California P, 1975.
  15. ^ 1. Encyclopaedia Britannica (2008), "Tamil Literature." Quote: "Apart from literature written in classical (Indo-Aryan) Sanskrit, Tamil is the oldest literature in India. Some inscriptions on stone have been dated to the 3rd century BC, but Tamil literature proper begins around the 1st century AD. Much early poetry was religious or epic; an exception was the secular court poetry written by members of the sangam, or literary academy (see Sangam literature)." 2. Ramanujan 1985, pp. ix–x. Quote: "These poems are 'classical,' i.e. early, ancient; they are also 'classics,' i.e. works that have stood the test of time, the founding works of a whole tradition. Not to know them is not to know a unique and major poetic achievement of Indian civilisation. Early classical Tamil literature (c. 100 BC–AD 250) consists of the Eight Anthologies (Eţţuttokai), the Ten Long Poems (Pattuppāţţu), and a grammar called the Tolkāppiyam or the 'Old Composition.' ... The literature of classical Tamil later came to be known as Cankam (pronounced Sangam) literature. (pp. ix–x.)"
  16. ^ Kumar Das, Sisir. A history of Indian literature, 500-1399: from courtly to the popular. Sahitya Akademi, 2006. ISSN 9788126021710 8126021713, 9788126021710. {{cite book}}: Check |issn= value (help)
  17. ^ Datta, Amaresh. The Encyclopaedia Of Indian Literature (Volume Two). Sahitya Akademi, 2006. ISSN 9788126011940 8126011947, 9788126011940. {{cite book}}: Check |issn= value (help)
  18. ^ "India – Caste". Encyclopædia Britannica Online.
  19. ^ Paswan, Sanjay. Encyclopaedia of Dalits in India: Movements. Gyan Publishing House, 2002. ISSN 9788178350349 8178350343, 9788178350349. {{cite book}}: Check |issn= value (help)
  20. ^ "UN report slams India for caste discrimination". CBC News. 2 March 2007.
  21. ^ Eugene M. Makar (2007). An American's Guide to Doing Business in India.
  22. ^ a b Medora, Nilufer (2003). "Mate selection in contemporary India: Love marriages versus arranged marriages". In Hamon, Raeann R. and Ingoldsby, Bron B. (ed.). Mate Selection Across Cultures. SAGE. pp. 209–230. ISBN 0-7619-2592-9.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: editors list (link)
  23. ^ "Divorce Rate In India".
  24. ^ "Child marriage in India a major peril, health experts tell Lancet". Mint. Retrieved 3 April 2011.
  25. ^ "State of the World's Children-2009" (PDF). UNICEF. 2009.
  26. ^ "List of Holidays in India". Retrieved 7 July 2010.
  27. ^ "18 Popular India Festivals". Retrieved 23 December 2007.
  28. ^ 1. "South Asian arts: Techniques and Types of Classical Dance" From: Encyclopædia Britannica Online. 12 Oct. 2007. 2. Sangeet Natak Academi (National Academy of Music, Dance, and Drama, New Delhi, India). 2007. Dance Programmes[dead link] 3. Kothari, Sunil. 2007. Sattriya dance of the celibate monks of Assam, India[dead link]. Royal Holloway College, University of London.
  29. ^ Lal 1998
  30. ^ (Karanth 1997, p. 26) Quote: "The Yakṣagāna folk-theatre is no isolated theatrical form in India. We have a number of such theatrical traditions all around Karnataka... In far off Assam we have similar plays going on by the name of Ankia Nat, in neighouring Bengal we have the very popular Jatra plays. Maharashtra has Tamasa. (p. 26.)
  31. ^ "Country profile: India". BBC. 19 August 2009. Retrieved 2007. {{cite news}}: Check date values in: |accessdate= (help)
  32. ^ Dissanayake & Gokulsing 2004
  33. ^ Rajadhyaksha & Willemen (editors) 1999
  34. ^ Delphine, Roger, "The History and Culture of Food in Asia", in Kiple & Kriemhild 2000, pp. 1140–1151.
  35. ^ Lentil: An Ancient Crop for Modern Times. But it has been red lentils which have 'fed the masses' particularly in the Indian subcontinent. Lentils are a staple food in many regions {{cite book}}: Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help)
  36. ^ Achaya 1994, Achaya 1997
  37. ^ Shores, Lori. Teens in India. Compass Point Books, 2007. ISBN 0756520630, 9780756520632. {{cite book}}: Check |isbn= value: invalid character (help)
  38. ^ "Anand crowned World champion". Rediff. 29 October 2008. Retrieved 29 October 2008.
  39. ^ "India Aims for Center Court". WSJ. September 11, 2009. Retrieved 29 September 2010.
  40. ^ "Shooting is India's No. 1 sport: Gagan". Deccan Herald. 5 October 2010. Retrieved 5 October 2010.
  41. ^ "Sawant shoots historic gold at World Championships". TOI. Aug 9, 2010. Retrieved 5 October 2010.
  42. ^ "Saina Nehwal: India's badminton star and 'new woman'". BBC. 1 August 2010. Retrieved 5 October 2010.
  43. ^ "Is boxing the new cricket?". Live Mint. Sep 24 2010. Retrieved 5 October 2010. {{cite news}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)
  44. ^ "India makes clean sweep in Greco-Roman wrestling". TOI. Oct 5, 2010. Retrieved 5 October 2010.
  45. ^ Xavier, Leslie (Sep 12, 2010). "Sushil Kumar wins gold in World Wrestling Championship". TOI. Retrieved 5 October 2010.
  46. ^ Majumdar & Bandyopadhyay 2006, pp. 1–5.
  47. ^ "Indian Grand Prix". Retrieved April 23, 2011.
History
Geography
  • Dikshit, K.R. (2007). "India: The Land". Encyclopædia Britannica. pp. 1–29. {{cite book}}: |access-date= requires |url= (help); External link in |chapterurl= (help); Unknown parameter |chapterurl= ignored (|chapter-url= suggested) (help); Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help)
  • Government of India (2007). India Yearbook 2007. Publications Division, Ministry of Information & Broadcasting. ISBN 81-230-1423-6.
  • Heitzman, J. (1996). India: A Country Study. Library of Congress (Area Handbook Series). ISBN 0-8444-0833-6. {{cite book}}: Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help)
  • Posey, C.A (1994). The Living Earth Book of Wind and Weather. Reader's Digest Association. ISBN 0-89577-625-1.
Flora and fauna
  • Ali, Salim; Ripley, S. Dillon (1995). A Pictorial Guide to the Birds of the Indian Subcontinent. Mumbai: Bombay Natural History Society and Oxford University Press. pp. 183, 106 colour plates by John Henry Dick. ISBN 0-19-563732-1. {{cite book}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help)
  • Blatter, E.; Millard, Walter S. (1997). Some Beautiful Indian Trees. Mumbai: Bombay Natural History Society and Oxford University Press. pp. xvii, 165, 30 colour plates. ISBN 0-19-562162-X. {{cite book}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help); Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |publisher= (help)
  • Israel, Samuel; Sinclair (editors), Toby (2001). Indian Wildlife. Discovery Channel and APA Publications. ISBN 981-234-555-8. {{cite book}}: |last2= has generic name (help); Invalid |ref=harv (help)
  • Prater, S. H. (1971). The book of Indian Animals. Mumbai: Bombay Natural History Society and Oxford University Press. pp. xxiii, 324, 28 colour plates by Paul Barruel. ISBN 0-19-562169-7. {{cite book}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help); Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |publisher= (help)
  • Rangarajan, Mahesh (editor) (1999). Oxford Anthology of Indian Wildlife: Volume 1, Hunting and Shooting. New Delhi: Oxford University Press. pp. xi, 439. ISBN 0-19-564592-8. {{cite book}}: |first1= has generic name (help); Invalid |ref=harv (help); Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |publisher= (help)
  • Rangarajan, Mahesh (editor) (1999). Oxford Anthology of Indian Wildlife: Volume 2, Watching and Conserving. New Delhi: Oxford University Press. pp. xi, 303. ISBN 0-19-564593-6. {{cite book}}: |first1= has generic name (help); Invalid |ref=harv (help); Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |publisher= (help)
  • Tritsch, Mark F. (2001). Wildlife of India. London: Harper Collins Publishers. p. 192. ISBN 0-00-711062-6. {{cite book}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help)
Culture
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Featured_article_review/India/archive2&oldid=1088879154"