India Project‑class
This page is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia articles Project This page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

/archive1

Hey there, i'm looking, if there's someone willing to help cleaning up article Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Ashoka's policy of Dhama. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anupmehra (talk • contribs) 19:55, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

dear friends i have recently joined this project i am here with giving you the link of this caption this is regarding indian history khilafat movement kindly look into this

i hope this may help us we may add the link to this photgraph of the members who are in the photo

Image:Umar_alisha_members_of_legislative_assembly_dated_1937-03-05.JPG

Pingali 15:38, 16 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

http://www.hinduonnet.com/thehindu/mp/2002/10/14/stories/2002101401180300.htm

regards

Pingali 11:05, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please read. Regards, Ganeshk (talk) 08:02, 16 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Found this article through the cross-namespace links and thinking it quite a good start I wikified and organized it the best I could, being that Indian history is not my forte. I'm just bringing it to your attention so it can be reviewed and expanded beyond the Ahom-Mughal conflict, or whatever you want to make of it. Dracontes 14:15, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. The WikiProject Council has recently updated the Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Directory. This new directory includes a variety of categories and subcategories which will, with luck, potentially draw new members to the projects who are interested in those specific subjects. Please review the directory and make any changes to the entries for your project that you see fit. There is also a directory of portals, at User:B2T2/Portal, listing all the existing portals. Feel free to add any of them to the portals or comments section of your entries in the directory. The three columns regarding assessment, peer review, and collaboration are included in the directory for both the use of the projects themselves and for that of others. Having such departments will allow a project to more quickly and easily identify its most important articles and its articles in greatest need of improvement. If you have not already done so, please consider whether your project would benefit from having departments which deal in these matters. It is my hope that all the changes to the directory can be finished by the first of next month. Please feel free to make any changes you see fit to the entries for your project before then. If you should have any questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me. Thank you. B2T2 15:14, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm interested in making free svg maps. Please drop me a note on my talk page if you need any. =Nichalp «Talk»= 09:20, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

@Nichalp:Hello there, I am replying to nearly-a-decade old post, but I am hoping for the best that your "interest" has not faded with time! I would like to have some of your help. -Anand2202 (talk) 09:58, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This pak as been untagging indus valley with the indian tag on it. Could use some help on this. Szhaider (talk · contribs) seems to be behind it. He takes the tag off harappa civilization and other indic historic sites as well.--D-Boy 21:41, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Can someone please look at the stray little stub Rajarajan that's been created recently. Am I right in guessing that name should redirect to an existing article like Rajaraja Chola I?? --Mereda 17:31, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Can someone have a look at the latest entry at Taj Mahal (disambiguation), please? Is Veena a vandalism entry? It looks odd to me. --Nemonoman 05:25, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've fixed it. Thanks Parthi ^{talk/contribs} 05:39, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

== Please dont steal Pakistani history == before 1947 there WAS NO pakistan OR india. it is the creation of British. Serious note. Dont make a joke out of this. I will take this matter further.

	 Mistaken Definition of Ancient India

We have all seen the term Ancient India before. On first thought you would think it applies to the Ancient History of India. Well, you are wrong. This term applies to the Ancient History of South Asia.

For decades, Indian historians have written the history books according to their own liking. And because of Pakistanis being ashamed of their non-Islamic past, their jobs had been made so much easier. To understand what has happened in the region, you have to be open minded. Everything written here is backed up with facts, logic and common sense. The logic applied to this argument makes sense.

Before India became an English colony sometime in 1800's or perhaps earlier, there was no such thing as India that we see today. The subcontinent was very much divided into many parts ruled by various dynasties. After independence in 1947, many of the states in the subcontinent were united into two single countries. The Republic of India and Pakistan. The Republic of India was not supposed to claim the name 'India'. This was a political agreement broken in 1947 which has lead to a lot of confusion in modern times. India, just like Pakistan was born in 1947. Prior to this, the region which is now India, Pakistan and Bangladesh, was known as British India. When the region was partitioned, Republic of India claimed the title of 'parent state' of British India, as they received the larger land mass for their country. Along with this title they also claimed the History of the region which was British India in ancient times.

This region was only ever united when Britain invaded. Prior to that, the region was scattered with dynasties. Logically, it doesn't make sense that India can claim the history of people and land which never belonged to them. The old argument of 'Pakistan not existing prior to 1947, therefore there is no such thing as Ancient Pakistan' is flawed. The same logic can be applied to India. There was no such thing as a country, India prior to 1947, and prior to the 1800s; the South Asian subcontinent was never united in anyway. So the current definition of Ancient India is flawed. Ancient Indian history is the history of Republic of India in Ancient times. This doesn't include any region outside of their own borders.

Therefore, grouping the history of the entire South Asian subcontinent, which has never been united prior to the 1800s and passing it on to a country which came into existence in 1947, doesn't make sense. Indian Historians have ignored these arguments and pretended that India has existed for 1000s of years.

Let's talk about Indus Valley for example. The region in question is now located in Pakistan. The people of the region have always been living there. However the history of the region is claimed by India, who is in absolutely no way related to the Pakistani people, neither have they ever had claim over the land which is now Pakistan. Indus Valley settlements are located all over Southern Asia. These include, Iran, Turkmenistan, Afghanistan, northwest India, and of course Pakistan. However, the Main IVC cities, aswell as the majority are in Pakistan. The main ones being, Harappa and Mohenjodaro. The Indus Valley history should be called Ancient Pakistani. Any history which took place in what is now Pakistani should be known as Ancient Pakistani history. This includes the Kushun empire aswell.

The Pakistani identity is being stolen because Historians hide the fact that South Asia has never been united prior to 1800s.

It is incorrect to even label IVC as Ancient South Asian history. South Asia is home to 1.6 billion people, which is way too broad to describe the people of Indus valley, which is now Pakistan. Sure this is no harm in mentioning the settlements outside of Pakistan (India, Iran, Turkmenistan, Afghanistan and Kashmir), however one has to remember that Pakistan is the home of it.

User:Unre4L

Wikipedia is not a soapbox and we aren't required to listen to fringe blogs.Bakaman 03:55, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Um...pakistan didn't exist before 1947. This is not a joke.--D-Boy 09:52, 19 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

India didnt exist before the 1850s Thats not a joke either mate. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Unre4L (talk • contribs) 22:06, 19 December 2006 (UTC).[reply]

May I suggest a few message boards or blogs where this discussion will be better appreciated, User:Unre4L? deeptrivia (talk) 22:56, 19 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Republic of India and Pakistan both didn't exist before 1947. True. However, historians and other scholars (not just Indian, includes Western) don't use the term "Ancient South Asia." They stuck with "Ancient India." Blame them not us. Gizza^{Chat ©} 23:55, 19 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This has been discussed so many times before... Nobleeagle ^[TALK] [C] 05:26, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Unre4L is a member of the forum that he quotes...in fact he is responsible for more than 50% of the output of that forum...so this evidence of his may as well be OR. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 05:29, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Here's another point Unre4L. The Indus civilisation, even when considering the modern post-1947 borders, isn't completely in Pakistan. See Image:IVC_Map.png. Lothal, for example is in the Republic of India. Gizza^{Chat ©} 08:29, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That's beside the point. Harappa is in Pakistan, and we won't tag Harappa as "Ancient South Asian" but Banawali as "Ancient India". The 1947 border is irrelevant for articles on the Bronze Age. see the ((mergefrom)) on this page. It would be best to create a sub-project "WP IVC" and use a template specific to that. dab (𒁳) 14:59, 22 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

True after independence the Republic of India claimed exclusive rights over the usage of name 'India' which was previously used to denote British India.But there was no 'British Pakistan' or anything like that prior to the partition.Parts of present-day Pakistan too were considered to be and officially referred and marked in maps as 'British India'.In fact, your argument seems absurd. Does not the river 'Indus' which gave India its name run through Pakistan! As far as Indus sites are concerned,there are sites such as Lothal,Ropar and Kalibangan in India which are as important as Harappa and Mohenjodaro.Please dont make a political issue of this.The stuff in Wikipedia might please some, it may not please others.However, articles are based on facts and not on opinions -Ravichandar84 15:13, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This category has become very large. I think we should focus on expanding/merging these stubs. Do we need a subproject for that? deeptrivia (talk) 06:59, 24 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Make an indian military stub. there's project for it.--D-Boy 11:46, 24 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oops.. didn't quite get what you're saying. deeptrivia (talk) 18:20, 24 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Indian military history task force--D-Boy 05:58, 25 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The question is, what do we do with the hundreds of Indian history stubs. A large number of them are not related to military history. deeptrivia (talk) 09:46, 25 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I can help with clean-up and copy-editing of any merged stubs. It would be good if we can save as much content as possible, and not undo hard effort. I watch this page infrequently, so shoot me a message on my talk page if my services can help. You can also email me, and sometimes catch me on IRC Wikipedia. Nina Odell 13:46, 4 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I found Serfoji II in the 'pages to be expanded' list and have added additional information.Is there any task or editing work remaining to be done with the page or shall I strike off 'Serfoji II' from the pages to be expanded list. Regards -Ravichandar84 15:04, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, The civilizations in the Indus valley are as Indian as they come. Tomorrow if pakistan breaks up into a further two staes, and one calls itslf talibanistan (or whatever they wish)..then will the 'new people' lay claim to it as well? Absurd man!! It is an Indian civilization, regardless of the fact that the northern part of what was India is now called pakistan.. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rabbanikov (talk • contribs) 13:10, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On the talk page of the Wikipedia article Tipu Sultan I have been having a conversation with Kanchanamala about the spelling of Tipu Sultan. He has changed all the references within the article to 'Tippu'. I would be interested to hear comments from other members of WikiProject Indian History. Thank you Mick gold 09:14, 25 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, all. It was initially my hope to try to have this done as part of Esperanza's proposal for an appreciation week to end on Wikipedia Day, January 15. However, several people have once again proposed the entirety of Esperanza for deletion, so that might not work. It was the intention of the Appreciation Week proposal to set aside a given time when the various individuals who have made significant, valuable contributions to the encyclopedia would be recognized and honored. I believe that, with some effort, this could still be done. My proposal is to, with luck, try to organize the various WikiProjects and other entities of wikipedia to take part in a larger celebrartion of its contributors to take place in January, probably beginning January 15, 2007. I have created yet another new subpage for myself (a weakness of mine, I'm afraid) at User talk:Badbilltucker/Appreciation Week where I would greatly appreciate any indications from the members of this project as to whether and how they might be willing and/or able to assist in recognizing the contributions of our editors. Thank you for your attention. Badbilltucker 20:35, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please see Talk:History of India and present your opinions as to whether India has any ownership over the history of the regions around the Indus. Nobleeagle ^[TALK] [C] 03:29, 4 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

All that's happening there is simple trolling. Same (hilarious) arguments are being presented over and over again. The best thing is to ignore it, and just revert any vandalism. deeptrivia (talk) 06:56, 4 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

We are presenting arguments which make sense, and please dont tell people to ignore the arguments. How can India lay claim over a region which never belonged to India, and isnt even inside your borders? Unre4Lﺍﹸﻧﺮﮮﺍﻝ ^UT 23:29, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How can the Islamic republic of Pakistan lay claim to a proto-Hindu civilization that is considered "kaffir" ? Bakaman 21:20, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've filed an RFC relating to the Taj Mahal at Talk:Taj Mahal#Request for Comment: Inclusion of minority points of view. Your comments would be most welcome. Joopercoopers 18:27, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User:Fowler&fowler is deleting each and every reference to these three archaeologists in Indus Valley Civilization -related articles, seemingly for "political" reasons. Input on the talk page of the IVC article would be appreciated. Talk:Indus_Valley_Civilization#Fowler.26fowler.27s_deletion_of_all_references_to_BB_Lal.2C_Jane_Mcintosh_and_SP_Gupta --RF 16:58, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Friends this profile has been involved in altering the contents of the Indian History Main Project Page

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Saurav_Basu2007&action=edit

As a result of which the participants list got deformed.

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Indian_history&diff=116251684&oldid=115011791

As I could not understand the head or tail of the changes that have been made instead I undid the revisio n made by this individual. -Ravichandar84 02:52, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

______________________________________________________________________

FROM UAE DUBAI. ziauae@gmail.com Comments will be welcomed by email.

It is realy useful to have a conversation about india, indian history is whateve, the future is not going towards good. all the region what was a golden bird before 1700 is now looking as a war zone for the people of india with no benifits. It is realy unwanted. no body like to put his house in flames at the time when he is living there, but here it is being done by so called educated rulers just for nothing, so please get the truth other wise it will get you.

Governor-General of India has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. DrKiernan (talk) 15:28, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I was trying to put my name into the participant section and it copied by username bio. onto it. sorry. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.160.134.156 (talk) 10:47, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

TinucherianBot can automatically tag articles with ((WP India)) Banner as ((WP India|class=|importance=)) to the talk page of articles without the project banner. It can also add the workgroup paramaters like "|kerala=yes|kerala-importance=" etc ,if needed. The currently supported workgroups are Kerala, Maharashtra, Andhra pradesh, Tamil Nadu, Gujarat, Bengal, Goa, Himachal Pradesh , Karnataka , Punjab,cities, Cinema, Literature, Protected Areas of India, History, Politics, states, Geography,Maps,Districts and Tamil.

If you need so, you need to provide me with the Categories to run the Bot. Due to some technical issues, the Bot will not run recursively to sub-categories. The requester should kindly verify that there are NO non-related articles in the category.
You may request for the bot run on my talk page... Thanks -- TinuCherian ^{(Wanna Talk?)} - 06:39, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

To help this workgroup patrol existing articles for vandalism/recent changes, Ganeshbot has created the Wikipedia:WikiProject Indian history/Articles page. This page will be updated on a regular basis. Please do remind me if I forget. :) It contains articles that were tagged with the India banner and fall under the scope of this workgroup. Please let me know in case of any questions. Thanks, Ganeshk (talk) 11:35, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User:WolterBot has created a Wikipedia:WikiProject Indian history/Cleanup listing page; it contains the articles that fall under the scope this workgroup and have cleanup tags on them. See this page for more information on this works. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thanks, Ganeshk (talk) 04:04, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As you may have heard, we at the Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial Team recently made some changes to the assessment scale, including the addition of a new level. The new description is available at WP:ASSESS.

• The new C-Class represents articles that are beyond the basic Start-Class, but which need additional references or cleanup to meet the standards for B-Class.
• The criteria for B-Class have been tightened up with the addition of a rubric, and are now more in line with the stricter standards already used at some projects.
• A-Class article reviews will now need more than one person, as described here.

Each WikiProject should already have a new C-Class category at Category:C-Class_articles. If your project elects not to use the new level, you can simply delete your WikiProject's C-Class category and clarify any amendments on your project's assessment/discussion pages. The bot is already finding and listing C-Class articles.

Please leave a message with us if you have any queries regarding the introduction of the revised scheme. This scheme should allow the team to start producing offline selections for your project and the wider community within the next year. Thanks for using the Wikipedia 1.0 scheme! For the 1.0 Editorial Team, §hepBot (Disable) 21:43, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia 0.7 is a collection of English Wikipedia articles due to be released on DVD, and available for free download, later this year. The Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team has made an automated selection of articles for Version 0.7.

We would like to ask you to review the articles selected from this project. These were chosen from the articles with this project's talk page tag, based on the rated importance and quality. If there are any specific articles that should be removed, please let us know at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.7. You can also nominate additional articles for release, following the procedure at Wikipedia:Release Version Nominations.

A list of selected articles with cleanup tags, sorted by project, is available. The list is automatically updated each hour when it is loaded. Please try to fix any urgent problems in the selected articles. A team of copyeditors has agreed to help with copyediting requests, although you should try to fix simple issues on your own if possible.

We would also appreciate your help in identifying the version of each article that you think we should use, to help avoid vandalism or POV issues. These versions can be recorded at this project's subpage of User:SelectionBot/0.7. We are planning to release the selection for the holiday season, so we ask you to select the revisions before October 20. At that time, we will use an automatic process to identify which version of each article to release, if no version has been manually selected. Thanks! For the Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial team, SelectionBot 23:05, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Muhammad Ali Jinnah has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. YellowMonkey (bananabucket) 03:40, 21 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I and one of my fellow editors are facing a deadlock on a issue of bias in Operation Blue Star article, the summary of dispute can be found at [1], please let us know your views so that 'alleged' bias may be looked into and a consensual solution may be found. Thanks LegalEagle (talk) 06:23, 9 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have nominated Kingdom of Mysore for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Regards, Fowler&fowler«Talk» 02:43, 5 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am gathering sources for a paper on cotton trade in the middle east and Asia. Please see this question at the reference desk for more details. If you know of any good sources on the subject, please add them to the discussion. Thank you. --Ghostexorcist (talk) 20:02, 5 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

History of Mumbai, a recently listed GA, has been listed for a Peer review at Wikipedia:Peer review/History of Mumbai/archive2. Comments, Suggestions are welcomed. Thanks, Kensplanet^T_C 09:35, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I and my fellow editors are facing a deadlock on a issue of removing/toning down few lines on 'Allegations of Human Rights violation against the Indian Army' under 'criticism of the operation' section in Operation Blue Star article, concerns include WP:NPOV, WP:SOAP & WP:V, the summary of dispute can be found at [2]. I would request all interested editors to kindly go through the article and please let us know your views/opinion at the talk page of the article so that npov, balance and undue weight concerns may be looked into and a consensual solution may be found. Thanks LegalEagle (talk) 06:01, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've recently created this page, and need a little bit of help with the article and its deletion debate. Apparently, I need to find where this concept exists in the Arthashastra. Thanks, -download ׀ sign! 21:43, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have nominated Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here.Cirt (talk) 06:34, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A lot of people had problems with the current template .The main problem was representing Kingdoms which existed for multiple centuries. It also divided the geography artificially into 3 parts in an unsuccessful attempt to show contemporaries. I have created a new template User:Vinay84/Template:Middle kingdoms of India which I believe shows the situation better. I wanted a discussion before I replaced the current template with the new one. So please click the discussion wikilink and provide your opinion. --Vinay84 (talk) 02:44, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This message is being sent to each WikiProject that participates in the WP 1.0 assessment system. On Saturday, January 23, 2010, the WP 1.0 bot will be upgraded. Your project does not need to take any action, but the appearance of your project's summary table will change. The upgrade will make many new, optional features available to all WikiProjects. Additional information is available at the WP 1.0 project homepage. — Carl (CBM · talk) 03:26, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

User:DASHBot/Wikiprojects provides a list, updated daily, of unreferenced living people articles (BLPs) related to your project. There has been a lot of discussion recently about deleting these unreferenced articles, so it is important that these articles are referenced.

The unreferenced articles related to your project can be found at >>>Wikipedia:WikiProject Indian history/Unreferenced BLPs<<<

If you do not want this wikiproject to participate, please add your project name to this list.

Thank you.

Update: Wikipedia:WikiProject Indian history/Unreferenced BLPs has been created. This list, which is updated by User:DASHBot/Wikiprojects daily, will allow your wikiproject to quickly identify unreferenced living person articles.

There maybe no or few articles on this new Unreferenced BLPs page. To increase the overall number of articles in your project with another bot, you can sign up for User:Xenobot_Mk_V#Instructions.

If you have any questions or concerns, visit User talk:DASHBot/Wikiprojects. Okip 00:47, 28 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Version 0.8 is a collection of Wikipedia articles selected by the Wikipedia 1.0 team for offline release on USB key, DVD and mobile phone. Articles were selected based on their assessed importance and quality, then article versions (revisionIDs) were chosen for trustworthiness (freedom from vandalism) using an adaptation of the WikiTrust algorithm.

We would like to ask you to review the Indian history articles and revisionIDs we have chosen. Selected articles are marked with a diamond symbol (♦) to the right of each article, and this symbol links to the selected version of each article. If you believe we have included or excluded articles inappropriately, please contact us at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.8 with the details. You may wish to look at your WikiProject's articles with cleanup tags and try to improve any that need work; if you do, please give us the new revisionID at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.8. We would like to complete this consultation period by midnight UTC on Monday, October 11th.

We have greatly streamlined the process since the Version 0.7 release, so we aim to have the collection ready for distribution by the end of October, 2010. As a result, we are planning to distribute the collection much more widely, while continuing to work with groups such as One Laptop per Child and Wikipedia for Schools to extend the reach of Wikipedia worldwide. Please help us, with your WikiProject's feedback!

For the Wikipedia 1.0 editorial team, SelectionBot 23:09, 19 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have created together with Smallman12q a toolserver tool that shows a weekly-updated list of cleanup categories for WikiProjects, that can be used as a replacement for WolterBot and this WikiProject is among those that are already included (because it is a member of Category:WolterBot cleanup listing subscriptions). See the tool's wiki page, this project's listing in one big table or by categories and the index of WikiProjects. Svick (talk) 21:20, 7 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! This message is just to let you know that I did an enormous copyediting work in List of Indian monarchs. Regards. --Againme (talk) 19:36, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Below are some ideas on restructuring and revitalizing WikiProject History. It may be easier to keep discussion in one place, perhaps here.

General Points

• Restructure the front page so that it more closely resembles that of WikiProject Military History. This design is easy to navigate, and getting to specific areas of the WikiProject is made quicker and less difficult.

• Forge closer ties with some of its "daughter" projects. WikiProject History should serve as a focal point for history-related article improvement drives and discussions, and should be a community of editors supportive of smaller, fairly inactive region-specific history projects.

• Expand the A-Class review process. This should be a major function of WikiProject History (conducting A-Class reviews for smaller, "daughter" projects).
  • Work on expanding the number of History Good and Featured articles.

• Host task forces devoted to improving recently-created articles. Some editors should work with WikiProject Deletion Sorting to save as many quality history-related AfDs as reasonably possible.

• WikiProject History should be less of a "front-lines" WikiProject, like the Military History one, but more of a coordinating effort. An enhanced A-Class review process and forging relations with "daughter" projects would help to achieve this goal.

Membership and Leadership

• All current WikiProject History members would be members of the new, revitalized project. WikiProject Military History members, as well as members of all region-specific history projects, would be automatically inducted into the project, although these users could opt out at any time.

• All members of the WikiProject should have an equal say in WikiProject affairs.
  • However, a group of five coordinators should be elected by all editors that are part of the abovementioned categories to make the WikiProject "flow" smoothly. These coordinators would serve for twelve months each, and would be elected in February of each year.
  • Each coordinator would have a specific task, or "department".
    • Chief Coordinator. This coordinator would serve as a guide to other coordinators and members of the project.
    • Assessment and Review Coordinator. This coordinator would sort reviews, with the help of two delegates that s/he could appoint.
    • Membership Coordinator. This coordinator would deal with membership issues, and would direct and judge "contests" on the project.
    • Resources Coordinator. This coordinator would assist members in need.
    • Content Coordinator. This coordinator would work on improving articles in need, and would direct efforts and drives related to this.

Role on the Encyclopedia

WikiProject History should be a visible, important part of the encyclopedia, as it should work to coordinate other projects and direct various task forces and drives on the website. Newcomers interested in history should be assisted and guided by the Resources Coordinator and other helpful editors.

WikiProject History should work together with other projects to achieve some of the goals of the encyclopedia as a whole.

Thank you for reading this, and for commenting, if you are interested. DCItalk 23:17, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Is up for FPOC. This is one of the highest (if not the highest) visibility portal on Wikipedia, I recommend commenting on it! Cheers, ResMar 23:15, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi everyone. March is Women's History Month and I'm hoping a few folks here at WP:Indian history will have interest in putting on events (on and off wiki) related to women's roles in within Indian history. We've created an event page on English Wikipedia (please translate!) and I hope you'll find the inspiration to participate. These events can take place off wiki, like edit-a-thons, or on wiki, such as themes and translations. Please visit the page here: WikiWomen's History Month. Thanks for your consideration and I look forward to seeing events take place! SarahStierch (talk) 20:36, 1 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello all! I’m working with the Saylor foundation to create a series of original, crowd-sourced textbooks that will be openly licensed and freely available on the web and within Saylor’s free, self-paced courses at Saylor.org. We are using Wikibooks as a platform to host this project and hope to garner the interest of existing members of the Wikibooks and Wikipedia community, as well as bring in new members! We thought that some of your members may be interested in contributing to our book Saylor.org's Ancient Civilizations of the World. (talk) --Thomas Simpson (talk) 15:48, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Another editor tagged Bahirji Naik for speedy deletion. I added some references and removed the speedy tag. Help from other editors would be welcome. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 21:41, 26 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Bicholim conflict is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bicholim conflict until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article.

I'm placing this notice here because this is a case where I hope I'm wrong about the article. I wanted to do everything possible to see that this article is vetted by editors with a better knowledge of Indian history and access to better resources.--ShelfSkewed Talk 17:20, 28 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If you're interested in the history of India circa 600 AD (covered most extensively in the Chach Nama, a list of articles pertaining to the subject and their many needs can be found at User:DCI2026/Chach Nama table. It would be optimal if we could come together to improve Wikipedia's coverage of a little-known but important historical topic. dci | TALK 18:15, 3 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• And one more thing - I've decided to start a "task force" regarding the Chach Nama; I will be using the WikiProject Indian history name. If there is any objection to this, I will gladly change it. dci | TALK 00:11, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

As this Category is supported by WikiProject Indian history, Please pour your comments on merging those articles --Neechalkaran (talk) 01:10, 2 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello all,

this historical illustration showing the capture of Lucknow does not have any information about its origin attached and hence might soon be deleted at Commons. I've done some research, but all I was able to find out is that it's probably not from this book (didn't examine the whole book, but since the caption is in a different font and the general style of the artwork is different it seems unlikely to be the original source). The illustration is very likely to be old enough to be in the public domain, but we need at least some evidence for that in order to keep it at Commons. Hence, any hint would be highly appreciated. I'll try to remember to monitor this page, but I highly recommend to leave your comments at the deletion request at Commons in order to keep the discussion at one place. Thanks a lot for your attention, --El Grafo (talk) 12:31, 27 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I'm Supernerd11, and I was just letting you know that I nominated K. N. Srinivasan for deletion. Feel free to share your thoughts here. Cheers! Supernerd11 :D Firemind ^_^ Pokedex 04:59, 2 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Here on WW2 article, India is shown as a separate country(not part of British empire), all though the link leads to British India, but India was crown colony of British and was part of British empire, so should not be India there shown as part of British Empire? India was not dominion like Canada or Australia, and British joined in WW2 with out consulting with Indian leaders.Ovsek (talk) 13:59, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi all,

My name is Adi Khajuria and I am helping out with Wikimania 2014 in London.

One of our initiatives is to create leaflets to increase the discoverability of various wikimedia projects, and showcase the breadth of activity within wikimedia. Any kind of project can have a physical paper leaflet designed - for free - as a tool to help recruit new contributors. These leaflets will be printed at Wikimania 2014, and the designs can be re-used in the future at other events and locations.

This is particularly aimed at highlighting less discoverable but successful projects, e.g:

• Active Wikiprojects: Wikiproject Medicine, WikiProject Video Games, Wikiproject Film

• Tech projects/Tools, which may be looking for either users or developers.

• Less known major projects: Wikinews, Wikidata, Wikivoyage, etc.

• Wiki Loves Parliaments, Wiki Loves Monuments, Wiki Loves ____

• Wikimedia thematic organisations, Wikiwomen’s Collaborative, The Signpost

The deadline for submissions is 1st July 2014

For more information or to sign up for one for your project, go to:

Project leaflets
Adikhajuria (talk) 12:21, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello there! As you may already know, most WikiProjects here on Wikipedia struggle to stay active after they've been founded. I believe there is a lot of potential for WikiProjects to facilitate collaboration across subject areas, so I have submitted a grant proposal with the Wikimedia Foundation for the "WikiProject X" project. WikiProject X will study what makes WikiProjects succeed in retaining editors and then design a prototype WikiProject system that will recruit contributors to WikiProjects and help them run effectively. Please review the proposal here and leave feedback. If you have any questions, you can ask on the proposal page or leave a message on my talk page. Thank you for your time! (Also, sorry about the posting mistake earlier. If someone already moved my message to the talk page, feel free to remove this posting.) Harej (talk) 22:47, 1 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This is a notice about Category:Indian history articles needing expert attention, which might be of interest to your WikiProject. It will take a while before the category is populated. Iceblock (talk) 20:08, 11 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I was wondering if anyone can help with this page. It has previously been proposed for deletion because Asaf Khan I doesn't have an article and Asaf Khan II and Asaf Khan III don't have any incoming links. I was looking to create a stub on each of the three but couldn't get enough information. It seems a shame if it ends up deleted. Best wishes, Boleyn (talk) 13:10, 24 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Boleyn I see no tension at the moment. If you could even cite a source which proves that these people existed, like a genealogy which only mentions their names, then I think that is enough for now. Blue Rasberry (talk) 17:36, 24 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello everyone!

You may have received a message from me earlier asking you to comment on my WikiProject X proposal. The good news is that WikiProject X is now live! In our first phase, we are focusing on research. At this time, we are looking for people to share their experiences with WikiProjects: good, bad, or neutral. We are also looking for WikiProjects that may be interested in trying out new tools and layouts that will make participating easier and projects easier to maintain. If you or your WikiProject are interested, check us out! Note that this is an opt-in program; no WikiProject will be required to change anything against its wishes. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you!

Note: To receive additional notifications about WikiProject X on this talk page, please add this page to Wikipedia:WikiProject X/Newsletter. Otherwise, this will be the last notification sent about WikiProject X.

Harej (talk) 16:57, 14 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Recently I have got a copy of Imperial Gazetteer of India published 130 years ago during British colonial era. It is a valuable source of Information on various aspects of India's history. I am planning on its use as a source for creating new/adding to existing articles on Indian History. But when I went through this project page (Conventions and Policies), I got confused whether the document in my possession is a primary or secondary or tertiary source!? Is it ok for me to go ahead with my plans? -Anand2202 (talk) 13:44, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

According to Sitush, any British Raj source is a primary source and probably unreliable due to the biases of the time. But I notice that there are plenty of articles that refer to Gazetteers. They should all be replaced eventually. - Kautilya3 (talk) 13:38, 16 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It would be helpful to have other views on the edit at [3] - see also the talk page for some context. Thanks. Doug Weller (talk) 19:20, 11 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a concrete time period for "history of India" to consider? For example, I'm trying to figure out how should the categories in Category:Decades in India and Category:Centuries in India be considered and how many belong to the task force. I'm presuming most of those older ones would fall into the history taskforce here (perhaps stop at 2015 and not include the 2020s I guess). -- Ricky81682 (talk) 07:04, 30 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Most of the sources used for the page on Prithviraj Chauhan are from old and biased sources and I believe that Prithviraj Chauhan was an important figure for medieval India and should be given some importance.

Hi all

I'm designing a tool for Visual Editor to make it easy for people to add open license text from other sources, there are a huge number of open license sources compatible with Wikipedia including around 9000 journals. I can see a very large opportunity to easily create a high volume of good quality articles quickly. I have done a small project with open license text from UNESCO as a proof of concept, any thoughts, feedback or endorsements (on the Meta page) would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks

--John Cummings (talk) 14:57, 28 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I have been working on and off on the list of state leaders by year articles. The listings of countries in South Asia is especially lacking in some years. I have worked a lot on the most is probably List of state leaders in 1759. However even it is no where near complete. I begin to do this in 2010 and thought that the lists were moving away from being so Euro-centric. However I seem to be about the only person who has made any actual expansion of the lists in those six years. List of state leaders in 1723 lacks a listing of even the Mughal Emperor, but lists 137 sub-units of the Holy Roman Empire. List of state leaders in 1734 only lists China, Japan, Korea, the Ryukyu Kingdom and Hyderabad State for Asia, and I only added Hyderabad State today. Before that South Asia was totally ignored on the list. I can't make these lists good on my own, I need help in building them, so can people please help building them.John Pack Lambert (talk) 05:06, 28 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I have recently created an article on Barrackpore Mutiny of 1824. Grateful if somebody could review and let me know feedback on its talk page. PS. The article's importance has been rated as low and quality scale has been assessed C in WikiProject India (possibly by some Non-Indian Military History administrators). Any help to improve the ratings will be appreciated. Avskbhatta (talk) 22:58, 28 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Xx236 (talk) 11:55, 18 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The article Non-cooperation movement seems to have been hit by a lot of vandalism in the past few months, much of which was never caught/reverted. I've tried to clean up what seems to me to be bad edits, but I'm don't know much about this topic, so I'm limited to how much I can correct. Help? Thanks, Aristophanes68 (talk) 00:42, 6 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Is this wikiproject still active? -- Pankaj Jain Capankajsmilyo (talk · contribs · ) 11:25, 30 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

We – Community Tech – are happy to announce that the Popular pages bot is back up-and-running (after a one year hiatus)! You're receiving this message because your WikiProject or task force is signed up to receive the popular pages report. Every month, Community Tech bot will post at Wikipedia:WikiProject Indian history/Popular pages with a list of the most-viewed pages over the previous month that are within the scope of WikiProject Indian history.

We've made some enhancements to the original report. Here's what's new:

• The pageview data includes both desktop and mobile data.
• The report will include a link to the pageviews tool for each article, to dig deeper into any surprises or anomalies.
• The report will include the total pageviews for the entire project (including redirects).

We're grateful to Mr.Z-man for his original Mr.Z-bot, and we wish his bot a happy robot retirement. Just as before, we hope the popular pages reports will aid you in understanding the reach of WikiProject Indian history, and what articles may be deserving of more attention. If you have any questions or concerns please contact us at m:User talk:Community Tech bot.

Warm regards, the Community Tech Team 17:16, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

It starts with "The Magadha Empire was established very likely by King Jarasandha, who was a son of Brihadratha,". But Magadha doesn't mention Jarasanda. The second paragraph of the lead says " Bimbisara, also known as King Shrenik, ruled this kingdom from 617-565 BC" but Bimbisara says "544 – c. 492 BCE" - very different years. The second sentence says " Aryabhata (565–535 CE)" while Aryabhata has different dates. Then there are several tables of legendary kings with impossible dates and a citation needed tag from January 2012. Doug Weller talk 10:28, 22 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You are welcome to discuss the newly created ((Infobox folk song)) and its future here. --Tamtam90 (talk) 06:22, 18 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Editors may wish to comment on this proposal on the article's talk page Lyndaship (talk) 07:55, 3 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello and greetings from the maintainers of the WP 1.0 Bot! As you may or may not know, we are currently involved in an overhaul of the bot, in order to make it more modern and maintainable. As part of this process, we will be rewriting the web tool that is part of the project. You might have noticed this tool if you click through the links on the project assessment summary tables.

We'd like to collect information on how the current tool is used by....you! How do you yourself and the other maintainers of your project use the web tool? Which of its features do you need? How frequently do you use these features? And what features is the tool missing that would be useful to you? We have collected all of these questions at this Google form where you can leave your response. Walkerma (talk) 04:24, 27 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Is this Alha or Udal of Mahoba? The captions of the two articles seem to contradict each other. Pandakekok9 (talk) 08:18, 27 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Can some expert look at Rajput wiki page, specifically Rajput Origin section of the page which has been edited heavily in recent months with one sided view. Thanks in advance. Sajaypal007 (talk) 15:00, 1 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Dear All, Please see Talk:Rajput. This topic has been discussed multiple times in multiple sections with this user over several months and many editors have explained all points to him one by one. All edits are supported by multiple very high quality academic sources and no existing edits were removed. Please see the multiple discussions with this user on Talk:Rajput and all of us have explained to him. Another user had also opened an RFC to prevent further disruptions and that was closed. The edits are not one sided. They were added to balance the existing WP:PUFFERY and existing one sided edits made by editors promoting the caste, in fact, the page was protected by admin due to "caste boosterism" after some editors tried to remove the edits the above user is complaining about. Please see [[4]]. Also, this user as well as others(some of who have been warned by Sitush and admins and others have been banned) has been involved in disruptive WP:PUFFERY edits by the removal of "unpleasant" content from the Rajput page. Please check history of Rajput page and the talk page. CC: Bishonen , NitinMlk, Heba Aisha , Мастер Шторм , is there no end to this? Thanking you , Sincerely LukeEmily (talk) 16:59, 1 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

LukeEmily Plz report at WP:AE. The admins will take care of them.Heba Aisha (talk) 17:02, 1 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

LukeEmily, I agree with Heba Aisha on this one. Thanks, Мастер Шторм (talk) 05:10, 2 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Heba Aisha, Мастер Шторм, sorry for the late reply. OK. I will. Should I wait for another disruptive edit since I am a little late?LukeEmily (talk) 16:10, 12 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes...wait for him to create disruption then use all diff. To show his gaming behavior. Heba Aisha (talk) 16:11, 12 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have nominated Vijayanagara Empire for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Izno (talk) 02:15, 17 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This article could use some more eyes; I made a first pass at trying to clean it up a bit, but it could use a lot more work. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 16:30, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  You are invited to join the discussion about whether individual rulers of Turk Shahis and Nezak Huns deserve individual pages. Relevant links are:

• Discussion on Ghar Ilchi
• Discussion on Bo Fuzhun
• Discussion on Tegin Shah
• Discussion on Barha Tegin

Thanks, TrangaBellam (talk) 13:28, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A relevant meta-discussion is in progress at this thread. TrangaBellam (talk) 13:28, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi everyone, I am currently working on the 'Hakra Ware culture' article and have seen multiple conflicting sources for the chronology of this culture and would appreciate any input on verifying the information on this page. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sram337 (talk • contribs) 01:59, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There is a discussion at Talk:Madhava of Sangamagrama that this Project may be interested in. --20:53, 26 September 2022 (UTC) ARoseWolf 20:53, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have nominated Political integration of India for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" in regards to the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 22:38, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Template: Infobox Indian state or territory has an RFC for possible consensus. A discussion is taking place. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. Tojoroy20 (talk) 21:24, 3 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like some experts to have a look at this section--thanks. Drmies (talk) 17:29, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I am currently in the prosess to creating this article: Mughal War of Succession (1658–1659). Can other editors help me? SKAG123 (talk) 22:23, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I came across these two while processing the backlog at WP:Unreferenced articles. Are these articles duplicates? I can't tell. Would someone here be up for clarifying the difference if there is one or merging if there isn't? Thank you. Turtlecrown (talk) 20:06, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]