Featured articleIndia is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
Main Page trophyThis article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on December 3, 2004, and on October 2, 2019.
On this day... Article milestones
DateProcessResult
September 16, 2004Featured article candidatePromoted
April 11, 2005Featured article reviewKept
May 6, 2006Featured article reviewKept
July 28, 2011Featured article reviewKept
On this day... Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on August 15, 2004, August 15, 2005, August 15, 2011, and November 26, 2012.
Current status: Featured article


Humans made it to Australia before here

edit

Humans made it to Australia before here bypassing India? 50.100.82.136 (talk) 01:09, 5 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

This is the problem with random statistics in the lead....There is a debate if we where here before the Youngest Toba eruption as outlined at Clarkson, Chris; Harris, Clair; Li, Bo; Neudorf, Christina M.; Roberts, Richard G.; Lane, Christine; Norman, Kasih; Pal, Jagannath; Jones, Sacha; Shipton, Ceri; Koshy, Jinu; Gupta, M. C.; Mishra, D. P.; Dubey, A. K.; Boivin, Nicole; Petraglia, Michael (2020-02-25). "Human occupation of northern India spans the Toba super-eruption ~74,000 years ago". Nature Communications. 11 (1). Springer Science and Business Media LLC. doi:10.1038/s41467-020-14668-4. ISSN 2041-1723...... The debate should be removed from the lead and explained in the article in detail...... As the number 55 seems to be a synthesis of sources with an average guess compiled by Wikipedia editors.Moxy🍁 01:24, 5 November 2024 (UTC)Reply
Dear IP, The earliest identified anatomically modern human remains found thus far outside Africa are in Australia. That has been known for a very long time. But the human migration out of Africa is based on modern DNA marker evidence, both the mitochondrial which came to be analyzed with a fair level of certainty by the late 1980s and the Y-chromosome which did by early 2010s.
What appears in this article is only material that has appeared in introductory-textbooks, i.e. has been vetted for due weight. See WP:TERTIARY for the role of these text books in due weight.
The first book we have cited (in the sentence about human migration in the lead) is a first-year-graduate level textbook written by Michael Petraglia and Bridget Allchin, leading physical anthropologists. Naturally we give it primacy as their subject of specialization is most closely associated with human migration into South Asia. These authors say, "Y-Chromosome and Mt-DNA data support the colonization of South Asia by modern humans originating in Africa. ... Coalescence dates for most non-European populations average to between 73 and 55 ka." (where KA or KYA stands for "thousand years ago.")
The other two citations are also to textbooks, one the major historical demographer of South Asia, Tim Dyson,'s Population History of India, published by Oxford University Press in 2018, and the other the environmental historian, Michael Fisher's Environmental History of India, published by Cambridge University Press, in 2018. All three are cited in the lead, and all three citations have generous quotes.
We have not averaged out the various estimates, as @Moxy: has conjectured; rather, we have relied on the scholarly tertiary sources to do so for us. In particular, Tim Dyson says, "It is virtually certain that there were Homo sapiens in the subcontinent 55,000 years ago, even though the earliest fossils that have been found of them date to only about 30,000 years before the present." (as opposed to Australia, I might add, where the earliest fossils have been dated to 47 KYA).
So the fact that two leading physical anthropologists, Petraglia and Allchin, one of the human migration out of Africa and the other of India, and the leading historical demographer, had all three picked 55 KYA, is what clinched that particular date for us. Note we say, "By 55KYA ..." That means they might have come earlier, but no later.
Also for us, Nature Communications (cited by Moxy) whose average turn-around-time for first notice of acceptance is 8 days is not the best choice for supporting or discrediting the settled broadscale view of this article. Best regards, Fowler&fowler«Talk» 20:09, 27 November 2024 (UTC)Reply
Sould drop 55 from the lead as its simply a Wikipedia guesstimation. And say in the body that there are two different answers:"Tthe 'early version' states that they came from Africa through the Arabian peninsula 74,000 to 120,000 years ago, bringing Middle Stone Age tools for hunting, gathering food, and making clothes. The 'late version' claims they arrived later, about 50,000 to 60,000 years ago. By 50,000 B. C. , tools were made in large numbers with organized workers and established communication routes for distribution."Joseph, T. (2018). Early Indians: The Story of Our Ancestors and where We Came from. Juggernaut. ISBN 978-93-91165-95-6. Should also link the articles we have on the topic so other can read about the debate Peopling of India.Moxy🍁 20:38, 27 November 2024 (UTC)Reply
If you have a scholarly tertiary source, such as the three major ones I have mentioned, please add them here; otherwise, you are wasting community time. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 12:53, 28 November 2024 (UTC)Reply
Yes waste of time here Moxy🍁 13:06, 28 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

Discussion about add India's house speaker and chief justice in Wiki page

edit

Good Afternoon to all my respected editors, I have a suggestion that I want to add India's house speaker and chief justice name in the page because many countries has their house speaker and chief justice name in their wiki page like USA so as an Indian I want to add their names in the wiki page so what's your thoughts about this? Roni0102 (talk) 08:08, 13 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

Best follow other FA/GA country articles that dont list them because of lack of mention in the articles or simply because of position non notibility on an international scale. Moxy🍁 08:42, 13 November 2024 (UTC)Reply
I agree to add the names of Speaker and Chief Justice, don't know what so exception for only India that's it's removed. Loveforwiki (talk) 09:45, 13 November 2024 (UTC)Reply
So give me the permission so that I can add Speaker and Chief justice name Roni0102 (talk) 09:49, 13 November 2024 (UTC)Reply
Loveforwiki, the rationale is given by Moxy. This is a Featured article and, those positions aren't internationally notable for a general crowd. — — Benison (Beni · talk) 15:43, 13 November 2024 (UTC)Reply
Well, it's mentioned in most of the democratic countries. That's why it should be mentioned. Loveforwiki (talk) 16:03, 13 November 2024 (UTC)Reply
So I want that permission for that because internationally India is now more popular so why not everybody needs to know who is India's chief justice and House Speaker Roni0102 (talk) 16:07, 13 November 2024 (UTC)Reply
@Roni0102 Wait if you gets permission. by the way Wikipedia runs from west point of view, how the west sees the world. Loveforwiki (talk) 16:13, 13 November 2024 (UTC)Reply
India is a featured article, or FA. That means its layout, lexicon, syntax, and style conform to featured article criteria and the article has had at least one major community review (WP's most rigorous) and likely more for older articles. Moreover, there are only eight nine country FAs on Wikipedia, of which India is the oldest, now 20 years old. If you examine those eight FAs, the other major ones—Australia, Canada, Germany, and Japan—have but two offices listed under government and they are not the speaker. Cameroon and Bulgaria do have longer lists, but I have not looked at their page-histories to see if they were changed after the community review. Nauru (around whose perimeter my late parents had once walked many moons ago) does have the speaker listed, but among only two in the list. Best regards, Fowler&fowler«Talk» 16:39, 13 November 2024 (UTC)Reply
PS And Madagascar, which is also major, certainly for lemurs, has only two listed under the government Fowler&fowler«Talk» 16:50, 13 November 2024 (UTC)Reply
Loveforwiki, Once again, it has nothing to do with democracy. It all depends on the article quality. India is a featured article, one of the oldest of it's kind. Hence, it follows that guideline.
@Roni0102, Wikipedia works on consensus. You need to start a discussion in this talk page, demonstrating the need of inclusion of the speaker and CJ in the infobox, followed by proper rationale and guidlines. Then the editors of the page will decide via consensus if that inclusion is needed. Once again, I urge you both to go through WP:FA page to understand what a featured article is and how it is different from other pages on various (democratic) countries. Happy editing :) — — Benison (Beni · talk) 16:34, 13 November 2024 (UTC)Reply
There must have been an edit conflict, but I didn't see your post Benison and ended up repeating parts of your reply. Apologies. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 16:40, 13 November 2024 (UTC)Reply
Thank you for all of this I understand now and sorry to disturb you sir and please forgive me if I done something wrong Roni0102 (talk) 16:44, 13 November 2024 (UTC)Reply
Not your fault @Roni0102:. We should really have an FAQ up top. I've been meaning to for ages, but dawdling (also for ages). Fowler&fowler«Talk» 16:55, 13 November 2024 (UTC)Reply
Hey guys i think we should add the speaker name and chief justice in the lead. It's important part. Loveforwiki (talk) 04:20, 17 November 2024 (UTC)Reply
Loveforwiki, Kindly re read the messages and replies above. Clearly th3 consensus is against it. Thanks. — — Benison (Beni · talk) 09:19, 17 November 2024 (UTC)Reply
hello sir someone removed the vice president name of India so sir can you fix that sir Roni0102 (talk) 08:44, 27 November 2024 (UTC)Reply
Only the head of state and the head of government. The other major featured artices, such as Australia, Germany, Canada and Japan, show only those. Please don't post again with the same question. We can't change what is there. Best regards, Fowler&fowler«Talk» 10:44, 27 November 2024 (UTC)Reply
@Fowler&fowler I previously replied his comment below. Edasf«Talk» 13:49, 28 November 2024 (UTC)Reply
Yes, I had seen your reply. It is the reason I (more or less} copied it in my reply, and later thanked you publicly. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 14:12, 28 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

"Jana Gana Mana" is in Bengali and not in Hindi

edit

Wikipedia's claim that "Jana Gana Mana" is in Hindi is totally fake. Jana Gana Mana has been written by Bengali Nobel Literate Kabiguru Rabindranath Tagore in Sandhubhasa or Sanskritised Bengali. The Jana Gana Mana as it's sung is the original one not a translation of Hindi. Please kindly change it soon. 106.221.114.3 (talk) 17:14, 25 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

My understanding is that the original song is, of course, in Bengali, but the Indian national anthem is the Hindi "version" of it ("version" being the choice of word of the Constituent Assembly of India in the later 1940s when the discussion took place. By "version," apparently what they mean is this: As the song was written in Sanskritized Bengali, the choice of "Hindi version" by the Constituent Assembly of India was mainly to set the pronunciation of the Sanskrit words when singing, i.e. the anthem has "vidhata" and not "bidhata," which it would be in Bengali, or the Hindu pronunciation "jan" instead of "jono" in the Bengali. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 22:45, 25 November 2024 (UTC)Reply
PS Compare, for example, the transliteration in Tagore's original Bharoto Bhagyo Bidhata and in Jana Gana Mana. Tagore's original, besides, has an apt name for the song, for according to his translation it means "Dispenser of India's destiny." But the official title (or popular title) now is the first three words of the song, "Jana Gana Mana," which in (Tagore's song's AI overview) means: "People (Jana) group (Gana) mind (Mana)" which doesn't tell us what it is about.
Unfortunately, this does happen in popular and official culture in a lot of places.
Regional turns of phrase, for example, are disappearing in many Western countries. It probably happened a little more in a multi-cultural, multi-ethnic post-colonial state such as India, where the Hindi speakers (perhaps from being speakers of the largest spoken language) attempted to turn their language into at first a national language, but failing that to the official language of the union. (see Hindi Day). Something similar probably happened to other Modern Indian Languages, many of which were regional languages, and Urdu, also, which was not regional. Thus Iqbal's children's song, Tarana-e-Hindi became Sare JahaN se Achcha. Even then, only five rudimentary couplets from it are sung in India's popular culture.
Unfortunately, we at Wikipedia can't do too much about these historical devolutions, which might not have been ideal. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 23:23, 25 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

Vice president name removed

edit

I just saw now that India's vice president name was removed from there?? Why this position also internationally known so why it's removed so please add that name Roni0102 (talk) 15:32, 26 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

 N Not done: Good to simply add Head of State and Head of Government.Position of VP isnt that notable in parliamentry democracies like India Edasf«Talk» 17:12, 26 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

Change in CPI score and India's rank as per the latest report by CPI

edit

Corruption in India is perceived to have increased during the last decade. According to the Corruption Perceptions Index, India was ranked 78th out of 180 countries in 2018 with a score of 41 out of 100, an improvement from 85th in 2014, but has increased during the last decade as India now Ranks at 95th out of 180 countries listed with a score of 39 well below the global average of 42 as can be seen at this https://www.transparency.org/en/cpi/2023/index/ind

The previously mentioned data has not been updated for a decade now and needs updation in some shape or form. InspiredTheodore (talk) 01:05, 30 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

change population statistics

edit

there have been new census; delete this after confirmation and editings. 203.81.240.254 (talk) 16:18, 4 December 2024 (UTC)Reply

Well, do you have a source saying so? Hacked (Talk|Contribs) 16:35, 4 December 2024 (UTC)Reply

Repeated edits in the lead without a discussion here

edit

@Khassanu: Please read WP:OWN#Featured_articles. It is very helpful when editors look at this article with fresh eyes and correct errors. But we all have to play by the same rules: Minor, factual edits are fine, but anything substantial requires a discussion and renewed consensus on this talk page.

View for example that major changes you had made in this diff of my revert. Please engage editors here on the talk page, explain what you would like to do, and achieve a consensus for it. Soft pinging user:RegentsPark and user:Vanamonde93 Fowler&fowler«Talk» 17:07, 8 December 2024 (UTC)Reply

POLITICAL SCIENCE

edit

ವಿಶ್ವಸಂಸ್ಥೆ ಮತ್ತು ಭಾರತ 2409:408C:AD9C:8F3:681B:ED0:2ED:E3CD (talk) 06:16, 9 December 2024 (UTC)Reply

ನಮಸ್ಕಾರ! ಇದಕ್ಕಾಗಿ ದಯವಿಟ್ಟು ಕನ್ನಡ ವಿಕಿಪೀಡಿಯಕ್ಕೆ ಭೇಟಿ ನೀಡಿ ಅಥವಾ ಇಂಗ್ಲಿಷ್‌ನಲ್ಲಿ ಹೇಳಿ. ಧನ್ಯವಾದಗಳು. Hacked (Talk|Contribs) 06:23, 9 December 2024 (UTC)Reply

"ভাৰত" listed at Redirects for discussion

edit

  The redirect ভাৰত has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 December 13 § ভাৰত until a consensus is reached. Hey man im josh (talk) 17:14, 13 December 2024 (UTC)Reply

  NODES
admin 2
COMMUNITY 4
Idea 1
idea 1
INTERN 4
Note 5
Project 33