Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]

Jump to content

Talk:India: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Line 72: Line 72:
{{od}} I certainly don't believe it ("Human Rights") should have a separate subsection. I'm thinking more along the lines of two or three sentences in the society section with links to the main articles. We need to hear from the others ({{u|Bladesmulti}}, {{u|Qwyrxian}}, {{u|RegentsPark}}) to gain consensus, and I'm not sure they'd go even as far as me. You did not respond after bringing up the issue, so the others might not respond right away. When we do have the consensus, the two or three sentences would be finalized on the talk page first. That is how we have traditionally done it. Regards, [[User:Fowler&amp;fowler|<font color="#B8860B">Fowler&amp;fowler</font>]][[User talk:Fowler&amp;fowler|<font color="#708090">«Talk»</font>]] 03:12, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
{{od}} I certainly don't believe it ("Human Rights") should have a separate subsection. I'm thinking more along the lines of two or three sentences in the society section with links to the main articles. We need to hear from the others ({{u|Bladesmulti}}, {{u|Qwyrxian}}, {{u|RegentsPark}}) to gain consensus, and I'm not sure they'd go even as far as me. You did not respond after bringing up the issue, so the others might not respond right away. When we do have the consensus, the two or three sentences would be finalized on the talk page first. That is how we have traditionally done it. Regards, [[User:Fowler&amp;fowler|<font color="#B8860B">Fowler&amp;fowler</font>]][[User talk:Fowler&amp;fowler|<font color="#708090">«Talk»</font>]] 03:12, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
:The problem with the society section is the title seems broad and vague. If other editors, in addition to Fowler&amp;fowler, do not want a human rights subsection, then I suggest [[Child labor in India]] and issues of [[Debt bondage in India]] can go in the economy section. I do not know where maternal mortality would go from the currently available sections, however, some other country articles have a health section. Additionally, since the important issue of child malnutrition is in the economy section (which does not seem to be the most appropriate) and HIV/AIDS is never mentioned in the entire article, a health section would have additional benefits. As for [[Rape in India]], [[Acid throwing]], [[Bride burning]] and [[Female infanticide in India]], I do not think they fit in the society section since they are more about crime but I can understand if other editors would like them there. [[User:JustBeCool|JustBeCool]] ([[User talk:JustBeCool|talk]]) 18:25, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
:The problem with the society section is the title seems broad and vague. If other editors, in addition to Fowler&amp;fowler, do not want a human rights subsection, then I suggest [[Child labor in India]] and issues of [[Debt bondage in India]] can go in the economy section. I do not know where maternal mortality would go from the currently available sections, however, some other country articles have a health section. Additionally, since the important issue of child malnutrition is in the economy section (which does not seem to be the most appropriate) and HIV/AIDS is never mentioned in the entire article, a health section would have additional benefits. As for [[Rape in India]], [[Acid throwing]], [[Bride burning]] and [[Female infanticide in India]], I do not think they fit in the society section since they are more about crime but I can understand if other editors would like them there. [[User:JustBeCool|JustBeCool]] ([[User talk:JustBeCool|talk]]) 18:25, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

:: We need to be careful that we don't turn this article into an unreadable sea of blue (links) or a prosified [[outline of India]] article. At first glance I think the only additional topic that need to be linked ''directly'' from this page among the ones mentioned above would be [[human rights in India]], with a one or two sentence summary in the society section, or split between the society and economics section. The other sub-topics ([[Rape in India]], [[Female infanticide in India]], [[Acid throwing]], [[Bride burning]], [[Child labor in India]], [[Debt bondage in India]]), would themselves be discussed in that linked article, just as we only link to [[Transport in India]] here rather than linking to [[Rail transport in India]], [[Taxis in India]], [[Suburban rail in India]] [[Air transport in India]],[[ Indian Road Network]], [[National Highway (India)]] ''ad infinitum''.
:: Of course the exact language and article(s) to link can be discussed and finalized here on the talk page. JustBeCool, do you want to draft a proposal to get the discussion started? [[User:Abecedare|Abecedare]] ([[User talk:Abecedare|talk]]) 20:50, 27 November 2013 (UTC)


== Tenth or Eleventh? ==
== Tenth or Eleventh? ==

Revision as of 20:50, 27 November 2013

Featured articleIndia is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
Main Page trophyThis article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on December 3, 2004.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
September 16, 2004Featured article candidatePromoted
April 11, 2005Featured article reviewKept
May 6, 2006Featured article reviewKept
July 28, 2011Featured article reviewKept
Current status: Featured article

World Economic History : GDP India and World

According to economic historian Angus Maddison in his book The World Economy: A Millennial Perspective, India was the richest country in the world and had the world's largest economy during 0 BCE and 1000 BCE.[1][2] Also for most of the period when China was the dominant economy in the world, India held the second position of the largest economy.[1] India's share of the world income (economic output) was 27% in 1700 (compared to Europe's share of 23%) to 3% in 1950.[3]

Society section

So I added a statement from a new report that India has the largest number of slaves. It was politely reverted claiming that it was not appropriate for the society section. Since many other country articles have a human rights section, can that section be started along with my info and a 'main article|Human rights in India' link? I added that information in the society section because it was next to a sentence on Dalit persecution, so it seemed the article's most appropriate place to add it. The society section only has the disparate information of caste, marriage and festivals. Doesn't it seem better to break that section and send the information to other sections. JustBeCool (talk) 01:07, 24 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

JustBeCool, I think you should not add such news anywhere in whole Wikipedia. Because there's no independent verfibility in these reports. The slavery in many countries remains legal. Thus it's impossible to assume from such report, that it will present anything to be legible. If you look at the Slavery#Present_day it's already given. Therefore if you presented any new stats, anywhere you can remove them, since they have to be removed. Bladesmulti (talk) 11:32, 28 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know how this effects the rest of your arguments Bladesmulti, but that section you just pointed to shows a clear error in your claims--slavery is, in fact, illegal in all countries in the world. Of course there are millions of violations, but that does not mean that it's actually acceptable. Furthermore, you can't argue that there are "no independent verifiability"; the report itself is the independent verification. The BBC is practically the gold standard for news agencies, and they count as a reliable source for information, and can be presumed to have done basic fact checking on their publications. Now, it's still possible to argue this info doesn't belong in this article, but not based on your objections.
With reference to JustBeCool's question, I do think that we need a link to Human rights in India somewhere in this article, though I'm not sure where the best place to put that is. Qwyrxian (talk) 22:38, 28 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure that this slavery information fits in the India article. The news story is based on an index compiled by one organization (Walk Free) and the report itself probably has caveats and explanations. I would wait for reliable secondary sources (academic ones) to analyze and comment on the report before considering including any information here. We don't want our articles to be a mere compendium of news reports. --regentspark (comment) 22:54, 28 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

regentspark is actually right.. Only one organization which had no wiki page before this same editor JBC created one, about 3 days ago or more. Bladesmulti (talk) 13:46, 29 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure about the organization, Walk Free, either. More importantly, I'm not sure if the word "slavery" can be used as a catchall for human trafficking, child labor, bonded labor, etc. However, I will note that Child labor in India is an important social issue. Perhaps that can be mentioned somewhere in the article. It could be done either in the economy section or the society section. There are plenty secondary sources. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 18:31, 29 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
More troubling for me is that topics related to violence against women to to their neglect, such as: Rape in India, Acid throwing, Bride burning, Female infanticide in India, Sex selection, Maternal mortality, topics which make up a large proportion of stories on India in the press, and also are the subject of significant secondary literature, find no mention in the article. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 19:35, 29 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Finally, as for human rights, I'm not sure about this, but I wonder if human rights violations in India (as detailed for example in the article Human rights in India are a subject of sizable secondary literature. As I said, I'm not sure about this, but it might be worth checking. I mean academic literature, not NGO reports. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 19:42, 29 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Many issues were brought up here. As I said, we could start the human rights section and that can be an appropriate place for the glaring gaps such as Rape in India, Acid throwing, Bride burning, Female infanticide in India, Sex selection, Child labor in India as well as the issues associated with slavery, such as debt bondage, human trafficking, etc. However, maternal mortality is not appropriate in such a section. Should I get started on this? JustBeCool (talk) 02:48, 27 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I certainly don't believe it ("Human Rights") should have a separate subsection. I'm thinking more along the lines of two or three sentences in the society section with links to the main articles. We need to hear from the others (Bladesmulti, Qwyrxian, RegentsPark) to gain consensus, and I'm not sure they'd go even as far as me. You did not respond after bringing up the issue, so the others might not respond right away. When we do have the consensus, the two or three sentences would be finalized on the talk page first. That is how we have traditionally done it. Regards, Fowler&fowler«Talk» 03:12, 27 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The problem with the society section is the title seems broad and vague. If other editors, in addition to Fowler&fowler, do not want a human rights subsection, then I suggest Child labor in India and issues of Debt bondage in India can go in the economy section. I do not know where maternal mortality would go from the currently available sections, however, some other country articles have a health section. Additionally, since the important issue of child malnutrition is in the economy section (which does not seem to be the most appropriate) and HIV/AIDS is never mentioned in the entire article, a health section would have additional benefits. As for Rape in India, Acid throwing, Bride burning and Female infanticide in India, I do not think they fit in the society section since they are more about crime but I can understand if other editors would like them there. JustBeCool (talk) 18:25, 27 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
We need to be careful that we don't turn this article into an unreadable sea of blue (links) or a prosified outline of India article. At first glance I think the only additional topic that need to be linked directly from this page among the ones mentioned above would be human rights in India, with a one or two sentence summary in the society section, or split between the society and economics section. The other sub-topics (Rape in India, Female infanticide in India, Acid throwing, Bride burning, Child labor in India, Debt bondage in India), would themselves be discussed in that linked article, just as we only link to Transport in India here rather than linking to Rail transport in India, Taxis in India, Suburban rail in India Air transport in India,Indian Road Network, National Highway (India) ad infinitum.
Of course the exact language and article(s) to link can be discussed and finalized here on the talk page. JustBeCool, do you want to draft a proposal to get the discussion started? Abecedare (talk) 20:50, 27 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Tenth or Eleventh?

Edit might be objectionable. If you see List of countries by GDP (nominal), you will find India being 10th and even 9th(United Nation estimate), but not 11th. Bladesmulti (talk) 13:39, 31 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The eleventh corresponds to the Oct 2013 IMF estimates that were recently used to update the infobox. I have edited the main text to cite the same source. Frankly there is no "right" answer here since the GDP and rank will be sensitive to the estimation methodology and date (for both the GDP year and when the estimate was made). So all we can do is cite our sources, be reasonably up-to-date and try to be internally consistent. PS: From the India article, I excluded the exact URL where we can count India's eleventh rank, because of its sheer length. Here it is, if anyone wishes to verify. Abecedare (talk) 14:29, 31 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Calculated, yes it's 11. Bladesmulti (talk) 18:50, 31 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

3 changes

1st The 1st one was already suggest here, few months ago. It was about changing the current line "It has unresolved territorial disputes with China, which escalated into the Sino-Indian War of 1962;[109] and with Pakistan, which flared into wars fought in 1947, 1965, 1971, and 1999.[109]" into "It has unresolved territorial disputes with China[link to (China–India_relations#1960s)] and Pakistan[link to Indo-pakistan conflicts]", because there are a lot more than just 5 mentioned conflicts, holding high importance too.

2nd Other one:- Since we got a fact like "A vegetable retailer in Tamil Nadu. More than 95% of retail industry in India is unorganized" added, Can we add related to this story? :-

http://www.ibtimes.com/how-many-people-india-pay-income-tax-hardly-anyone-1294887 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-22772391

Thing that, only 2% or 3% are paying income taxes.

3rd "Kerala is the most literate state;[251] Bihar the least", should be "Kerala is the most literate state; with 95.5%[251], while Bihar the least with 67.8%." Bladesmulti (talk) 13:46, 17 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request, 23 November 2013

122.168.239.109 (talk) 16:00, 23 November 2013 (UTC) Hi, I want to create account but i m unable to create account please help us[reply]

 Not done: Click the link that says "Create account" (probably at the top right corner of the page) and fill in the boxes there. --Stfg (talk) 16:52, 23 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  1. ^ a b "The World Economy (GDP) : Historical Statistics by Professor Angus Maddison" (PDF). World Economy. Retrieved 21 May, 2013. {{cite web}}: Check date values in: |accessdate= (help)
  2. ^ Maddison, Angus (2006). The World Economy - Volume 1: A Millennial Perspective and Volume 2: Historical Statistics. OECD Publishing by Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. p. 656. ISBN 9789264022621.
  3. ^ Madison, Angus (2006). The world economy, Volumes 1–2. OECD Publishing. p. 638. doi:10.1787/456125276116. ISBN 92-64-02261-9. Retrieved 23 May 2013.