Jump to content

Talk:Roopkund

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


Untitled

[edit]

'Skeleton Lake and 'Roopkund' is the same thing .Name 'Roopkund' indicates geographic location and only popular name in India. So,better merge both the articles under single name 'Roopkund'.Tribhuwan

Agreed. Please go ahead and do so if you feel motivated. Wachholder0 00:33, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WP:INDIA Banner/Uttarakhand workgroup Addition

[edit]

Note: {{WP India}} Project Banner with Uttarakhand workgroup parameters was added to this article talk page because the article falls under Category:Uttarakhand or its subcategories. Should you feel this addition is inappropriate , please undo my changes and update/remove the relavent categories to the article -- TinuCherian (Wanna Talk?) - 13:55, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Legends - how much weightage to be given?

[edit]

It is a proven fact that hundreds of skeletons are found in the lake. But, there is no historical reliable records for the reasons of this find. Legends say that hail stones of size of cricket balls killed a large group pilgrims and some sources are also available for these legends. My question is, how much weightage/importance is to be given for this legend/legends in the body of the article? Some importance is appropriate, as there are no other proven reliable records for the reasons of such a large number of skeletons in the lake. Rayabhari (talk) 04:56, 30 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ongoing edit conflict regarding altitude of the lake

[edit]

We seem to have an ongoing lack of consensus regarding the lake's altitude and whether or not it should be converted. Can we please discuss this before further changes are made? Thanks.

Cadar (talk) 17:39, 24 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

nature.com article

[edit]

Research published @ nature.com suggests that the remains are from ~800CE and ~1800CE, eastern Mediterran and Southeast Asian individuals. Andree.sk (talk) 13:50, 22 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


1800 CE is what it says in the nature article CE Common Era , ie AD. This has been morphed to BC in the article as well as in popular press coverage. (Perhaps using an obscure but politically correct terminology isn't such a great idea after all!)

Gjxj (talk) 20:33, 22 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]