Talk:India

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 26 October 2023

India name has been changed to Bharat from India hopefully this site will be up to date 60.50.88.107 (talk) 09:11, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. The Herald (Benison) (talk) 09:35, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

WP:INDIANEXP

https://indianexpress.com/article/explained/explained-history/ncert-textbooks-replace-india-with-bharat-8999272/lite/

The Herald (Benison) I had provided reliable sources now change 'India' to 'Bharat'

Thanks... Balotra (talk) 17:06, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

I am waiting

Do it as soon as possible Balotra (talk) 17:09, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

Where are The Herald (Benison) Balotra (talk) 17:26, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

 Not done The source provided only states a "suggestion" of changing the name. Also, this is the English language Wikipedia, and WP:COMMONNAME applies. Even if the name was to be officially changed, it is unlikely that Wikipedia would follow suit unless the new name was in common use worldwide. Also, please read the edit notice! Black Kite (talk) 19:38, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

It is official name in Constitution of India. Balotra (talk) 02:26, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Then provide a citation to a reliable source, or a citation to a copy of the constitution where this can be verified. The citation above merely discusses a suggestion, not an actual name change. Your behavior is bordering on WP:TENDENTIOUS, further requests like this will result in a block on your account. ~Anachronist (talk) 20:05, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 30 October 2023

Pages are renamed by moving them to new target names. This procedure preserves the page's edit history. Please do not rename a page by copying/pasting its content to a new page name. If you have an autoconfirmed account (an account that is at least four days old and has made more than 10 edits), you can move a page yourself, but please first review Wikipedia:Article titles. If you still wish to rename the page, go to it, click the Tools drop-down menu at the top (near the View history button and Watchlist star), and choose Move. You can then specify a new name for the article. The old page name will automatically become a redirect to the new page. However, if it isn't possible for you or you think the move would be at all controversial you should request the move on the talk page using the Template:Requested move. Even where a move is uncontroversial, if the desired target page name already exists and is other than a redirect with only one edit, you will need an administrator or page mover to move the page for you, which can be requested at the technical requests section of requested moves. Hope this helps.

Balotra (talk) 04:57, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. CMD (talk) 05:39, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

India, that is Bharat,

As per Constitution of India, Article 1 "India, that is Bharat" so this must be added/updated in Wikipedia as well. For reference Please check https://legislative.gov.in/constitution-of-india/ Manish4 4 (talk) 06:28, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Already in the article. CMD (talk) 06:43, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

my suggestion is to add "that is Bharat," in Heading or very 1st line. Manish4 4 (talk) 07:47, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Add Bharat

India, that is Bharat, shall be a Union of States. Source: Constitution of India. https://www.mea.gov.in/Images/pdf1/Part1.pdf

1.By adding Bharat meaning will remain same in wikipedia article and viewer will visible 'Bharat' the official name as per Constitution of India, article 1. Maru Pradesh, Bharat (talk) 15:36, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Read the edit notice and the edit requests above. Thanks. The Herald (Benison) (talk) 15:41, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 5 November 2023 (2)

2409:4081:1D91:43B:0:0:76CA:B712 (talk) 07:18, 5 November 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Bishonen | tålk 07:31, 5 November 2023 (UTC)

Freedom from want?

The last sentence of the history section says:

"India's sustained democratic freedoms are unique among the world's newer nations; however, in spite of its recent economic successes, freedom from want for its disadvantaged population remains a goal yet to be achieved."

I find it difficult to understand what this sentence is trying to say. Is it trying to say that people in India want its disadvantaged population and being free from this 'want' is a goal not achieved. Or, is it trying to say that disadvantaged population of India wants several things in their lives, and making them free of this 'want' is a goal not achieved.

The source simply points out that we would not claim that work is complete in regards to poverty eradication, and this poverty limits freedom of a huge number of people in India.

I think the source could be probably paraphrased in a better way. Or, is 'Freedom from want' a common technical concept that I am unaware of? Rahul (talk) 15:30, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

"Freedom from want" was one of the Four Freedoms outlined by Franklin Roosevelt. In formal law, it can be interpreted as another name for the right to an adequate standard of living, although I'm interested to see if the connection between FDR's specific term and the human right is historical or just synthsised here on Wikipedia. W. Tell DCCXLVI (^{talk to me!}/_c) 16:45, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

It means neither, nor was Roosevelt the first to use that expression (in 1941) "Want" in the sense of "the state of lacking the necessaries of life; penury; destitution" goes back to Middle English. (OED) Notable users include:

a1616

Scarcity and want shall shun you, Ceres blessing so is on you. W. Shakespeare, Tempest (1623) iv. i. 116

1766

Here to the houseless child of want My door is open still. O. Goldsmith, Ballad [the Hermit] in Vicar of Wakefield vol. I. viii. 70

...

2002

May you live for ever and never die in want. J. McGahern, That they may face Rising Sun 239

India has by far the largest population of malnutritioned children of any country in the world.

The nationalists who won India its freedom were able to stop outright starvation among their population, but not poor nutrition. Penury and destitution are still a glaring fact of life in India. The expression has been at the end of the modern history section for more than ten years. Nothing has really changed in India (despite its highly touted rate of growth) for the sentence to merit a revision. You are welcome to attempt a new consensus per WP:ONUS if you'd like. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 18:32, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

"Want" is obviously not being used in the meaning of desire or yearning. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 18:36, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

"world's most populous democracy" is propaganda, not a statistic

whether you agree with it or not, the claim that a country is a "democracy" is a statement of political ideology, and not a simple fact about which an article lede can claim to report objective statistics. i don't necessarily believe it isn't true, but I don't think it should be listed next to uncontroversial facts. 128.114.255.157 (talk) 06:09, 15 November 2023 (UTC)

Mention 'ganges' as 'ganga' it's more realible

akankshavishwas132.154.58.254 (talk) 15:49, 17 November 2023 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 19 November 2023

Change the language of the anthem and national song from Hindi and Sanskrit, respectively, to Bengali (and maybe Sanskrit).

"This source", currently used in the article, is apparently controversial, according to this news article. There are references online that mention the anthem having been written in Bengali and sometimes also Sanskrit (e.g. here, here, and here).

Also, this report from the Constituent Assembly debates on January 24, 1950, mentions a Hindi translation of the Constitution, but not a "Hindi version" of the national anthem. Unless a different document mentions it, the reference to a "Hindi version" appears to be inaccurate.

It's common knowledge in India that the national anthem was written in Bengali, though I don't have a written source for that.

The page Jana Gana Mana also mentions that it was written in Bengali, and that it was adopted by the Constituent Assembly, but not that it was adopted in Hindi.

The confusion might have arisen because, according to Jana Gana Mana, there are official lyrics in the Devanagari script, which is commonly associated with Hindi (though other languages use it too), but that is a transliteration, not a translation.

Also, jaage, maage, and gaahe are all recognizably Bengali third-person singular verbs, not Hindi or Sanskrit verbs, while the noun naame is a Bengali locative, but as far as I know not a valid word in either Hindi or Sanskrit (the locative singular of naaman can be either naamni or naamani in Sanskrit).

"Vande Mataram" is written in Bengali according to this, and in Bengali and Sanskrit according to Vande Mataram. For the national song, it's a complicated issue, as seen here. Htysc (talk) 06:57, 19 November 2023 (UTC)

WAY too many links!

I just want to put this out there hoping somebody might do something about this. There are FAR too many links in this article, especially in the lead. So many, it was totally unreadable for me personally. So much so I actually found a Firefox addon to strip the link styling completely from the page. Most readers wouldn't know to do what I did and, if they have the same issue I do with too much style changing, won't bother reading the utter mess I encountered before I found the extension.

Can someone please take some time to minimize the links on this page? The way it is now is just ridiculous. 2601:18C:4300:84E0:D81C:F778:C17F:1DA7 (talk) 04:23, 27 November 2023 (UTC)

WP:FARGIVEN

This article was listed as need a Featured article review about three years ago. There are still too many images with MOS:SANDWICHing and poor layout, the lead is too long, Administrative divisions is an unnecessary list which could be simply summarized from the sub-article, there is still dated information (eg "The 522-million-worker Indian labour force is the world's second-largest, as of 2017" and "According to a 2011 PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC) report, India's GDP at purchasing power parity could overtake that of the United States by 2045"), it is easy to spot content that could be in sub-articles rather than here (eg, "Averaging an economic growth rate of 7.5% for several years prior to 2007," from Economy, and almost every section can be trimmed. Some of the footnotes are so long that copyright concerns might be raised. The layout in the government section is a list sandwiched between an image and a table. It doesn't seem that the work that needed to be done three years ago has been undertaken; trimming, tightening, and taming the images, plus bringing the lead down. The Featured article review should proceed. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 07:27, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

I agree to a FA Review. Rewriting the lede seem to be eminent, IMO. There have been multiple constructive edits which sometimes I feel were turned down just because the article is an old FA. Getting consensus for removal also is a lengthy procedure foe sucha highly watched high traffic article. Copyright concerns also raise a flag. The Herald (Benison) (talk) 07:48, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

The FAR nomination was held off years ago as improvements were supposedly underway; someone should nominate this at FAR now, as it appears these improvements aren't happening. The datedness of some of the text is surprising. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 08:18, 28 November 2023 (UTC)