Talk:Mehrgarh

message: I don't know much about this topic so I don't want to make edits myself, but this National Geographic article (about the early dentistry practiced there) implies the site existed before the use of metal, about 9000 BCE.Rigadoun 17:36, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I have added a paragraph as well as the link to the Nature article on the proto-dentistry.  They used flint drills.  The Nature article—a one-page pdf—is fascinating and well worth reading.  Fowler&fowler«Talk» 09:24, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

text: I found some old vandalised text and replaced that, corrected the date in the article, removed the sidebar which was added by a sockpuppet of a banned editor and seems pov, removed a couple of other irrelevant infoboxes. Thanks for spotting this. Dougweller (talk) 13:10, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Date?

message: "A mountain by name "meru" is mentioned in many classical Tamil literature.  Its exact location is not clear.  From this article etymologically speaking a mountain near the Bolan pass may the one rererred to." Lycurgus (talk) 04:34, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Comment by [[Special:Contributions/219.64.73.143]] 

message: What is amazing about mehrgarh is that it is still a living farming village.Even today people go about their business cultivating and harvesting.But there was a problem with rival tribes and the govt siding with one particular tribe.This ended in heavy damage to the site and surrounding areas.I dont understand why UNESCO does not take an interest in the site as it is a world heritage site.The site of mehrgarh is much more earlier then Taxila or Harrapa.Time someone did something about it or it will just fade into oblivion.Because of security reasons the French mission who was admistering the dig and looking after the artifacts has refused to camp there anymore.Someone somewhere should do something or we will lose this amazing heritage.--Brahvi 1 (talk) 18:09, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Farming village 

message: Where are they? Or is the numbering of the periods only 1, 2, 3, 7? Or is there just not enough info on them? Munci (talk) 19:39, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Periods IV-VI

message: Sorry, AshLin, I have to revert your India project tag.  There is a long-standing convention at the IVC pages of sites in Pakistan that India project banners are not added.  Those banners have caused bitter edit warring before, and it is best left as is.  True, Stein does mention Mehrgarh in his History of India, but this is an article on Mehrgarh, not History of India.  The sources will inevitably be more specialized than a general history of the subcontinent.  Archeological sources are quite careful about avoiding too much use of "Indian history" when talking about Mehrgarh, and preferring "South Asia" or "Indian Subcontinent,"  even the Histories of India, such as Stein's. The two Britannica articles that mention "Mehrgarh," for example, say:  From the "Origins of Agriculture" article: Research indicates two early stages of agricultural development in South Asia. In the earlier stage, dating roughly from 9500 to 7500 bp, agriculture was being established in parts of Pakistan, in the northwesternmost part of the subcontinent. At the ancient site of Mehrgarh, where the earliest evidence has been found, barley was the dominant crop and was apparently supplemented with some wheat.
and  From the Britannica India page, history section: The Indo-Iranian borderlands form the eastern extension of the Iranian plateau and in some ways mirror the environment of the Fertile Crescent (the arc of agricultural lands extending from the Tigris-Euphrates river system to the Nile valley) in the Middle East. Across the plateau, lines of communication existed from early antiquity, which would suggest a broad parallelism of developments at both the eastern and western extremities. During the late 20th century, knowledge of early settlements on the borders of the Indus system and Baluchistan was revolutionized by excavations at Mehrgarh and elsewhere.  
Note that it says knowledge of early settlements on the borders of the Indus system and Baluchistan was revolutionized, not "Indian history."  Regards,  Fowler&fowler«Talk» 16:08, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Pray, who were the participants in that "bitter edit warring"?-MangoWong (talk) 02:00, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

text: If Mehrgarh is not about Indian history/ India, how come it is being discussed in the Britannica article on India?(India Encyclopædia Britannica. Encyclopædia Britannica Online. Encyclopædia Britannica, 2011. Web. 19 Aug. 2011.)<http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/285248/India>.-MangoWong (talk) 09:28, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

text: The same article also saysThe Indian subcontinent, the great landmass of South Asia, is the home of one of the world’s oldest and most influential civilizations. In this article, the subcontinent, which for historical purposes is usually called simply “India,” is understood to comprise the areas of not only the present-day Republic of India but also the republics of Pakistan (partitioned from India in 1947) and Bangladesh (which formed the eastern part of Pakistan until its independence in 1971). It is usual to refer to "South Asia" as "India".-MangoWong (talk) 10:01, 19 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: IVC (3300–1300 BCE) = Pakistan (DOB 8/14/1947). Astonishing but true.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 167.219.48.10 (talk) 12:53, 19 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: 167.219.48.10 Most everyone already knows that Pakistan became separate from India on the midnight of 8/14/1947. So? I have no quarrel with that point.-MangoWong (talk) 13:46, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

text: Thanks. You are right.-MangoWong (talk) 00:54, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

text: It is not about nationalism at all. The banners are meant to help people find articles of interest easily. If some article is of interest to X topic, and WP has a project page on it, I think it is justified to add the banner so that people who have an interest in that topic can locate the articles easily. If Lothal is somehow of significant interest to WP:Pakistan, then it should have that banner. I see nothing wrong in it. As far as edit warring on this is concerned, I think it is an unproductive thing and not worthwhile to indulge in. I have better things to do.-MangoWong (talk) 11:05, 20 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think it belongs here. And although I'm not saying this about WP India, some require permission before adding the tags. Dougweller (talk) 11:34, 20 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: India project tag

message: It is becoming the fashion in Wikipedia to have infoboxes at the top, boxes that provide little information and take up a lot of room.  So it had become with this article, with one infobox after another being introduced and with actual information (both textual and visual) being progressively moved farther down the page.  I have taken the liberty of removing one vacuous "settlement" infobox.  Mehrgarh is an archaeological site, not a settlement; besides, this article is entirely about the site.  There is already one physical map that gives an excellent idea of Mehrgarh in relation to the Kacchi plain and the mountains of Baluchistan.  What is the point of adding an empty map of Pakistan that has nothing except Mehrgarh?  Apparently, these days, software graphics programmers, champing at the bit to add to Wikipedia, are making their contributions by adding redundant maps.  I have also moved the other infoboxes, which are only peripherally relevant, to farther down the page.  This way the pictures and text about Mehrgarh take precedence.  Fowler&fowler«Talk» 04:45, 23 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Infoboxes 

message: I didn't want the section to seem like the research claims the inhabitants of Mehrgarh were certainly fully mongoloid, it actually suggests they may have been partially mongoloid. I will try to find a quotation in the texts which illustrates this.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Easy772 (talk • contribs) 16:37, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Hancock is not WP:RS, as Doug Weller also said; Kenoyer gives a rather free interpretation of Lucas. On scrutiny, these "facts" are flimsy. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 07:37, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Regarding the 'Dental morphology' section 

message: See . I will support protection if it continues. Dougweller (talk) 17:21, 2 December 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sock puppetry 

message: I'm failing completely to find an accurate reference for the quotation of Catherine Jarrige's comment on the relevance of Mehrgarh? Can it be added? Who can find it out? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 157.193.240.214 (talk • contribs) 15:22, 1 December 2015
:The quote was added in 2007. with a source that just said "Guimet". The current reference is a self-published book(I can find it on Amazon published by Createspace) from 2014, so clearly not the actual source - added by a new editor who didn't stay long, probably a good faith edit. Quotes must be sourced and I can't find a source so am removing it, but of course it is still in the history if anyone wants to search again. Doug Weller (talk) 17:03, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citation reference for the quoatation of Jarrige, C.?? 

message: could you take a look at the sidebars at this page, and turn them into sidebars with collapsible lists? I gave it a try at :Template:Neolithic, and failed miserably... Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 07:28, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sidebars 

message: I disagree with all these statements because Mahergarh is derived from Mahar tribe, Mahar's were inhabitant of that area they used to live there thus the name mahergarh is called.   — Preceding unsigned comment added by 45.116.233.62 (talk) 18:16, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Disagree

message: As far as I can find, according to the updated sequence of Jarrige, only the first two periods were neolithic. Period III was chalcolithic, see here. BoH (talk) 12:15, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Only I and II neolithic 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Mehrgarh. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160303221610/http://archaeology.up.nic.in/doc/mn_jfj.pdf to http://www.archaeology.up.nic.in/doc/mn_jfj.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20051030014804/http://jorde-lab.genetics.utah.edu/elibrary/Kivisild_1999.pdf to http://jorde-lab.genetics.utah.edu/elibrary/Kivisild_1999.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:30, 24 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified (January 2018) 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 22:08, 15 May 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion 

message: By Fowler&fowler 
-- Same research applicable to this excavation site which belongs to South Asia Jaykul72 (talk) 01:13, 9 October 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Spot the difference between Pakistan vs. South Asia and Indian subcontinent versus South Asia. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 04:15, 9 October 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:  Apologies I had a incorrect query A: Mehrgarh and Pakistan result is 1200, whereas B: Mehrgarh and South Asia is 832.  Jaykul72 (talk) 04:41, 9 October 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mehrgarh South Asia site 

message: Because I certainly don't see it at Talk:Sanskrit#Large block of scholarly referenced text deleted from Sanskrit page. Doug Weller talk 14:08, 9 October 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  What does the edit summary "South Asia decisions by admins in the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Sanskrit#Large_block_of_scholarly_referenced_text_deleted_from_Sanskrit_page Sanskrit TalkPage" mean? 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the . —Community Tech bot (talk) 09:09, 10 February 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the . —Community Tech bot (talk) 18:52, 10 August 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion