Talk:Bihu

message: I have tried to get a reference to explain the Assamese Calendar to tie in with the timing of Bihu. Unfortunately my research was only preliminary and did not yield desirable results. In the meantime I have wiki linked "Assamese New Year" to the "Bengali Calendar" article. Can someone with more relevant details please point out valid references? Do look at Chaipau's observation in my talk page where he refers to  and the Bhaskarabda era. -Deepraj | Talk 08:41, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Assamese Calendar 

message: Bihu is not a religious festival, its more of a cultural festival in nature. So I think the reference to Hinduism should be removed from the article.
Raju Das 08:34, 5 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Related to Hinduism???? 

message: An image used in this article, , has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations 
;What should I do?
Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.
* If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
* If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.
* If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Commons Undeletion Request
This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 21:08, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: File:The dancers in vibrant Bihu costume.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Bihu. 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/20120117010132/http://www.efi-news.com/2012/01/celebrating-natures-bounty-magh-bihu.html to http://www.efi-news.com/2012/01/celebrating-natures-bounty-magh-bihu.html
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) 02:17, 20 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Welcome to wikipedia. Please explain and discuss your concerns on this talk page. You added "indigenous" when the cited peer-reviewed scholarly sources do not support this. For example, the lead sentence cites Dalal's text published by Penguin: it makes no such mention. You also added some non-RS. For example, the 1932 published 'Deodhai Assam Buranji is old and non-WP:RS ' - these are not acceptable. Do you have a peer-reviewed scholarly source that discusses "indigenous" context of the Bihu festival? I would welcome it and collaborate with you to summarize it. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 01:27, 30 June 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: All sources added are scholarly sources. Bihu is a festival unique to Assam, hence indigenous. It is a harvest festival with roots in animistic faiths. It doesn't have anything to do with Hinduism. There is no such festival anywhere else. Have a look at the sources added before deleting sourced content. Deodhai Buranji is a literal translation of a historical document written in the 15th century, there is no doubt for rejecting such documents as these are plain translations, nothing to be researched.2405:204:B18E:B512:400C:B121:BB15:F592 (talk)  —Preceding undated comment added 04:49, 30 June 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: @2405:204:B18E:B512:400C:B121:BB15:F592 / hopping IP: The article already states the animistic links, based on two scholarly sources. It also summarizes the scholarly views of its syncretic links to Hinduism, as WP:NPOV guidelines require. The article must present both sides, because the scholarly sources do so. Please do not delete the mention of Hinduism/Hindus, as peer-reviewed sources such as Christian Roy's do verify this on pages 479-480. Please do not edit war to violate the NPOV guideline. The sources you added are without page numbers or lack any source. Please identify the page numbers for verification and add sources (if it is a non-English source, please see WP:NONENG guidelines and follow the "provide quotes and translations" part of it). Your cooperation is requested, Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 16:20, 30 June 2018 (UTC)

text: @2405:204:B18E:B512:400C:B121:BB15:F592 / hopping IP: I tried to locate some of your sources using google and other academic networks. I am unable to find these sources you added without ISBN / url / publisher / other details, and which you allege support your contribution: [1] Gogoi (2015), Baapoti Hahun Bihu; [2] Hakacham (2010), Origin of Bihu; [3] Gandhiya (2007), Jatiya Utsav Bihu. Please provide more citation details for further due diligence. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 17:24, 30 June 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: I have retained the views about Hindus and Hiduism as per WP:NPOV guidelines along with adding proper sourced as well as quoted translated content directly from the books. Kindly, do not removed these well sourced information. Requesting your cooperation2405:204:B18E:B512:F55D:FB42:F57A:82C5 (talk)  —Preceding undated comment added 22:43, 30 June 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: @2405:204:B18E:B512:*:*:*:* / hopping IP: That is not my only concern. You haven't addressed the other concerns above. Please see my suggestions on how you can and please read the links. Thank you for adding the two quotes, one from Gogoi and another from Gandhiya. Please do provide ISBN or other equivalent information. This information will help WP:V effort, establish that it is not WP:SPS nor other questionable sources. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 23:10, 30 June 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unsourced edits and NPOV 

message: Bihu origin history was falsly given here so i delete all.. In the name of bihu origin only chutiya history was given Krishna231 (talk) 17:58, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: You're going to need a better explanation than "it's false" to delete that much sourced material. OhNoitsJamie Talk 18:00, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bihu origin 

message: 1. Matak is not ethnic group but rather a accumulation of different tribes. And Matak as a group was formed in 18th century so it is not related to the Chutia kingdom. 
2. Also i have added citation in the proper place. 
3. Bihu is not related to Hinduism. Bodos celebrate Bihu as Bwasigu and Dimasa celebrate it as Bishu dima, these group dont celebrate the festival as a HINDU FESTIVAL.
4. The Authencity of Chutia King Ratnadhwajpal is still in question  Homogenie (talk) 01:33, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Regarding Bihu