Talk:Bhirrana

message: Currently this article is about the excavation at Bhirrana and not the modern village. Since the modern settlement was (I assume) built much later on the site after the ancient settlement was long deserted, it's probably best to make two separate articles about the ancient settlement and the modern settlement. Once somebody wants to make an article for modern Bhirrana, it should probably carry this name; the content of the current article is better moved to a different article then, with a title such as Bhirrana archaeological site for example. --AlexanderVanLoon (talk) 12:12, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I can't find any evidence for a modern village with this name. There may be a Birhana village however, but again is it near the archaeological site? Dougweller (talk) 13:21, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: If you follow the coordinates in the article and open them with Google Maps, you'll see that there is a village called "Bhirdana" to the west of the coordinates. The name is probably slightly different because the Romanisation of the Hindi name is different. Also, if you look at the coordinates I wonder if they are accurate, because I can't see any excavated site on the satellite photos of Google Maps. AlexanderVanLoon (talk) 08:12, 1 May 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah, I should have tried that. I looked for anything that discussed the archaeological site and for Birhana and same variants but failed to find anything useful. But that spelling does. Can't comment on the coordinates, but we should certainly split the article. No time to do it myself though. Dougweller (talk) 10:25, 1 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Separate modern Bhirrana and the excavation at Bhirrana 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Bhirrana. 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/20120426145357/http://www.frontlineonnet.com:80/fl2502/stories/20080201504012900.htm to http://www.frontlineonnet.com/fl2502/stories/20080201504012900.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:34, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Bhirrana. 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/20150418014451/http://harappa.drupalgardens.com/sites/harappa.drupalgardens.com/files/The%20Indus%20Fish%20Swam%20in%20the%20Great%20Bath.pdf to http://harappa.drupalgardens.com/sites/harappa.drupalgardens.com/files/The%20Indus%20Fish%20Swam%20in%20the%20Great%20Bath.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20170118032736/http://server2.docfoc.com/uploads/Z2015/11/21/vESLakMBYz/45a03572f94e7a873d7c350293cca188.pdf to http://server2.docfoc.com/uploads/Z2015/11/21/vESLakMBYz/45a03572f94e7a873d7c350293cca188.pdf
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.frontlineonnet.com/fl2502/stories/20080201504012900.htm
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) 13:20, 19 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hi, I have improved the introduction part by adding dates. The dates were already there in the later section down in the article. This site is such an old established site, it should reflect dates in the main introduction just like all other pages of other IVC sites. I also added a bit of information about Ghaggar river being the former course of the Himalayan river Sutlej which abandoned the palaeochannel shortley after 8,000 years ago, which is the 6th millennium BCE as found by the studies done by IIT Kanpur, Imperial college London and many other universities & institutions. I am a new user and this is one of my first edits. Please advise if any improvements can be made to my edits. I was listening to the involved archeologists themselves after which I decided to read more information about this archeological site on internet and came to wikipedia. Although the information available on this page is detailed enough to be a good article. I am reading other published journals about this archeological site and will add more information to make this article more interesting which will benefit all the readers of wikipedia. Thanks --Havimel (talk) 10:05, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Improved introduction part of this page 

message: Again just like before, Joshua Jonathan has showed circular edit behaviour. He initially kept pushing "pre-IVC" classification of Bhirrana. Now he in circular manner removed that "pre-IVC classification" from the first line of introduction.
Like initially Joshua Jonathan kept removing all the dates from this Bhirrana page, including the dates from the right hand side table. Then in circular manner, he added back the dates when I asked for a wikipedia committee to review. From start to until now, they kept sending me block warnings for the edits which these editors would go back and made themselves. This seems a complete non sense circular behaviour by these group of editors who are harassing me for making edits.--Havimel (talk) 03:36, 12 September 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Another circular edit by group of wikipedia editos