Talk:History of Delhi

message: Note:  Project Banner with Delhi workgroup parameters was added to this article talk page because the article falls under :Category:Delhi or its subcategories. Should you feel this addition is inappropriate , please undo my changes and update/remove the relavent categories to the article -- Amartyabag  TALK2ME 13:30, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[WP:INDIA]] Banner/Delhi Addition 

message: In the second paragraph, we find the following sentence:
:"Though settlements have been dated to have been in existence in Delhi for millennia, there is no record to stand by that claim."
I had changed "to have been taking place" to "to have been in existence".  However, there is another problem with this sentence.  If settlements have been dated, presumably through archaeological evidence, then there is some evidence of them, and the statement "there is no record to stand by that claim" would be incorrect.  Perhaps someone who knows the subject can work on this.CorinneSD (talk) 01:45, 21 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  2nd paragraph 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on History of Delhi. 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/20080423014415/http://www.sfusd.k12.ca.us/schwww/sch618/Ibn_Battuta/Battuta%27s_Trip_Seven.html to http://www.sfusd.k12.ca.us/schwww/sch618/Ibn_Battuta/Battuta%27s_Trip_Seven.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090816204247/http://www.ucalgary.ca/applied_history/tutor/islam/mongols/timurid.html to http://www.ucalgary.ca/applied_history/tutor/islam/mongols/timurid.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140415093344/http://www.rubypressco.in/ to http://www.rubypressco.in/
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) 03:08, 3 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: How are we considering, as Hemu for a year is included because he had absolute control while marathas werent technically ruling or controlled delhi from 1757 to 1803, were mughal considered vassals of marathas at that time because mughals still ruled from delhi except a few times when there wasnt any emperor. Also abdali too captured delhi in 1760-61 and even mughals probably issued coins in his name so its more than marathas because mughals didnt issue coin in marathas name, and after abdali ruhelas controlled delhi for 10 years after that Mahadji recaptured delhi and brought Shah Alam from Allahabad and gave him the throne and he became sort of prime minister with much power but that too for some years and after that some one else was made. British in 1803 defeated marathas in battle of delhi and captured delhi, so how to write list of dynasties ? Sajaypal007 (talk) 15:45, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, Ahmad Shah Abdali must be mentioned to keep the article neutral. Khestwol (talk) 15:48, 12 October 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: In my opinion neither Ahmed Shah Abdali nor Nadir Shah can be used here although they did control the city for a short time. In my opinion for medieval period after Mughals, marathas should be mentioned because they control the city albeit in Mughal name and afterwards EIC from 1803 and British Crown from 1858 till independence. During Mughal rule Hemu can be mentioned too because he declared himself sovereign. Marathas should be mentioned from 1750s or 1770s or even 1780s since Mahadji Sindhia became protector of the realm, whichever is agreed upon.Sajaypal007 (talk) 21:03, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dynasties which controlled delhi? 

message: Scholars like Michael Witzel have confirmed that Indraprastha, an Indo-Aryan city in the Khandava Forest, was indeed on the site of modern Delhi. Now, this article and other related articles must be updated, and more content from the Vedic era must be added using reliable sources. Khestwol (talk) 15:48, 12 October 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: The period can also be mentioned as Vedic and Epic period so that Mahabharata period can be part of it.Sajaypal007 (talk) 21:05, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Vedic era

message: The section dealing with Post independence period has a big paragraph just dealing with riots. And another small paragraph about finding of Ashoka inscription, thats it. This is clearly WP:POV that post independence Delhi had only riots. The riot portion should be trimmed a bit as its too long to be mentioned here in such length and other major portion of Delhi's history should be included.Sajaypal007 (talk) 21:08, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Post Independence Period 

message: Why hasn’t anything about the true natives of Delhi been included? 2405:201:4022:381B:C531:2DAC:D047:D4A9 (talk) 09:33, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Natives and Villages of Delhi