Talk:History of Bengal

message: Should Magadha be included in this section (since the kingdom didn't actually originate in ancient Bengal, just expanded into it later)?   class="autosigned">—Preceding unsigned comment added by Reahad (talk • contribs) 14:12, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ancient history 

message: This article is full of conjectures with no concern for verification and forms a class by itself. One is not surprised to find statements such as "Hindu scriptures such as the Bible suggest that ancient Bengal was divided among various tribes or kingdoms, including the Nishadas and kingdoms known as the Janapadas". This is awful.
Mejda July 1, 2010  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mejda (talk • contribs) 16:50, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bible - A Hindu Scripture? 

message: This section is in need of serious clean up and POV check. There are many grammar mistakes, spelling mistakes, etc. Also there are no spaces between sentences. The factual accuracy and the time-line of events is not in proper place. This article is protected, which is puzzling because there is so much improvements that needs to be done. 
Thank you  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 159.91.241.218 (talk) 00:40, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Medieval Bengal

message: This is still a start-class article in terms of quality. As noted in the lack of proper citations and earlier posts on this talk page, this article requires a restructure and rewrite on a considerable scale, with proper source citations. I think History of Korea is a reasonable B-class article to follow, given Bengal history has many states to cover. But the History of Kashmir is also good South Asian model to follow, given it's precise size and B-class status.--Vaza12 (talk) 08:13, 29 August 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Overhaul needed 

message: The statement is "Under the Mughal Empire which had 25% of the world's GDP, Bengal Subah generated 50% of the empire's GDP and 12% of the world's GDP." and the source for it is a Bangladeshi newspaper tabloid called Daily Star. That doesn't look like an RS for historical GDP claims. Swingoswingo (talk) 16:06, 6 September 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: You're entirely correct: the assertion's quite bogus, the claim of half of Indian GDP apparently being made up by that author. Bengal (then including Bihar and with around a quarter of the subcontinent's population) may well have contributed a half of India's exports but certainly not of its GDP (leaving aside the author apparently equating C18 Bengal with modern Bangladesh which had only about a tenth of the total population). A share of 6% of world GDP is quite possible (the statement that Bengal's economy was bigger than that of any mid-C18 European empire is correct), but twice as much is ludicrous. Precisian (talk) 20:07, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reliable source 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on History of Bengal. 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/20090203202750/http://frontlineonnet.com/fl2124/stories/20041203003009100.htm to http://frontlineonnet.com/fl2124/stories/20041203003009100.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) 15:02, 4 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The article says
' The original settlers spoke non-Aryan languages — they may have spoken Austric or Austro-Asiatic languages like the languages of the present-day Kola, Bhil, Santhal, Shabara, and Pulinda people. At a subsequent age, peoples speaking languages from two other language families — Dravidian and Tibeto-Burman —seem to have settled in Bengal. Archaeological discoveries during the 1960s furnished evidence of a degree of civilisation in certain parts of Bengal as far back as the first millennium BCE.'
How has one reached this conclusion, has there any inscription of austric or austro-asiatic languages been found from bengal. Aryan migration theory is not a universally accepted one, i think we should just stick to available data from archaeology and leave linguistics to the main article of aryan migration.60.52.45.174 (talk) 13:05, 24 November 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Aryan migration theory and historicity of bengal 

message: Aryan migration squad in posting unsourced aryan POV in the article while sourced bronze age bengal era is being omitted, wikipedia seem to deliberately pushing aryan POV in each and every article which is concerned with the history of india.
i suggest to add archaological based articles and sources for indian history articles which should be devoid of aryan theories
these two sources are good sources for bengal bronze age
History of High Tin Bronze and Brass of Eastern India* Pranab K Chattopadhayay
Pandu Rajar Dhibi
Shouldered Celt and Hamped Bull (Copper) of Protohistoric Period, Bengal115.135.130.182 (talk) 18:02, 30 November 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Aryan migration squad 

message: Per MOS:OVERLINK:
* "Generally, a link should appear only once in an article". Do not link Indian subcontinent, when it is already linked in the preceeding sentence. Do not link Southeast Asia when it is already linked in the preceeding paragraph. Do not link shipbuilding when it is already linked earlier in the same subsection.
* Do not link "everyday words understood by most readers in context". Do not link gross domestic product, railway, or rice in this context. People do not need to read 12,500 words about rice's etymology, physical characteristics, cooking, nutritional value, history, production, price, environmental impacts, pests and diseases, varieties, etc. to understand the History of Bengal.
* Do not link geographic features or countries with which most readers will be at least somewhat familiar, unless there's a reason that reading the target article would help the reader understand the source article. Do not link Asia, Central Asia, Western Asia, Indian Ocean, Britain, China, India, Japan, or Singapore in this context. People do not need to read about Singapore's etymology, history, government and politics, geography, economy, infrastructure, demographics, education, health, culture, etc. to understand the History of Bengal.
--Worldbruce (talk) 02:36, 22 January 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: I tried to reduce overlinking, remove a red link and change the first para (where there was overlinking to Indian subcontinent) but I have been reverted twice. I changed the first para to be more concise of the article's content. I saw the first para of the History of India as an example.--102.162.96.23 (talk) 06:53, 27 January 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Overlinking 

message: The Sheoraphuli "Kshatriya" Rajbansha received great honors from the Mughal emperors. During the reign of Akbar, the Barddhaman Maharaja possessed 10 ani while the Sheoraphuli Raja held 6 ani[7]. Remarkably, when Serampore was under Danish rule as a colony in 1752, the Danes paid taxes to the Sheoraphuli Rajas, recognizing them as the rightful owners of the townLSS O'Malley (1912)Bengal District Gazeteers : page 79. Zeal09 (talk) 08:10, 13 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 13 July 2023