Talk:History of India (1947–present)

message: This article needs to be improved. It only consists of wars and electoral politics. -JatinShah
: Way too short as well. Compare this article to the one for the History of the People's Republic of China, which has 4 full (and still being developed) pages! 11:55, 7 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Improvement needed

message: One thing that is not clear to me from reading any of the wikipedia articles on India is: what was it that made Indians, belonging to many different ethnic groups, speaking many different languages, and having belonged to all sorts of various political entities over the centuries, feel sufficiently "Indian" to form one nation instead of three or a dozen or what have you? Was Hinduism the unifying thread? Sylvain1972 20:34, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Suggestion

message: Many people do not know how to properly use commas. Here are a few rules.
1. Only put a comma between the subject and the predicate if there is there is an adjectival clause attached to the subject that already required a comma at its beginning. Examples of errors:
a. The sentence
:The 21st century saw India, improve relations, with many countries and foreign unions including the United States, the European Union, Israel and the People's Republic of China.
should have been
:The 21st century saw India improve relations with many countries and foreign unions including the United States, the European Union, Israel and the People's Republic of China.
b. The sentence
:The economy of India, has accelerated by growing at a very rapid pace.
should have been
:The economy of India has accelerated by growing at a very rapid pace.
c. The sentence
:India, is now being looked at as a potential superpower.
should have been
:India is now being looked at as a potential superpower.
2. When using commas to introduce an adjectival clause that requires a preceding comma, place the adjectival clause (and comma) IMMEDIATELY after the noun that it describes. Example of error:
a. The sentence
:The commonwealth games scandal rocked the country in 2010, which raised questions about the credibility of the government.
should have been
:The commonwealth games scandal rocked the country in 2010, raising questions about the credibility of the government.
In its present form, it implies that 2010, not the scandal, raised questions about the credibility of the government.
3. Always put an "and" at the end of a list. Example of error:
a. The sentence
:The Vajpayee administration continued with privatization, reduction of taxes, a sound fiscal policy aimed at reducing deficits and debts and increased initiatives for public works.
should have been
:The Vajpayee administration continued with privatization, reduction of taxes, and a sound fiscal policy aimed at reducing deficits and debts and increased initiatives for public works.
or
:The Vajpayee administration continued with privatization and reduction of taxes, a sound fiscal policy aimed at reducing deficits and debts and increased initiatives for public works.
Normally, I would just make the edits myself, but I can't. Would someone please fix these mistakes wherever they appear? I guarantee that all three are abundant in this article (and beyond).  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.253.128.170 (talk) 04:09, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Commas 

message: Please add your thoughts here.—indopug (talk) 14:03, 14 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Should the "[[History of the Republic of India]]" article be rewritten as the "History of independent India"? 

message: From the 1950s to the 1980s, India followed socialist-inspired policies. The economy was shackled by extensive regulation, protectionism and public ownership, leading to pervasive corruption and slow economic growth. Beginning in 1991, significant economic reforms have transformed India into the third largest and one of the fastest-growing economies in the world.
What's with the right-wing bias in the intro? "Shackled by regulation"? "Socialism leading to corruption and slow growth"? Don't tell me that's neutral history, it sounds like the IMF wrote that. VolatileChemical (talk) 02:36, 29 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  NPOV in the lead 

message: [Please elaborate this]  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 1.186.183.43 (talk) 16:03, 31 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Meaning of India being Republic 

message: How is this academic or academic source? "Former Union Minister and BJP leader Arun Shourie described the Centre as a “one-man government,” a presidential form of government, without checks and balances  and called Modi a narcissist, machiavellian and a let-down."
I suggest this be removed. (174.201.11.128 (talk) 21:21, 13 September 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: It's a well-sourced opinion, which isn't unacceptable per se.—indopug (talk) 17:11, 15 September 2016 (UTC)
replies: text:  How is it academic? (2600:1001:B10F:192D:6CE9:B0:51E8:C113 (talk) 18:08, 15 September 2016 (UTC)
replies: text:  While academic sources are definitely preferred, they are not easily obtainable for recent events. In which case, newspapers are a reasonable substitute.—indopug (talk) 18:11, 15 September 2016 (UTC)
replies: text:  Why is it important to keep it? Example: what value does it provider to the reader of a history page? Since this is not academic. (2600:1001:B10F:192D:6CE9:B0:51E8:C113 (talk) 18:44, 15 September 2016 (UTC)
replies: text:  Kautilya3, can you kindly help solve this dispute? It seems like it is going nowhere. (2600:1001:B11C:4B5B:CD76:6C3:6DD0:D6F3 (talk) 05:13, 18 December 2016 (UTC)
replies: text:  I can't get into it right now. Busy with RL. However, the policy is clear. The opinions of notable people can be mentioned with WP:In-text attribution. However, we would need to summarise his views fairly, in particular the substance of the criticism. We can't take just the most extreme labels and leave out the rest. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 10:45, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

text:  Oops, just noticed that this is the "history" article. The Modi government is not part of history yet. So the entire government can only be summarised in a very cursory way. This content should really go into Premiership of Narendra Modi, and perhaps some of it into Narendra Modi. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 10:49, 18 December 2016 (UTC)
replies: text:  Kautilya3 - so, can I remove it? As we both agree, this unacademic opinion and labeling does not belong in a "history" article. (2600:1001:B11C:4B5B:CD76:6C3:6DD0:D6F3 (talk) 16:30, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

text: Kautilya3, let me know if you have any objections. If not, I will go ahead and remove it tomorrow. (2600:1017:B420:CF7D:64C2:5AC1:E1E9:536A (talk) 20:31, 21 December 2016 (UTC)
replies: text:  Yes, I have already agreed that the comment doesn't belong here. Instead of removing it, you can replace it with some more substantive comment, like the divisiveness mentioned in the reference 1 below. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 21:13, 21 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Return of BJP - Arun Shourie 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on History of the Republic of India. 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/20110606112149/http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/17/52/39452196.pdf to http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/17/52/39452196.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130909095145/http://www.hindustantimes.com/India-news/UttarPradesh/Fresh-clashes-in-UP-s-Muzaffarnagar-leave-26-dead-Army-deployed-in-affected-areas/Article1-1118891.aspx to http://www.hindustantimes.com/India-news/UttarPradesh/Fresh-clashes-in-UP-s-Muzaffarnagar-leave-26-dead-Army-deployed-in-affected-areas/Article1-1118891.aspx
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) 16:23, 3 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on History of the Republic of India. 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/20140912114721/http://www.princeton.edu/~jns/publications/Understanding%20Support%20for%20Islamist%20Militancy.pdf to https://www.princeton.edu/~jns/publications/Understanding%20Support%20for%20Islamist%20Militancy.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) 10:30, 5 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the . —Community Tech bot (talk) 00:22, 22 August 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the . —Community Tech bot (talk) 00:06, 26 August 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the . —Community Tech bot (talk) 15:51, 1 September 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion 

message: Rajagopalachari’s party and alliance is noted by Ramachandra Guha, the premiere historian in Modern Indian history as key to building the current political alliance and opposition in India as seen here. A small section of Rajagopalachari is improving the article, as confirmed by Guha and other historians. (2600:1001:B004:7F10:61A2:C88F:5CB9:DCF9 (talk) 17:50, 8 February 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:   C. Rajagopalachari 

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 nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 04:29, 9 February 2020 (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) 21:42, 7 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion 

message: Hi, What should be the cut-off date for inclusion of content in this article, or for that matter for any country? Six months, one year, five year before the present? Thanks.Jonathansammy (talk) 18:02, 2 December 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Period under Coverage 

message: Should this article named "political history of India (1947-present)? I say that because most of the content in this article  is about government and politics.If we want to keep the present name then, I think a lot of content on history of people, places, culture etc. needs to be added.Thanks.Jonathansammy (talk) 18:11, 2 December 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article name 

message: in the top line mentioning that it is the history of the republic of india, the link for republic of india redirects to slurpee  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.126.168.82 (talk) 05:54, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: you have a sharp eye....i fixed it  Rjensen (talk) 06:29, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  why does republic of india redirects to slurpee