Talk:Indo-Gangetic Plain

message: Population Table...
If the population table was taken out, the map of Indo Gangetic plain should be taken out too, cuz it covers the same area as the table.  If you look at the table CAREFULLY, it covers vast areas totally encompassed in the map, and a section with ***PARTS OF*** Madhya Pradesh, Orissa, etc...I had added the "estimated" populations for tiny PARTS OF these states, NOT THEIR FULL POPULATIONS...Please don't delete this table...it gives a good guide...if u believe a certain subnational area is not within the plain, then discuss it here!
:I agree... it also provides a strong(er) basis for the population figure cited in the opening. Brutannica 07:35, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Removed a very short paragraph taken verbatim from Encyclopaedia Britannica's article of the same name. Original here.
--Old Moonraker (talk) 15:31, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[WP:COPYVIO]] from Britannica 

message: What is "chender"?
Troglo (talk) 23:48, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chender 

message: I notice that this article has recently been moved from Indo-Gangetic Plain, the widely recognized and commonly used term, to Indus-Gangetic Plain. Why? Q·L·1968 ☿ 03:08, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I've moved it back. "Indo-Gangetic" is not just a compound of two nouns; it's an adjective meaning "of the Indus and the Ganges" (i.e. Indic+Gangetic). In the interests of parallelism, we could say Indus-Ganges Plain, but (a) that's not the name in common use, and (b) the article already mentions the name "Indus-Ganga Plain" in the intro, which I think is adequate. Q·L·1968 ☿ 18:09, 3 November 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Why the move?

message: I was intrigued to learn that the plains of the Indus are nearly contiguous with those of the Ganges, and clicked through here to learn more (this version).  However on arriving, I was dismayed by the section Geography.  It looks like a patchwork of different voices, sometimes repeating the same thing in different ways, sometimes quite unrelated to each other.  Also, some parts are decidedly India-only (ignoring parts of the plains in neighboring countries). And some parts are written in an unusual style. 
I'll try to improve it if I get time.  Suggestions how to fix are welcome. 
ADD: Turns out that much of these symptoms may be due to rampant copypasta.  See section below.  Keeping this post to record why  section of  article attracted my attention in the first place.  
Pelagic (talk) 20:25, 29 May 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: The geography section is contradictory, obviously combining 2 different versions. At one the "Indo-Gangetic" plain is described with subsections, obviously to be understood as the initially mentioned 2.5 km2 with a billion inhabitants. Then out of a sudden pops up The Indus–Ganga plains, also known as the "Great Plains"  which has only 700,000 km2 , and is below called again "Indo-Gangetic" having 400 Mio people. So what is it??? Kipala (talk) 09:18, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Geography section 

message: Water and the laws in India, p. 542: 
The Indo-Gangetic Plains extend from Gujarat, Rajasthan and Punjab on the west to West Bengal on the east. Parts of Gujarat and Rajasthan lie on the Indus plains, and the rest of the area lies on the plains of the Ganges and the Brahmaputra. Bordered by the Vindhya mountains on the south and the Himalayas on the north, this region is characterised by a fairly gentle topography. 
Wikipedia article:
Some geographers subdivide the Indo-Gangetic Plain into several parts: the Gujarat, Sindh, Punjab, Doab, Rohilkhand, Awadh, Bihar, Bengal and Assam regions. In India, the plains extend from Gujarat, Rajasthan and Punjab on the west to West Bengal on the east. Parts of Gujarat and Rajasthan lie on the Indus plains whereas the rest of the area falls within the plains of Ganges and Brahmaputra.[6]
Okay, this is only a couple of sentences.  I'm removing the second sentence as it conflicts with the first, and adds nothing to the article.  Rewording the third sentence to be not India-centric.
Pelagic (talk) 21:40, 29 May 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Water and the laws in India 

message: See: comparison, article Pelagic (talk) 21:47, 29 May 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  GK Today 

message: : This sentence "" seems like an original research not to mention that the source itself is unclear. While the state of Rajasthan has some tributaries of Ganges flowing into it, Gujarat has nothing to do with Ganges. It is very likely that "Gujarat and Rajasthan" is considered a single geographic entity in the source. Secondly, the latter part of the sentence: "" would make one believe that parts of Gujarat and Rajasthan are in Brahmaputra plains which is totally absurd since these regions are separated by thousands of kilometers, unless the source considers "Ganges and the Brahmaputra" to be a single entity.
: I'd suggest we remove this confusing sentence and replace it with something like " just to keep the source relevant. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 11:17, 30 May 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes,  I misunderstood the source without checking the states' locations on the map.  Will fix, and thanks for pointing that out.  Pelagic (talk) 11:42, 30 May 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thanks a bunch. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 11:59, 30 May 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: * GK Today seems unreliable as well as its contents may be a regurgitation of an old version of this article. I put a "better source" tag near it as per WP:RS and WP:CIRCULAR. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 13:38, 30 May 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Confusing sentence

message: upsc 2405:201:C031:A817:D832:D035:90A5:CED8 (talk) 18:29, 3 May 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  import for upsc 

message: In which states north indian river plains are located 103.156.121.77 (talk) 13:23, 16 December 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Geography 

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) 06:38, 13 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion 

message: The redirect Cow belt has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at  until a consensus is reached.  Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 10:13, 28 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  "[[:Cow belt]]" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]]