Talk:Hindu chronology

Untitled
I have added in sections in an attempt to make this more readable. It seems to me this article is misnamed. It should be called something like 'Hindu calendar (history)'? It is too big to merge with the existing hindu calender article.Neelmack 08:51, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

61.1.40.200 11:07, 31 August 2007 (UTC)comparative value
61.1.40.200 11:07, 31 August 2007 (UTC)'I found some discrepancy in calculation/conversion in this topic at sub. topic 2.4 Days of topic 2 Solar year. Does not match with the value given at it’s above table ( The divisions of the civil day ) – Hitesh Viroja ( India )'

From EB1911
The original for this article appears to be an OCR transcript from EB1911, e.g.. The text has footnotes, sidebars, etc all mashed in at random places, along with OCR errors (e.g. | for 1, etc). As such, tagging it for citations seems kind of pointless, as EB1911 qualifies as a WP:RS. Knowing who "J.F.F" was would help, though. rudra (talk) 11:49, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

this should be moved to a subpage, such as Hindu calendar/1911 Britannica, and used as a quarry so to speak, importing whatever is useful to the live article. Wikipedia is not an EB 1911 restoration project. dab (𒁳) 21:41, 7 February 2008 (UTC)