Talk:Jana Gana Mana/Archive 4

Merger
I was WP:BOLD and merged contents of Jana Gana Mana (hymn) into this article. It seamed wrong to have two articles about the same song.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  14:11, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
 * I have reverted you. The Hymn is different from the National anthem. The 2 songs are not the same. 182.64.243.113 (talk) 03:43, 14 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I never said they are the same, but they are two variants of the same song. That is acknowledged in the lead section of this article. Why would we have separate articles about versions of the same song? WP:NSONG says that Sngs with notable cover versions are normally covered in one common article. Now, I know that this is not pop music and cover version, but the concept is the same: different (notable!) versions of the same song are covered in one article. Also, per WP:NSONG, articles unlikely ever to grow beyond stubs should be merged to articles about an artist. I don't see how Jana Gana Mana (hymn) can grow beyond stub. If we remove the lyrics, we are left with just a few basic sentences.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  17:53, 14 February 2016 (UTC)
 * The original hymn (in 2 verses) was composed in 1905 for the Partition of Bengal agitation, and published without attribution in the Tatwabodhini Patrika of Nov 1905. In Dec. 1911 Tagore recited an extended and modified version in 5 verses at the Indian National Congress, Calcutta. In Jan 1912 the text of the 5 verse version was published in the Patrika, and in Feb 1912 this version was performed at the Adi Brahmo Samaj (Jorasanko Thakurbari). The 2nd verse of the original (2 verse) hymn and the 5th verse of the 1911 are completely different, reflecting the status of the agitation at those times. So it is not correct to say that all these are the same songs. The lyrics of the 5 verse version obviously cannot be inserted into the Jana Gana Mana (anthem) article. There are enough sources to justify an article on the 5 verse hymn, which is undergoing a resurgence due the 2015 movie Rajkahani where the 2nd through 5th verses were sung independently. NSONG would be inappropriate for this particular composition, considering its national anthem status and separate religious usage in India and Bangladesh. 122.162.75.132 (talk) 02:55, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

Languages?
Why does the article seem to take precedence for Bengali? IMHO, it should have versions in all the scheduled languages of India, maybe in dropdown boxes to save space. Aryamanaroratalk, contribs 00:12, 25 December 2015 (UTC)
 * It was originally written in Bengali, though that had been removed from the article (probably vandalism; I reverted.) oknazevad (talk) 14:42, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

Article cleanup
This article needs cleaning and much better sourcing. I have started the process by removing many POV and undersourced sections. Please add proper reliable sources if you revert. 182.64.243.113 (talk) 03:40, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

Infobox
I have tried to add the flag of India to the infobox but it got reverted by. What I noticed is, in the Sri Lankan anthem Sri Lanka Matha and Pakistani anthem Qaumi Taranah the flag is the lead image. This is not a problem as long as there is an image, but there should be info like duration which is 52 seconds and Relinquished which is present.2.51.20.209 (talk) 15:58, 15 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your post. This is not the page of the Flag of India, which does have the flag in the main infobox picture.  Rather, this is the page of India's anthem.  The India page's own infobox displays this page's link very promninently.  India moreover is a Featured article.  Other featured articles (off the top of my head) either have the (sheet) music, the lyrics, or something that is musically associated with the anthem.  Examples: Deutschlandlied (FA: Germany; picture in infobox: sheet music), Advance Australia Fair (FA Australia; picture in infobox: organ), O Canada (FA: Canada, picture in infobox: lyrics); God Save the Queen (FA New Zealand; picture: sheet music); and Kimigayo (FA: Japan, picture in infobox: sheet music)  In addition, the template  says in its documentation:  image: Name of an image file (e.g. a lyrics sheet or sheet music).  For that reason, I added the sheet music, which is available on Wikipedia in image form.  As for the parameter "until" which outputs "relinquish" in the infobox, if we write "until present," it appears in the output as "Reliquished present," which is confusing, as it can be interpreted to imply that the anthem very recently was discarded as India's national anthem.  For all these reason, I revered your edit.  Best regards,  Fowler&amp;fowler  «Talk»  18:15, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

Hindi version
In your recent edit, you reinstated the claim that the National Anthem is the Hindi version of the original song written by Tagore. After IP made those edits, I did a bit of research on this. It seems like there has never been a "Hindi version", at all, in the first place. The claim is sourced to the Indian government's portal, which, of course, quotes the content supporting the claim. But serious concerns were raised against the same by people, including several scholars. RTIs have been filed on the issue, which were unfortunately responded with — "information as asked by you is not available with the undersigned", by the Home Ministry. However, none of the official or scholarly historical accounts say that the National Anthem was adopted by the Constituent Assembly in its 'Hindi version'. The information on the Government website must have probably been mistakenly documented. So you might want to reconsider having this in the article. Cheers, Tyler Durden (talk) 20:37, 14 April 2017 (UTC)


 * Not just the government, the Indian parliament, whose progenitor the Constitutent Assembly was, says the same on its website: Jana Gana Mana. India's Ministry of Information and Broadcasting in its  India 2008: A Reference Manual says the same on pages 22 and 23 (Chapter 2).  Britannica Encyclopaedia of India says the same: "Adopted by the Constituent Assembly as the national anthem of India on January 24, 1950, the song Jana-gana-mana, in its Hindi version of the first stanza, was originally composed in Bengali by poet Rabindranath Tagore." (see here)  Whether or not India's government portal, its parliament, its Ministry of Information, and the editors of the Britannica have all made mistakes is not for us to decide, especially not by attempting to do WP:OR.  Best regards,  Fowler&amp;fowler  «Talk»  23:16, 14 April 2017 (UTC)
 * you have not used any scholarly sources in your edits. A manual of India's I&B ministry is not a scholarly source, and we cant simply use material from Brittanica as is. The scholarly sources pointed out by have no mention of 'Hindi version'. I am invariant under co-ordinate transformations (talk) 02:43, 14 August 2017 (UTC)
 * If we can use a publication of the I&B ministry as a source, surely the text of the Constituent Assembly resolution which adopted Jana Gana Mana as the national anthem supersedes it, as it also official material from the Indian government. And there is absolutely no mention of a 'Hindi version' here: http://parliamentofindia.nic.in/ls/debates/vol12p1.htm I propose that we change 'Hindi version' with 'adapted to the occasion' as that is what the resolution says. I am invariant under co-ordinate transformations (talk) 02:47, 14 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Not the same thing. The I&B manual is not a primary source.  It is used for all sorts of statements on Wikipedia.  When the government of India changes the national animal from the "Indian lion" to the "Royal Bengal Tiger," and it is reflected in one of these manuals, we typically don't wait for the reliable sources to discuss that change.  We change the national animal on Wikipedia, however, we don't use "Royal," as that is not the part of the species name (see Bengal tiger).  For better or worse, there are certain things that the government of the day has primacy over, general secondary sources don't.  When the US, changed the name of Cape Canaveral to Cape Kennedy and then changed it back to Cape Canaveral, people simply did the same.  ( Aside: The problem with Jana Gana Mana, according to my understanding is, that "Hindi version" is a poor choice of words.  Obviously it is not the Hindi translation, or transliteration, as the same I&B manual renders it in Roman spelling.  So, question then arises what "Hindi version" means for a song that is mostly Sanskrit?  My own conjecture is that they mean "Hindi pronunciation."  No one made a big deal of this until the Hindu nationalists came into power in 1998 and immediately began to have panicky nightmares that the Bengalis might begin to sing this: Jono  Gono Mono ...  So they introduced this novel interpretation of the official pronouncements.  They are right in as much as people need to know how to pronounce the words of a national anthem.  They are saying it is the Hindi pronunciation. ) Much as I might disagree with their interpretation, we can't ourselves argue original intent.  I simply go along with what the government says.  Tomorrow, if they change the national anthem to Vande Mataram, we'll have to change it on Wikipedia.  And if they say it has to be spelled and pronounced Vande Mataram, and not Bande Mataram, we have to say the same on Wikipedia.  Best regards,  Fowler&amp;fowler  «Talk»  05:03, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Jana Gana Mana. 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/20130115004029/http://knowindia.gov.in/knowindia/national_symbols.php?id=6 to http://knowindia.gov.in/knowindia/national_symbols.php?id=6
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20170212092002/http://indianexpress.com/article/india/jk-in-a-first-state-govt-employee-among-two-arrested-for-not-standing-during-national-anthem/J%26K%3A/ to http://indianexpress.com/article/india/jk-in-a-first-state-govt-employee-among-two-arrested-for-not-standing-during-national-anthem/J%26K%3A
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121218024543/http://www.rareindianfacts.org/2012/12/controversy-surrounding-indian-national.html to http://www.rareindianfacts.org/2012/12/controversy-surrounding-indian-national.html

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) 19:39, 21 November 2017 (UTC)

Bengali Transcription
At the very beginning of the article, it shows that Jana Gana Mana's transcription in Bengali is [ɟənə gəɳə mənə]. This is incorrect, as the phonology of Bengali does not have the schwa, nor does it have the retroflex nasal. This transcription looks like it could be Sanskrit or Hindi, but it most certainly is not Bengali. If Jana Gana Mana's name was written in Bengali, it would be transcribed [dʒɔno gɔno mɔno]. I am not sure whether the language claimed to be transcribed is wrong or if the transcription is wrong, so can someone please say what the best thing to do is? Stormmaashrooms (talk) 17:38, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
 * The transcription is probably for the Hindi version, as the original Bengali version was not used as the national anthem. The article used to explicitly mention that it was adopted in its Hindi form, but it was removed last month without any edit summary. I have restored the mention now. It is probably safe to switch the IPA language from Bengali to Hindi. —Gazoth (talk) 20:46, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

New transliterations
, what is the source for the three new transliterations that you have added? —Gazoth (talk) 14:39, 23 June 2018 (UTC)

Lyrics
, WP:LYRICS does not forbid inclusion of lyrics, it only talks about copyright concerns. Other popular national anthems such as God Save the Queen, The Star-Spangled Banner and Advance Australia Fair include the lyrics. Can you substantiate your claim that it is a convention to not include lyrics? The transliterations on this page were indeed excessive, but that is not an excuse to remove all lyrics. —Gazoth (talk) 13:34, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

तव vs. तब
The तब listed in the pdf document is clearly a typo. I am a native, fluent Hindi speaker, and तव is a poetic word for "your, thy" in Hindi, not तब. Here is a dictionary reference to support this: Oxford Hindi Dictionary. The Official Romanisation also clearly indicates this by writing "tava" not "taba". So this needs to be fixed in the article and as it stands the Official Romanisation doesn't match the Hindi. In addition, all Bengali words with "b" that have Hindi equivalents with "v" were adapted accordingly with "v" (e.g. विधाता, द्राविड़, विंध्य), so तब is definitely an error in the pdf document. Furthermore, there is no reason why the MHA order would "trump" anything else on an Indian govt. website as you claimed. --Foreverknowledge (talk) 22:14, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
 * You might be right about the Hindi word, but your analysis amounts to original research. We are not supposed to achieve consistency between different language transcriptions, we just summarize from reliable sources. In this case, an official order is a much stronger source than something posted on a website, especially since the order was supposed to summarize all previous orders on the national anthem. If you find one of the previous orders on national anthem and show that it was a typo, we can replace तब with तव. तब should stay until then, but I have no objections to adding तव as footnotes as has done. —Gazoth (talk) 02:00, 16 July 2018 (UTC)
 * I think तब "taba" was an effort to mirror Bengali, which is "taba" in both transcription and transliteration. Ficusindica (talk) 02:03, 16 July 2018 (UTC)
 * If the aim was to mirror Bengali, the Official Romanisation would have "taba" instead of "tava", and the spellings बिधाता, द्राबिड़, बिंध्या would've been used instead of विधाता, द्राविड़, विंध्य. --Foreverknowledge (talk) 04:28, 16 July 2018 (UTC)

"द्रावि़ड़"
""द्रावि़ड़" is actually used, often in Jana Gana Mana. Ficusindica Look at
 * No, द्रावि़ड़ is a typo. Many typos will produce a small number of results online. Google refers it to द्राविड़. Nuqta is only for consonants as shown on the Wiktionary link. You have placed it under a vowel. So it doesn't make sense at all. --Foreverknowledge (talk) 03:17, 16 July 2018 (UTC)

Hindi version
There has never been a Hindi version. The original parliament records don't mention of it - https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1810361/. There is no name of Hindi translator or no date later where a 'Hindi' version is adopted. The ministry site says: "The composition consisting of the words and music of the first stanza of the late poet Rabindra Nath Tagore’s song known as “Jana Gana Mana” is the National Anthem of India." (https://mha.gov.in/sites/default/files/NationalAnthem%28E%29_2.pdf). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ckundu (talk • contribs) 06:30, 26 June 2018 (UTC)

"তব শুভ আশিস মাগে" vs "তব শুভ আশিষ মাগে"
It seems that both of these are commonly used:. আশিস appears in dictionaries and not আশিষ, but the official Hindi version seems to be based on আশিষ ie. आशिष. I'm proposing putting আশিস, and possibly even আশিষ, with a note on the other usage. Ficusindica (talk) 16:43, 13 August 2018 (UTC)

Transcriptions
Transcriptions in languages other than Bengali, Hindi and English are considered to excessive and have been previously removed from this page. You need to get consensus on the talk page before adding any other transcriptions. —Gazoth (talk) 06:46, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

Hindi version
Your provided reference does not support the statement that you have added. Jana Gana Mana is already the Hindi version of Bharoto Bhagyo Bidhata. The fact that Jana Gana Mana's origins were not mentioned by the Constituent Assembly in one debate does not mean anything. —Gazoth (talk) 06:33, 26 June 2018 (UTC)
 * There is no substance in the claim "Jana Gana Mana is already the Hindi version of Bharoto Bhagyo Bidhata". Neither there is any Hindi translator, nor any mention of Hindi version in parliament. It doesn't stand. The ministry clearly states it as the original song and not of any translation similar to the parliament records. It's not 'one debate', it's the resolution to adopt national anthem and there is no 'Hindi' version. Ckundu (talk) 06:44, 26 June 2018 (UTC)
 * The Encyclopedia Britannica reference is quite sufficient. If you want to prove otherwise, you need to provide a reference that explicitly refutes the claim that there was a translation. "There is no mention of it" is unverifiable and not good enough. —Gazoth (talk) 06:51, 26 June 2018 (UTC)
 * For any Hindi version to exist, you need to provide the name of the translator and some parliament resolution to substantiate it. I'm afraid Britanica reference may not supersede Parliament resolution. Ckundu (talk) 06:56, 26 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Why would a parliamentary resolution be required to support a translation? You cannot set arbitrary standards for references. I'd suggest that you read up on WP:RS. Once again, a lack of a mention does not mean anything. Claiming otherwise is pure original research. —Gazoth (talk) 07:03, 26 June 2018 (UTC)
 * As the parliament resolution to adopt the national anthem doesn't mention of any translation, clearly it deals with the original song. Also as there can be no translation without a translator, the claim of Hindi version needs at least that name to exist at all. Ckundu (talk) 07:08, 26 June 2018 (UTC)
 * This is going nowhere. You keep repeating the same statements without addessing any of mine. For the last time, a lack of a mention does not mean anything. I don't need to provide you with arbitrary details when the statement is sufficiently supported by a reliable source. The question of Encyclopedia Britannica reference superseding a constituent assembly meeting transcript does not arise as the latter does not contradict the former. —Gazoth (talk) 07:18, 26 June 2018 (UTC)
 * I understand there is not much reference to support the claim of Hindi version or the statement "Jana Gana Mana is already the Hindi version of Bharoto Bhagyo Bidhata". That was exactly my point. I believe the parliament resolution is a reliable source whether you agree or not. As Britannica comes up with a rference to Hindi version which is not there in the parliament resolution, the contradiction is self-evident. The ministry record is also in line with the parliament resolution without any mention of Hindi version. Ckundu (talk) 07:25, 26 June 2018 (UTC)
 * I suggest that you re-read the entire conversation if you think that I said there were insufficient references for Hindi version. If the constituent assembly had called Jana Gana Mana Bengali, then there would be contradiction. Since it does not say that, there is no contradiction. The "ministry record" that you are referring to is just your interpretation since it too does not call Jana Gana Mana Bengali. On the other hand, India 2008 reference manual by I&B ministry and the India portal both call Jana Gana Mana as Hindi version. —Gazoth (talk) 07:35, 26 June 2018 (UTC)
 * From WP:RS, "The reliability of a source depends on context. Each source must be carefully weighed to judge whether it is reliable for the statement being made in the Wikipedia article and is an appropriate source for that content." Since there is no mention of any translation in the parliament resolution, the translation is not there. The references you provided have been discussed earlier in this page. Please take a moment to go through. Ckundu (talk) 07:41, 26 June 2018 (UTC)

Since there is no mention of any translation in the parliament resolution, the translation is not there. is considered as original research. I saw the previous discussion, but I don't see anything that would disqualify the sources. —Gazoth (talk) 07:50, 26 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Please read through to recheck what original research is. This doesn't fall under that as it simply goes by what's there in the resolution rather than extrapolating that to some translation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ckundu (talk • contribs) 07:54, 26 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Quoting from the policy To demonstrate that you are not adding OR, you must be able to cite reliable, published sources that are directly related to the topic of the article, and directly support the material being presented. Since your conclusion that there was no Hindi version is not explicitly stated by the source, it is not directly supported and is thus original research. —Gazoth (talk) 08:03, 26 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Had there been an Hindi translation, it would have been mentioned while adpting that as national anthem. Original is the default. Rather, Jana Gana Mana is already the Hindi version of Bharoto Bhagyo Bidhata is considered as original research. Ckundu (talk) 08:06, 26 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Now we are just going around in circles. It is not original research as the Encyclopedia Britannica reference explicitly states that Jana Gana Mana is the Hindi version. If you have a reliable reference that explicitly states that Jana Gana Mana was adopted as national anthem in Bengali version, we can continue this discussion. Until then, this the last message from me on this topic. —Gazoth (talk) 08:14, 26 June 2018 (UTC)
 * The Britannica doesn't mention Jana Gana Mana is already the Hindi version of Bharoto Bhagyo Bidhata. And since the adoption was not by Britannica authors but by Indian parliament, I look forward to see a parliament resolution that explicitly states that Jana Gana Mana was adopted as national anthem in Hindi version. However, for now, let me add the reference to the original parliament resolution. Hope that's ok with you. Ckundu (talk) 10:33, 26 June 2018 (UTC)
 * I have reverted your edit as it would undermine the previous sentence amounting to synthesis. As I said before, the standard for sources in Wikipedia is documented by WP:RS. You set an arbitrary standards for sources as per your personal preference. Please don't make any further changes to the page on this topic until you get a consensus here, as you'd be in violation of WP:3RR. Lastly, my statement Jana Gana Mana is already the Hindi version of Bharoto Bhagyo Bidhata was my explantation for you when I assumed that you were unaware of the background. Britannica doesn't explicitly state that, but it does say Adopted by the Constituent Assembly as the national anthem of India on January 24, 1950, the song Jana-gana-mana, in its Hindi version of the first stanza, was originally composed in Bengali by poet Rabindranath Tagore which is sufficient to support the statement in the lead. —Gazoth (talk) 16:52, 26 June 2018 (UTC)
 * There is a simple compromise here. The Time of India article is a good enough reference to show that there is disagreement over the Hindi version part. However, it cannot be in the lead. We can add it in one of the later paragraphs. —Gazoth (talk) 17:19, 26 June 2018 (UTC)

National anthem language.
Jana gana mana is our national anthem Why not mention "bengali" near jana gana mana? Meanwhile dead language sanskrit is mention bellow for vandhe matharam. Albinsholan (talk) 13:43, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

Bharath
The Bharath mentioned in the song is the subcontinent which was joined into British-India along with the various independent kingdoms which were allied to British India. Before this historical event, there was no such thing as a Bharath, other than in (maybe) Brahmanical books which have no relevence to the majority populations of Pakistan, India or Bangladesh. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.97.77.170 (talk) 05:46, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

Full Version
the full version is not exactly the full version, just the first paragraph. Can someone add the actual lyrics in both Bengali and Sanskrit? 210.16.113.95 (talk) 10:52, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

Translation
Several editors recently have been changing words in the text of the English translation. This is supposed to be an exact transcription of Rabindranath Tagore's English translation. The current text is sourced at Wikisource, and I have added another source which includes a photograph of Tagore's actual handwritten translation. As the existing text is well sourced, please do not make changes to this text without providing a source for the change. CodeTalker (talk) 15:28, 16 August 2021 (UTC)