Talk:Maharashtra/Archive 1

RfC: Definition of Standard Marathi
My inclusion of the statement "Standard Marathi is defined as the language of the Deshastha Brahmins and the like, in and around Pune." has been disputed. The complete dispute is at: Talk:MaharashtraZuggernaut (talk) 23:33, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

In which sense is M. the most advanced state. Figures, facts?

Good start, but let's work on NPOV here.

"Maharashtra is the most advanced state in India". Like the above poster, I'd like to know "advanced" how? Number of cell phones? Poets? Lithium mines?

"It has a glorious history" -- Every place likes to think it has a glorious history. Let's just stick with the supporting facts.

Advanced in India
We can say tha Maharashtra is the most advanced "Big" state in india as its GSDP is much higher than other states and its is most industrialised state in the country. ~

This is also teh state in which farmers commit most number of suicides every year for lack of ability to even feed themselves

I Guess that satifies ur demand for figures
I've added the figures from "Times of India" on the revenue collected from Maharashtra. Mahasrashtra adds about $20 Billion to New Delhi's cofers every year through taxes.

Temp page
Please see Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)#Temp pages for discussion of their use. I've removed the inappropriate message from the Article. Other editors should be aware that there is a Maharashtra/temp, and that this is being worked on in parallel with the article. They should therefore make any additions, excisions, corrections, etc., to both the article and the temp page. Mel Etitis ( &Mu;&epsilon;&lambda; &Epsilon;&tau;&eta;&tau;&eta;&sigmaf; ) 11:02, 13 May 2005 (UTC)

Groundnut
This page links to the disambiguation page groundnut, but I'm not sure which sense is intended. Can you help? Thanks. &mdash; Pekinensis 20:40, 9 July 2005 (UTC)


 * I've linked it to peanut. =Nichalp   «Talk»=  08:03, July 10, 2005 (UTC)

Thank you. &mdash; Pekinensis 12:38, 10 July 2005 (UTC)

State animal
State animal: shekroo (giant squirrel): Ratufa Indica =Nichalp   «Talk»=  12:15, July 11, 2005 (UTC)

Infobox
Some of the entries are a bit obscure; what do "2nd" and "3rd" mean in this context? And what does "area magnitude=11 mean? --Mel Etitis ( &Mu;&epsilon;&lambda; &Epsilon;&tau;&eta;&tau;&eta;&sigmaf; ) 20:48, 17 July 2005 (UTC)
 * The numbers are the ranking of the state with respect to population and area. For the magnitude see: Orders of magnitude (area). These fields are modelled on the Template:Infobox Country. See the India and Sweden pages for the implementation. See also: WikiProject Indian states. =Nichalp   «Talk»=  07:24, July 18, 2005 (UTC)

-
 * Thanks. I suppose that the worry I have is that the average reader is going to be as puzzled as I was; the box doesn't explain, and the use isn't obvious.  Anyone involved in editing Wikipedia infoboxes will probably know, but we need to make it easily understandable for readers.  Any ideas how that might be done? --Mel Etitis  ( &Mu;&epsilon;&lambda; &Epsilon;&tau;&eta;&tau;&eta;&sigmaf; ) 10:11, 18 July 2005 (UTC)
 * I know, the magnitude part is not known to the average user. But on the other hand, most fields are largely static and shouldn't face frequent editing. States are rarely split or created, so the magnitude should be static. Its not possible to add comments to these auto templates; the best thing to do I suppose is to check out the talk page where the link is present to the states' wikiproject. =Nichalp   «Talk»=  10:33, July 18, 2005 (UTC)

added a new template in the bottom
I have added a new template in the bottom. Any comments??? This could be made dynamic once consensus is rcvd.

The reason for the new template is that there is no single place in the main Maharashtra article where all major cities and districts is located. Also, I think the seal needs to brought down from the infobox

Pizzadeliveryboy 22:13, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

Maharashtra derives it's name from Mahars ?!?!?
The earlier revision of the article stated such arrant nonsense as the word "Maharashtra" is derived from the word "Mahar" !!!! As a Maratha, I take severe objection to this demeaning statement. No historian nor any researcher has mentioned this thing. This is somebody's fertile (or, futile) imagination at work. Just check the etymology section on the Maratha page. It gives the perfect etymological origin of Maharashtra. A word like "Mahar", which was used to demean the lower-caste people, a word which is no longer constitutionally correct is being used to describe our holy land, the "Maharashtra". It's someone's ploy of maligning the Marathi public. But we'll certainly not let them succeed.

As far as "Maha rathi" is concerned, it is mentioned in many great historians, scholars and researchers' works inc. Lokmanya Tilak. For your information, "Maha" means great and "rathi" means charioter. So, literally the meaning becomes "Land of the great charioters". New Rock Star 18:27, 24 January 2006 (UTC)


 * My mistake - I was reading it as Maha Ratta and not Mahar Ratta.....Mahar Ratta is surely wrong - I havent found a ref to that POV anywhere except in some personal page in tripod....so that will go. However, rathi too is wrong since the correct word for charrioteer is sarathi, not rathi....rathi means valiant/great warrior.


 * Pizzadeliveryboy 19:12, 25 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Actually, that is one of the possibilities suggested on Maharashtra Govt website itself. Take a look at this link:http://www.maharashtra.gov.in/english/community/community_geo_profileShow.php

Another theory I read somewhere else(I am not sure where but I think it was either the Pearson IAS guide or Manorama year book) was that it is a derivative of the "Rashtrakuta" empire that existed before the Islamic conquests of the Deccan. Given that the Rashrakuta empire was located over western Deccan plateau and included most of modern Maharashtra, I feel this posibility may also be counted --Deepak D&#39;Souza 10:29, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Please read the references I have added to the statement. These are 1901 Govt. Of india's piblished documents. These are written by Mr. Russel in co-operation with Mr. Rai Bahadur Hira Lāl and by Mr. Riply after discussing with Mr. Bhandarkar. Thank You. There are few more descriptions in Huan Tsnags' diary about the people who resided in this region during his period which is written in Indian Census Report (1901). Please take a look and decide.--Layzyak (talk) 15:46, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

What you are saying Mistake made in 1901 (unknowingly or purposefully), when foriegn invaders in india, who never wished localite indians to know their history, ability and traditions so it is easier to tame them, to enslave them; We are still Carrying !!! We are still insulting Maha-Rathi's for internal petty jealousies.

just because one person (Mr Rusell or whosoever) tells us, at one place, we forget 2000 years history that land of Maha-Rathi's have provided Great Ashoka, Empiror SataVahana, Emperor Rashtrakuta and King Shivaji with Best of Warriors. The Land which is so advanced and industrial today. Most funny JOKE is none of these historian are from Maharashtra, how can they be so sure about Maharashtrian history ! and how we know they are not baised.

Term Mahar is not at all demeaning because Maha-r have proved what indeed Great-Warriors they are by helping Shivaji build most swift, quick, robust yet light army. Yet again by helping British defeat Peshwas, when mistake was made to remove them from Maratha army. Mahar's are acknowledged hard-workers, may be reason why this land is was called Mara-Rathi's land in first place.

The fact still remains Indian slave mentality who just because XX person tells him, prefers to call fellow indians:Maha-Rathi's in demeaning way ! No concerns calling Maharashtra land of Maha-rs, But IT MEANS ONLY ONE AND ONE THING - LAND OF MAHA-RATHIs. We don't need Russel / Delhi Gazette to tell us, what Warriors Maha-rs or Maha-Rathi's are. It is already proved it When Satavahana and Maratha Kingdoms ruled more than half of India, when Ashoka and Rashtrakuta recruited warriors from this land. I don't think we need Indian Gazette for that, Do WE ?

Can I request you to put things in correct context in main article. Either say MahaRathi and Mahar both meaning great warriors; and Maha-Rashtra meaning great nation. OR Delete un-necessary. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.206.86.33 (talk) 22:20, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Audio
I hve replaced the computer generated voice with my own. I feel that the computer voice was not having he proper intonation & that an Indian voice would be much better here. Hope thats not a problem.

Thanks

Srik e it ( talk ¦  ✉  ) '' 05:23, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

What about Culture?
Surely Maharashtra has a substantial cultural identity, so why is there no mention of culture so far in this article?

good idea. suggestions for this section
 * Tilak, role in freedom struggle
 * ganeshotsav and other religious festivals
 * maratha empire
 * maratha forts built by shivaji and little kids today
 * maharashtrian cuisine
 * shiv sena, thackeray family, saamna
 * distinction of mumbaikars, coast and khandesh
 * not much idea of vidarbha culture myself, but should be added

added by user:tejas81

Second Capital?
An anon (24.7.93.43 (talk · contribs)) has just added that Nagpur is the second capital of Maharashtra. I highly doubt that this is true, but can someone re-affirm this? I can't seem to find any reliable resources to refute this. Thanks --Srikeit (Talk 06:57, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
 * It's not the "second" capital. The winter session of the legislative is held in Nagpur, so it can be called as a winter legislative capital. I've heard reports that Nagpur was supposed to be a "backup" capital, but no sources to back it up. We'll have to revert. =Nichalp   «Talk»=  10:37, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks Nichalp. --Srikeit (Talk 10:41, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

I ("anon") was the person who wrote Nagpur is the second capital of Maharashtra. I grew up in Nagpur and it is correct that the winter session of the legislative assembly is held in Nagpur. I have always believed this ... but here are two references: Govt web site for Nagpur: http://nagpur.nic.in/ - check history section, last line (1960). Maharashtra IT Parks, Nagpur History Page: http://www.maharashtraitparks.com/itparks_about_nag.htm

Later,

- Neeraj,


 * "Second" capital would be too vague without expanding on the exact status. (Compare with Jammu/Srinagar) Mentioning it as the winter legislative capital would be the correct thing to say.  =Nichalp   «Talk»=  06:06, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

I think that is far. I made that change.

- N.

Let me rekindle this discussion. Nagpur is in fact the Second Capital of Maharashtra. History has it that Vidarbha had decided to join Maharashtra during the first state reorganization because of Nagpur pact. You can get a complete discussion of this from Indian Governments Rajya Sabha session dialogs mentioned here. Open this link and search Nagpur. You would get it. I would try to find a better proof if you need more. I would changing the status of Nagpur in the article soon if I do not see anymore arguments. If you have anything more drop a message at gppande (talk) 14:14, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Is Maharastra the largest state in India?
I see conflicting data throughout the article in terms of size of Maharastra. I do know for sure that Maharastra is not the largest state ofIndia, also as per the area_rank feild my belief seems to be true. But somehow there are places in the article which it be the largest and provide numbers according to the claim. Can someone provide a proper reference about actual size of Maharastra and how it compares to the rest of states in India? Kedar 23:52, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Hi Kedar,

The following links from the Govt. Of India website will help. Apparently Maharashtra is 3rd largest, behind Rajasthan and MP.

http://india.gov.in/knowindia/state_uts.php?id=23 (Rajasthan) http://india.gov.in/knowindia/state_uts.php?id=15 (MP) http://india.gov.in/knowindia/state_uts.php?id=16  (Maha)

Hope this helps.

Mihir — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mihirsaswadkar (talk • contribs) 00:37, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

Leading industrial state.
There is a contradiction in the articles refering to the states of Maharashtra and Gujarat. Both are listed by Wikipedia as the countries leading industrial state.

Maharashtra's is India's leading industrial state contributing 13% of national industrial output. 64.14% of the people are employed in agriculture and allied activities. Almost 46% of the GSDP is contributed by industry

Gujarat is a state in the Republic of India. With 19.8% of the country's total industrial output, it is the most industrialized state in India. 141.109.96.97 20:13, 7 April 2007 (UTC) Although I'm not sure if the numbers are correct, assuming that they are the distinction given to Maharashtra in this article is false.

Problem with map in Firefox 2.0.0.4
I'm using Firefox 2.0.0.4 and the map is not showing up in the main infobox at the top of the article. If I hover over it, it appears to be a link, and if I click on it I get the map on its page. Other SVG maps, such as for Andhra Pradesh or Karnataka, do show up just fine, but all I see is an empty box where this one should be. --38.115.151.134 22:53, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Said what?
This paragraph is obtuse:

Prabhu Ramchandra touched this land previously known as 'Dandaka-Aranya' (Deep woods). Shri. Prabhu Ramchndra commenced his attack on Lanka from this land. Over the centuries, gradually this Dandaka-Aranya turned into the sacred Maharashtra. Religion, Philosophy, Technology, Arts, Knowledge, Bravery evolved here for centuries...Many dynasties from Satvahan to Shilahaar including Rashtrakut, Chalukya, Aadhin, Saindrikya, Kalchuri, Vakatak, Kadamba, Pallav etc. ruled Maharashtra rituously. Poets created Kavya-Kailas in this land. Sculptures crafted Kailas-kavya in black stones of Maharashtra.

Touched? Rituously? and jumbled.

DrLeonP 08:10, 1 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks for pointing the whole paragraph as obtuse. I was about to delete the whole paragraph. but thought I should mention it here first, wait for replies and then proceed to delete. "Prabhu raamchandra" is not exactly fit for history. The rest of the paragraph also sounds like a marketing pitch. The Kavya-Kailas and Kailas-kavya is 'brilliant' word play but not appropriate for wikipedia. I will delete the paragraph in a week if nobody replies with reasons why it should be kept. --Kaveri 19:00, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Music
HI Kaveri, i have removed the new subsection related to music as it has been already been put under Entertainment. Incase you still want to havea seperate section for music. Then i think you wil have to edit the Entertainment secion too. in my opinion just club them and add your info (Asro 07:05, 2 August 2007 (UTC))


 * Well, I wanted to write about all the genres of music, especially classical Hindustani. Maharashtra after early 20th century became an important place for hindustani vocal and has remained so. I wanted to write about that. I think music should be part of culture than entertainment. Also, I was trying to follow the structure of some other states. I didn't pursue it further as I did not have enough time to rearrange the exsting content. But will do that in a week. Will leave a post here about what I intend to do before I actually rearrange content. --Kaveri 17:51, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism
There was an attempt to 'Kannadize' the article. I have corrected the opening paragraph of the article. Please remember we are INDIANS and we should respect the other regions of the country which do not speak the same language as ours. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sam.khawse (talk • contribs) 21:22, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

Forts and Trekking Spots
The list of forts in Maharashtra has been moved to a dedicated list page (needs work) to reduce the size of the article. An enthusiastic editor has also dumped the following list of trekking spots there. I thought it would be a waste to delete them. And so they are moved to below until we can find something better to do with them. - Mayuresh 16:32, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

101 Trekking spots in Sahyadris
 * Ajinkyatara
 * Ajoba
 * Alang
 * Avchitgad
 * Anjaneri
 * Arnala
 * Asherigad
 * Aundha
 * Ban
 * Bhairavgad (Koyna)
 * Bhairavgad (Malshej)
 * Bhudargad
 * Bhor – Wai (Satara)
 * Chakan
 * Chanderi
 * Chandan
 * Chandragad
 * Chavand
 * Dhodap
 * Dhak-Bahiri
 * Duke's Nose
 * Ghangad (Dhangad)
 * Gorakhgad
 * Hadsar
 * Haji Malang (malanggad)
 * Hargad
 * Harihar
 * Harishchandragad
 * Irshalgad (Irshaal)
 * Jivdhan
 * Janjira
 * Kaladgad
 * Kalsubai
 * Kalyangad
 * Kamalgad
 * Karnala
 * Kawlya
 * Kenjalgad
 * Kohoj
 * Korigad (Koraigad / Koregad)
 * Korlai
 * Kothaligad (peth)
 * Kulang
 * Lingana
 * Lohgad
 * Machindragad
 * Madangad
 * Mahimatgad
 * Mahipat
 * Mahuli (Bhandargad, Palasgad)
 * Malanggad
 * Malhargad
 * Manikgad
 * Mangi-Tungi
 * Moragad
 * Mulher
 * Naneghat
 * Padar (Bhimashankar)
 * Pandavgad
 * Panhalgad (panhala)
 * Patta
 * Peb
 * Prabalgad
 * Pratapgad
 * Purandar
 * Raigad
 * Rajgad
 * Rajmachi (Shrivardhan, Manranjan)
 * Rangana
 * Rasalagad
 * Ratangad
 * Ratnadurga
 * Rohida
 * Sagargad
 * Sajjangad
 * Salher
 * Salota
 * Samangad
 * Santoshgad
 * Sarasgad
 * Shivneri
 * Shivtharghal
 * Shirgaon
 * Siddhagad
 * Sinhgad
 * Sudhagad
 * Sumargad
 * Sundargad
 * Tikona
 * tahuli
 * Torna
 * Tringalwadi
 * Tung
 * Underi
 * Vallabhgad(vallabhgad.com)
 * Vajragad
 * vasai
 * vasota
 * Vandan
 * Vairatgad
 * Veru
 * Visapur
 * Vishalgad

Bombay Skyline
The B/W picture of the skyline is vertically stretched, the buildings are actually somewhat shorter. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.183.179.10 (talk) 20:03, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

GDP
Tow issues. Number 1: In third paragraph of the introuction of the article, it says that Maharashtra contributes to 15% of Industrial output, whereas in the third paragraph of Economy section, the industrial output is 13%, Which is correct?

Number 2: Reference number three reports "In 2005-06, the state contributed 15% to India ’s industrial output and 12 % to GDP". Reference 4 says "Maharashtra contributes to almost 14.7 per cent of India's gross domestic product and 15.1 per cent of the national income." However the article says Maharashtra is India's most developed and urbanized state, contributing 15% of the country's industrial output and 14.7% of its GDP. Apparently, the big number from both the references have been randomly chosen.

Reference 3 is the worldbank website, which is a third party reliable source. Therefore, I suggest to correct the numbers. Docku (talk) 19:27, 9 July 2008 (UTC)


 * According to Ministry of Statistics and Program Implementation GDP share of the state in year 2004-2005 is 13.16 % and for year 2005-2006 is 13.2. However, the data for year 2005-2006 is not complete as it does not include J&K and Nagaland. However it can be said that the GDP is clearly between 13.1 to 13.2. Then why is worldbank reporting the GDP as only 12%? Where did they get that information from? Are they also writing things just arbitrarily? I hope not. In any case, I believe more in MOSPI statistics. Anyone has any opinion? Docku (talk) 12:58, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

GDP/per capita
I guess Maharashtra has the highest GDP/per capita according to this table. Year 2005-2006 data is a reasonable data to include. All that we need to do is to devide the GDP by population. The problem is that we have reliable population data only from 2001. The information is from Ministry of Statistics of Program Implementation. Guess, it is a reliable source. Docku (talk) 21:21, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Maharashtra is not necessarily the richest state in India. A more recent article referring to the data from Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Govt of India. Even some articles in Wikipedia have evidence to the contrary. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Marshall1984 (talk • contribs) 19:41, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

Most Urbanised State
According to this article, Tamil Nadu is the most urbanised state in India. This The Hindu article was published in May 2008. In contrast, the reference used in Maharashtra article is from data from 1991. Please correct me if I am wrong. If I am not wrong, we may need to remove the claim. Docku (talk) 20:40, 9 July 2008 (UTC)


 * In fact, Maharashtra being the second most urbanised state is mentioned in the second paragraph of the economy section. Docku (talk) 21:00, 9 July 2008 (UTC)


 * User:Nikkul has unilaterally modified information without involving in discussion. I hope he will participate in discussion here before involving in such actions. Docku Hi 22:37, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

maharashtra is not richest state of india there are other state has more per capita income then maharashtra like gujarat, goa, delhi and punjab so how could some user take fake data and make vandalism. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.198.185.163 (talk) 03:20, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Maharashtra is richest state in term of GDP not per capita income. I am sure that country/State wealth is measured in term of GDP. —Preceding unsigned comment added by KuwarOnline (talk • contribs)
 * The sources speak for themselves, inlcuding a WorldBank ref:. Do you have any sources which contradict these. --Deepak D'Souza (talk) 19:15, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

principal cities
The whole section is written in superlative and superfluos language lacking, in many cases, citations. Guess, it needs some work on it. Dock Hi 21:45, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Image of Maha Vidhan election results.
I think the image is too crude, shows incomplete data - since Maharashtra was formed as a state in 1961 - and no other FA state articles like West Bengal or Kerala have such an image. I think image should be moved to some article which is about elections or article of Maharashtra legislature. -- gp pande  «talk»  16:52, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Agree. Kensplanet (talk) 14:50, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Photo Gallery
I propose that a photo gallery be added to show the great symbols of maharashtra. Also the indian state of Bihar has a photo galley and punjab pakistan. So why not Maharashtra.Dewan S. Ahsan 22:11, 2 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Some aspects of this topic have already been addressed on your talk page by User:Nichalp. Here are some other points:
 * WP:INCITIES and WP:INSTATES are the guidelines governing the articles on Indian states and cities. and do not recommend a photo-gallery section.
 * WP:IG says,
 * "Wikipedia is not an image repository. The gallery tag is not a tool to shoehorn images into an article, and a gallery consisting of an indiscriminate collection of images of the article subject should generally either be improved in accordance with the above paragraph or moved to Wikimedia Commons. ... One rule of thumb to consider: if, due to its content, a gallery would only lend itself to a title along the lines of "Gallery" or "Images of [insert article title]", as opposed to a more descriptive title, the gallery should either be revamped or moved to the Commons.
 * This is an encyclopedia and not a tourism brochure. Images are added that are directly relevant to the text and add to the readers understanding of the subject.
 * Bihar and Punjab (Pakistan) are poor articles to model this one on; instead you should be looking at the featured articles, which represent the best content on wikipedia. AFAIK there are no featured articles on cities/states (except Delhi and Karnataka, to which you added galleries recently) that have photo galleries.
 * If you disagree with the points presented by Nichalp or me, feel free to start a wider discussion on WT:INB and WP:VP to propose changes to the guidelines. Note that I plan to remove photo-galleries you added to Delhi, Karnataka etc after this discussion is complete unless we establish a different consensus. Abecedare (talk)
 * Delhi and Karnataka photo gallery are on the tourism section. I dont see why it should be delited and it can be hidden. There is a hide button for these sections so it makes no sense to erase it. It took me hours of hard work to put these galleries in place and as I states before there is a hide button. So I dont see why. Dewan S. Ahsan 23:17, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

They should not be there in FAs. Commonscat suiffices.  YellowMonkey  ( click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model! ) 03:05, 3 March 2009 (UTC)


 * A photo gallery is not needed here as per WP:IG, also the images in particular sections are more appropriate. -- Redtigerxyz Talk 14:02, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Holidays Maharashtra
This is a Best Travel and Tourism portal of maharashtra. . . www.holidaysmaharashtra.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by Holidaysmaharashtra (talk • contribs) 11:43, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Divisions of Maharashtra
Can someone please clarify the number of divisions in Maharashtra? Six or seven? Paalappoo (talk) 14:54, 12 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Right now there are only six divisions.
 * The govt of Maharashtra has already decided to start a new official revenue division at Nanded dividing the existing Aurangabad Division in Marathwada region. The approval has already been processed on 5 January 2009 . The new Nanded division will comprise of Nanded, Latur, Parbhani and Hingoli districts.
 * But, this new official division is yet to come to effect as of date. Hence, right now only Six Divisions. Nanded will be the Seventh Division. For more details, please see Regions and Divisions of Maharashtra. User:Despardes7 18:04, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Festivals in Maharashtra
My experience of staying in Maharashtra for 28 years tells me Diwali is still the largest festival in Maharashtra and not Ganeshotsav. In what sence it has been claimed that Ganeshotsav is the largest festival? Number of days? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Abhi shidhore (talk • contribs) 12:31, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Border disputes
I think its worth mentioning the border dispute with Karnataka for Belgum district in this article. This border dispute article is already present in wiki so it can be linked. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Abhi shidhore (talk • contribs) 12:37, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Should we replace Infobox settlement with Infobox Indian state or territory in Indian states and union territories pages ?
Please share your thoughts and comments on this topic, Discussion page :- Wikipedia talk:Noticeboard for India-related topics — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tojoroy20 (talk • contribs) 22:37, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

Template:Infobox Indian state or territory has an RFC
Template: Infobox Indian state or territory has an RFC for possible consensus. A discussion is taking place. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. Tojoroy20 (talk) 21:02, 3 February 2023 (UTC)

Infobox replacement
The Infobox settlement used on this page is going to be replaced with Infobox Indian state or territory as per the Proposal and Consensus of RFC. Any questions/suggestions? Discuss Here.

You can also contribute by replacing Infobox settlement with Infobox Indian state or territory on other pages, or by improving this one. Tojoroy20 (talk) 18:49, 12 March 2023 (UTC)


 * ✅ Replaced — Tojoroy20 (talk) 20:31, 12 March 2023 (UTC)