Talk:Patna/Archive 1

Miscellaneous
This page was moved from Patna to distinguish it from Patna, Scotland.

This page was moved from Patna to distinguish it from Patna, Scotland.

Following Ashoka's reign the empire disintegrated and the city began to deteriorate, and was not restored until the Mughals began using it as a major center of trade in the 16th century.

Huh?

Pataliputra was the capital of the Gupta dynasty during the Golden Age of Indian History - it was after the Gupta Empire that Patna deteriorated and waited for the Mughals in the 16th century to revive it. I will be making this change in a couple of days. --ashwatha 19:34, 3 Sep 2004 (UTC)


 * My reference (our ignoble competitor) had some terrible omissions and errors. I'd much appreciate any improvements. Derrick Coetzee 01:10, 5 Sep 2004 (UTC)

In my opinion, one, sentence edit by user Ansukla on 09.04.2005 is not complete. I sent him the following message. This one sentence edit requires to be clarified. Quote hello dear Mr Ansukla - recently, you have added one sentence in the history of Patna. Would u plz let me know the context / clarify the point. Thanks. --Bhadani 09:59, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC) Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Ansukla" Unquote--Bhadani 10:56, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)

regular vandalism of this page
It is interesting to note that some annonymous users are regularly vandalising this artice. I would request them to contribute something positive, instead of pure nonsense, because, I am sure a person who can use wikipedia and edit MUST be not so foolish. I request all such vandals to have a positive attitude and do something good, instead of wasting their energies on destructive activities. Ok.--Bhadani 04:13, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I think in Educational Section We need to add Some information about major IT intitutions providing technical education to about twenty five thousand students in Patna Only. RSJaiswal

Popullation Density and Area
Hi ,

Please try to validate Popullation Density and  Area of patna city. please don't cofuse with Patna division or Patna district. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Devesh.bhatta (talk • contribs) 07:26, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Wrong Map
I'd like to point out that Patna is wrongly located on the map. It's the capital of Bihar, but on the map is marked somewhere in the Central India

Slawomir

Agreed, We need to work on MAP. Devessh S N Bhatta (talk) 07:28, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Popullation Density and Area
Hi ,

Please try to validate Popullation Density and  Area of patna city. please don't cofuse with Patna division or Patna district. Devessh S N Bhatta (talk) 07:28, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Copyright violation?
I am not sure, but certain portion of the article appears to be almost verbatim copy from the source mentioned below:

Mauryan Patliputra was replete with multi-storeyed wooden buildings and palaces surrounded by parks and ponds. According to Greek accounts, royal parks were lined with evergreen trees, which neither grew old nor shed their leaves. There were more than 500 towers and there were 64 gates in the city wall, surrounded by wooden palisade with loopholes for the arches. A ditch around the city served the dual purpose of defence as well as sewage disposal. Every street had its water courses serving as house drains that finally emptied into the moat. Any deposit that obstructed the passage was punishable by law. House owners were required to have fire prevention elements and the streets provided with vessels of water and sand, kept ready in thousands.
 * quoting from this article

Emperor Ashoka, the grandson of Chandragupta Maurya, transformed the wooden capital into a stone construction around 273 BC Chinese scholar Fa Hein, who visited India sometime between 400 BC to 15 AD, believed demons were commissioned to erect these massive stone structures, which cannot be human work.


 * quoting from this source:

A strong sense of imagination is required to recreate the Mauryan Patliputra replete with multistoreyed wooden buildings, palaces surrounded by parks and ponds. If we are to believe the Greek accounts, the royal parks were lined with evergreen trees, which neither grew old nor shed their leaves. The capital city with more than 500 towers and 64 gates was surrounded by wooden palisade with loopholes for the arches. A ditch aroulnd the city served the dual purpose of defence as well as sewage disposal. Every street had its water courses serving as house drains that finally emptied into the moat. Any deposit that obstructed the passage was punishable by law. House owners were also required to have fire prevention elements and so were the streets provided with vessels of water and sand kept ready in thousands.

Transformed To Stone City

It was Ashoka who transformed the wooden capital into a stone construction around 273 B.C. This sudden change prompted Fa Hein, who visited India between 400-15 AD, believe that genni(demons) were commissioned to erect these massive stone structures. Mauryan architecture is one of the least known subjects in Indian history, though Literary references to palace, forts, halls and stupas are aplenty but archaelogical evidences are scarce, Kumrahar site at Patna is associated with the ancient Palace site of Patliputra.


 * My comments: I will try to re-write these paragraphs. But, I suggest that the editor who has given this edit should do this, as he can do it with his own inputs. Thanks. --Bhadani 15:36, 5 August 2005 (UTC)


 * It will have to be rewritten. Also we can consider emailing the site and requesting permission to copy text. =Nichalp   «Talk»=  17:51, August 5, 2005 (UTC)

Sorry for the dealyed response. I have not been surfing for sometime. Incidentally, this text has been taken from The Hindu, not the website you have mentioned, which itself appears to have taken it from the said Hindu article. I just did a quick reword of the same. Hope there is no serious violations caused.

I will try to locate the name of the author, a muslim gentleman, and the date of its publication, most probably early 2001 - someone had forwarded the article to me as a document. I am also trying to involve some more folks into this job - people who would contribute photographs. Thanks

--TV 11:24, August 16, 2005 (UTC)
 * Nice to see your response, surely you are doing fine work. Let us make this article really great. --Bhadani 13:37, 16 August 2005 (UTC)

GA
I'm surprised at this article rated as "Good". It needs a lot of work, and there's no substitute for meeting the WP:FA requirements. =Nichalp  «Talk»=  17:46, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
 * I do agree. In fact, many edits come from time to time which are not encyclopedic at all. I would suggest the editors to be add value instead of deduct the same from the contents. --Bhadani 15:42, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

I just edited a small grammer error. Overall, I think its a good article. -Amit

GA Delisted
The presense of a tag on this page led me to look further into this article and its compliance with the good article criteria. Unfortunately, the article in its current state no longer meets the criteria of a good article for the following reasons: Please try to improve this article to bring it up to good article standards and one it is done so, please renominate it at the good article candidates page. If you substancially disagree with this delisting, and you feel that this article in its current state was improperly delisted, please bring the issue up at good article review. If you have any questions, please drop a note on my talk page. --Jayron32| talk | contribs 17:22, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Referencing - The aforementioned tag indicates that some editor(s) on wikipedia are unsatisfied with the level of referencing of the article. I say I agree with them.  The article has NO inline citations, lists NO references where the information comes from, and needs MUCH work in this department.  See WP:CITE, WP:ATT, WP:RS, and WP:CITET as guidelines to help you do this correctly.
 * Images - There is a dead image in the article. This needs to be either removed of replaced with a free-use image.

Indeed, this isn't a 'good' article. Some of the claims are totally unsubstantiated. For example, the people of Patna are NOT considered intellectual. This is not even a commonly-held view in India. Generally, Bihar (and in particular, Patna) have an arguably deserved reputation for illiteracy, underdevelopment, and crime. --felixmendelssohn

Introduction needs to be edited
I am not sure, how much this line - "It is the centre for all the students from Bihar preparing for various competitive examinations." is relevant in the introduction.

202.144.93.138 (talk) 09:03, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

File:Patna.jpg may be deleted
I have tagged File:Patna.jpg, which is in use in this article for deletion because it does not have a copyright tag. If a copyright tag is not added within seven days the image will be deleted. -- Chris  07:13, 27 April 2009 (UTC) i love patna.

Consistent spelling of Pataliputra
The article had about half "Pataliputra" and half "Patliputra". I changed them all to "Pataliputra", which is the spelling used in the title of the Wikipedia article "Pataliputra". Gwil (talk) 04:18, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

File:Patna.jpg
is still available in other Wikipedias such as one I have seen in the Hindi Wikipedia -- Extra999 (talk) 13:06, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

Good picture in need
The main picture of the info box shows just the Ganga (or Ganges) river. I think there should be a better picture there. -- Extra999 (talk) 22:20, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

Coordinate error
The following coordinate fixes are need for

—218.248.80.58 (talk) 00:25, 16 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Declined — Coordinates appear to be correct, please feel free to repost the tag with a specific explanation of why you believe a correction is needed. Best regards,  T RANSPORTER M AN   ( TALK ) 17:13, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

Upgrading the page to latest design
The wiki pages of all the top class cities like london and newyork are significantly different to the Patna page and are much better looking. Change the image to a montage type. For that, whoever has uploaded the maximum images here will need to prepare a montage of his pics. Copyright issues are there otherwise, I would have done it myself. Also, there are many loose links and the picture quality is poor. please help in improving them  Boolyme   Talk!! 13:50, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Hotels and Restaurants
I feel that this section is far too promotional, and should not be naming individual establishments, at least in the manner it does. I think the best procedure will to see how this is done in similar articles, and whether there are specific policy guidelines. As it stands, it is probably unacceptable, in that it gives no clear references. AndyTheGrump (talk) 23:17, 5 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Edited the page. See and give feedback  Boolyme   Chat!! 13:38, 6 February 2011 (UTC)


 * I'm not sure this is really what is required. We really need a reference from an external source, commenting on the quality of facilities, rather than listings from travel-guide websites. It is unclear why the establishments in question are being named, rather than others. Though to a resident of Patna they might possibly be the most obvious candidates to include, we need a verifiable source that says so: otherwise the article is likely to end up with an ever-extending list of such establishments. AndyTheGrump (talk) 16:13, 6 February 2011 (UTC)


 * I have raised this matter in Wikipedia Bihar Portal. Getting such a list (that is not from a travel guide) is very difficult even for top cities like New York or London. Can you give me any specific example?  Boolyme   Chat!! 17:49, 6 February 2011 (UTC)


 * I'd try looking at our other articles: see for example Paris, Rome, New York etc. They rarely mention specific establishments, for the reasons I've already given, but they may suggest ways to talk about them in more general terms. I see that there is a Tourism in Patna article already, and individual establishments would probably be better discussed there - though you'll still have to provide a rationale for including particular ones. AndyTheGrump (talk) 18:09, 6 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Ok. I have removed the names of hotels and restaurants. I will however keep the theaters' names as they are the only one there.  Boolyme   Chat!! 18:34, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

Introduction should be more informative and put some more facts
I tried to put up some informations on the webpage but they were deleted. This is a pretty known fact that India produced five "The Great" Emprerors. Out of five, four were from this region of Patliputra, whose capital was Patliputra: Chandragupta Maurya, Ashoka, Vikramaditya and Samudragupta. For this fact people of Bihar feel proud of and it should be included in the introduction section. This also highlights the richness of this ancient city, witness of great ruling and formation of Indian Empires. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.212.45.114 (talk) 12:50, 13 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Read Wikipedia guidelines for editing.  Boolyme बूलीमी   Chat बोलो!! 18:33, 16 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Next time you try to revert by using different IPs, all your IPs may get blocked.  Boolyme बूलीमी   Chat बोलो!! 14:41, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

What is required?
I want this page to nominated as good article. However, after viewing talk page, i feel some users are not satisfied with the article. I want to contribute in developing this page, may i know what exactly needs to be done in order to nominate it for good article? Maverick.Mohit


 * Maverick.Mohit asked me to come and comment on this issue based on my comments to him/her on his/her talk page. I am not a GA reviewer, and only participated in one GA process myself, a look at the article shows me some concerns.  I think the biggest and hardest to fix concern are the unreferenced or undereferenced parts of the article.  Specifically, I note that several different sections of the article are unsourced; specifically, I see the following as needing references:


 * First part of "Vedic Era"
 * First paragraph of "Mauryan Empire"
 * Most of "Gupta and Mughal Empire"
 * Most of "Indian Independence Movement"
 * Most of "Topography"
 * All of "Medieval Era", "British Empire", "Economy", "Demographics", "Rail Network", and "Air Network"

Furthermore, I see that a number of the references are of questionable quality and probably don't meet WP:RS, such as 21, 22, 26-28, etc. These probably all need to be replaced.

Other things I note:
 * The references (that are being kept, and any being added) all need to be put into complete citation form. The best way to do that is to use the various "Cite" templates, like  and.
 * The tone of parts of the article do not meet WP:NPOV; phrases like "The mangoes of Digha, Patna are very delicious & famous", "Yet another language is..." and "Patna is unique in having four large rivers in its vicinity" all jump out at me, and there are many more.

There may be other issues as well; you'll eventually want to read the WP:Good article criteria, and ensure you've met everything there. Before nominating the article for Good Article status, you may first want to use the peer review process, but you'll want to wait to do that until the article is much closer to GA status.

I hope this very informal look helps. I'll add this to my watchlist in case other questions pop up; I can't really help much with sources, although later on I may have time to help with formatting and NPOV issues. But, first, work on sourcing and making sure that the article thoroughly covers the subject. Qwyrxian (talk) 10:50, 22 February 2011 (UTC)


 * There is another big issue appearing here, now that I've started sifting through it. There are at least a fair few statements made which are not actually supported by the cited sources. I've fixed 2 or 3 already but there are others. I'm not quite sure why this is but it is disappointing & extremely worrying as it renders pointless the entire purpose of citations . I'll keep editing it over the next few days. - Sitush (talk) 21:29, 24 February 2011 (UTC)


 * ... and another issue: copyright violations. Bearing in mind numerous comments above about sourcing etc, I'm almost inclined to suggest that this article is blanked and started over, with some proper oversight by responsible editors. - Sitush (talk) 21:48, 24 February 2011 (UTC)
 * That would be a very drastic solution, one that is generally only employed when there is good evidence of large-scale copyright infringement. If it's just individual sections, then blank those sections  underneath the relevant section title, followed by  at the end of the copyrighted part.  Blanking the parts that are just unsourced is a trickier issue.  While, in principle, any unsourced information that can be challenged can be removed by any editor, in practice, people often object. But, it's still acceptable, especially if you have reason to doubt the accuracy of the info in question.  For example, I just removed a part of the lead that's promotional and contradicts information later down in the article, as well as significantly reduced the overly promotional and unsourced info in economy.   Personally, this is the approach that I like to use--pare down sections and information to the bare minimum, leaving only the least questionable and mundane statements (along with any sourced info available.   An alternative would be to work up an entirely new draft in a sandbox in your userspace, then, once it's up to a decent quality level itself, merge over the better version.  I'll keep working on the article sporadically, but, again, I don't really have any easy way to get info other than simple online news searches, so someone with better sources or more personal knowledge may be able to help in that regard.


 * Yes, I said "almost". It is not an option. I'll keep sifting through the thing. Right now I'm concentrating on sorting out the refs that are there, and fiddling about with other bits as I come across them. This includes rephrasing to avoid copyvio. - Sitush (talk) 23:54, 24 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Thank you for taking interest in this article and pointing out the statements which needs references. I will be editing this article in upcoming days.I have very limited online sources regarding references,still i will try to provide references.As for regarding copyright vio, please don't delete anything w/o mentioning it here.If possible will look for replacement for pics. Thanks once again.Maverick.Mohit (talk) 18:00, 25 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Hi, I'm not sure what the issue is or was with the pictures, and Boolyme is currently blocked from editing for sockpuppeting so won't be able to explain for a week or so. As for references in general, my experience generally is that this sort of stuff is usually online. My problem is that I'm not remotely experienced in Indian affairs & am wary about misinterpreting something - so I'd rather point out the problems and hope that someone else can fix them. I know it seems a bit of a negative way of doing things but I am doing quite a bit of positive stuff along the way. Copyvios are being fixed as I go along, don't worry about it too much. The really important thing is references: if it cannot be referenced then it really should not even be in the article, so this needs sorting out. If you could explain/answer any of my queries in the sections below then I'd be grateful. Thanks. - Sitush (talk) 18:43, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Sikhism
Please forgive my ignorance regarding Sikhism. In the following excerpt from the article - "Takht Sri Patna Sahib is one of the Five Takhts of Sikhism and consecrates the birthplace ..." - should the word "consecrates" really be "commemorates"? In Christianity, "consecrates" makes no sense here. Thanks. - Sitush (talk) 01:05, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Indo-Greeks
Aside from the Encyclopedia Britannica article (which is actually a special version, not the "real" Britannia) please can someone source some decent verification for the Indo Greek statement. It has been on and off this article far too often. I've already explained this in my edit summary but still got knocked back, which demonstrates a certain lack of AGF. Let's get this sorted once and for all please. - Sitush (talk) 09:38, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
 * ACtually, I've found a decent explanation of the controversy and propose to cite it in the article - . If anyone objects to this then please do so soon, otherwise I'll add it. - Sitush (talk) 12:03, 25 February 2011 (UTC)


 * - Sitush (talk) 16:46, 7 March 2011 (UTC)