Talk:Assam/Archive 3

Pointless reverts

Any further pointless reverts such as these will result in a report to ANEW. I do not care if you think the english bad, fix it. The edits themselves are correct. Darkness Shines (talk) 18:32, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

I have found that my edits to the lede of the page 'Assam' have been reverted by user Chaipau citing 'competition in the lede as to the imporatnce of a city is not appropriate...' as reason. I would like to suggest Chaipau to go through wikipedia page Maharashtra, where one can find (...It is the second most populous state after Uttar Pradesh and third largest state by area in India. Maharashtra is the wealthiest state in India, contributing 15% of the country's industrial output and 13.3% of its GDP (2006–2007 figures)...Maharashtra is the world's second most populous first-level administrative country sub-division. Were it a nation in its own right, Maharashtra would be the world's twelfth most populous country ahead of Philippines. Were the editors of that page indulged in 'competition' ? Similar information is also available in the page Tamil Nadu and also Andhra Pradesh etc., where one can find (Two of the mega cities of the state - Hyderabad and Visakhapatnam - were listed among the top 15 cities contributing to India's overall Gross domestic product).
I had also supplied all relevant references to my edits.
So, it is apparant that the user Chaipau's personal beliefs might have come in the way of my edits with relevant references, which might have prompted him to go for the reverts.
Although, I have added the information under 'Urban Centres' as perChaipau's suggestion, I am keeping my option open for reverting to the original text that have been reverted, of course, with a report to the wikipedia administrators, provided I don't get any convincing reply from Chaipau on this page.--Nborkakoty (talk) 17:00, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

Nborkakoty, please refer to WP:Otherstuffexists. Thanks. Shovon (talk) 17:14, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

Borkotoky, you can put all Assam statistics that you want in the lede. You can write Dibrugarh has the best railway network/ best airport in the Dibrugarh article's lede, but not here. Chaipau (talk) 17:22, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

Nborkakoty's reply

The validity of the facts added to the article were deemed to have been accepted by User Chaipau as and when the same was suggested to be included under ‘Urban centres’ (refer to cited reasons for revert by Chaipau). If, the way the facts were presented was not agreed upon, the same could have been modified. Now whether such facts can be mentioned in the lede or not-

It is no exception and not even a precedent setting act either, to mention cities/urban centres in the lede of an article on a state. In the page Andhra Pradesh one can find 'Two of the mega cities of the state - Hyderabad and Visakhapatnam - were listed among the top 15 cities contributing to India's overall Gross domestic product', in the page Jharkhand one finds ' The industrial city of Ranchi is its capital and Dumka is sub capital while Jamshedpur is the largest and the biggest industrial city of the state. Some of the other major cities and industrial centres are Dhanbad, Bokaro and Hazaribagh', in the page Gujarat in the same way one finds, 'Its capital city is Gandhinagar, whilst its largest city is Ahmedabad', in the page Madhya Pradesh one finds, ' Its capital is Bhopal, and the largest city is Indore'; all in the lede portion of the respective articles

When an world famous institute like the 'International Institute for Environment and Development' in London finds out 'Guwahati is one of the 100 fastest growing cities in the world', the official website of Asian Development Bank in Manila, Philippines selects/identifies Guwahati and Dibrugarh as major cities in the state of Assam, newspapers like Hindustan Times writes 'Dibrugarh is the only non-capital city in India to have trains like Rajdhani Express and Vivek Express etc. originating from it', the same, of course, won’t perhaps be construed by any sensible user/editor of Wikipedia, who applies his/her own mind and wisdom over any matter before reverting edit/s, as matters of pride/vanity specific to Guwahati/Dibrugarh but matters of significance to Assam. (refer to the added references to the reverted edits). Any such matter of significance to Assam and related to any other city/region can also be added with valid reference.

Facts like ‘Dibrugarh has radio centre, TV centre, medical college, university, DU institute of Engineering of Technology, Regional Medical Research Centre, Directorate for Development of small tea growers (Govt. of India), upcoming Bogibeel bridge, Brahmaputra Cracker and Polymer Limited etc. etc.’ were not added in the lede of the Assam page, not even under the heading ‘Urban centres’ either. --Nborkakoty (talk) 14:18, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

Please look at Shovon's pointer above. Chaipau (talk) 14:37, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

Feature article push

I would like to invite editors interested in pushing to make this a featured article. Please submit your suggestions. Once we get coordination, and get things done to our satisfaction, we shall present it for evaluation. Chaipau (talk) 18:41, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

For starters, a lot of unnecessary, trivial type of information, which have been included in the article, need to removed. The tone of certain sections, as well as, the language needs to be corrected too. Shovon (talk) 07:47, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

Numbering convention issue?

In the area stating the population of the major cities, the numbers look strange. What is "9,68,594"? Seems like missing digits there, isn't it? 24.87.130.101 (talk) 03:43, 26 May 2014 (UTC)

ahahaha the section is too funny

The post british section is really funny. Some of the indigenous muslims in the region are being called illegal immigrants from bangladesh whereas hindus in bangladesh are called indigenous bangladeshis? hahahaha

The muslim assamese have been living in the region since before the time of the sultanate of bengal, then nawabs of bengal and then throughout the british raj. Trying to call them illegal immigrants to steal their lands is not going to work. The indian government should realize that after 65 years of hindu fanaticism these sort of rubbish tactics don't work anymore. MuslimAssamese (talk) 08:46, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

This article has seen some serious decay. Edit and help. Chaipau (talk) 10:06, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

From now onwards Muslims in India want to be left alone so that they can develop the country. The country has been so completely destroyed because the government is incapable of developing the country and neither do they let the Muslims develop the country. Its a fact that Muslims in India are capable of getting outside investments and infrastructure investments from Muslim and Asian countries much more than Hindus could ever get. From now onwards the Muslims want to be left alone and as they develop they will give it to the Hindus and the cities and states will develop and Hindus can get what they want. Its simple. 42.241.148.213 (talk) 22:19, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

update here goes the hindu rss indian government sending out bogus sms messages for the upteenth time. I wonder if people ever get bored of this stuff happening again and again in different situations because i sure as hell do. And can the government please stop the whole "pak link" nonsense. Let it go, the Pakistani population is 180 million they cannot be bothered anymore. Nothing can be done against them now, its all over. Atleast now concentrate on the country instead of wasting time obsessing over others who don't care about India. What a waste of 66 years its been. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 114.74.150.172 (talk) 06:39, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

Talk pages are not an online forum. And anyway, there are sources which incite hate without reason: [1] which claims to be "The Islamic Revival Channel" has a video (now under a temporary ban in India) which uses a TV report of an un-credited source of a single murder to say that "rivers of blood" are running in Assam. Anyway, from now on, refrain from using Talk pages to vent. Nshuks7 (talk) 12:08, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

I posted my reply http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:114.74.150.172, but it was removed citing wikipedia policy 114.74.150.172 (talk) 06:22, 26 August 2012 (UTC)