Talk:Bindusara

Geographical Locations

The article needs to have names of places such as Baluchistan amended with names, that were used by Historians to describe locations in anciant times. Chirags 22:34, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

-Couldnt Bindusara be considered Eurasian? After all, his mother was apparently the daughter of Selucus, who was Macedonian, and Chandragupta's only recorded wife so I would think so. I might be mistaken though. -User: Afghan Historian

Military Conquests

This is just a general suggestion, but there should be accurate maps that depict the areas of influence and direct control for each monarch like on the Changragupta page —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.211.249.183 (talk) 20:04, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject class rating

This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 17:31, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Ranajit Pal

This article's introduction talks about Dr. Ranajit Pal, and includes statements like "Dr. Ranajit Pal stated..". Is this guy a vetted authority on history? I see that he is a proponent of an alternate theory, but is it necessary to give this much credence to his views. The introduction may need re-writing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.96.227.70 (talk) 11:27, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

This guy Ranajit Pal may be a non-entity but it is shocking to find Wikipedia using a large block from his website article on Bindusara (http://www.ranajitpal.com ) and present it without any acknowledgement or reference. This is plain plagiarism. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mejda (talk • contribs) 08:55, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Lifespan

He is stated as being born in 320BC and dying in 272BC, and yet it says he was 52 years old at his death. Given these dates he would have been 48 years old when dying (320-272=48), so is it an error by the original editor in calculating the age at death, or are the dates wrong? I don't have personally the expertise (or time) to research this topic, or else I would. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.102.129.191 (talk) 14:54, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

References

There are two references provided for the Strabo book referenced in the first article section. Upon seeing to improve the referencing style, I located the url that was previously cited, and also found an additional url. The one referenced first is the new URL I found. I used it first because the URL leads to a site where one can view the original source entirely and actually flip through the pages. With this, I was able to identify the page number of the sourced material and include it in the reference. It is also possible to download a pdf version of the source from this site. I left the original (previously referenced) URL source as an additional citation because this URL leads to a cite that provides information regarding the source's URI and URN. Should these be of standard uses in Wikipedia referencing in the future, the information is provided on this website. I did not find a template showing how to include book, chapter, and section number in the citation, and this information is necessary to locate the material through this (Original, previously cited) URL, so I included it following volume. I am not sure if this is correct, but I thought it looked appropriate. For the new source I found (the one shown first of the two in the references) this (book, chapter, and section number) information is not necessary, as the source information can be located directly with volume and page number. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Datdyat (talk • contribs) 14:52, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

In attempting to improve the citation style for other references cited (e.g., by giving them a standard format and adding missing information), I identified two editions of one of the references (History and doctrines of the Ājīvikas: a vanished Indian religion) from the same year but from different publishers and containing different numbers of pages. The original citation of the work did not include the publisher or location name. I found an incomplete digital edition of the original edition that allowed me to confirm the appearance of key words on the page numbers originally cited. I was not able to find a digital version of the second edition. I therefore concluded to assume that the reference originally cited was the first edition, and this is the reference I have used on the article page.Datdyat (talk) 16:03, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

¢ The page linked to this talk page was sabotaged recently. I'd like to fix it, but don't have time right now. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kaerondaes (talk • contribs) 02:39, 22 October 2013 (UTC) this is the worst dinner ever♥