Talk:Economy of India/Archive 4

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Query arising from FAR

Dear contributors

Can someone reveal whether Maddison's estimates on India's share of global income, as cited in the colonial section, were based on PPP? These are fascinating figures, and we need to verify the methodology. Tony 14:15, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

India has been judged as the sixth most dangerous country

• http://www.expressindia.com/fullstory.php?newsid=72099

India 6th most dangerous country for kids: Poll

New Delhi, August 7: India has been judged as the sixth most dangerous country for children in the world, according to a recent poll. Afghanistan, Palestinian territories, Myanmar and Chechnya were placed better than India in the poll conducted by Reuters Alertnet, a humanitarian news website run by Reuters Foundation, Rajya Sabha was told today.

During the survey, the website asked more than 110 aid experts and journalists to highlight the most dangerous places for children. The first five dangerous countries are Sudan, Northern Uganda, Democratic Republic of Congo, Iraq and Somalia, Minister of State (independent charge) for Women and Child Development Renuka Chowdhury said while replying to a written question.

The facts that have been taken into account for the poll survey include the children involved in armed conflict, the psychological trauma experienced by children caught up in violence, the children living in poverty and forced to work to support themselves and their families and malnutrition among children, the minister said.

vkvora 04:33, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Note: I've commented out the copyrighted news story pasted here verbatim from Times of India's website [1]. --Ragib 05:17, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Economy of India and Rationing Card

Article 'Economy of India' contains many subject including silver coin, RBI, currency note of 1000 rupees, Metro railway and Bombay Stock Exchange. Only the missing information is of Rationing Card which is meant for poor to get food grains at subsidised rate. Will some body give some short of information on Indian Rationing Card and no of persons holding this cards?

Many Industrialist are also holding Rationing Card means they are poor in thinking also.

vkvora 15:56, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

GDP Ranking

1>The GDP ranking is wrong. The world need not be accounted for. Hence the Rank becomes 5th from the present 6th.

Now the European Union also cannot be accounted for since the economy of various nations of the European Union is shown as different and in many places like in the Economy of France EU is unaccounted for. Either make the change in all the Economy of <countryname> or place the rank of India as 4th. Chanakyathegreat 09:22, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

2>The graph shows both Bangladesh and Pakistan for 1950,1960 and 1970 whereas Bangladesh got created only in 1971.Can someone explain how could the GDP of a non existing country is calculated?

Poverty

The poverty point in India has declined to 22% in 2006. Please see the link - http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/articleshow/702850.cms Can some update the infobox.

Infobox

Some of data given in the infobox is wrong. Even CIA world fact book has updated data. Can some please help me in umderstanding how to update the infobox. User:apurv1980 18:30, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Nationalisation of Banks

203.199.104.65 12:29, 3 January 2007 (UTC)WIKIPEDIA mentions in this article:

Prime Minister Indira Gandhi nationalised 15 banks in 1969, followed by six others in 1980, and made it mandatory for banks to provide 40% (since reduced to 10%) of their net credit to priority sectors like agriculture, small-scale industry, retail trade, small businesses, etc. to ensure that the banks fulfill their social and developmental goals.

ACTUALLY only 14 banks were nationalised in 1969 [19th July 1969 to be precise].

Source: Website of Reserve Bank of India http://www.rbi.org.in/scripts/chro_1968.aspx

S.Ravindranath Bank of India Mumbai India203.199.104.65 12:29, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Indian Poors sacrifice their children for Prosperity.

Indian Poors sacrifice their children for Prosperity.

http://www.expressindia.com/fullstory.php?newsid=79072

Parents sacrificing sons to be prosperous.

vkvora 04:37, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Killing for 'Mother' Kali

Human sacrifice has always been an anomaly in India. Even 200 years ago, when a boy was killed every day at a Kali temple in Calcutta, blood cults were at odds with a benign Hindu spiritualism that celebrates abstinence and vegetarianism. But Kali is different. A ferocious slayer of evil in Hindu mythology, the goddess is said to have an insatiable appetite for blood. With the law on killing people more strictly enforced today, ersatz substitutes now stand in for humans when sacrifice is required. Most Kali temples have settled on large pumpkins to represent a human body; other followers slit the throats of two-meter-tall human effigies made of flour, or of animals such as goats.

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,501020729-322673,00.html

http://www.newhumanist.org.uk/forum/threads.php?id=2220_0_23_0_C

The preceding unsigned comment was added by 59.184.161.148 (talk) 05:40, 14 January 2007 (UTC).

What's your point ? --Milki 15:43, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Eager beaver.Nshuks7 (talk) 11:49, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

World bank external links

These links:

• Doing Business in India
• Enterprise Surveys: India
• Privatization Database: India
• Infrastructure Projects: India

Were added by an editor whose only contributions have been to promote the World Bank Group (doingbusiness.org is a World Bank Group project). We have recently uncovered significant edits promoting this organization (see this WikiProject Spam discussion). In the interest of our neutral point of view policy and conflict of interest guideline I've moved the links here for other editors to consider. I personally think that four data links from one organization may be overkill without competing points of view. Also, Wikipedia has articles on the Ease of Doing Business Index and the World Bank Group which may be more appropriate than an external link. Thanks -- Siobhan Hansa 14:04, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Economic Reforms

Hi, Shouldn't we be covering the Economic Reforms instituted. They have had a massive impact on the Indian economy and we need to cover it.

Venkatesh 06:09, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

L&T 54?? Impossible

The article is wrong in stating that L&T is ranked #54 and higher than reliance, indian oil, etc. in the forbes listing. Someone probably got that number from one of the niche rankings forbes publishes and wrongly added it to this list. --Blacksun 15:48, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Numbers vs Text

The following section:

The economic reforms that caused a surge in economic growth after 1980 can be attributed to two stages of reform. The pro-business measures of 1980, initiated by Rajiv Gandhi, eased restrictions on capacity expansion for incumbents, removed price controls and reduced corporate taxes. The economic liberalisation of 1991, initiated by then Indian prime minister P. V. Narasimha Rao and his finance minister Manmohan Singh in response to a balance-of-payments crisis, did away with the Licence Raj (investment, industrial and import licensing) and ended many public monopolies, allowing automatic approval of foreign direct investment in many sectors.

Implies that the economy grew after 1980. According to the graph opposite, the GDP/Capita went down after 1980. Also, even accounting for the subsequent recovery, the growth after reforms doesn't seem greater than the growth before refroms. In fact it seems less.

I imagine that the graph is right, and the neoliberal propaganda is wrong. Can we do something about this? 87.194.30.86 13:35, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

This Article Can Be Improved

I think that there are several ways that this article can be improved. 1. The name of the "Notes" section should be changed with the name of the "References" section. 2. The external links should be organized into "official" and "unofficial" branches, each one containing organized groups of organized links. 3. The introduction should be made shorter, with some of the information that would be cut away going to their sections. Johnsmithcba 19:52, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Average Wage

I cannot find any information on this page regarding the average or median income for India. Where might that information be found. Shouldn't it be incorporated into this page... Discussion?

207.157.13.2 15:41, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Sbilogo.gif

Image:Sbilogo.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 21:54, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Reliance group logo.png

Image:Reliance group logo.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 08:00, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

GDP growth projection with PPP shift taken into consideration

With the calculation currently there in the article, hyper inflation would lead to hyper GDP growth. An inflation rate of 100% would increase GDP growth by 100%, the way the math has been done there.

GDP growth numbers reported by the IMF, World Bank and UN agencies are based on dollars. The 2006/7 GDP growth of 9.4% for example is calculated from: (GDP in 2006 in rupees * dollar-rupee-rate in 2006) - (GDP in 2005 in rupees * dollar-rupee-rate in 2005)

This automatically accounts for rupee appreciation against the dollar.

Goldman Sachs is a reputed investment firm. You can't question their economic reports without substantial backing.

Yeah, the section was written as an essay, and should never have been there in the first place. So it's gone now. My fault for continually reverting you. But the stuff that's there now needs a source. Gscshoyru 16:08, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:IndianBankNotes.JPG

Image:IndianBankNotes.JPG is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 04:07, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Excised text

I removed a huge block of text which disputed the Goldman Sachs report in excruciating depth. While interesting, it is original research and throws the article completely out of balance. The block may be found here for reference. — Ravikiran 16:48, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Opening discussion

Gunjan, please discuss here about that disputed block of text. My objections are stated above. It is original research and makes the article unbalanced. — Ravikiran 13:17, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Once again, Gunjan/207... Please discuss this [2]. — Ravikiran 17:49, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Gunjan, your "compromise" [3] does nothing to fix the two problems, which I will restate below:

• This is an article about the Economy of India, not an analysis of Goldman Sach's prediction. Anything over 2-3 lines on that report is overkill.
• Wikipedia is not the place where you can publish original analyses. Even something as simple as the Goldman's model overpredicting past growth rates for India - that has to be attributed to someone. There is no way your text can be retained anywhere in Wikipedia, but I am right now concentrating on this article. — Ravikiran 23:46, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

This issue has been on my to-do list for a very long time, and I completely agree with Ravikaran's analysis. To summarize:

• The "Future predictions taking purchasing power parity into account" was not only unnecessarily detailed but also violated wikipedia's policies on verifiability and no original research. Therefore it has no place in this or any other wikipedia article and I have deleted it.
• The lengthy "Future predictions: "conventional wisdom" from Goldman Sachs" was redundant (it basically repeated the same statement thrice) and gave a single report undue weight, especially considering that wikipedia is not a crystal ball. It certainly did not deserve a section of its own, and I have compressed the prediction to a sentence in the After 1991 section.

Gunjan, I understand that you added your analysis in good faith, but I hope you will click on the policy links I have provided above and understand why the additions are inappropriate for wikipedia. If you disagree, feel free to discuss it on this talk page. Cheers. Abecedare 00:33, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

OK - hope you guys listen to this, because this is the last straw, and my faith in the sincerity of the people maintaining this page (and not something driven by pure ego) has already fallen quite low:

1.Ravikaran- stop reverting the rankings - India is now the 3rd largest economy as of 2007 not 4th- read the Wiki data behind the link!!!! Be a bit less trigger happy about deleting content or reverting to old data before verifying stuff- unless you really want to kill this page and make it obsolete, or want to get blocked from editing because of 3RR.

2. Perhaps I might be less familiar with Wiki, but Ravikiran you need to be a bit more thoughtful before put sentences which don't make any sense or severely damage the page content (like the future economy is now a meaningless stubb and a huge gap in an article that talks about the second fastest growing and the third largest economy in the world -what a terrible decline in just 1 week- and thanks to the history we all know who is behind it!)- you even deleted reasonable stuff about Goldman Sachs report that was not even added by me. Just because you think it is not relevant does not make it so- remember that. You have to have a strong reason for going around deleting contents that have no errors in them- and fit well in the page. Remember- there are a lot of pages in Wikipedia that do not go beyond the superficial stuff- you don't want this page to end up there- just because knowledgeable people find it difficult to add any new content because of your hegemony.

3. The stuff I added was a summary of what I presented at the Linucon 2004 conference - it was my research but not "original research" (and had a link to that paper presentation). The historical data on decline of India's PPP were not even research -that was just facts- important ones in the context of the discussion. Oh, btw, having a PhD in Machine Learning from UT Austin, and having worked for S&P, Amazon and other companies as a financial modeler for a few years now- I "might" know more than you about macro-economics (not sure what your background is - but sorry to say Ravikaran, you do not seem to be able to grasp even basic concepts-from what I could tell from your toxic comments. It is a huge and unfortunate loss for this page having an unqualified zealot driving it. Taking advice from Wikipedia itself, I am now formally giving up wasting my time on it- as the Wiki page on mediating dispute suggests - move on... creat a new page, perhaps in the future some more reasonable editors who would be open to new ideas and facts glaring at their face that are relevant today, and who respect others as they would want others to respect them, will come along.

gunjankg 01:19, 5 October 2007, PST

Those who are interested in Gunjan's presentation at the Linucon 2004 conference on the future of space exploration given the rapid rise of India and China can read it here [4]. Those who wish to actually read about the Indian economy may read the article. Thank you. — Ravikiran 14:48, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Time cove june 26 2006 1101060626 400 1.jpg

Image:Time cove june 26 2006 1101060626 400 1.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 19:43, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Partisan Interpretation of Colonial Economics

Hi,

"An estimate by Cambridge University historian Angus Maddison reveals that India's share of the world income fell from 22.6% in 1700, comparable to Europe's share of 23.3%, to a low of 3.8% in 1952.[17] While Indian leaders during the Independence struggle, and left-nationalist economic historians have blamed colonial rule for the dismal state of India's economy in its aftermath, a broader macroeconomic view of India during this period reveals that there were sectors of growth and decline, resulting from changes brought about by colonialism and a world that was moving towards industrialisation and economic integration.[18][19]"

This statement is partisan, and only puts forth one point of view. The phrase "left-nationalistic economic historians have blamed" is a straw man, and the following statements seem to be cyclical ("changes brought about by colonialism" is presented as a counterpoint to "blamed colonial rule", while these two ideas are essentially the same). Much scholarship at Cambridge, Chicago, and other universities have put forth a more balanced view which factors in British mismanagement of the Indian economy and the use of poverty for political gain (ex. Easterly's "White Man's Burden"). I believe that there should be room for these viewpoints rather than airing just one rather one-sided one, and one that's from a unbalanced source (references 18, 19 are from OUP, and Oxford is not renound for allowing discussion of the negative aspects of colonialism). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.1.153.51 (talk) 01:44, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

--Agreed, please add any solid references you have. Make sure they are watertight, because some people on here are only too happy to delete anything 'anti-colonial'. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.10.192.78 (talk) 09:36, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Income distribution

After the liberalization of the economy, the poor has benifited the most. [5] Before the license raj, a limited amount of people who did business with the politicians, the politicians and those who started very early were wealthy. This has changed with the liberalization and the wealth distribution is getting even. This is a good sign of progress. Chanakyathegreat (talk) 12:26, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

Conflicting Workforce Statistics

The page states that 59% of the total workforce of India was employed by the agriculture sector in 2016 and that 57% of the workforce was employed by the retail sector in the same year (2016). These stats are based on adding the indirect and induced employment to direct employment based on the source, but this is never indicated and seems more confusing than simply listing direct employment by sector. Plus the listed totals add up to far more than 100% which seems unclear. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.186.24.194 (talk) 02:54, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 11 June 2018

14.139.226.50 (talk) 11:43, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

Change the line in first paragraph of the page "It is the world's fifth-largest economy by nominal GDP and the third-largest by purchasing power parity (PPP)" to It is the world's seventh-largest economy by nominal GDP and the third-largest by purchasing power parity (PPP)." Recommended change is to the word "fifth" to "seventh" .

Reason for this : The hyper link mentioned for the "fifth largest economy" in the existing page states that India is at seventh position as per IMF's 2018 data.

 Done L293D (☎ • ✎) 13:19, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 1 July 2018

The poverty data given in the article is woefully out of date, at >20%. According to worldpoverty.io and the world bank, the rate is now close to 5%. The data is both misleading and outdated. Almost all other figures on the sidebar are from 2016/17, but only this one is from 2011, and should be updated since the percentage has dropped to a quarter of what it was. Drainbox (talk) 13:33, 1 July 2018 (UTC)

 Not done: I'm quite sure you are right, but please supply reliable sources to reference your claim. You say that wordpoverty.io and the world bank state the poverty rate is at 5%: just supply an URL for verification. L293D (☎ • ✎) 02:25, 2 July 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 30 July 2018

Population below poverty line - 5.3% or 71.5 millions Source- https://www.brookings.edu/blog/future-development/2018/06/19/the-start-of-a-new-poverty-narrative/ https://edition.cnn.com/2018/06/26/africa/nigeria-overtakes-india-extreme-poverty-intl/index.html Mohak004 (talk) 00:57, 30 July 2018 (UTC)

 Done​ — Newslinger talk 03:24, 4 August 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 29 September 2018

Jessishere123 (talk) 02:49, 29 September 2018 (UTC)
Growth               = 8.2%(projected)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. cymru.lass (talk • contribs) 20:17, 2 October 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 6 November 2018

Percentage of population below poverty line can be updated to 4.7% as per the world poverty clock ( November 2018 ). Tanmay0186 (talk) 05:45, 6 November 2018 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. ♪♫Alucard 16♫♪ 07:30, 6 November 2018 (UTC)

Please find below the source: https://worldpoverty.io/ Tanmay0186 (talk) 09:35, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

As of today the clock is at 8% unless I'm missing something. Is there a source like an article that clearly states the update you are requesting to make? ♪♫Alucard 16♫♪ 18:47, 15 November 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 6 December 2018

there is a change in GDP RANK. we are 5 th rank in gdp but there is 6th written. please change as our gdp is more than UK Shailender reddy (talk) 07:40, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. ‑‑ElHef (Meep?) 15:19, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

Nominal GDP to be updated @ 7.2% for 2019

Nominal GDP should read 3.0530 trillion USD

GDP per capita also needs updating to USD 2006

India position on nominal GDP to rise to 5th from 6th overtaking UK — Preceding unsigned comment added by 14.141.147.33 (talk) 05:54, 12 January 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 19 January 2019

Shanbs1 (talk) 05:49, 19 January 2019 (UTC)

therisapalli cheppeed or copper plate incription is not for a christian person but to Mr. Joseph raban a jew settled in then cochin principality. it granted permission for trade to persons registered under him to do bussiness in the town and inside the fort. these traders were from ezhavar community of kerala who were mainly into trading, farming , indusrties etc.

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. DannyS712 (talk) 05:55, 19 January 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 5 February 2019

There is a need to update the Indian Economy's ranking in light of new data. The Indian economy is now the world's Fifth largest by nominal GDP and 3rd largest by PPP. The article's statement that India is the world's seventh largest by nominal GDP is outdated. RajvirBatra (talk) 16:19, 5 February 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Dolotta (talk) 20:18, 6 February 2019 (UTC)

Add revenue ppp

Lets add revenue ppp (2.6 trillion$) Adityabraggs (talk) 17:05, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

I request semi edit

Need to change populaion under poverty Adityabraggs (talk) 11:23, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 11 March 2019

Change Nominal GDP from $2.948 trillion to $2.848 trillion as it has been incorrectly copied from the source, the IMF website given below:

https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/weo/2018/01/weodata/weorept.aspx?pr.x=48&pr.y=6&sy=2017&ey=2018&scsm=1&ssd=1&sort=country&ds=.&br=1&c=534&s=NGDPD%2CPPPGDP%2CNGDPDPC%2CPPPPC&grp=0&a= Shre rj (talk) 09:40, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

 Done Danski454 (talk) 19:49, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

Regarding Nominal GDP of India

I just saw US Economy page on Wikipedia the US Nominal GDP is 21.1 trillion but that is IMF approximation same goes for China they also used IMF approximation so why we are not using the same approximation for India we should change India's GDP from 2.7 trillion to 2.9 trillion.And if you want to verify open US Economy wiki page and check out the citation for US Nominal GDP. And also according to IMF estimate India is currently the world's 5th largest economy.Here is the link.https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/weo/2019/01/weodata/weorept.aspx?pr.x=76&pr.y=17&sy=2019&ey=2020&scsm=1&ssd=1&sort=country&ds=.&br=1&c=924%2C132%2C134%2C534%2C158%2C112%2C111&s=NGDPD&grp=0&a= User:DataCrusade1999|DataCrusade1999]] (talk) 17:29, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 9 February 2019

India is now sixth largest economy of the world not seventh. 2409:4041:609:AF61:6B7B:F847:602C:BE9 (talk) 11:25, 9 February 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. ‑‑ElHef (Meep?) 14:42, 9 February 2019 (UTC)

https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/weo/2019/01/weodata/weorept.aspx?pr.x=39&pr.y=17&sy=2017&ey=2021&scsm=1&ssd=1&sort=country&ds=.&br=1&c=534&s=NGDPD,PPPGDP,NGDPDPC,PPPPC&grp=0&a= We can check UK and France but India is the sixth largest Economy in the world. But I am using IMF approximation because every other countries Economy page on wiki are also using IMF approximation like US and China.DataCrusade1999 (talk) 04:27, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

Discrepancy in the introduction

India is currently the 5th largest Economy in the word when it comes to Nominal GDP this is according to IMF so please make change ASAP here is the IMF Link.https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/weo/2019/01/weodata/weorept.aspx?pr.x=76&pr.y=17&sy=2019&ey=2020&scsm=1&ssd=1&sort=country&ds=.&br=1&c=924%2C132%2C134%2C534%2C158%2C112%2C111&s=NGDPD&grp=0&a= DataCrusade1999 (talk) 06:57, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

GDP nominal and ppp for 2019

Gdp nominal 2,957.720 Gdp ppp 11,412.971 Per capita nominal 2,188.029 Per capita ppp 8,442.960 Source- International monetary fund IMF

  https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/weo/2018/02/weodata/weorept.aspx?pr.x=60&pr.y=8&sy=2019&ey=2019&ssd=1&sort=country&ds=.&br=1&c=512%2C668%2C914%2C672%2C612%2C946%2C614%2C137%2C311%2C546%2C213%2C962%2C911%2C674%2C314%2C676%2C193%2C548%2C122%2C556%2C912%2C678%2C313%2C181%2C419%2C867%2C513%2C682%2C316%2C684%2C913%2C273%2C124%2C868%2C339%2C921%2C638%2C948%2C514%2C943%2C218%2C686%2C963%2C688%2C616%2C518%2C223%2C728%2C516%2C836%2C918%2C558%2C748%2C138%2C618%2C196%2C624%2C278%2C522%2C692%2C622%2C694%2C156%2C142%2C626%2C449%2C628%2C564%2C228%2C565%2C924%2C283%2C233%2C853%2C632%2C288%2C636%2C293%2C634%2C566%2C238%2C964%2C662%2C182%2C960%2C359%2C423%2C453%2C935%2C968%2C128%2C922%2C611%2C714%2C321%2C862%2C243%2C135%2C248%2C716%2C469%2C456%2C253%2C722%2C642%2C942%2C643%2C718%2C939%2C724%2C734%2C576%2C644%2C936%2C819%2C961%2C172%2C813%2C132%2C726%2C646%2C199%2C648%2C733%2C915%2C184%2C134%2C524%2C652%2C361%2C174%2C362%2C328%2C364%2C258%2C732%2C656%2C366%2C654%2C144%2C336%2C146%2C263%2C463%2C268%2C528%2C532%2C923%2C944%2C738%2C176%2C578%2C534%2C537%2C536%2C742%2C429%2C866%2C433%2C369%2C178%2C744%2C436%2C186%2C136%2C925%2C343%2C869%2C158%2C746%2C439%2C926%2C916%2C466%2C664%2C112%2C826%2C111%2C542%2C298%2C967%2C927%2C443%2C846%2C917%2C299%2C544%2C582%2C941%2C474%2C446%2C754%2C666%2C698&s=NGDP_RPCH%2CNGDPD%2CPPPGDP%2CNGDPDPC%2CPPPPC&grp=0&a= Silentassassin265 (talk) 14:49, 17 June 2019 (UTC)

Please edit it

Silentassassin265 (talk) 15:54, 17 June 2019 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

• 1 AD to 2003 AD Historical Trends in global distribution of GDP China India Western Europe USA Middle East.png

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 16:07, 3 July 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 1 September 2019

Typo in "health household savings" -> "healthy ..." Raipta (talk) 04:46, 1 September 2019 (UTC)

 Done. KREOH (talk) 04:52, 1 September 2019 (UTC)

Change as per source

In the introduction India is mentioned as second in start up hub rank whereas the source states it to be fourth also the year is wrong. Kindly make the necessary changes. Abhinav0908 (talk) 17:00, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

Hi @Abhinav0908:!

Can you provide a source for those claims? It would be useful for making changes. Best wishes --Lakshmisreekanth (talk) 04:06, 13 September 2019 (UTC)

Lead Section

Hi @KREOH: I have added new information in the lead section, since you are an active contributor to economic articles can you tell me is there anything new that I need to add to the lead. Read the entire lead then tell me what is required.--Aakanksha55 (talk) 05:56, 15 September 2019 (UTC)

@Aakanksha55: There is nothing about India's economy before the 1990s. If you're interested you could go from there. KREOH (talk) 22:24, 15 September 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 1 October 2019

In the introductory portion (3rd paragraph) of the wiki page, change the contribution of agriculture to GDP which is written 50%. That figure is correct for the year 1950, but now the contribution of agriculture to GDP is 15.87%, as mentioned in the same wiki page itself, on the right column. Here goes an external reliable link/source that asserts the same: http://statisticstimes.com/economy/sectorwise-gdp-contribution-of-india.php Sambitroy610 (talk) 20:46, 1 October 2019 (UTC)

 Done but not by me... --Goldsztajn (talk) 12:56, 2 October 2019 (UTC)

New GDP figures for 2020

The new projected gdp numbers for 2020 needs to be updated, Nominal GDP to 3.25 trillion USD and PPP to 12.75 USD trillions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 14.141.147.33 (talk) 07:35, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

India a country of farming

As we know that inda is a country of collection of village. in our lovely country many people lived and they servive on the farming. they are all days and night farming to update is economy — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rajsharma5y (talk • contribs) 11:20, 25 January 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 27 February 2020

Add the following to the "Remittances" section

See also: Hawala, Hundi, FATF, Indian diaspora, Greater India, and Indianisation

Justification for inclusion: Following deepen the CONTEXT: Hawala and Hundi are also remittances system of/to/from India. Their inclusion enriches the context by linking it to historical and contemporary modes. FATF governs money transfer/laundering/terror funding which are important issues.

Indian diaspora, Greater India and Indianisation drive and influence the remittances. 58.182.176.169 (talk) 04:55, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

 Not done. There's alraedy a {{Main}} pointer. An excessive list of "See also"s for a section is generally inappropriate, especially when it's a mere 3 sentences long. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 16:29, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 27 February 2020

List of the largest trading partners of India- China, USA, UAE, Saudi Arabia, Switzerland, Germany, Hong Kong, Indonesia, South Korea, Malaysia, Singapore, Japan, Iran, Iraq, South Africa and Australia. Megha Parmarr (talk) 09:16, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

 Not done. It's not clear what changes you want to make. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 16:30, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 29 February 2020

trading partner Megha Parmarr (talk) 03:56, 29 February 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Goldsztajn (talk) 09:39, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 28 February 2020

change "India's largest trading partners are China, USA, UAE, Saudi Arabia, Switzerland, Germany, Hong Kong, Indonesia, South Korea, and Malaysia" to "[largest trading partners] are China, USA, UAE, Saudi Arabia, Switzerland, Germany, Hong Kong, Indonesia, South Korea, Singapore, Germany, Hong Kong, South Africa, South Korea, Australia and Malaysia" Megha Parmarr (talk) 07:08, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

 Done I've used the latest data from the Department of Commerce and just listed the top 10.Goldsztajn (talk) 09:53, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

More information about govt budgets in the article?

Can there be some more information in this article about the union budget of India over the years... and in turn linked to the main article? DTM (talk) 11:16, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

Please could editors here have a look at "Economic impact of the 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic in India"

Please could editors editing this have a look at "Economic impact of the 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic in India". Please try to improve it in any way you can. Also, would a seperate subsection for the article be suitable here? DTM (talk) 09:58, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 23 June 2020

2405:204:A7:4B0E:DDD0:5220:F8E7:84E5 (talk) 04:40, 23 June 2020 (UTC)

India nominal gdp is 4 trillion $

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. JTP ^{(talk • contribs)} 05:24, 23 June 2020 (UTC)

India's total foreign exchange (Forex) reserves stand at around US$ 517.637 billion on 17th July 2020 Rajeshtrp (talk) 08:36, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

The given information on Wikipedia about India's forex reserves is wrong

India's total foreign exchange (Forex) reserves stand at around US$ 517.637 billion on 17th July 2020 Rajeshtrp (talk) 08:36, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

The values are correct as per the RBI's weekly statistical supplement Debitpixie 💬 09:53, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 28 July 2020

India's total foreign exchange (Forex) reserves stand at around US$ 517.637 billion on 17th July 2020 Rajeshtrp (talk) 08:33, 28 July 2020 (UTC) Plz remove the wrong information of India's forex reserves

India's total foreign exchange (Forex) reserves stand at around US$ 517.637 billion on 17th July 2020 Rajeshtrp (talk) 08:33, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Interstellarity (talk) 12:18, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

Economic indicator data

Applaused has been adding data from IMF staff estimates for 2020 economic indicators, I disagree and think we should wait for MOSPI data. Kindly put forth your opinions here so we can reach consensus. Prolix 💬 07:04, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Applaused is now edit warring. Prolix 💬 07:06, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Prolix so when india economy in skyrocketing we allow to include data next year. but when in bottom we not allow? beside, it's the same source from IMF website.

The 'same' source doesn't match up with the values that were on the article from the previous estimates for the year. Explain why IMF estimates should be preferred over MOSPI data. Prolix 💬 07:35, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Indian economic system

Hi All @KREOH: @Goldsztajn: @Prolix: In the lead section of the first paragraph it states India is a "market economy". But sources provided does not confirm clearly that Indian economy is a market economy. Moreover technically speaking no economy in the world is fully market economy especially during times of recession governments across the world do intervene through monetary and fiscal policy. And governments introduce huge stimulus package in a Keynesian economic style. In Indian context from 1950-1991 India was strictly mixed economy with heavy influence of socialist policies from 1991 it adopted free market system, so rather mention "mixed-market economy" or "social market and market-orientated economy" or mixed-free market economy which ever you find suitable. Remember finding sources which quotes exactly these words would be difficult. So a brief note needs in ref needs to be mentioned since users won't get confused. And if you guys find good scholarly sourced then pls feel free to add. Thanks--103.102.116.225 (talk) 06:28, 2 November 2020 (UTC)

India was not the world's largest economy

Article should be monitored for whitewashing history by pro-Indian editors. India is not the world's largest economy, china was, see

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_regions_by_past_GDP_(PPP) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.132.99.144 (talk) 03:25, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 3 January 2020

Please update "Labour force by occupation" in infobox: Agriculture: 41%, Industry: 26%, Services: 32% (FY 2020).

Update in infobox "Exports" figure 313.4 billion (2020) and "Import" figure 474.7 billion (2020). Source. Don't forget to add the source. Thanks--202.78.236.186 (talk) 06:04, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

Please provide sources for the labour force figures. Your source for the exports is broken. Prolix 💬 13:35, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

Prolix I have given the sources for Labour force and also updated the source for export and import figures. Click on "Top n countries" you'll get those figures for trade. Thanks--202.78.236.186 (talk) 15:05, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

 Done Please verify Prolix 💬 18:45, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

Prolix Thanks Prolix. Could you please update few more figures in infobox.

Please consider making an account and updating these figures yourself, you clearly have some editing experience. If this is not possible for some reason, do let me know. Prolix 💬 07:30, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 4 January 2020

Please update the following data in Infobox and also update its given sources

Update "Current account" -$24.6 billion (2019-20) Source

Update "Gross external debt" US$ 558.5 billion (FY 2020) Source

Update "Net international investment position" US$ 379.3 billion (FY 2020) Source

Update "Revenues" ₹34.45 trillion / 18.08% of GDP Source

Update "Expenses" ₹59.36 trillion / 31.15% of GDP Above source. Thanks--202.78.236.186 (talk) 18:01, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

 Done Thanks, Pulisi (talk) 16:57, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

Pulisi Please update the date for "Revenues", "Expenses" and "Current account" it should be 2020. Thanks--202.78.236.186 (talk) 04:37, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

Done Thanks!, Pulisi (talk) 08:49, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 6 January 2020

Please update the following data in Infobox and also update its given sources

Update "GDP by sector" Agriculture: 16%, Industry: 25%, Manufacturing: 14%, Services: 49.9% Source World Bank (FY 2019)

Update "FDI stock" Inward: $51 billion Source UNCTAD (2019) Thanks--202.78.236.186 (talk) 05:09, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

 Done Thanks!, Pulisi (talk) 08:57, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

Thanks Pulisi.--202.78.236.186 (talk) 14:59, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

Kingdom of Mysore wages

Hey, my problem with the claims about Mysore, stems from this discussion [6]. Pleas read it. The claim that Mysore wages were higher then British is original research. Parthasarathi actually says that "At the moment, the quantitative data are inconclusive, but the figures for India that have been obtained from primary sources are radically different from the scattered earnings data found in the secondary literature. This indicates that more research is needed on the basis of primary evidence for India". Neither he nor Sivramkrishna say that Mysoreans wages were higher than British, this is simply original research. I think this should be rewritten more neutrally, like "according to Parthasarathi and Sivramkrishna the grain wages of weavers in India were as high as British", or something like this. DMKR2005 (talk) 17:12, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

DMKR2005, I have read the relevant parts of the book (albeit not in too much detail) and I'll have to agree, the statement does indeed seem like original research. I would much rather the statement be reworded to read what the original authors actually intended to get across as opposed to simply removing the content like you did.

If you would be willing to make the relevant changes please do go ahead. Thank you for engaging in discussion, I really respect that. Have a good day! Prolix 💬 17:58, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll rewrite it, when I have time DMKR2005 (talk) 23:45, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

Hey, just saying that I used "maybe higher", because according to Sivramkrishna [7], which is the source that Parthasarathi used in the book: " Before anyone jumps to conclusions about living standards in southern India in the early nineteenth century, we hasten to add a cautionary note on the state of the economy at the time of Buchanan Journey. We had mentioned earlier that our paper is based entirely on observations recorded at one point of time", on page 729. And of course Parthasarathi himself said that more research is needed, before any conclusion could be drawn. Although I think your changes are fine, though I would prefer to use "could be as high" DMKR2005 (talk) 16:24, 10 January 2021 (UTC)

DMKR2005, added in 'likely'. I think that this line, "However they concluded that due to the scarcity of data, it was hard to draw definitive conclusions, and that more research was required." is enough to convey to the reader that the data here is not definitive and that a lot of this is based on assumptions and inconclusive information. Prolix 💬 18:38, 10 January 2021 (UTC)

Yeah, thanks. It's fine than DMKR2005 (talk) 19:08, 10 January 2021 (UTC)

India was not the world's fastest economy

During 2014-2018 India was not the fastest growing economy, China was; Indian government changed the calculation of the GDP figures to deceive others.

Exactly

Tayyab Ahmad67 (talk) 21:32, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

Original research about Mughal labour

I'm just gonna copy, part of my criticism from Mughal empire talk page: "Mughal India's workforce had a higher percentage in the non-primary sector than Europe's workforce did at the time" is referenced to Cipolla. But Cipolla says that "Because of lack of statistical data, no one will ever know with any degree of accuracy what percentage of European population was employed in the primary sector". Ciopolla says that even for mid 18 century the data is imprecise. Most importantly neither Cipolla nor Yazdani say that Mughals had higher percentage in the non primary sector then europe. This statement is simply original research, combining two sources to draw conclusion . In fact I've never saw any economic historian saying anything like this.

I am also skeptical about the claim that Mughals had higher per-capita agricultural output and standards of consumption. The cited source is Franks's article, which in itself cites Irfan Habib, Percival Spear, and Ashok Desai.The same source also says that: "Ken Pomeranz(1997) however suggest that European standards of consumption were higher than Asian one", which is kind of strange, as Pomeranz would later write Great Divergence, where he would argue, that standards of living were comparable, at least for China. They seem to me quite dated authors, as a lot of new information have been produced since, from Broadberry, Gupta, Parthasarathi, de Zwart and others. Some of them disagree with there conclusion while others back it up. For newest data see [8]. In regards to the claim we should at least mention that Frank is talking about 17 century. DMKR2005 (talk) 17:39, 21 January 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 22 February 2021

GDP per capita of india should be 2029$ in nominal but it is showing less ,you can calculate it 2405:204:221F:B26:0:0:BE2:A8A4 (talk) 06:36, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. – robertsky (talk) 17:50, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 12 May 2021

2401:4900:47D7:E7A5:0:0:620:33BA (talk) 14:01, 12 May 2021 (UTC)

GDP of India is 3.15 trillion making it the 5th largest economy, surpassing U.K.

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 14:06, 12 May 2021 (UTC)

Not accurate DEBAISH GHOSH MAJUMDAR (talk) 13:53, 18 June 2021 (UTC)

protected edit request on 18 June 2021 (2)

growth =

• 1.83% (Q1 21/22e)(National Statistical Office)

DEBAISH GHOSH MAJUMDAR (talk) 01:16, 18 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. – NJD-DE (talk) 10:59, 20 June 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 18 June 2021 (4)

• FOREIGN RESERVES = $605.086billion (18 June 2021) (4th) DEBAISH GHOSH MAJUMDAR (talk) 12:10, 18 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: Source says $608.081 billion. – NJD-DE (talk) 11:03, 20 June 2021 (UTC)

References

protected edit request on 18 June 2021 (2)

population = 1,392,000,000 (2021 est.) DEBAISH GHOSH MAJUMDAR (talk) 11:16, 18 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Article infobox already says that there's a population of 1,392,000,000 – NJD-DE (talk) 11:08, 20 June 2021 (UTC)

References

Semi-protected edit request on 18 June 2021

gdp =

• $3.06 trillion (nominal; 2021(Q1)est.)

DEBAISH GHOSH MAJUMDAR (talk) 01:05, 18 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. ◎ | melecie | t 01:16, 18 June 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia.org DEBAISH GHOSH MAJUMDAR (talk) 13:54, 18 June 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia can't be used as source on Wikipedia.– NJD-DE (talk) 11:14, 20 June 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 18 June 2021 (6)

| population = 1,393,012,692 (18 June , 2021est.)

• Population Growth Rate = 0.993%(18 June , 2021est.)

}} DEBAISH GHOSH MAJUMDAR (talk) 13:52, 18 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. – NJD-DE (talk) 11:14, 20 June 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 18 June 2021 (7)

• Population = 132,003,426

Population growth rate = 0.99

• GDP(Nominal) = $3.07trillions(Q1 2021/22)

Nominal (per capita) =$2,193 (Q1 2021/2022) GDP (PPP) = 10.23trillions (Q1 2021/2022) PPP per capita = $7,336 (Q1 2021/2022)

• GDP growth rate = 3.8% (JANUARY , 2021/2022)

1.6% ( JUNE 2021/22)

• Foreign exchange reserves = $600.09billions (2021)

• Poverty = 9.21% in extreme poverty(2021)

11.21% below $1.90/day (2021) 38.42 below $3.20/day (2021)

• HDI= 0.645 , medium (2021)

• Inflation rate = 4.78% (2021) DEBAISH GHOSH MAJUMDAR (talk) 14:24, 18 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. – NJD-DE (talk) 11:14, 20 June 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 20 June 2021

• Poverty = 6.09% in extreme poverty(2020) Talk:Economy of India/Archive 4/decrease positive DEBAISH GHOSH MAJUMDAR (talk) 05:41, 20 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. – NJD-DE (talk) 11:14, 20 June 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 18 June 2021 (5)

population = 13,000,04385(2021 est.)

• Population growth = 1.078

| gdp =

• $3.05 trillion (nominalNominal; 2021 est.)
• $10.21trillion21 trillion (PPP; 2021 est.)

| gdp rank =

• 6th (nominal; 2020)

DEBAISH GHOSH MAJUMDAR (talk) 13:38, 18 June 2021 (UTC)

References

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. – NJD-DE (talk) 11:17, 20 June 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 18 June 2021 (2)

caption = Mumbai, the financial centre of India captipn = Bangalore , the Silicon valley of India DEBAISH GHOSH MAJUMDAR (talk) 11:24, 18 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Do you want a skyline image of Bangalore added to the infobox as well? – NJD-DE (talk) 11:20, 20 June 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 18 June 2021 (3)

• Inward: $59.64 billion (Q4 2020/21)
• Outward: $18.79 billion (Q4 2020/2021) DEBAISH GHOSH MAJUMDAR (talk) 11:45, 18 June 2021 (UTC)

References

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. – NJD-DE (talk) 11:20, 20 June 2021 (UTC)

Average salary in India

Please don't revert. There are some source they shows different results.

• Source one
• Source two

90% Indian's earn less then 12,000 per month. Then how can it be 32,000? Dinesh | Talk 03:43, 6 July 2021 (UTC)

Because we are talking about the average salary out here NOT the median salary. The number would have been much lesser had we stated the median salary. - user:addie293 — Preceding undated comment added 16:00, 6 July 2021 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Pumapaparti.N.rao.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 21:42, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 2 August 2021

Please

1. "expand" this table India's historic GDP by adding data from the "subsections" in the "Economy_of_India" article, and

1. then insert that expanded right on top of the "Economy_of_India" article as the fist subsection titled "Summary breakdown of India's historic GDP" or similar but self-self descriptive such heading. Thank you.

58.182.176.169 (talk) 20:32, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Please provide the table with markup you'd like added. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 21:47, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 6 August 2021

Please this somewhere, perhaps at the end in "see also" section or "see also" navigation template in history section.

• GDP of India (1-1947 CE)

58.182.176.169 (talk) 18:29, 6 August 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: I don't think there's a benefit to linking to a single person's estimate of the GDP of the entire Indian subcontinent, especially as that is not "India" as we know it today. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 10:56, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 17 August 2021

Please add the following quote to the "British era" section:

"Company official John Sullivan observed in the 1840s: 'The little court disappears - the capital decays - trade languishes - the capital decays - the people are impoverished - the Englishman flourishes, and acts like a sponge, drawing up riches from the banks of the Ganges, and squeezing them down upon the banks of the Thames'. India that the British East India Company conquered was no primitive or barren land, but the glittering jewel of the medieval world. Its accomplishments and prosperity - 'the wealth created by vast and varied industries' - were succinctly described by a Yorkshire-born American Unitarian minister, J. T. Sunderland. At the beginning of eighteenth century, as the British economic historian Angus Maddison has demonstrated, India's share of world economy was 23 per cent, as large as all of Europe put together. By the time the British departed India, it had dropped to just over 3 per cent. The reason was simple: India was governed for the benefit of Britain. Britain's rise for 200 years was financed by its depredation in India."

— Shashi Tharoor, The Looting of India, Inglorious Empire: What the British Did to India (2017)

Thanks.

58.182.176.169 (talk) 14:55, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit semi-protected}} template. This quote seems overly long for the section. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 15:14, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

References

Semi-protected edit request on 24 September 2021

GDP of India is currently 3.17 trillion dollars. 110.226.9.23 (talk) 11:54, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 12:09, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

in india birds are migration and die

india other country are not to save a bird they cannot intrest in nature the people can be used artificial thing people have not to attached environment these can be besiege in their office work and another time with their cell phone other thing the birds are die to vibration and harmful ray of trasformer and cell phone — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2401:4900:471C:9CCB:ADC1:D071:6B77:D070 (talk) 14:10, 3 October 2021 (UTC)

World Economic History : GDP India and World

According to Pradeep Rathore economic historian Angus Maddison in his book The World Economy: A Millennial Perspective, India was the richest country in the world and had the world's largest economy during 0 BCE and 1000 BCE. Also for most of the period when China was the dominant economy in the world, India held the second position of the largest economy.

(Economic facts and statistics are missing in economic section and Wikipedia article. Include the above reality into India main wikipedia article.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 106.204.24.0 (talk) 21:57, 20 May 2013‎ (UTC)

References

Cite error

There is currently a ref in the infobox named https://worldpoverty.io/headline, which is undefined (as the reference URL is being used as the refname).
It was introduced in this edit on September 1st.

The current ref:
<ref name="https://worldpoverty.io/headline" />

should be reformatted as:
<ref>[https://worldpoverty.io/headline People in the world living in extreme poverty]</ref>

Instead, if the source is unreliable, the details could be reverted back to the previous details, as shown in the edit details.

Thanks 89.241.33.89 (talk) 16:01, 10 October 2021 (UTC)

 Done --Ferien (talk) 20:29, 10 October 2021 (UTC)

Thank you 89.241.33.89 (talk) 20:55, 10 October 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 10 October 2021

Update required: Inflation rate of India fell in Aug 2021 and is 5.3% the page still shows data of June 2021 kindly update it as soon as possible. MindOfOm (talk) 04:19, 10 October 2021 (UTC)

References

COMPLAIN REGARDING REQUEST

On 10th October 2021 I had given a valid edit request with sources yet it has not been attended to, however I noticed other requests which were made after mine were attended to, it is not ok that a page this huge has not updated inflation rate since June 2021, kindly do the needful, Thank You!

MindOfOm (talk) 03:51, 13 October 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 1 November 2021

I am sending a response because there have been changes of the years. I want to correct the mistakes. 173.183.161.26 (talk) 00:06, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 00:35, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

GDP

India has the 5th highest gdp thing suka's 2A02:A451:11F9:1:B036:438A:E7CA:65DF (talk) 18:25, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Very outdated

This article is very outdated. I currently don't have much free time. If anyone is able to edit this article. Please do it. I saw some places where the data given is from 2011!! A lot has changed since then. Please look into it if anyone has time. Thank you!! ~Spirit 103.253.203.132 (talk) 02:42, 24 December 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 8 January 2022 (2)

India's economy is now 3.1 trillion $. Mavihs rundip (talk) 07:55, 8 January 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made.Kpddg ^(talk) 12:53, 8 January 2022 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

• South-mumbai-2020.jpg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 15:07, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 19 January 2022

User:APPU suddenly changed the lead section of the article on 18th January 2022, where he states "mixed economy" whereas it was mentioned "market economy" as per source. He changed by mistake, the source states market economy. Please change to earlier version. Thanks--202.78.236.72 (talk) 06:39, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

pinging APPU for inputs. hemantha (brief) 13:03, 20 January 2022 (UTC)

I think not. The first citation has no mention of market economy. The second citation does not have an explicit mention of market economy, at least to be found by thissearch. The third citation is 24th page of a book where it is stated that "Despite India's emerging market economy being relatively resilient, it has experienced limited integration with global trade.". It does not say that India is a market economy. All it is saying is India's market economy is emerging. Having a market economy is possible in a mixed economy too. On the contrary there are ample academic sources saying that India is a mixed economy. See here. https://www.google.com/search?q=india+mixed+economy Appu (talk) 10:28, 21 January 2022 (UTC)

Economic Condition of India.

Economic Condition of India. 2409:4043:79E:DECD:4237:1556:59EA:3AB9 (talk) 02:37, 30 January 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Dinesh | Talk 05:33, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 31 January 2022

please the gdp growth rate of india in 2020-2021 from -7.3% to -6.6% Centriputal (talk) 19:18, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

 Reviewing request. Dinesh | Talk 07:50, 2 February 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 31 January 2022

change the gdp growth in 2020-2021 from -7.3% to 6.6% Centriputal (talk) 19:15, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

 Reviewing request. Dinesh | Talk 07:51, 2 February 2022 (UTC)

Per capita income source

The article does not mention the number in USD 106.51.142.88 (talk) 20:15, 29 January 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Dinesh | Talk 07:59, 2 February 2022 (UTC)

Picture change

Plwase change the picture of mumbai and change it with so beautifull skyline of mumbai Poppat muhammad (talk) 07:24, 3 February 2022 (UTC)

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit semi-protected}} template. Dinesh | Talk 09:04, 3 February 2022 (UTC)

GDP Growth Data Confusion

Hi @Ruk469: Please check this official MOSPI Source [9] or this [10] or [11] all three MOSPI source states GDP contracted by more than 7%. Don't go by Indian news report they're unreliable and publish bullshit news most of time. Their credibility and journalistic qualities are highly questionable. Thanks--Mariam57 (talk) 13:46, 25 March 2022 (UTC)

@Mariam57 I am not talking about media. Am talking about the latest press note on 2nd advanced estimates by MoSPI. I also attached the source for the same. talking about the "bullshit news", you are completely wrong here. Ruk469 (talk) 14:07, 25 March 2022 (UTC)

@Ruk469: Ok you had added the official MOSPI source. Great. Thanks for correcting me.--Mariam57 (talk) 18:02, 25 March 2022 (UTC)

@Ruk469: However, you added official source. You can add quarter-wise growth rate in infobox. Do not add yearly growth rate, unless IMF or World bank didn't published latest estimates. Dinesh | Talk 04:36, 26 March 2022 (UTC)

@Dineshswamiin: Is there any problem if the official data is there along with the estimated data? Ruk469 (talk) 05:15, 26 March 2022 (UTC)

@Ruk469:, @Dineshswamiin: You guys can keep either IMF or World Bank data, both are reliable, both of them publish annual growth rates. I think no need to provide quarterly as it be very difficult for ordinary viewer to read, moreover, the infobox would look very clutter. It better to provide estimate and forecast year and also provide current year as well. Official Govt source can be used for current fiscal year, but for estimate and forecast year should always be from IMF or World Bank source.--Mariam57 (talk) 09:40, 26 March 2022 (UTC)

@Ruk469: We're using IMF figure for GDP and, PPP. Second reason is Indian rupees is managed floating exchange currency. If you convert GDP by IMF into Indian rupees, growth rate will be less than -7.3 (less than IMF estimate, 2020) and, if you'll convert GDP by government into USD, growth rate will be higher than -6.6 (government estimate). Of course, official government data is more relevant but not for infobox. For the same reason, we don't use Forex reserves in Indian rupees. Official data by government can be used for GDP by sector etc. Dinesh | Talk 03:38, 27 March 2022 (UTC)

@Dineshswamiin: Understood. Thanks for correcting me. Ruk469 (talk) 03:44, 27 March 2022 (UTC)

Related to my lates edits

Hey guys i have recently updated import/export data of indian economy acc. To the new data by ministry of commerce , few days earlier also i triedbut my changes were reverted bcz i didnt clearly gave proof . Bt this time i added citations to all my new data , its more elaborate (link to govt website : ( https://commerce.gov.in/ ) plase click on "latest trade figures" tab there you can get all data of what i was editing + i am new to wikipedia so it takes multiple edits for me to add up new things , plz bear with me : ) Poppat muhammad (talk) 15:24, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

Change unemployment rate

Change unemployment rate i read article of ECONOMIC TIMES That unmployment rate has gone down from 49.7% to 37.2%  : ) Poppat muhammad (talk) 16:34, 5 April 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: According to the page's protection level you should be able to edit the page yourself. If you seem to be unable to, please reopen the request with further details. Dinesh | Talk 07:29, 7 April 2022 (UTC)

Update export statistics

Latest data pf export statistics is out for March 2022 and data on page is of (Apr-Feb of FYI 2021-22) please update data according to (Apr-Mar of FYI 2021-22)

Yours sincerely , Than you, Poppat muhammad (talk) 16:36, 5 April 2022 (UTC)

 Later: I'll do it after publishing report. Dinesh | Talk 07:32, 7 April 2022 (UTC)

Hey dinesh , its me again ! I recently noticed that Export/Import data is still stuck at Apr-Feb (2021-22) , as we know now its 15th Apr 2022 , new FYI has started , i think you should update export figures for complete FY(2021-2022) :)

I read articles which said export is now $669.95 Billion Poppat muhammad (talk) 05:28, 15 April 2022 (UTC)

Not now... Data for FY 2021-22 isn't published yet. Dinesh | Talk 09:08, 15 April 2022 (UTC)

please check the link before reverting the changes As data of export/import for March 2022 is out on https://commerce.gov.in/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/Screenshot_3.png So i added up previous data of (Apr-Feb 2021-22 ) with March 2022 It is accurate up to 2 decimal places ...... THANK YOU : ) Poppat muhammad (talk) 13:09, 19 April 2022 (UTC)

 Already declined : It is already answered that Financial Year 2021-22 have to end and thus updated accordingly. Sneha04 ^💬 18:49, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

Update Export and Import figures

Export and Import figures are written wrong here in the page. It is only showing the export and import figures of merchandise goods without adding the export and import of services which is wrong.

The total export of india (Merchandise + services) for 2022 is $668.89 billion.

The total import of india (merchandise + services) for 2022 is $756.68 billion.

Please update these export and import figures by verifying the figures from the official governmental published report.

Here is the reference of export and import figures for 2022 from india's official governmental website: https://commerce.gov.in/trade-statistics/latest-trade-figures/

Requesting you to update the export and import figures as soon as possible. Thanks. Contribution888 (talk) 05:36, 24 April 2022 (UTC)

 Later Dinesh | Talk 10:44, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

The export and import figures are still not updated. The figures are still wrong. Contribution888 (talk) 07:16, 26 April 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: It is already addressed that the data provided is provisional or estimates. The latest release is of february 2022. Following the latest release or end of FY2021-22, the data will be updated accordingly. Sneha04 ^💬 09:54, 26 April 2022 (UTC)

No you are wrong Sneha. To see the total export and import amount of whole year, download the pdf of "India’s Foreign Trade: March 2022" from this the official governmental website: https://commerce.gov.in/trade-statistics/latest-trade-figures/

Its clearly mentioned in the pdf. Everyone can see from the official governmental source. Again requesting you to update the actual figures of export and import. Don't mislead the figures. Thanks. Contribution888 (talk) 19:52, 26 April 2022 (UTC)

 Done Dinesh | Talk 02:26, 27 April 2022 (UTC)

I am still not able to see the actual export and import figures. It is still showing the wrong export and import figures. Thanks. Contribution888 (talk) 07:58, 27 April 2022 (UTC)

 Already done Import-export data in infobox is excluding service Import-export. Dinesh | Talk 10:23, 27 April 2022 (UTC)

Update Population below poverty line

population below poverty line in india 6% on less than $3.2/day. But in the page someone has updated wrong by writing 46% on less than $3.2/day.

2 days ago it was showing correct poverty population percentage of 6% on less than $ 3.2/day. Now, someone has changed the poverty population percentage to 46% on less than $ 3.2/day which is wrong.

Requesting you to update the Population below poverty line percentage of $3.2/day to 6%. Thanks. Contribution888 (talk) 05:52, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

 Reviewing... Dinesh | Talk 10:46, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

Is it still being reviewed ? It does not even requires to be reviewed because a profile called "Maryam54" just changed the figure from 6% to 46% without any reason. Here just need to undid the wrong change made by profile "Maryam54" which is baseless and misleading information. Requesting you to revert back the change to 6% from 46% as soon as possible. Cause the figure of 46% is just baseless and misleading. Thanks. Contribution888 (talk) 07:51, 27 April 2022 (UTC)

If these kinds of things will keep happening on the wikipedia pages then the trust of Wikipedia would be decreased in people's eyes. So it is our reponsibility to correct the wrong and misleading informations as soon as possible. So that trust of wikipedia would not be damaged. Cause millions of people read wikipedia page daily and they don't deserve to read wrong and misleading information. Thanks. Contribution888 (talk) 07:55, 27 April 2022 (UTC)

@Contribution888: Maybe it was a mistake. He/she provided a source. I changed it 6 to 61.7. You can click here (page-203) to view source. Dinesh | Talk 15:59, 1 May 2022 (UTC)

World Bank releases this report annually and sometimes on Spring end, Certainly, It is 61.7. Check the page no. 10 of this [12] Sneha04 ^💬 02:26, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

Geography

Population of India and economic activities 2409:4066:E15:109A:0:0:EACA:880C (talk) 07:12, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Please reopen the request with further details. Sneha04 ^💬 17:59, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 13 May 2022

Compared to previous governments , India has developed very quickly under Modi government. 2402:8100:387F:8424:1:0:F7E:DA16 (talk) 02:51, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Hemantha (talk) 02:56, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

Suggestion for adding MPI data

We should add the multidimensional poverty index(mpi) data released by Niti Aayog in November 2021 which states that 25.01% are mpi poor. Ruk469 (talk) 05:26, 11 May 2022 (UTC)

Check it careful, feel free to edit it! Dinesh | Talk 09:26, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

Regarding Figures as per citation and dispute resolution by seeking Consensus

Pinging @Mariam57, Dineshswamiin, Ohnoitsjamie, and Fylindfotberserk: for Solution or Conensus. Here is the issue, recent changes made by User:Dineshswamiin, User:Mariam57 and others including me in Good faith with reliable citation are being reverted without convincing reasons by User:Contribution888 acting like WP:DONTGETIT.

I could create an RfC but RfCs are time consuming, and editors time is valuable. Before using the RfC process to get opinions from outside editors, it's often faster and more effective to thoroughly discuss the matter with any other parties on the related talk page.

So, First the concern is about Population below Poverty Line. Contribution888 and @Ruk469, both were deviating from the Reliability and were engaged in Wikipedia:Edit war. Sources like this [13] are generally not quite reliable. When both warned, User:Ruk469 aknowledged but User:Contribution888 followed Uncivility and Harassment. Although this is different from the topic of concern and will be uphold on relevant spaces.

Again, Contribution888 referenced Bare PDF citing IMF report which had no specific point to directly support the figure (example: parameter like page no.) and it doesn't conform to Wikipedia's article standard. See that edit by User:Contribution888 here [14]

Following all these things, the most reliable sources is World bank, in fact, IMF also collaborate with World bank on Macro Poverty Outlook and refers to World Bank Reports when dealing with Poverty Outlook on their own reports. A report on poverty in South Asia is published annually and at spring named as South Asia Economic Focus. [15] It clearly states the figure of 61.7% below $3.2/day. Have a look here on Page 10 on the table [16]

I made the changes following the citation, see here, [17] and was reverted again by User:Contribution888 with misleading edit summaries violating civility without even verifying the source. See here [18] and the user chose to Edit War for once again.

The Second concern is about removal of Sourced content by the same user and the reason given is "(Poverty rate of india in 2021 is 6% according to world poverty clock 2021. Please don't provide old data of 2011. Thanks.)". See edits of User:Dineshswamiin reverted by User:Contribution888 here [19]

Please verify all above and leave your valuable comments to reach to consensus regarding concerned topic. Sneha04 ^💬 06:16, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

Hey folks, The first thing is that @Sneha04 is being so biased and doing her best to present old data of 2011 regarding the population below poverty line of $3.2 . According to 2021 estimates, the population below poverty line is 6%. You can read thousands of articles on that. And Everyone knows that. But @Sneha is posting figures of 2011. Second thing is that The population living in extreme poverty is 0.8% in 2022 according to International Monetary Fund. Everyone knows that but still @Sneha is posting old figure of 2011. Yesterday she sent me messages by threatening me that I would be blocked just because I posted the actual figures with proper sources of latest years 2021 and 2022 which according to her is edit war. When today I sent her message regarding her biased posting information then she deleted the her user talks by giving false reason of uncivil act. Wikipedia is not for posting the biased information to oppose the government or anybody. But she is trying her best to degrade the government by posting the biased information. Thanks all the wikipedia folks. Hope you all can see everything clearly. Contribution888 (talk) 06:43, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

@Contribution888 @Dineshswamiin I have a suggestion. Should we add multidimensional poverty index(mpi) data released by niti aayog in November 2021 which states that 25.01pp are mpi poor? Ruk469 (talk) 04:30, 11 May 2022 (UTC)

Contribution888 can't respond. Check out here.

I could change the figures but still waiting for their comments to build a consensus around. Please add a new section with your suggestion of showing MPI. Sneha04 ^💬 04:45, 11 May 2022 (UTC)

@Sneha04 Sure. Ruk469 (talk) 05:25, 11 May 2022 (UTC)

@Sneha04:, @Ruk469:: I'm very busy these days. I'm unable to find a better source because of lack of time. Perhaps;

• $3.2 per day (GDP nominal): ~50%
• $3.2 per day (GDP PPP): ~5%

If official report (published by government) is available, you can use it as source. If mentioned, you can use this report (here to download, PDF (~15MB)) as source. (updated - signed) Dinesh | Talk 09:28, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

According to World Bank (Report 2011, based on PPP), 5.5% people living on less than $1.9 per day, 62% on less than %3.2 per day, and 88% on less than $5.5 per day. About 6% people are living on less than $1.9 per day (Worldpoverty).[20]

However, less $3.2 per day is not necessary. Dinesh | Talk 09:46, 15 May 2022 (UTC)

Forex reserce updation

Recently indias forex reserves have jumped by appx $4.2 billion and are standing at $597.409

I had seen it from official data ......

Date : 27/05/22 saturday

Thank you Poppat muhammad (talk) 13:35, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

Type of India's Economy, By coordination

@Mariam57 there is a term called mixed market economy which is blend of both words, see the redirect page Mixed market economy. Sneha04 ^💬 07:43, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

@Sneha04: We have to go by the sources and it clearly states India has a market economy. All of the sources are academic sources. So your view hardly matters at end of the day we have go the sources. Thanks--Mariam57 (talk) 12:04, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

An unsolicited advice : Please Don't be uncivil in Edit Summaries like when it doesn't meant reasonably correct and the consensus yet not reached. see WP:SUMMARYNO

You have reverted my edits without having consensus built upon it. This edit [21] was clearly not adhering to WP:QUO . Quoting guideline "During a dispute discussion, until a consensus is established, you should not revert away".

It seems you may not have much knowledge about Economics, so let me help you, India is definitely a market economy as well as a mixed economy and when it is so, we call it a mixed-market economy.

Now, It's not my views and it definitely doesn't matter on Wikipedia's article space. Please look again at the citation provided. You might not have checked out the citations yet.

Check out the very first Citation on this article by Kaushik, Surendra K. Here it is again, “India's Evolving Economic Model: A Perspective on Economic and Financial Reforms.” The American Journal of Economics and Sociology, vol. 56, no. 1, [ American Journal of Economics and Sociology, Inc., Wiley ], 1997, pp. 69–84, JSTOR 3487351.

Just pick the very first paragraph and second line, what it says? Quoting "Economic policies of the Indian government have guided and shaped India into a mixed economy. Again, on the fifth line you will get, India is an Open-Market economy too! So it is defined in such cases as mixed-market economy.

You did the same at Economy of Canada. Now, You can join at WP:ECON and discuss it with other fellow contributors before making wrong changes to the article which are clearly supported by strong reliable sources.

Now I guess, you got it and I hope you willn't act like WP:ICANTHEARYOU. Sneha04 ^💬 14:23, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

@Sneha04: Technically all economies are market economy. In India's case as majority of sources categorically states moreover if you read in depth you will know that authors of the articles has states multiple times, India as being a market economy. Moreover "mixed market economy" term is not broadly used in financial or economic world. Economist by and large mostly use free market, open market, market economy, capitalist economy or Laissez-faire economy or neo-liberal in political economic sense. But all these terms are interrelated and can be categorizes as capitalist economies. Please don't change terms unnecessarily. We should rather sticks what economist mostly use in financial world. Thank You!--Mariam57 (talk) 17:31, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

In that sense all economies are mixed economies but I will refrain from going deeper into the topic and definitions. Now, those statements with unclassified terms you mentioned are just random with no reasonable logic and "what economists say" are kinda arbitrary lacking absolute understanding. It's not about a term convention here, it's representation in a logical way.

By the way, you gave a statement about what was present for so long on edit summary of this edit [22]Right? Term "Mixed economy" was a part of this article for so long! See here [23], the article back at 2017 but was changed recently on this edit [24] without any consensus developed on WP:ECON.

There is actually term of mixed market economy and there is a redirect page on wikipedia to represent both of these core economic system at the same time and it was continued on Wikipedia's article space for a long time. You have removed the term in most of the articles recently which were well existed long, without even checking the sources, and most of them with misleading edit summaries like terming "Copy-edited". I think it's a good-faith addition and pretty much needed. Sneha04 ^💬 03:37, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

@Dineshswamiin: @Fylindfotberserk: @Ohnoitsjamie: @Vanamonde93: Guys can you come of this issue majority of the sources says India has transitioned from mixed economy to market economy. But Sneha04 is adamant on putting "mixed market economy" which is not at all widely used in financial world. Moreover, most academic sources state that India as a market economy. Thanks--Mariam57 (talk) 12:53, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Maybe Index of Economic Freedom article can be helpful! Dinesh | Talk 15:43, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Look, you are talking about Economic freedom, it is different from topic of concern. All economies aren't absolutely open or closed! There comes this freedom index to deal with this problem. It's not about terms but more about representation of it. This is the reason, terms like open, closed, free are avoided in most articles similar to this one.

It was a simple good faith addition or representation of terms in a way readers can understand, but it drawn into such a ridiculous exchange of words, I really can't make sense of those arguments. Posing WP:NOTGETTINGIT, Lack of competence is clearly seen.

"What is widely used in financial world", can be known just a google search away. So using the same irrational argument on every next reply doesn't conclude a consensus.

The statement by User:Mariam57 again lacks fundamental understanding of Economics, Economic Orders. You can obviously judge it by that straight random illogical POV statement "India has transitioned from mixed economy to market economy.", FYI India is both a market economy as well as a mixed economy. It transitioned from a socialist economy to mixed one. I could describe what is market socialism and mixed market but it would be so long and will get contradicted by WP:FORUM as well. So it is better to look at sources provided and figure out which look reasonable to others. Sneha04 ^💬 18:11, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Suggestion: You should not engage in edit war. Before reverting second time, mention user on the talk and discuss about it. (See: Three revert rule) Dinesh | Talk 16:13, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

@Sneha04: @Dineshswamiin: Look first of all I admit we both were slowly engaging in edit wars. And we should be aware of it but unfortunately @Sneha4 acted irrationally reverting edits without reaching consensus. The "mixed market economy" term redirecting to mixed economy. Why it should redirect to mixed economy why not market economy. If you notice carefully all the top notch scholarly articles from Harvard, Cambridge or Oxford you'll notice economies are either "market economy" or "mixed economy" but this so called "mixed market economy" terminology is not used at all. Then why on earth we should use that terminology. We should go by the sources rather than inventing our own terminology. Moreover, @Sneha4 you're not an economist of Harvard or MIT caliber so don't try to be over smart. Better, what the sources says we should stick with it. Again you tried to change in US Economy as well, which I reverted it. Even in dictionary we have these above terms Source 1 Source 2 Source 3 Source 4. There is no so called "mixed market" term. And guys if you want I can put more top class academic sources published from world's leading institution regarding India's economic transformation. Thanks--Mariam57 (talk) 12:52, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

@Mariam57 Since beginning, "what happened" is in front of everyone, So nobody is asking for your kind justification about that! I reverted following WP:BRD as citated sources have contradicted your edits clearly and effectively.

I really can't make sense of your aggression because even when you don't have necessary understanding about Econ and getting contradicted by citations, you kept reiterate unreasonable statements just to obstinate. Are you an economist from Harvard or MIT calibre? moreover, is that a criteria of editing Wikipedia? Even, if I appear over-smart to you, does that help the purpose of consensus? Again, I don't need to establish my accomplishments on random people on this space. At least I'm not cantankerous when I don't have acute awareness about a certain topic. So assume good faith from next time and be competent. And yes, Sources are contradicting your words not mine. So, you better stick to sources and stop using selective words from it. Again, acting like, "I am not getting this" wouldn't help you polarize the conclusion of the discussion. Putting certain words from random dictionary for references doesn't seem logical to a reasonable observer.

"Mixed-Market Economy" is certainly redirected to "mixed economy" following a discussion because that is more reasonable and that's what exactly I was trying to say.

I refrained from WP:FORUM for long now, but to enlighten certain people, I have to explain it. Explaining it, Mixed-market economy certainly represent mixture of state capitalism with private capitalism along-with state intervention in the form of regulations, policies, a form that is successively covered under Typology section of mixed economy. Now, Pure Market Economy is an absolute or extreme sense of Capitalism but India is neither a socialist economy nor a capitalist economy in a whole or entirely (that's why called as Mixed-economy), but both of these nature is present, and a mix of mixed economy just what @Hemantha explained and it is unapt to put this highly selective word like "Market Economy". Now, mixed economy is a broader branch which includes a lot of other econ-systems too, that's why to be specific, the term Mixed-market economy continuing on Wikipedia's article space for a long time with a redirect page.

Again, an advice since you are not quite sound with Guidelines as seen from your past activities, US Economy is not concerned here. Use relevant discussion page for that. Continuing edit war and harming the article space may seem ideal to you but there could be discussion on respective talk page. This behaviour can cost you in future. Another reminder, See "What Wikipedia is not"

I had produced sufficient lines in quotation on first place at the very beginning of this discussion, so from the next time, bring your "top class academic sources", "top notch scholarly articles" and cite those sentences impartially instead of babbling around with the same reply of "guys if you want I can do this, I can do that, why on earth we should use that terminology" on everybody. Be careful, you can get self-contradicted when citing sentences of your "top class academic sources", "top notch scholarly articles" unless you use method of Cheery-picking.

Sneha04 ^💬 10:45, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

Also another point if you guys are not satisfied with "market economy" term then we can say "free market economy" or "capitalistic economy" or "Laissez-faire economy". Thanks--Mariam57 (talk) 13:02, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

No, none of those are appropriate. Mixed economy is the correct one since whole swathes of economy - natural gas, fertilizers, drugs, cereals and pulses - are controlled by government policies which either directly set prices or strongly influence them through subsidies. Y._V._Reddy, who was then a deputy governor of RBI, has described the economic reforms as "more dynamic mix of mixed economy i.e., changing mix of State and market or public and private sector". He goes into more detail in a later speech where he says The altering of the boundaries between State and market encompasses, what is variously described as, realigning government, structural reforms towards liberalisation or deregulation, and changing mix of the mixed economy. There is extensive literature now as well about the increasing protectionism in India (with Atmanirbharata and increasing tariffs) and the rise of "national champions" like Ambani and Adani which make "market economy" an even more inapt description. Hemantha (talk) 03:55, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

@Hemantha I somewhat agree to you, But Mixed economy is an extensive domain, so using a term like Mixed-market economy is more logical in that sense. If you put don't want to put Mixed-market economy, we can agree to put mixed economy with a redirect to that section Mixed Economy#Typology is also feasible. Looking forward for your reply to conclude the consensus and request for closure, change in protection level from @The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい):. Sneha04 ^💬 10:57, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

Issue would be finding suitable sources. If you can find them, you can go ahead. Hemantha (talk) 13:01, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Hemanth, the two sources you provided are very old one published in 1996 another in 1997. But if you look carefully the sources which already present in article are recent and all are research scholarly sources even though India has adapted mixed economy since 1950 with excessive socialistic policy but when India got bankrupt in 1991 it opened up its economy. And also collapse of Soviet Union played a huge role. Right now all countries have move toward market-oriented economy though some government regulation is their even in most well developed economies like U.S. or Europe or Japan because they too provide huge agricultural subsidies. The "Market economy" is the correct term because majority of the sources do state India has made radical transformation after 1991 economic collapse. And current and previous regimes in India has opened up its economy quite a lot. From relaxing of FDI policy to privatizing government enterprises by reducing stake. As I said earlier we have to go what majority of the sources says. Also I would like to reiterate if "market economy" term is not liked by other editors then we can go "free market economy" or "capitalistic economy" or "Laissez-faire economy". The point is after the collapse of Soviet Union in 1991 the whole world has adapted Adam Smith's economic philosophy of "free market". Over the last 200 to 300 years many recessions have come and gone but Adam Smith's free market principal have thrived and prospered. Thanks--Mariam57 (talk) 04:44, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

Let's see the refs in the article - most of which were placed by you.

• Kaushik, Surendra K.

Economic policies of the Indian government have guided and shaped India into a mixed economy. ... Financial and economic reforms since 1991 have accelerated the pace of change toward an open market economy

I fail to see how this supports the addition that India is already a market economy.

• Sharma, Shailendra D

While reforming India's "inward-oriented" commandist economy has not been easy, some important, indeed irreversible changes have been introduced.

Once again, he doesn't say anywhere that India has already become a market economy. The paper is about the political economy in India, tracing how the strategy of the political elite changed over the time. The paper does not attempt to describe the actual state of the economy.

• Sharma, Chanchal Kumar

precise mechanism that has controlled the transition of the economic system in India from a command economy to a free market economy

This is a review paper with 10 cites, which generally follows the same ground as the one before in tracing the political decision making. Note that the author is a Political Science professor. Author appears to be using the term loosely (nobody can say India is a free market economy). There are other instances - like his description of South Korea as a market economy - of imprecise language which coupled with the cite count, journal etc do not make this reliable or authoritative for the purpose of describing India's economy at present.

• Chandrasekhar, C. P. - Another political economy paper. I'm unable to access, but seeing that it has a single cite, I do not expect it to be useful in this context.
• Budhwar, Pawan - An article from a business school lecturer, which goes into things like business hours, electricty voltages etc that is written as an introduction to India for businesses. Neither scholarly nor authoritative, but note that he says "a quasi-free market economy"
• Panagariya, Arvind - Search on google books didn't throw up any relevant passage. Please quote the part which supports describing India as market economy.

Overall the consensus is that India is a mixed economy which is on a path to less government intervention. Even if we disregard the inappropriateness and the poor quality, you do not appear to have actually gone through the sources you've used. The last line in your reply above cause me great apprehension about your ability to comprehend the nuances involved here. Hemantha (talk) 12:57, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

References

There hasn't been any consensus on this issue. And who said @Hemantha: these are all poor quality sources. These source are all from research scholars. Unfortunately Wikipedia has been filled with illiterates and half-literates like you. But in Encyclopædia Britannica most editors scholars or Nobel laurates. Now I'm not interested in personal attacks. Fact of the matter its difficult for socialist like you to digest India has become a free market economy. Even though sources are reiterating multiple times. Check this Source 1 Source 2 Source 3 Source 4 Source 5 Source 6 Source 7 Source 8 Source 9 Source 10 Source 11 Source 12Source Source Source 13 Source 14 Source 15 Source 16 Source 17 Source 18 Source 19 Source 20 Read all these source oh by the you don't have full access to these sources unless your research scholars/academician who have paid account to these articles. Every authors has mentioned how India's made radical transformation after the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991 and at that time India got bankrupt and then adapting free market principals India has made huge transformation. Now in ideal situation in every nation has adapted "market economy" but all nations have some state regulations. Even in U.S., Europe or Japan for instance they have free market still some degree of government regulation still remain. When recession or depression happens fiscal or monetary intervention are required either from state or reserve banks. Like in 2008 global financial crisis massive fiscal stimulus packages were announced from governments across the world. The main point is all countries work under free market principals. Guys read the whole book of Arvind Panagariya he has mentioned how India has adapted free market. Thanks--Mariam57 (talk) 16:26, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

Haha, I have half a mind to add "half-literate socialist" to my user page. On a serious note, instead of dumping hits from a Google Scholar search for "India free market economy" (atleast 5 out of first 9 links are from the first page there), please add relevant quotes which support calling India a market economy. For eg, Montek Singh Ahluwalia's paper says right at the beginning - India’s gradualist approach to reform, which has meant a frustratingly slow pace of implementation, illustrating once again the scholarly opinion that India is only slowly progressing towards becoming a market economy. Hemantha (talk) 17:03, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

It doesn't matter from where the sources belong so long as the sources are reliable or at least scholarly level written by academicians then its fine. As I said read the whole book of Arvind Panagariya you'll know in most pages he clearly mentioned India has transitioned from socialist-oriented mixed economy to free market economy. I'm pretty sure you haven't read the other sources in depth. First read the above sources properly then come to challenge me. Fact of the matter is you guys don't have the habit or patience to read articles or books. And try to engage into an argument. Rather than wasting too much time to Twitter or Facebook read books or articles. You'll understand and know lot of things. Read the book of Arvind Panagariya. And if possible read other sources which I provided then come to challenge me. If you want then I can provide you with more scholarly sources. Just free advice from me take it or throw it; read read & read. Thanks You!--Mariam57 (talk) 03:24, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

Your continued personal attacks and WP:STONEWALLING by a stubborn refusal to bring a single quote despite multiple specific requests, shows that you either haven't read the sources you've dumped here or that you aren't willing to engage in a productive discussion. Either way, there is no use in prolonging this discussion. Hemantha (talk) 09:19, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

The problem lies with you. The fact of the matter is you haven't read a single source properly and came here to argue with me. First read all the sources then come here to argue. And by the way I haven't made any personal attack its you who is making all sort of personal attacks. Look ignorant people like you are ultimate blabbers. Talks cheap but have zero knowledge about subject matter. Socrates once said "When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser".--Mariam57 (talk) 15:09, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

Fully protected

Since there's been an edit war going on for several days now, I've protected this page at the WRONG version for a week. Discussions should happen on the talkpage, not in edit summaries, so use this time to work it out here. After this expires, if you need someone to restore the original semiprotection I'll take care of it. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 14:34, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

@The Blade of the Northern Lights: Thanks, only two users were engaged in the edit war. Maybe article's protection level should be changed back to the semi-protection. Dinesh | Talk 16:52, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Hi @The Blade of the Northern Lights: Please change the protection level back to permanent semi-protection as it was earlier. Currently "Full protection" level is expired, so its better to go the earlier protection. Thanks--Mariam57 (talk) 04:47, 1 June 2022 (UTC)

Done. Thanks for the ping. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 14:52, 1 June 2022 (UTC)

@The Blade of the Northern Lights, please review it again and change it back as it was earlier cause I can't edit the page. There are some datas that should be updated. Ruk469 (talk) 17:05, 7 June 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 25 June 2022

Please guys make some factual data, extreme proverty in india is 6% not 1% as you guys listed. I read the source and they write likewise 6%. be more realistic India still very poor county 103.105.33.125 (talk) 11:23, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

 Done I've reverted Himanshu 3028 who has repeatedly changed it without a backing source. I suspect this is because of recent declaration by Surjit Bhalla, IMF; whose model has been widely criticised. Hemantha (talk) 12:09, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

Request for updating the GDP growth data

India's GDP grew by 8.7% in FY22 according to the government data released today.

Here is the source- https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/business/india-business/indias-economy-expands-8-7-in-fy22-q4-growth-at-4-1/articleshow/91918744.cms

Thanks. Ruk469 (talk) 16:34, 31 May 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for telling, GDP growth rate are based on the latest world bank's data. So it's not incorrect. GDP growth rate estimates can be taken from World Bank, IMF and official data. Dinesh | Talk 10:37, 3 July 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 5 October 2022

Majornamratadhasmana (talk) 10:33, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

2020 Indian economy has witnessed major setback after Pandemic of Covid 19. As an emerging and a youngest economy immediate corrective action were taken, and the economy was stabilized with its measures of Make in India. Indian economy not only boosted her GDP also prepared herself as a support for Global Economy. https://www.thehansindia.com/hans/opinion/news-analysis/india-should-leverage-new-world-order-756839. The wave of Make In India in Defense Sector has not only boosted their strategic value, but also integrated their capability building. Drones, INS Vikrant and CLH Prachand were manufactured primarily in India. Next with Vedanta pitching in for manufacturing of semiconductors, many MNCs have started eyeing to India for Investment. these immediate strategic measures have given boost to economic strength of the country

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Dinesh | Talk 18:01, 11 October 2022 (UTC)

Economic growth of India

The economic growth is mainly dependent on the gdp of India The growth is calculated by per capita 175.101.104.22 (talk) 05:19, 6 October 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Dinesh | Talk 18:01, 11 October 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 18 October 2022

change photo of mumbai skyline V952010 (talk) 17:39, 18 October 2022 (UTC)

 Declined - in order for us to fulfil a photograph request, you need to provide said photograph yourself. MadGuy7023 (talk) 18:04, 18 October 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 22 October 2022

latest photo of mumbai skyline V952010 (talk) 23:03, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: You cannot take images from anywhere on the Internet and upload them as your own work. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 01:09, 23 October 2022 (UTC)

its was taken by a drone yesterday V952010 (talk) 02:18, 26 October 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 15 November 2022

Ease of doing business rankings have been discontinued in 2021 due to irregularities.

https://www.worldbank.org/en/news/statement/2021/09/16/world-bank-group-to-discontinue-doing-business-report Sacchaimax (talk) 19:28, 15 November 2022 (UTC)

Ease of doing business rankings have been discontinued due to irregularities. Sacchaimax (talk) 19:30, 15 November 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Actualcpscm (talk) 23:00, 16 November 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 21 November 2022

File:Skyline 2221.png updated skyline of mumbai V952010 (talk) 02:50, 21 November 2022 (UTC)

What changes do you want? Dinesh | Talk 09:48, 21 November 2022 (UTC)

the photo used for the skyline of Mumbai to be updated with the one provided ,im sorry its very difficult to understand how to request changes to an article in wiki V952010 (talk) 22:39, 24 November 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 25 November 2022

Please remove the part about Indian government manipulating economic data. This is not true and there are many independent private agencies as well as global institutions which corroborate the govt.data.

Ayush Gupta 183.82.153.50 (talk) 21:05, 25 November 2022 (UTC)

File:Red information icon with gradient background.svg

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{Edit semi-protected}} template. - FlightTime (open channel) 21:06, 25 November 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 07 January 2023

Please add this line in the top paragraph of the lead section "India accounted for 7.2% of global economy in 2022 in PPP terms, and around 3.4% in nominal terms in 2022". Source [25] Thanks. 2405:201:800B:684F:3C74:AFF4:A167:C0DB (talk) 17:35, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

 Not done for now: Please start a discussion. Dinesh | Talk 12:43, 1 February 2023 (UTC)

India Education Program course assignment

This article was the subject of an educational assignment supported by Wikipedia Ambassadors through the India Education Program.

The above message was substituted from {{IEP assignment}} by PrimeBOT (talk) on 19:54, 1 February 2023 (UTC)

Somethings wrong information provided by IMF

01/02/2023 indian govt announce his annal budget The govt show official data of debt borrowing by indian govt. Govt say the total debt postition 152,61,122( in inr crores)as on 31st march 2023 But wikipedia data show 227.946(US$2.9 trillion) lakh crore please check and correct. Thank you Manish patidar Refrance :- Indian budget page number 47 (Debt position of the government of india) 157.34.55.94 (talk) 14:55, 3 February 2023 (UTC)

 Checking... Dinesh | Talk

Education is important

Hello everyone study is very important in our life. Education provide success in our life. 103.181.57.95 (talk) 12:54, 22 March 2023 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• India Product Exports (2019).svg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 14:55, 23 March 2023 (UTC)

Game

Game 42.109.196.20 (talk) 16:40, 25 March 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 28 March 2023

In the article " Economy of India " , 2022 data is still showing in the article. The same source that is cited shows Indian GDP at 3.82 trillion , which is not updated yet. Kindly update the number based on the same source provided for it. Sidram1809 (talk) 18:47, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

In progress: An editor is implementing the requested edit. Guessitsavis (talk) 22:13, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: At least from what I saw, GDPs are not typically updated until the period they would be updated for had past. I could definitely be wrong, and please feel free to correct me. Guessitsavis (talk) 22:55, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

Edit India's GDP PPP figures:

In "Statistics" section of "Economy of India" page India's GDP PPP is shown $11.851 Trillion (as of 2022) but in "Data" section of the same page India's GDP PPP for 2022 is shown as $11.665 Trillion.

So I request to change India's GDP PPP to new $11.851 Trillion in "Data" section.

I also request to adjust India's future GDP PPP projections (from 2023 to 2027) according to India's GDP PPP in 2022.

For Eg: If lets say India's GDP PPP growth rate is 10% in 2023 than according to GDP PPP of $11.851 Trillion in 2022 the GDP PPP of India for the year 2023 should be written as $13.0361 Trillion instead of present projection of $12.813 Trillion.

Thanks KrishanVerma171 (talk) 12:44, 2 April 2023 (UTC)

 Done Dinesh | Talk 15:39, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

Sir I have said "For Eg: let's say India's GDP PPP growth rate is 10%", it was just an example, you should not have changed India's GDP PPP figures to $13.0361 Trillion because I was very obviously giving an example, $13.0361 Trillion is not correct GDP PPP of India (2023), this figure was just an example which I was giving to help people understand what I want to say in an easy way.

Please Sir read my original comment thoroughly and understand what I really meant to say.

Let me tell you whole context:

• Initially India's GDP PPP was $11.665 Trillion, than a person came and changed India's GDP PPP figures to $11.851 Trillion, and I noticed that, So to make "Economy of India" webpage up to date I recommended few suggestions like:

Updating of GDP PPP figures in "Data" section of the same webpage, because that person have updated only "Statistics" section and not "Data" section.

•What I was saying is that: "Let's say India's GDP PPP growth rate is 10%" notice I was saying "let's say" ,i.e. I only want you to assume, the real GDP PPP growth rate of India for the year 2023 was to be determined by using either maths formula or by some source on the internet.

Please Sir I request you or anyone who is reading this, to update "Economy of India" web page to new, appropriate and up to date data.

Thanks KrishanVerma171 (talk) 16:16, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

@KrishanVerma171: I've been updated some economic statistics in infobox. In data section, it's not possible to update in real-time. I or any other user will update that section. However, if possible I'll try to update it as soon as. The date is based on IMF's latest estimates. You can access database here. You also can edit! Dinesh | Talk 17:19, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

Okay Sir! Thanks For providing source and Thanks for editing. I appreciate your efforts! KrishanVerma171 (talk) 20:01, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 11 April 2023

I want to edit "Economy of India" webpage, to make certain changes like correcting of GDP figures and adding decimals in GDP figures KrishanVerma171 (talk) 19:58, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

That's not how edit requests work. Please read WP:EDITREQUEST. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 20:12, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

Oh Sorry! I am new to Wikipedia Editing I was not aware about how Edit requests works. I will try to minimize my mistakes and learn more. Thanks for sharing the article link! KrishanVerma171 (talk) 04:26, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Mkmkpdk.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 09:24, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

Mumbai Skyline Picture

No sure who removed the picture of the Mumbai skyline - it had the view of Bandra-Worli sea link along with the buildings behind. The reason given was some for of copyright violation by referencing an instagram account. Can people reading this page please help restore that picture or something equivalent deserving of the city? 51.190.147.228 (talk) 13:24, 4 June 2023 (UTC)

Bangladeshi illegal immigrant is uploading a photo again and again

Bangladeshi illegal immigrant is uploading a photo continuously, threat to Indian national security 115.96.102.214 (talk) 07:06, 4 June 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Dinesh | Talk 17:12, 5 June 2023 (UTC)

Don't change

Don't update image in infobox. Please establish a consensus before updating. Dinesh | Talk 17:20, 5 June 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 6 June 2023

The article has been massively abused , It is clearly looking like some amateur has written a lot of points with shoddy and crappy citations as well. How is this kind of amateur writing protected!!! Wow this is the worst. 2601:282:1682:67C0:F8D2:E4E5:F127:6CC1 (talk) 03:44, 6 June 2023 (UTC)

Not an edit request. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 03:57, 6 June 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 15 June 2023

Indian economy as stated by finance ministry has is 3.75 trillion dollars In Wikipedia page it is still shown as 3.737 trillion dollars Which shows difference of 13 billion dollars The GDP should be shown as 3.75 trillion dollars as quoted by finance ministry Lakshay gusain (talk) 22:48, 15 June 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 03:33, 16 June 2023 (UTC)

indian finance ministry has declared that Indian economy has reached 3.75 trillion

Various articles have been published if you google India GDP 2023 Lakshay gusain (talk) 13:41, 17 June 2023 (UTC)

India GDP 2023 Lakshay gusain (talk) 13:44, 17 June 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 17 June 2023

Indian economy has reached 3.75 trillion dollars according to recent estimate by finance ministry Lakshay gusain (talk) 13:35, 17 June 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. M.Bitton (talk) 17:28, 17 June 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 17 June 2023 (2)

Please update correct GDP figures of India Correct GDP is 3.75 trillion dollars Lakshay gusain (talk) 13:49, 17 June 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. M.Bitton (talk) 17:28, 17 June 2023 (UTC)

India GDP 2023 Lakshay gusain (talk) 05:32, 18 June 2023 (UTC)

India GDP 2023

India GDP 2023 Lakshay gusain (talk) 16:00, 18 June 2023 (UTC)

Forex reserves

As for RBI India's forex reserves now 609 billion dollars 120.88.35.81 (talk) 13:37, 21 July 2023 (UTC)

Social

About industries in India 45.117.65.69 (talk) 17:07, 25 August 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Dinesh | Talk 16:46, 30 August 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 31 August 2023

population - 1,428,627,663 people as on mid 2023(1st largest nation) Arorashrey10 (talk) 17:41, 31 August 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. ayakanaa ( t · c ) 03:17, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

GIFT CITY

Gujarat International Finance Tec-City (GIFT City) is a central business district under construction in Gandhinagar district in Gujarat, India. It is India's first operational greenfield smart city and international financial services centre, which the Government of Gujarat promoted as a greenfield project.

In 2020 GIFT IFSC bagged 10th place in Finance Industry and top rank in emerging financial centres in Global Financial Centres Index. As of June 2023, it is home to 23 multi-national banks including HSBC, JP Morgan and Barclays; 35 fintech entities; two international stock exchanges with average daily trading volumes of $30.6 billion; as well as India's first international bullion exchange with 75 onboarded jewellers. NamoBharat (talk) 14:31, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

Impact of demonetization in indian economy

Impact of demonetization in indian economy 122.186.163.238 (talk) 08:04, 10 November 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 19 November 2023

RishiGupta9424 (talk) 10:33, 19 November 2023 (UTC)

India's nominal GDP has been increased from 3.73 trillion dollars to 4.03 trillion dollars. But Wikipedia has not updated it.

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 17:51, 19 November 2023 (UTC)

India's GDP has crossed 4 trillion dollars mark.

If many Indian news sites are to be believed then India's GDP has crossed the 4 trillion dollars mark. If it's not a fake news then this should be updated here. 203.81.242.243 (talk) 04:19, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

This is based on an unverified screengrab from the live tracking GDP feed for all countries based on International Monetary Fund (IMF) data.^[26]

Wikipedia is based on what reliable sources say. The most recent IMF World Economic Outlook database figures predict that India's GDP will be 4,105 billion dollars in 2024, and 4,512 billion dollars in 2025. But now is 2023, the India's 2023 GDP is given as 3,732 billion dollars.-- Toddy1 (talk) 09:39, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

And here is another URL that also has the story about the unverified screengrab.^[27]-- Toddy1 (talk) 10:25, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

Market cap of BSE listed firms hit 4 trillion dollar market cap. Mark.

Sources: https://www.business-standard.com/markets/news/indian-markets-hit-historic-4-trn-market-cap-milestone-for-the-first-time-123112900205_1.html , https://www.financialexpress.com/market/historic-day-for-markets-bse-listed-companies-surpass-4-trillion-market-capitalization-3320567/ LakhnawiNawab (talk) 13:46, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

India is 3rd Largest Consumer Market not 6th.

The source in the article for the claim that India is 6th Largest is Nominal Household Expenditure not PPP Household Expenditure. According to PPP Household Expenditure India is 3rd Largest Consumer Market. Using Nominal Household Expenditure as a measure of how Large or Small a Consumer Market of a Country requires the Assumption that the Law of One Price is True or (Approximately True).

While Assuming LOP Holds is Reasonable to Make for Tradable Goods it doesn't hold for Non-Tradable Goods and Services as the Prices of Non-Tradables Deviate Heavily from Law of One Price (Presumably Due to Balassa–Samuelson Effect) Hence the Size of Rich Countries Consumer Market would be Over-Estimated Significantly and Size of Poor Countries Consumer Market would be Under-Estimated Significantly if Household Expenditure of Various Countries Consists Mainly of Non-Tradable Goods and Services.

Hence due to this Assumption being Likely Incorrect I suggest replacing the Text in the Article with the Correct Description that India is 3rd Largest Consumer Market.

Thanks.

Source for PPP Household Expenditure: https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NE.CON.PRVT.PP.CD?most_recent_value_desc=true 45.251.35.232 (talk) 09:25, 2 December 2023 (UTC)

What you are doing is what Wikipedia calls "original research". In other words, you are drawing your own conclusions from the sources. If your conclusions are reasonable, there will be reliable published sources that explicitly make the same conclusions. You need to see whether this is the case, and then come back citing those sources, and with quotations from those sources.-- Toddy1 (talk) 14:15, 2 December 2023 (UTC)

Sir with due respect thanks for reply but its well known that Law of One Price is not applicable for Non-Tradable Goods and Services. Its called the Penn/Balassa Samuelson Effect. Its the main reason Purchasing Power Parities were invented. But the source for this is right on the World Bank page I linked earlier. Make sure to click "Details" 45.251.35.232 (talk) 20:22, 2 December 2023 (UTC)

"Typically, higher income countries have higher price levels, while lower income countries have lower price levels (Balassa-Samuelson effect). Market exchange rate-based cross-country comparisons of GDP at its expenditure components reflect both differences in economic outputs (volumes) and prices. Given the differences in price levels, the size of higher income countries is inflated, while the size of lower income countries is depressed in the comparison. PPP-based cross-country comparisons of GDP at its expenditure components only reflect differences in economic outputs (volume), as PPPs control for price level differences between the countries. Hence, the comparison reflects the real size of the countries. For more information on underlying households and NPISHs final consumption expenditure in local currency, please refer to the metadata for "Households and NPISHs Final consumption expenditure, PPP (current international $)" [NE.CON.PRVT.PP.CD]. For more information on underlying PPP conversion factor, please refer to the metadata for "PPP conversion factor, private consumption (LCU per international $)" [PA.NUS.PRVT.PP]. For the concept and methodology of PPP, please refer to the International Comparison Program (ICP)’s website (worldbank.org/en/programs/icp)." 45.251.35.232 (talk) 20:23, 2 December 2023 (UTC)

With the greatest respect, you do not seem to understand Wikipedia's policy. Have you considered reading it? WP:OR.-- Toddy1 (talk) 21:49, 2 December 2023 (UTC)

Again This is not original research. There is even three Wikipedia articles explaining this with the appropriate citations. 106.198.88.174 (talk) 13:03, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

Just to clarify in case you are confused. All I am asking is to just replace this line

"The country remains the world's sixth-largest consumer market" and Source:https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NE.CON.PRVT.CD?most_recent_value_desc=true&year_high_desc=true

With This Line :

"This Country remains the world's third largest consumer market" and Source:https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NE.CON.PRVT.PP.CD?most_recent_value_desc=true

Notice I am using the Same Source (Data.Worldbank.Org) as the Current Text in the Article for its Claim that India is 6th Largest Consumer Market for the Source of My Claim that India is 3rd Largest Consumer Market. Only difference is I am pointing to the Correct Indicator in that Website.

If you have any issues with the Modification due to "Original Research" I want to know why that is considering I am using the Same Source as the Original Text.

Thanks. 106.198.88.174 (talk) 13:18, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

Long article

This article is too large (total number of words, too many sections) as per Wikipedia:Article size. Reading, editing and maintaining is too difficult. To maintain quality it should be summarised instead of expanding and adding sections. Dinesh | Talk 16:37, 15 December 2023 (UTC)

I'm mentioning recent editors. @Navi guy:@Rodw:@DataCrusade1999:@Toddy1:@Liz: Dinesh | Talk 16:45, 15 December 2023 (UTC)

Please could we remove sections such as Nationalization and De-regulation seems redundant to the topic Navi guy 08:32, 16 December 2023 (UTC)

I'm analysing article. It will take some weeks. Dinesh | Talk 04:52, 17 December 2023 (UTC)

Hi

https://www.reddit.com/r/india/comments/16fotb9/india_spends_big_on_what_it_needs_most_to_catch/ Can you put this image of Mumbai financial capital in the first file picture or thumbnail it is the best possible image that is their of Mumbai if to say, it is just like China's Lujiazui locality in Shanghai although it is not a locality like Lujiazui it's a image of Mumbai city or skyline from the view from the Mumbai coastal road. It is a view (from or) of the image of Mumbai from the Mumbai coastal road.

Mumbai coastal road (under construction grade separated expressway) view or image of Mumbai city or skyline,

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coastal_Road_(Mumbai) 

it is the best ever image of Mumbai so far or as of now of the city, from the Mumbai Coastal Road's view or angle of the city.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 2402:E280:3D48:133:E95F:259D:3C2:CD55 (talk) 05:10, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

Unfortunately it is not possible to change/upload the picture. Only images that are free to use, and uploaded by creater of image to Wikimedia Commons can be used. See Wikipedia:Uploading images Dinesh | Talk 08:12, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

Can't you right click, just open the image in a new tab on reddit and go to save images as, and then try and upload the image from your personal saved documents.

Here is the image again,

[28]https://images.wsj.net/im-849574/?width=2000&size=1.9493177387914

But I got this image from right clicking from the Wall Street journal and opening it on a new tab the news heading on it didn't come although it is a larger image. 2402:E280:3D48:133:1044:829B:C82C:4B58 (talk) 12:48, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

I know, but I cannot upload that picture. I could do only if I took picture and upload, in simple word only owner of the picture can upload (can't upload picture that downloaded from internet). Dinesh | Talk 14:32, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

How is it not possible to not upload a image here in Wikipedia from just another site by just saving the image their and uploading it easily here. 2402:E280:3D48:133:B8D2:1FD3:32AD:712F (talk) 15:17, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

But you have to be the owner of the image to upload the image wait till the Coastal Road project of Mumbai gets completed. 2402:E280:3D48:133:B8D2:1FD3:32AD:712F (talk) 15:17, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

This part of Mumbai will look so majestic it already does look quite impressive from the viewed image like you're in Dubai or Singapore or to some extend like New York. India is already a 4 trillion economy or more then that obviously you are going to see a construction boom. 2402:E280:3D48:133:B8D2:1FD3:32AD:712F (talk) 15:17, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

Removing debt section

If nobody objects, I'll remove it as it's not very important. Dinesh | Talk 14:14, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

Edit foreign reserved

620 billion dollar s 2409:4085:4EB4:9888:0:0:8F4A:D211 (talk) 13:46, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

Nominal GDP of India

I would like to revert India's nominal GDP back to 3.736 trillion as the financial year hasn't ended so it bit immature to update the nominal GDP as soon as the calendar year ends DataCrusade1999 (talk) 11:09, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

someone reverted the edits to 2023 data which in my opinion is right. DataCrusade1999 (talk) 07:59, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

Typo in History: Mughal, Rajput, and Maratha eras (1526–1820)

Last line of first paragraph reads: "... and possibly higher per-capita agricultural output and standards of consumption then 17 century Europe."

Here 'than' is mistyped as 'then'. Gakhar201 (talk) 22:42, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

 Done thanks. Dinesh | Talk 10:55, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

CS1 error

@V952010: You updated economy data but caused an error message hit on a date value in |archive-date. Achmad Rachmani (talk) 00:44, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 20 February 2024

The image needed to be resized as it is covering content Oblivion vro (talk) 13:15, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

 Done
— Urro^{[talk][edits]} ⋮ 14:10, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

Image in the infobox

​​ There is a dispute over the image in the infobox. Both images are from commons. A user claims that the bottom image is blurry, and that the top image is therefore better. But in reality they are about equal there, assuming that the purpose of the image is to show the city and not the fine detail of a building in the foreground. The blue image looks nicer. The thing that worries me is that neither image has metadata.-- Toddy1 (talk) 14:34, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

Please tell me how the image you re-inserted is "no more blurred" than the one I prefer, as stated in your edit summary.

I'm not saying that my added image is super sharp high-resolution either, but the other one is basically just a bunch of severely washed out skyscrapers in the far background of which one can barely make out any distinct structural features.

"Image x/y looks nicer" is a subjective opinion and not a valid argument. I don't want to start arguing on an aesthetic ground in the first place, but in my opinion, the blue background image could literally be an AI-generated skyline image of basically any city as it doesn't stand out regarding anything (except of course being extremely blurry), thus making such an image rather meaningless and quite interchangeable.

As far as objective yardsticks go, the other image is clearly superior in every respect: It's much sharper and shows more distinct buildings of the city in a clearer manner, while also focusing more on the actual skyline.-- Maxeto0910 (talk) 14:44, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

They are both images of the skyline - so the objective standard of sharpness is looking at the buildings on the skyline. That the buildings in the foreground are sharper in the top one is not an advantage in a photograph of the skyline.-- Toddy1 (talk) 20:32, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

The exact same thing can be said about the smaller buildings at the bottom of the other image. Aside from that, even the buildings in the background of my suggested image are far less washed out than the clearest buildings of the other image.—- Maxeto0910 (talk) 20:45, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

Mumbai Skyline Image Reverted Again

I am not sure why people keep reverting the image of the Mumbai skyline to something else. The previous version of the image was much better and potrayed the city as a large metropolis. The new image is a bunch of 4 random buildings. Can someone please update it and lock it such that it cant be changes by any random person? 2406:3003:2007:4A5:A049:7446:5BC2:A6C4 (talk) 00:11, 20 March 2024 (UTC)

I'm not exactly clear what the complaint is ~ first off there is no image captioned Mumbai skyline in the article, so i have to guess; guessing, i imagine you are concerned about the infobox image, which is currently the second of the two above. If i am correct in my guess, i would say that it has been reverted because that (the current) image is a longer-term one, so any discussion about removing or replacing it should take place here, and the only discussion currently on the page, above, comes to no conclusion at all, indicating that there is no consensus to have the brightly coloured image instead of the bluer one. The only reason i fear i may have misunderstood entirely is that neither image is a bunch of 4 random buildings, nor do i see any such image in the article as a whole. Happy days, ~ Lindsay^Hello 16:29, 20 March 2024 (UTC)

"A bunch of 4 random buildings" in the part of Mumbai known as "Worli". The photograph was taken from Lal Bahadur Shastri Road [LBS Marg] on 25 March 2023.

@LindsayH: The version of the article being complained about this was this one. The picture described as a bunch of 4 random buildings shows buildings in Worli.-- Toddy1 (talk) 17:58, 20 March 2024 (UTC)

Toddy1 Gotcha ~ misread the time of the IP's comment and thought they were complaining about your revert not the previous edit. Thanks for clarifying Happy days, ~ Lindsay^Hello 18:30, 20 March 2024 (UTC)

Request for Updated GDP Figures for India in FY 2024-25 According to IMF Data

It has come to our attention that the GDP figures for India in the fiscal year 2024-25 have not been updated to reflect the latest data provided by the International Monetary Fund (IMF). Several countries, including USA China, Malaysia, Bangladesh, and many others, have already updated their GDP figures according to the IMF's October report. However, India's GDP figures remain unchanged.

We request that the GDP figures for India be revised to align with the latest data provided by the IMF for transparency and accuracy. It is puzzling why there seems to be reluctance to update India's GDP figures when other countries have done so without issue. We believe that all countries should be treated equally in terms of data reporting and urge for prompt action to ensure consistency and reliability in economic data. Both India Wikipedia page and Economy of India Wikipedia should be updated. Thank you for your attention to this matter. 2402:8100:26E1:592F:F0B2:E112:AC92:65B (talk) 06:45, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

This doesn't specifically require the use of the admin tools, so I have made this a standard help request.

Who is "we"? Wikipedia is only as good as the editors who choose to participate. You are welcome to propose sourced changes to this article here, on this talk page. 331dot (talk) 08:34, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

I also believe it's important to revise the GDP figures for India to match the latest data provided by the IMF for transparency and accuracy. It's unclear why there's hesitation in updating India's GDP figures when other countries have done so without any obstacles. Treating all countries equally in terms of data reporting is essential, and updating India's GDP figures would uphold consistency and reliability in economic data. Its a protected page and can't be edited without admin's help. TheDarkKnight433 (talk) 08:55, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

It is not admin-only protected, it is semi-protected, meaning that IPs and new users cannot edit it., but anyone else can.

Wikipedia is only as good as the editors who choose to participate. We can't force people to edit this article- people must be interested in doing so. You or anyone is welcome to make a formal edit request(click for instructions) to propose specific edits to this article. Edit requests need to propose specific changes- not just "update this". 331dot (talk) 09:12, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

It is 100% clear, because it has been discussed at Talk:Economy of India#India GDP Figures FY23/24 and Talk:Economy of India#Semi-protected edit request on 19 March 2024.

What they want it to replace the figures for FY2023-24 with October 2023 predictions of what the Indian economic figure will be for the financial year that started on 1 April 2024. Those figures cannot possibly be as reliable as figures for FY2023-24.-- Toddy1 (talk) 09:24, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

You're the only one who is opposing it. The request to change the data is already made. I just don't get it why do you have problem with only Indian economy? The rest of the pages of economy of different countries is already updated with the same reference of IMF 's October report. TheDarkKnight433 (talk) 09:34, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

If other articles are using projections instead of actual figures, you should go to the talk pages of those articles and request that actual figures be used instead. This isn't an anti-India issue. a331dot (talk) 09:50, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

It's not possible to go and talk to 100s of Wikipedia page using the same source. Instead, this is the best option to update the figure of Indian economy. TheDarkKnight433 (talk) 09:59, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

It is possible- but if this is an issue across many articles you could open up a single discussion in a central forum like the Village Pump. 331dot (talk) 10:01, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

Do you represent the Indian government? 331dot (talk) 09:52, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

The GDP figures for India in 2023-24 were also estimates or based on projections, as the Indian government typically provides GDP growth estimates rather than exact figures. Given this uncertainty and the lack of precise data from the Indian government, it is logical to treat the 2023 estimates of IMF also as potentially inaccurate or subject to revision. Therefore, the 2023 updates is also wrong to add here.

In conclusion, since only the IMF and World Bank possess the mystical powers to bestow upon us the sacred knowledge of economic data, it seems fitting to remove the GDP section from Wikipedia pages altogether. After all, why bother with pesky projections when we can bask in the glory of uncertainty and ambiguity? Let's embrace the void and bid farewell to the illusion of precision in economic reporting. Its best to close this discussion here as no solution will come out of it. Thank you for your help and discussion. TheDarkKnight433 (talk) 10:31, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

You didn't answer my question. Do you represent or work for the Indian government? 331dot (talk) 12:40, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

What if I say yes? Does that even matter? You're not even solving my query instead you're making it unnecessary more complex. TheDarkKnight433 (talk) 15:11, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

This section leads off with "It has come to our attention". You also say later "we request" and "we believe" so you represent or are associated with some sort of group or organization. It does matter because if that group has some interest in this topic it could require you to disclose a conflict of interest and/or a paid relationship with the topic. Disclosing a paid relationship is a Terms of Use requirement. If you do not give a yes or no answer, I will interpret that as a yes. 331dot (talk) 15:32, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

No, I'm not associated with any group. TheDarkKnight433 (talk) 15:36, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

Why did you say "our" and "we"? 331dot (talk) 15:41, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

My mistake. I'm new here and learning. TheDarkKnight433 (talk) 15:45, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

Okay. You will greatly increase the chance your request will be acted on if you make it more specific, in a "change X to Y" format. Just saying "update this" is unlikely to work. You must tell us what you want done and offer sources. 331dot (talk) 15:47, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

Okay, thanks for the info. TheDarkKnight433 (talk) 15:55, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

I propose updating the economy section of the India page to reflect the latest data, as several other countries have already done so. This update will enhance the transparency and accuracy of the information provided, ensuring reliability for Wikipedia readers. Thank you. TheDarkKnight433 (talk) 09:54, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

The edit request process is for proposing specific edits, not a general request of "update this". See the Wikipedia:General disclaimer; Wikipedia does not guarantee reliability. This is a volunteer project that is not always consistent with updates. 331dot (talk) 10:00, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

Some historians claim

​An editor has changed

• Historians Tapan Raychaudhuri and Irfan Habib claim this state patronage for overseas trade came to an end by the thirteenth century ...

to

• Some historians claim this state patronage for overseas trade came to an end by the thirteenth century ...

An obvious objection to the edit is MOS:WEASEL. But there is a citation for the sentence in the article, though if we remove the names, it is unclear whether the citation supports the fact that "some historians" say this, or whether the citation is to a work by the historians in question (the latter is the case).

But MOS:CLAIM is a much bigger objection. The sentence has been written as an expression of doubt. That doubt would be OK, if the Wikipedia article were giving a contrary view, or giving good reasons for that doubt. But that is not the case.

I propose that we change the sentence to: This state patronage for overseas trade came to an end by the thirteenth century ... -- Toddy1 (talk) 04:53, 6 April 2024 (UTC)