Talk:Vikramkhol Cave Inscription

India: Odisha / History / Protected areas Low‑importance

	India portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Odisha (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by the Indian history workgroup (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by the Protected areas of India workgroup (assessed as Low-importance).

Archaeology C‑class Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Archaeology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Archaeology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ArchaeologyWikipedia:WikiProject ArchaeologyTemplate:WikiProject ArchaeologyArchaeology articles
C	This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

External links modified

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Vikramkhol. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/20130720033830/http://www.navratnanews.com:80/Tourisum/tourist_places_of_jharsuguda.htm to http://www.navratnanews.com/Tourisum/tourist_places_of_jharsuguda.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 19:08, 26 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

Unreliable date

Latest comment: 2 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The date of 1500 bce is more than tentative; it is not based on sound scientific principles. Jayaswal's reason for the date, in his own words, is "The writing is certainly older than the earliest specimen of Brahmi known so far; and Brahmi was completed before 1500 B.C." This is circular reasoning (why must it be older than Brahmi? Because he decided it's transitional from Harrappan to Brahmi, just from appearance.). He also gives Brahmi itself a date 1000 years earlier than the earliest I have seen elsewhere on Wikipedia, let alone any of my University archaeology textbooks. 2601:441:4400:1740:3177:7AD6:4BF8:3864 (talk) 19:44, 4 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

Add topic