Talk:Punjab, India/Archive 1

Archive 1

Untitled section

this article should be designated a stub

Please state your reason why? =Nichalp «Talk»= 18:56, July 14, 2005 (UTC)

Bias?

It says in the article : "The Indian government's reaction to the movement for Khalistan was to declare Punjab as a disturbed area and to grant the security forces draconian powers in the hopes of crushing the militancy and support for an independent state by force."

Yet this mentions nothing of the actions of terrorist groups which masterminded things such as the Golden Temple occupation and the violence committed by them. It seems that the blame is being shifted entirely to the Indian government which is not true. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.49.223.229 (talk • contribs)

Please feel free to add any additional information you have! Thanks. Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 15:01, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

Before trashing the Khalistan Movement, which i have no doubt u will do judged on your rather ignorant perspective of the troubles which engulfed Punjab in the 1980s and 1990s, you should educate yourself as to what happened in Punjab in the 1970s and 1980s, with special reference to the Anandpur Sahib Resolution. This document, whilst being proclaimed by the Sikh leadership, justifiably, as a federalist document, was portrayed, rather cynically i might add, by the Indian Government as a seccessionist act, and it was this act of stupidity on behalf of the Indian Govt, via Gandhi which propelled Punjab into the troubles of the 1980s. Moreover, the "terrorist" acts you so vividly describe (note the sarcasm here) have not been validated, or are you merely going to attribute the killing of any civilian between the period of 1984 to 1993 as terrorist affliated. Go and educate yourself on the Cats of Punjab Police...true Kharkoo Singhs never killed any civilian out of cold blood...yes criminal elements did use the Khalistan Movement as cover for heinoues activites, I have no doubts about that, but a differentiation should be made between these criminals and true Kharkoo Singhs who died defending their religion...the response of the Indian security apparatus was a heavy handed approach to any Sikh...you should read the Indian Army Manual which describes any baptised Sikh as a potential fountainhead of militancy...you should ask yourself why is it, that 13 years after the Indian Government itself declared militancy to be over, that Amnesty International is not allowed to operate in Punjab, or why is it that 50 or so Sikhs are still being held under TADA, which expired more than a decade ago...if you want an educated debate, then please respond, if you dont, then still respond...i'll prove you wrong on either account

Disambiguation page created

Alright, I went ahead and created a disambiguation page, my first. Since there didn't seem to be one distinguishing between the region, the indian state and the pakistani province, it appeared there was some confusion. Punjab nowe redirects to the disambiguation page, and the original Punjab page, which referred to the region, is now Punjab_region.

--bikehorn 06:13, 30 August 2005 (UTCsssoldkfsdopss

History!

Should we discuss the states reorganisation I mean from 170,000km2 for PEPSU to 50,000km2 Punjab! as to how PUnjab got a raw deal but has bounced back?

SET

Does anyone have any ideas about the Science, Engineering and Technology capabilities of this Indian state? I am uncertain as to whether or not Sikhs are what Occidental individuals term 'model minorities' or if they are high achievers (I doubt that Sikhs are as capable of achieving as highly as the Chinese do in the US and UK, but then I digress....).

Remember, this page needs a SCIENCE, ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY section. Perhaps a listing of the journals that the Univerisites within the state are known to be singificant contributors to. Perhaps even some famous Nobel Prize Nominees (or, better still, WINNERS) would be a good idea.

--Anon

Yes there is a Punjabi Nobel prize winner - Har Gobind Khorana -Nobel Prize for Medicine. --Oiws 17:51, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

translators needed at Wikipedia:WikiProject India/Translation

Wikipedia:WikiProject India/Translation--D-Boy 13:37, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Bias in the first Body Paragraph

This article seems to say many opinionated things about the Punjab region with backing them up with citations. Crispus 13:06, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Official Punjab Government citations have now been added in the section--Indian50 01:31, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Yes, that first paragraph is garbage and should be rewritten or deleted. Here's why:

Incorrect and shoddy information: "These character traits comes from Punjab's difficult history, particularly due to the number of outside invasions (Aryans, Persians, Greeks, Indo-Greeks, Scythians, Kushans, Indo-Sassanians, Turks, Mughals and Afghans) ..." First of all it would be good for this to have a reference. Secondly a couple of invaders entries are improper. While I'm not an expert, I seriously doubt that "Indo-Greeks" were invaders. Rather, the Greeks invaded and then became Indo-Greeks. For Aryan invaders the jury is still out, but even if there was an Aryan Invasion, I don't see the purpose of listing it. The modern Punjabi people are Aryans, and to say that you invaded yourself doesn't make any sense.

"... and retaliation from Punjabis in response to these acts. This heroism of Punjabis was highlighted with Alexander the Great's invasion of Punjab. One of the most notable being the Punjabi King Porus & his army's defence of Punjab." Living on the land corresponding to modern Punjab does not make you a Punjabi. Despite Porus living where he did, he was not a "Punjabi" king as in his time, thousands of years ago, there was no such entity known as Punjab, no Punjabi language, and no distinct Punjabi people and culture. We don't call the Romans Italians, do we? They hadn't become that yet. Thus while Porus & co. had their "heroism highlighted", they certainly weren't "Punjabi".

Unverifiable and meaningless POV: "Some of India's best intellectuals, business people, sports people, artists, military and political leaders come from this state. Punjabis customarily value and show great respect for their traditions and history. Traditional historic Punjabi culture is renowned for its tolerance, progressive and logical approach to life. [...] As a consequence it has some of the richest cultural history in the world." Tuncrypt 12:57, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Well I removed "Aryans" and "Indo-Greeks" from that section. Tuncrypt 15:17, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Some numbskull removed my comments. Tuncrypt 14:57, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Dispute

For those just arriving, the dispute is over the validity of a single sentence in the culture section:

“ Traditional historic Punjabi culture is renowned for its tolerance, progressive and logical approach to life.[8] ”

user:Indian50 seeks to maintain it. I seek to remove it, and this matter, which I see as spectacularly obvious and trivial, has turned into a huge mess because of Indian50's antics and lack of fitness as an editor. Anyway, here is why the sentence is inappropriate:

• It is subjective, opinionated, unverifiable POV.
• Its sourcing is dubious, a lie of Indian50:
  • It was originally copied from a casual government/culture website and only now retroactively "sourced".
  • Indian50 reverted at least ten times (half a page of history) before adding the reference (simultaneously reading up on things and engaged in an edit war, how convenient!).
  • What's even more is that this line which he now seems to be able to so accurately source was not even added by him in first place, over a year ago.
  • He has already been shown to make stuff up. For the current line, "These character traits comes from Punjab's difficult history, particularly due to the number of outside invasions (Greeks, Persians, Scythians, Kushans, Turks, Mughals and Afghans) [1]" he fought hard for (as in, reverted) the inclusion of this ending to it, "and retaliation from Punjabis in response to these", until I pointed out that that bit wasn't in the reference link.
  • It still remains subjective and unverifiable POV. It's nonacademic and thus unlikely to be in that source. "Punjabis are logical", lol.
  • How can the single sentence/tidbit of "Traditional historic Punjabi culture is renowned for its tolerance, progressive and logical approach to life" be spread over 5 pages, according to the reference?

The admin User:Rama's Arrow, whom I contacted for help, has placed an edit lock on this page. He told me that at this point, in order to make the removal I need a consensus of editors. Therefore if you agree with what I'm saying, write it down here. Rama's Arrow agrees with me in this, so that's one person so far.

Another development is that after this incident Indian50 indulged in retaliatory vandalism of the Gujarati grammar page, which I edit. After this he was blocked for 1 week by Rama's Arrow for "violating WP:CIV/WP:NPA, WP:EW, WP:3RR, WP:SOCK and harassing another user."

For the whole story, check Punjab (India) - History on May 7, 15, and 16, and User talk:Indian50, User talk:Rama's Arrow, User talk:Tuncrypt, and Gujarati grammar - History on May 16 and 17. Thanks. Tuncrypt 03:44, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

I believe you are in the right here, but a couple of points worth considering: I'm sure you are feeling very frustrated about the situation, but WP:CONSENSUS isn't about someone being right and someone being wrong, or taking a poll of who agrees with whom. I think it would help the process if we can remove the personal element here. It is unlikely that much of the contentious material could ever be rescued from POV, but in the spirit of conciliation, it is possible that evidence of "tolerance" (for example) could be made part of the description of the culture. Then again, it is not as if in an article about another culture one would note the "renowned intolerance" of its people. I don't know anything about Punjabi culture, so I can't suggest anything myself, but there might be a small amount of common ground in the dispute. Nposs 04:09, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

If you think about it, this is not a matter of consensus, a reaching of an agreement by different interests. Instead, the case is that Indian50 has been objectively discredited or disqualified as a party to a consensus through his lack of any debate or comments, his reversions, his vandalism, and his lies. He simply will not discuss or give and take towards an agreement; he's just wrong. This whole matter is simple, and it is absurd that is has gotten to this. Remove the sentence, and that's it. Tuncrypt 00:48, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Culture

I'm thinking that the Culture section needs to go. It is objectionable and hollow... in pretty much its entirety. Tuncrypt 02:51, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Culture

Culture needs to go, its objectionable...

I think its fine, just because you think doesn't make it so. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 6gkl (talk • contribs) 12:19, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Obvious factual errors in Agriculture Section

There was an Obvious factual error in Agriculture Section relating to % of india's rice, cotton and wheat produced in punjab. Corrected them based on the reference no.12 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Arunkrish (talk • contribs) 00:12, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Ghale bakshian

Could someone with knowledge about Punjab take a stab at cleaning up Ghale bakshian? Thanks! Kingturtle (talk) 18:00, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Punjabi spelling of Singh

I request Punjabi scholars from Punjab India who learn to write Punjabi at school to kindly give the correct spelling of the word "Singh" in Punjabi, in the Singh article. Kindly please edit it for correct Punjabi spelling and provide a reliable acceptable reference at least on the discussion page.

Some foreign born editors keep misspelling it, it seems, I have corrected the Hindi spelling, kindly provide a reference for Hindi spelling too if possible.

Thank you in advance.

Atulsnischal (talk) 06:51, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Blatant demographics errors

How can Punjab be 55% Sikh and 48% Hindu, with additional minorities? People are pumping up the Hindu demographic and whittling down the Sikh percentage constantly, and only offer up dead links for reference. The numbers don't add up.

And to the Bihari who deleted "Recent Immigration," the influx of UPers and Biharis is indeed a growing concern within the Punjabi Sikh community. Being a Bihari yourself, you're in no position to declare it "biased."

It is frustrating to see the extent to which Hindutva propagandists control Wikipedia.

3swordz (talk) 09:26, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

HELP!!! NEEDED for Article on Sikh Rajputs

Someone put a tag on "Sikh Rajputs" article that it will be deleted in five days etc., this article can not be deleted as Sikh Rajputs exist and most claims made in the article are true as well known to local Indians in Punjab only the need is that some interested and knowledgeable editors with access to proper history books etc. can eventually come forward and develop the article properly in time, quoting credible sources. Foreign born and raised editors with no direct local Indian knowledge are requested not to vandalize it as per their own fastly held thoughts and beliefs.

Thanks

Atulsnischal (talk) 08:13, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Hi

When you get time kindly assist with developing the Sikh Rajput article, it needs some badly needed refs too, it is being vandalized, check talk page.

Thanks

Atulsnischal (talk) 06:52, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Demographics

Math is not correct in this table.

Religion	Adherents	% of total
All	24,358,999	100%
Sikhs	18,000,000	59%
Hindus	6,000,000	39.357%
Christians	292,800	1.20 %
Muslims	60,045	0.06 %
Buddhists	41,487	0.17 %
Jains	39,276	0.16 %
Others	8,594	0.035 %
Not stated	4,468	0.018 %

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.196.204.76 (talk) on 22:46, October 15, 2008 (UTC)

Indus valley civilization

In dont understand why Mohenjo-daro which is in Sindh pakistan have to do anything with Punjab! I suggest that Harappa and Ganeriwala be added instead. Because these cities of Indus valley civilization are located in the Punjab region. Also the sentance is confusing by stating that Indus valley civilization is only located in Pakistan. Major discoveries have been found in Gujarat, Haryana, and Rajasthan. (Dewan S. Ahsan 04:09, 17 January 2009 (UTC))

References

gallery

Should we remove the gallery?Lalit Jagannath (talk) 18:10, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Education

Someone who knows the topic is requested to clean up the higher education institutes list, many non-notable names have been added. ReluctantPhilosopher (talk) 21:06, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Language as a state symbol

(Discussion moved here from my talk page -- Timberframe (talk) 16:07, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Punjab govt. considers its language as its state symbol.And you deleated it...........Why you are not deleting language from all states then............every state page on wiki says so.............maybe its bengal or karnataka........--Migelot ^{Talk to me!} 05:56, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

A language is not obviously or intuitively a symbol, but I'm prepared to accept that it is considered such if you can cite evidence of that. However, a language certainly isn't "Flora and fauna", which is where the table of state symbols is located, whereas this heading is appropriate to all the other symbols. If we're to include language as a state symbol then I suggest that (1) we justify doing so by reference to a reliable government source (2) we move the table to a morte appropriate section.-- Timberframe (talk) 16:02, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

The table is only in flora and fauna section..........It can be moved somewhere else........This article has many faults............such as History section needs attention ..........I didnt mind to bother you but every state page is showing in its state symbols.......Plz check West Bengal page. they are even showing Union day in state symbols along with their language Bengali About Tamil Nadu song and sports are part of it........So mate are you going to make modifications there also??? Punjabi is one of the state symbol of Punjab. I dont know you are Indian or not.......india is just like europe where different areas have different languages, cuisine, culture, dances, folklore even religion.If punjabis consider Punjabi as state language what others can possibaly do??--Migelot ^{Talk to me!} 16:59, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

yeah, all this aside, you don't need to inundate the article with useless images and bad English, Migelot. This article is an overview that leads off into several "main articles." Articles look professional when images are used as needed, not pictures of lassi and repetitive landscape pics. And languages can't be symbols, I'm not sure if you know what a symbol is. Additionally, your gimmicks, like that table, are not needed when you can simply incorporate the info into the article body. You should acclimate yourself to how articles are written in the English wiki, I've found that users like you bog articles down with minutiae and pretty pictures to the point where articles look like tourist ads, it's ridiculous.3swordz (talk) 12:14, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

You are going out of topic mate we are talking can language can be included in symbol section.I made it after watching west bengal and other states pages........but you dont want anybody making any contribution....its ur wish......I wonder why Timberframe has not replied. ur friend and well wisher--Migelot ^{Talk to me!} 17:45, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

I have addressed the language/symbol thing and if we even need a symbol section...read the fourth sentence onward of my previous post. And you should be doing what is best for this article, not copying everyone else's mistakes on other articles. You may have good intentions, but this article just doesn't need that redundant clutter.3swordz (talk) 10:23, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

A picture speaks for 1000 words.Did you ever noticed why Punjab page never became featured article whereas west bengal and sikkim have become featured articles many times????.......I am done editing here..........Its all urs..................Best of luck!!!!!!--Migelot ^{Talk to me!} 08:38, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

One thing more yaar.....If you bychance check page of Pakistani Punjab you might see Provincial symbols of punjab with language also in it......you should have not dictated ur temrs and remove everything others do here.....Thanx for time--Migelot ^{Talk to me!} 09:10, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

The quality of the article comes way before getting it "featured," like that even matters. And again, we can make this a tidy, informative article rather than copy everyone else's mistakes. A table is redundant when one reads the small paragraph right next to it and finds the same info. Moreover, getting rid of the extraneous takes up enough time without getting to improve on it. And West Punjab's table lists the "provincial" language as Punjabi, as if that language gets any sort of backing or support in Pakistan as opposed to Urdu. Goes to show the quality of that edit (languages...aren't ...symbols), that article is not my concern, to be honest. And frankly, judging by the style of your reply, and your seeing Wikipedia as a competition to match other articles regardless of quality and to get featured, I'm not sure you are familiar with certain cultural norms as they apply to English Wiki. Whatever, just don't make useless edits and we'll be good.3swordz (talk) 22:25, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

Sorry to have taken so long to respond, I was really hoping others would join in the discussion - but it seems not.

I still don't see how a language or a national day can be considered symbols. A symbol is symbolic of something else, it is a metaphor for the real thing. Languages and state days ARE the real thing, they're not symbolic of anything else other than perhaps a national identity. The fact that the West Bengal page adopts a particular approach does not mean it's a good model, and even if you can cite more examples I could suggest that they just followed the same model without critcial appraisal.

But maybe it's a cultural thing and to other minds language and national days are symbols; that's why I hoped for more critical input. -- Timberframe (talk) 13:11, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

Merge

Let's merge this with East Punjab, because it's basically the same as East Punjab anyway. —Preceding unsigned comment added by InMooseWeTrust (talk • contribs) 02:12, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

It is already notified in history section about Pakistani and Indian Punjab--Migelot ^{Talk to me!} 17:46, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

i think east punjab article is about the region in which the current state of punjab (india), himachal pradesh, and haryana are. because before those three states used to be just one punjab. Gman124 ^talk 03:49, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Oppose they are two different things. east punjab is punjab before india was rearranged by language barriers, its quite a bit larger.--Profitoftruth85 (talk) 17:33, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

I think we have reached consensus and I'll go ahead and remove the merge tag from the article--Profitoftruth85 (talk) 02:24, 3 July 2010 (UTC)

Etymology of Punjab

user with IP address 115.252.33.219 has made a changed in this section about origin of word punjab from persian to sanskrit without giving any reason or referance . I reverted it but he again made that change.What can be done?--Migelot ^{Talk to me!} 17:41, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

Punjab is derived from Sanskrit. In fact, pretty basic Sanskrit of Panch (five) and ab (water). That is why no reference (except a dictionary) is needed. The common Sanskrit word for water "Appu" is also related to the same root "ab". There is really no need to look for a Persian derivation. Persian is foreign to Punjab for most of its history. And, it is quite unlikely that there is a persian influence in the name. Punjab has the been the land of five rivers since Vedic times (circa 1500 BC). And, Persian influences in India do not start till the Muslim invasion (last 1000 years). The words for Panch and Ab do have close cognates in Persian. That is because Persian and Sanskrit are related Indo-Aryan languages. But, the derivation is directly from Sanskrit.

It's absolutely a MODERN PERSIAN(Farsi) phrase, and of course Persian is linguistically related to Sanskrit. Yet It's weird to call it a Sanskrit phrase or (Indo-Iranian one which is even more weird!). By such a weird logic one can claim Iranians right now speak Sanskrit (or perhaps the official language of Iran is "Indo-Iranian" instead of Persian!!!) Persian has long had a major linguistic and literary influence on Punjabi, as might be expected from the location in the northwest of the Indian subcontinent of the Punjab, the region traversed by the five tributaries of Indus which gave it its Anglicized name (< Persian panj āb “five waters”). Persian was the main language of administration and culture from the time of the Ghaznavid (q.v.) invasions of the eleventh century until its replacement by Urdu following the British conquest of the Punjab in the 1840s. Rostam —Preceding unsigned comment added by 120.140.184.128 (talk) 04:26, 23 April 2011 (UTC)

Definite article

I have inserted the definite article before Punjab in the intro, because thats the way it is in English language. I have added the reference of an official Canadian website which calls Punjab as "the Punjab".Cygnus_hansa (talk) 09:51, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

language

How about mentioning the fact that India's second official language was Persian for over 500 years. There are many words in the Hindu and Punjabi language that are burrowed from Persian. Even there country names are of Persian origin.

24.80.113.143 (talk)ditc —Preceding undated comment added 00:02, 7 April 2010 (UTC).

Requested move (May 2010)

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Page moved. General consensus seems to be that this is clearer, and more in accordance with similar articles. Ucucha 18:57, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

---

Punjab (India) → Punjab (Indian state) — Relisted. --RegentsPark (talk) 14:22, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

The reason that "state" included in the article, many Indian people know that is the Indian state rather than Western people. Unless, two American states disambiguated articles like Georgia and Washington, also Hidalgo in Mexico, Acre and Amazonas in Brazil. ApprenticeFan ^work 08:50, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

(NOTE WT:Noticeboard for India-related topics notified. --RegentsPark (talk) 14:22, 21 May 2010 (UTC))

• Suggest Punjab (Indian state) or Punjab (state of India) to match stuff like Georgia (U.S. state) 70.29.208.247 (talk) 10:32, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
  • Punjab (state) would normally be enough but there might be confusion with Punjab (Pakistan). Punjab (Indian state) isn't a bad idea but seems to imply a need for renaming Punjab (Pakistan) to Punjab (Pakistani province). — AjaxSmack 17:23, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
    • A rename for Pakistan sounds reasonable. 70.29.208.247 (talk) 04:27, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
• Comment I changed the requested title move name per AjaxSmack to match between Georgia (U.S. state) and Washington (U.S. state). ApprenticeFan ^work 23:45, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
• Support revised request, or leave. Johnbod (talk) 12:17, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
• Comment Why is this move needed? The two confusing bits, Punjab (India) and Punjab (Pakistan) are at reasonable titles, and the other Punjab region and Punjab (British India) as well as the associated sub units of East Punjab and West Punjab are at the right locations. Georgia in the US needs disambiguation because it was preceeded by the Province of Georgia, likewise, Washington, despite the state being larger, needs disambiguation because of the capital. Unless some compelling reason is provided, there's no need for this move IMO. —SpacemanSpiff 14:29, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
  • I guess the idea is that "Punjab (India)" is ambiguous and could also refer to Punjab region, East Punjab, or Punjab (British India) since all are or were at least partially in "India". — AjaxSmack 02:26, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Requested move back (July 2010)

{{movereq|Punjab (India)}}

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Moved to Punjab, India which enjoyed the most support. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 22:30, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

---

Punjab (Indian state) → Punjab, India — This article was only moved to this name a few weeks ago but I am not convinced that there was any good reason to move in the first place. The nominator's contention that "many Indian people know that is the Indian state rather than Western people" is pure speculation unless s/he can provide neutral third-party references to support it. Assuming an uninformed reader wants to look at this article, would they not be equally likely to search for "Punjab" or "Punjab India" as they would for "Punjab (Indian state)"? We have disambiguation pages like Punjab and hatnotes like {{about}} to indicate that there might be more than one article with "Punjab" in it's name? relisted Jafeluv (talk) 22:57, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

• The articles offered for comparison do not demonstrate that there is a need for the "(Indian state)" suffix; on the contrary they show that there are different reasons for each of their titles:

• the American state of Georgia (Georgia (U.S. state)) is up against Georgia the country (Georgia (country)) and "Georgia (state)" could easily refer to either entity.
• the American state of Washington (Washington (U.S. state)) needs to be distinguished from Washington D.C. and Washington State implies Washington State University equally as much as the state.

• if those two states are examples:

• why is New York the state not located at New York (U.S. state) to distinguish it from New York City?
• why is Kansas the state not located at Kansas (U.S. state) to distinguish from Kansas City?

The Latin American examples are even more varied:

• the Mexican state of Hidalgo (Hidalgo (state)) doesn't need disambiguating as Hidalgo (Mexican state), because the other major use is a term for Spanish nobility.
• the Brazilian examples (Acre (state) and Amazonas (Brazilian state)) show that they don't have the same set of guidelines, otherwise wouldn't it be Acre (Brazilian state)?

• All we need here is a disambiguation page (Punjab) and a short statement at the top of each article that might cause confusion, e.g. for this article:

This article is about the Indian state of Punjab. For other uses, see Punjab.

• There is certainly no need to include administrative status (state and province) unless it's part of the name, like the nearby Pakistani province of Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa which was until recently called North-West Frontier Province and not North-West Frontier or North-West Frontier (Pakistani province). We should only be as precise as is necessary.

Green Giant (talk) 04:18, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

• Oppose We do not usually disambiguate placenames by using parentheses. This format is usually reserved for rivers and mountains. Placenames normally follow the comma format, unless there are two places located in the same area with identical article titles, such as Wolin (town) and Wolin the island. The guidelines at Wikipedia:Disambiguation state:
  • A disambiguating word or phrase can be added in parentheses. The word or phrase in parentheses should be:
    • the generic class (avoiding proper nouns, as much as possible) that includes the topic, as in Mercury (element), Seal (mammal); or
    • the subject or context to which the topic applies, as in Union (set theory), Inflation (economics).
• They also state:
  • With place-names, if the disambiguating term is a higher-level administrative division, it is often separated using a comma instead of parentheses, as in Windsor, Berkshire.
• In this case, the disambiguator suggested is India, which is a higher-level administrative division. We should therefore be using the comma format in this case. I would Support a move to Punjab, India. It would also make sense to move Punjab (Pakistani province) to Punjab, Pakistan. Alternatively we could opt for State of Punjab and Province of Punjab, but, on balance, I think that would be more confusing for readers searching for the right page. Skinsmoke (talk) 21:00, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

• Support Either Punjab (India) or Punjab, India are fine. The 'state' disambiguator is unnecessary (there is no other Punjab in India). --RegentsPark (talk) 01:31, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

• Oppose (for now). "Punjab (India)" is ambiguous in the sense that it could also refer to Punjab region, East Punjab, or Punjab (British India) since all are or were at least partially in "India". I am open to arguments of primary usage but that's tricky since the article will always require some disambiguator. — AjaxSmack 03:30, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Comment There is no ambiguity here. Punjab region encompasses both the Indian state and the Pakistani province and is therefore not in India. The word region adequately disambiguates it. East Punjab is either another name for the Indian state, or a part of that state. It is not titled Punjab, and so there is no confusion. Punjab (British India) is a historic entity and the words British India adequately disambiguate it. Hatnotes can quite effectively redirect anyone seeking the region or the historic entity. Skinsmoke (talk) 06:30, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
    • Yes, Punjab (British India) and Punjab region are adequately disambiguated from the other Punjabs but they're not the articles in question here. "Punjab (India)" is not adequately disambiguated from the others since the term could equally apply to the Punjabs that were in pre-1947 India, i.e. the Pre-British Indian Punjab region and the colonial era Punjab (British India). Having an extra word, "state", in the disambiguator hardly clutters things and it precisely locates the subject in question both spatially and temporally. — AjaxSmack 06:48, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
      • India, in the context of wikipedia, refers exclusively to the modern entity. That is why there is no further need for disambiguation. --RegentsPark (talk) 21:47, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
        • History of India would beg to differ. And it's good that it does, because it would be totally ridiculous for India to be used only for the modern entity in Wikipedia. john k (talk) 16:41, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
  • Comment The hatnote would take care of that. Skinsmoke (talk) 12:14, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
• Comment - I think the main confusion would be between the two existing subnational entities i.e. the modern Indian state and the modern Pakistani province, and not between the modern state and it's historical predecessors. Punjab, India and Punjab, Pakistan would probably be better since generally titles should be the simplest possible. Green Giant (talk) 21:22, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
• Oppose per two comments shown as above. ApprenticeFan ^work 01:11, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
• Note The proposal has now been revised to move to Punjab, India (Just in case anyone else hadn't noticed, like me!). Skinsmoke (talk) 14:18, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Support the revised proposal. Skinsmoke (talk) 14:19, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Support. Punjab, India seems fine. Swaroop (talk) 15:33, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
  • Oppose. Basically what AjaxSmack says. Both Punjab, India and Punjab (India) could just as easily refer to the pre-1947 province, pre-partition. The current name is precise and accurate and really not all that long. john k (talk) 16:40, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
• Oppose. Comma-disambiguation is mostly reserved to cities, towns, villages. Country subdivisions without having the class identifier included are usually not disambiguated that way. Punjab State, India would be ok with comma. Schwyz (talk) 14:48, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
• Comment. Punjab State] isn't a common way of identifying Punjab, or any other state in India. I think there should already be a page called Punjab (British India), and I think that should resolve the debate of pre/post independence Punjab. MikeLynch (talk) 13:05, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
• Support a move to Punjab, India as the most logical title. We don't use India with historical (British rule time) articles, we rather use British India as the disambiguator and that should suffice. The dab page at Punjab also eliminates any confusion. —SpacemanSpiff
  • Who is we? Wikipedia editors? Wikipedia should be optimised for users, not editors. — AjaxSmack 01:39, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
• Support move to either Punjab (India) or Punjab, India. I think there really was never much of a reason given (as described in Jafeluv's comment) to move it in the first place. Really not as terribly ambiguous as described either; "India" is understood in its post-1947 modern context, and "British India" is usually called so. Hatnotes should easily get rid of all ambiguity, at any rate.3swordz (talk) 12:14, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Punjab during Mahabharata times was known as Panchanada.

http://books.google.co.in/books?ei=uG2RTb3xCYXQcZeeuUA&ct=result&id=0bkMAAAAIAAJ&dq=abhira+yadav&q=abhiras

Gazetteer of the Bombay Presidency ..., Volume 1, Part 1-page-11

-- Who gives a heck about what it was called during a mythical time! Stop saffornization of freaking everything in India! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.74.34.16 (talk) 19:55, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

Incomplete

There is no information on major social problems like female foeticide, drugs, illegal emigration to western countries, honour killings. Punjab/Haryana regions are the worst hit and well known for these problems. --David Fraudly (talk) 07:39, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

can you share any sources or resources for this information so it can be added to the article??MilkStraw532 (talk) 19:56, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

Akbar attempted to donate land but it was not accepted. Please stop promoting falsities about sikhism. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.48.169.110 (talk) 20:00, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Confusing?

This says that Dhian Singh was a top general - was he not the deodhi-wala (gatekeeper to the Maharajah's court) during Maharajah Ranjit Singh's reign? In Maharajah Ranjit Singh's lifetime, Golab Singh was to be found in Jammu. It was only after Maharajah Ranjit Singh's death, did Golab Singh become the chief minister (who then went on to betray the Punjabis and make them easy prey for British guns in the first Anglo-Sikh war). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Help please help (talk • contribs) 04:46, 29 September 2012 (UTC)Help please help (talk) 04:48, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

Give references if you are sure. 25 CENTS VICTORIOUS^☣ 06:11, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

Drugs

I AGREE with David Fraudly! I think the drug problems are becoming increasingly devastating and characteristic of this place, and I think it's irresponsible and deceitful to leave them out of the discussion/wikipage. I added a section this morning, but perhaps it didn't belong as an entirely independent section. The page for Washington, DC, for example, includes information about crime in its demographics section, so maybe it should be there, but I think this should definitely be a matter of discussion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dakuhippo (talk • contribs) 07:19, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

The information about drugs, female foeticide and other major problem should be present on wikipedia. But I have a view that it should be as a separate article. I am unable to find proper WP policy or guidelines regarding this. But somehow intuitively it felt that it should not be added in this article. Contents of this articles in some sense are more of permanent nature. The problems are rather recent stuff. Also I checked lots of other similar articles on different states of india and then reverted your edit. --Vigyani (talk) 07:37, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

(I have moved this new section to the end of the page). Vigyani asked me on my talk page to take a look at this. Having reviewed the Drugs section, I can see nothing wrong with it - the thing has citations to multiple reliable sources and is relevant to the subject of the article. While it is true that there can be issues regarding recentism, it seems that this is not some overnight sensation/one-day news story. Indeed, it appears that no-one is disputing that the content should appear somewhere but rather whether or not it should appear here. There is nothing wrong with creating a separate Drugs addiction in Punjab article and summarising that in this article but, right now, the section is not undue in weight and I can't actually see any benefit in forking it. That time may come, of course. - Sitush (talk) 17:18, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Article Neutrality

Some of the language used in this article seems to be biased. Phrases such as "It affords the best quality of life to its residents", "has the best infrastructure" seem to me to be overreaching opinions. In addition, the original citation listed the government of Punjab itself as a 'source', but the government would clearly have quite an interest in portraying itself in a positive light and downplaying negatives, as it might help attract new residents and corporations. — Preceding unsigned comment added by FarnhamJ (talk • contribs) 11:05, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

-- Maybe this is what you're looking for: http://www.oifc.in/Uploads/MediaTypes/Documents/Punjab-1207.pdf — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.244.179.210 (talk) 11:23, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

Pin codes & Post Office list for Punjab

I found the pin codes and Post Office list of Punjab in a website pricingindia.in/pincodes/punjab. Do you want to add this in article external links to help readers to know about locality of Punjab with 3836 post office with pin code and their address with Google map — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vickyrathee2005 (talk • contribs) 11:55, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Punjab, India. 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/20070417122227/http://punjabgovt.nic.in:80/punjabataglance/LeadingbyExample.htm to http://punjabgovt.nic.in/punjabataglance/LeadingbyExample.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: 18 January 2022).

• 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} 11:53, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

Whitewashing History?

How can there be absolutely no mention whatsoever of one of the most important political events in Punjab's history; that is, Operation Blue Star and the Khalistan movement? Hiding reality doesn't erase it. 138.229.215.167 (talk) 23:51, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

Indic scripts

Looks like there's been an edit war here regarding Gurmukhi script. WP:INDICSCRIPTS does not apply to infoboxes. It should be uncontroversial to add Gurmukhi text in the infobox. The convention on geographic locales is to add local scripts when relevant, and it's the case here. ʙʌsʌwʌʟʌ ^тʌʟк 02:23, 7 March 2017 (UTC)

The script can be added to the infobox in a line: native_name=

I suggested that here. I would add it myself, but I can't read Gurmukhi script and wouldn't know what I was adding. Apuldram (talk) 10:45, 7 March 2017 (UTC)

Added. ʙʌsʌwʌʟʌ ^тʌʟк 14:20, 7 March 2017 (UTC)

Incomplete Information

I just wanted to let the website users know that on the history section of the Indian Punjab page, it lacks great information since the early 1950s. I mean that since the early 50s, it has gone through the Punjabi Suba Movement, Indian Emergency from 1975 to 1977, terrorism, return of peace back to the state and impacts of the 1991 Indian Economic Reforms on the state. What about all that missing historical information? There is the late 1950s, 1960s, 1970s, 1980s, 1990s, 2000s. It's almost 60 years worth of information. Who is going to take a look at that? Kindly review it. Thanks. Wjkk20 February 23, 2018 (UTC)

Population

I reverted this edit. For starters, changing the infobox and leaving the article body as it was created an inconsistency. Furthermore, I am not convinced that the cited source says what is claimed. If you read the entire page, the 27.7 million figure is given and the estimated higher figure doesn't appear to come from the Department of Censuses.

There is a weird issue, however, regarding 2011 ranking which I have raised at Talk:List_of_states_and_union_territories_of_India_by_population#Punjab_-_15th_or_16th? because our infobox links to that article. To repeat it here, according to p 20 of this census handbook, Punjab was 15th. Our article says 16th. Is this handbook wrong? - Sitush (talk) 03:14, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 6 February 2021

The final line of the introduction has incorrect grammar. "Punjab has a bustling tourism, music, culinary, and film industries." This should be changed to this: "Punjab has bustling tourism, music, culinary, and film industries." The word "industries" is plural so using the indefinite article "a" is incorrect. 80.6.233.101 (talk) 01:10, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

 Done 54nd60x (talk) 11:20, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 16 May 2021

A new district has been added in punjab so total number of districts are 23 now Vikasid (talk) 15:48, 16 May 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. ― Qwerfjkl  (please use {{reply to|Qwerfjkl}} on reply) 16:07, 16 May 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 30 May 2021

Updated the GSDP FIGURES in the infobox and in the lead section. GSDP ₹5.41 LAKH CRORE AND per capita ₹155,157 (2020-21). Also update the source. Thanks--202.78.236.168 (talk) 05:50, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

References

Why is it taking so time to make such small changes in the GDP figures. Already source have been provided. Thanks--103.102.116.116 (talk) 05:34, 22 June 2021 (UTC)

I've updated the figures using your source. Please check if anything needs changing. As for your question, I do not know the answer. Open requests enter a centralised queue, and they normally get actioned within hours. It's bizarre that yours remained unanswered for three weeks. If this happens again, you can just file a new request, and if that gets ignored, bring it up at WT:INDIA. – Uanfala (talk) 20:49, 22 June 2021 (UTC)

@Uanfala: You forgot to update the GDP figures in the lead section of the third para. Per capita needs updated. Thanks--103.102.116.116 (talk) 05:12, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

Ooops. That should fix it [2]. – Uanfala (talk) 13:25, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 15 June 2021

Punjab State Of India has now 23 Districts in Total with the carving out of Malerkotla as a New District from Sangrur District Gpsingh37c (talk) 10:30, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 10:47, 18 June 2021 (UTC)

23rd District Malerkotla

2401:4900:4205:599F:D203:ABAC:AD88:6F3F (talk) 13:24, 28 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. ‑‑ElHef (Meep?) 14:37, 28 June 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 29 June 2021

112.196.105.202 (talk) 11:26, 29 June 2021 (UTC)

Punjab goverment made one new district Malerkotla. kindly add. now punjab have 23 districts. it made on 14 May 2021.

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 11:47, 29 June 2021 (UTC)

New District

Malerkotla is established as a new district of punjab which makes it 23rd. Vikram Jeet Johal (talk) 07:43, 14 August 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request in 29 August 2021

Districts are 23 now 106.196.105.183 (talk) 11:48, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 15:45, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 20 September 2021

change 9 °C (48 °F) in July to 31 °C (87 °F) in July 203.115.84.13 (talk) 09:52, 20 September 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Elli (talk | contribs) 16:35, 20 September 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 22 December 2021

change Punjab to Panjab 2A00:23C7:7F05:4700:808C:C830:136A:4DE4 (talk) 09:16, 22 December 2021 (UTC)

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit semi-protected}} template. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 10:20, 22 December 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 11 February 2022

hi the demographic information is very old on this page. 2605:8D80:32C:9E72:59D:CDA:9D36:83C5 (talk) 07:41, 11 February 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. --Ferien (talk) 08:31, 11 February 2022 (UTC)

On the name of state.

It's not Punjab dear it's PANJAB. 2409:4053:2E16:EEC:517F:5378:D769:1605 (talk) 16:59, 6 July 2022 (UTC)

'PUNJAB seems to be the WP:COMMONNAME. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 18:03, 6 July 2022 (UTC)

Additional official languages of Punjab

There is no additional official language in Punjab, the Government of Punjab never declared any additional official language and the Punjab Official Languages ​​Act 1967 also did not declare English and Hindi as additional official languages ​​of the State of Punjab. Shubhdeep Sandhu (talk) 08:25, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

References

Template:Infobox Indian state or territory has an RFC

Template: Infobox Indian state or territory has an RFC for possible consensus. A discussion is taking place. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. Tojoroy20 (talk) 21:30, 3 February 2023 (UTC)

Infobox replacement

The {{Infobox settlement}} used on this page is going to be replaced with {{Infobox Indian state or territory}} as per the Proposal and Consensus of RFC. Any questions/suggestions? Discuss Here.

You can also contribute by replacing Infobox settlement with Infobox Indian state or territory on other pages , or by improving this one. Tojoroy20 (talk) 18:53, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

 Done – Tojoroy20 (talk) 21:32, 17 March 2023 (UTC)