Discussions on this page often lead to previous arguments being restated, especially about the article's title. Please read recent comments, look in the archives, and review the FAQ before commenting on that topic.
This article is written in Indian English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, analysed, defence) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.
Ganges was a Geography and places good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
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
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Hinduism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Hinduism 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.HinduismWikipedia:WikiProject HinduismTemplate:WikiProject HinduismHinduism articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Wikipedia's articles on Religion-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.ReligionWikipedia:WikiProject ReligionTemplate:WikiProject ReligionReligion articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Rivers, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Rivers 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.RiversWikipedia:WikiProject RiversTemplate:WikiProject RiversRiver articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Bangladesh, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Bangladesh 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.BangladeshWikipedia:WikiProject BangladeshTemplate:WikiProject BangladeshBangladesh articles
This is certainly within bounds for the prolixity of the lead sentence, but wouldn't mind condensing the wording slightly. The local names could be kept within one set of brackets, but then we probably shouldn't have nested sets for the IPA and respelling. Alternatively, could we perhaps safely omit those pronunciations, since they're fairly intuitive to unfamiliar readers? — RAVENPVFF·talk· 10:02, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It is not just the prolixity, which we can argue about, but due weight. By freeing the local usage from its parenthesis, we give it prominence in the lead sentence. The usage is really incidental to a distilled encyclopedic summary of the river.
Also, without the parenthesis, "India" and "Bangladesh" become mildly repetitive, leading a reader to wonder, "Yeah, we already know it flows through India and Bangladesh."
There is a third issue. Indians use "Ganga" for the river along its whole course; that is, in the lower Ganges valley, they continue to use it both for main river which flows through Bangladesh and an artificial channel which diverts half the rivers water into Indian West Bengal. Bangladeshis use it only for their stretch of the river; Bangladeshi English-languages sources prefer Ganges to Ganga for the whole river. I fear your edit might become more grist for the India-POV mill for changing the page name to "Ganga."
We had considered all these issues, when we wrote the lead sentence. The one change that I think should be made is to flip the four citations: bring the last two (the British government and Library of Congress usage, which is tertiary) forward; the other two are secondary sources, and don't address due weight. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 10:48, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, I take back that last proposal. Probably best to let those four sleeping dogs lie. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 10:51, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Point taken. Would you still consent to combining the brackets, like so?
See the section above. The same issue had arisen there. The problem is that in India the whole river, from headwaters to mouth, is called Ganga. In Bangladesh, only the segment of the main stem flowing through it is called Padma. In English-language sources in BD, the preferred name for the whole river is "Ganges." In other words, "the local name along the course of the river changes from Ganga to Padma at the border. Thus, when we say, "in India: Ganga; in BD, Padma," we mean "locally: in India, Ganga; in BD Padma." or "locally, "Ganga," in India; "Padma," in BD" No more description is required. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 04:06, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Why is the Ganga river referred to as the Ganges in this article? The world doesn't revolve around the British. The original name is Ganga and should be referred to as Ganga only. It's an Indian river, so there's no need to name it as the Ganges just because some British mispronounced it. TheDarkKnight433 (talk) 19:03, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@TheDarkKnight433, please see the first discussion on this page and the many discussions about this in the archives which you can access from the archive box at the top of the page. There was a move discussion about exactly this just a few months ago at Talk:Ganges/Archive_7 that you should read first for some background on why this article is at Ganges. Ravensfire (talk) 19:13, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, after reading the entire discussion, it's evident that many people were in favor of changing the name of the river to its original name, which is "Ganga". "Ganges" isn't even an English word; Britishers who resided here weren't able to pronounce its actual name, so they called it Ganges. This river originates from India, and the word "Ganga" predates the English language itself. No one refers to it as the Ganges here in India. Therefore, I propose to reopen this discussion. TheDarkKnight433 (talk) 19:27, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Giving an example of a hotel? What if it's owned by some other nationals? I will give you more relevant source. How about from Government of India? TheDarkKnight433 (talk) 23:20, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@TheDarkKnight433:. Not one hotel, many hotels, and clearly not owned by "other nationals". But, since you bring up government sites, take a look at this one from the Uttar Pradesh ministry. Unfortunately, your "no one refers to the Ganges here in India" is just plain incorrect.RegentsPark (comment) 12:31, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As extensively discussed a few months ago, WP:COMMONNAME has the article using Ganges. I'm quite sure you're able to find source that use your preferred name - please note all of that was included in the discussion. Ravensfire (talk) 00:50, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Adding hindi name of Ganga next to the word The Ganges.[edit]
According to Wikipedia's guideline WP:NOINDICSCRIPT , for Hinduism-related articles, the use of Indic languages is permitted. Therefore, for topics such as the The Ganges, which is related to Hinduism, the use of Indic languages is acceptable. So, I propose to add this information.
No. This is an article about a geographical feature, a river. Articles 'related to Hinduism' are directly about religion. MrOllie (talk) 01:33, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You are just arguing without facts and sources. If you have source to claim your statement then attach it.
This source clearly mentions that it's directly related to Hinduism. So, there is no point of further discussion. TheDarkKnight433 (talk) 01:49, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You have to actually convince people to support your changes somehow, and simply declaring that discussion is at an end will not do so. MrOllie (talk) 01:59, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You tell what else do you need to get convinced. Isn't this enough? You were saying its not related to Hinduism and I proved it, that it is. TheDarkKnight433 (talk) 02:02, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The article would have to be directly about Hinduism to qualify for the exception. A tenuous relationship is not sufficient. MrOllie (talk) 02:38, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It is directly related. I literally attached a source to prove this claim. If you don't have knowledge about this topic, please refrain yourself from such topics. Thank you! TheDarkKnight433 (talk) 02:45, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ipse dixit. Also, making personal attacks about other people's level of knowledge will not cause others to support your proposals. MrOllie (talk) 02:46, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have to agree that saying this article is "about Hinudism" would be too much of a stretch. I wasn't around when the original decision was handed down, but it looks like there was a sort of knock-down fight about this issue that ended with a quite blanket avoidance of adding Indic scripts. To change that, you'd need to re-open the issue generally and not make weak arguments that one or another article which can be related to Hinduism, but not all that directly, is somehow not subject to the policy. Please drop this quest. — jmcgnh(talk)(contribs) 03:28, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Adding Indic language next to "The Ganges" would be incredibly helpful and beneficial for millions of people in India. The source also emphasizes the river's immense significance in Hinduism. I fail to grasp why the addition of just two words, which could benefit so many people, is being contested. TheDarkKnight433 (talk) 10:16, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Jmcgnh:, That's basically my thought on this as well. An article that would be fall into the exception would be one that is primarily focused on Hinduism. It's not intended to be a broad exception, and this would be pushing it to way beyond where it was intended.
And the OP has been blocked as a sock, so fairly moot discussion. Ravensfire (talk) 00:47, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
level-3 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
