Talk:Hindi–Urdu controversy

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Hindi–Urdu controversy article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1

Linguistics: Applied Linguistics High‑importance

	Linguistics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Linguistics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of linguistics 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.LinguisticsWikipedia:WikiProject LinguisticsTemplate:WikiProject LinguisticsLinguistics
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Applied Linguistics Task Force.

Languages

	Language portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Languages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of languages 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.LanguagesWikipedia:WikiProject LanguagesTemplate:WikiProject Languageslanguage
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

India High‑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
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Pakistan High‑importance

	Pakistan portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pakistan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Pakistan 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.PakistanWikipedia:WikiProject PakistanTemplate:WikiProject PakistanPakistan
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

July 2020

Hi! @Foreverknowledge:, don't revert cited sources, if any disagreement , then discuss here, i would like to know what is wrong in that sentences, Thank you 117.102.51.184 (talk) 06:28, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It’s highly suspicious you are making the same edits that were considered vandalism in the Urdu article. Your POV push is not valid. I’ve requested semi-pp on this article. Your thoughts @Austronesier, El C, Gotitbro, and Kautilya3:?Foreverknowledge (talk) 06:40, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Foreverknowledge: The additions are based on a complete misreading of the sources. 1. Hindi has not emerged based on the "demand that Urdu should be written in the native Devanagari script". Modern Standard Hindi is about much more than just the script. 2. Sentences like "Hindi in the Devanagari script replaced Urdu written in the Perso-Arabic script as the official language of Bihar in 1881, after the controversy, Hindus got their own modern language" That was not "after the controversy", but at the start/height of it; the whole thing sounds like an extreme tabloid-style over-simplification. And obviously, these edits are made by a sock IP of a blocked sockmaster. The fixation on the 1881 Bihar events as if this were the "birth year" of MSH is a trademark of their crooked POV-pushing. –Austronesier (talk) 19:19, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Foreverknowledge and Austronesier: This is mostly likely WP:LTA/SAMI, the IP range has been recently used by him to sock. I would like to say this again DO NOT FEED THE TROLL (or sock in this case) by starting conversations based around his edits or disruptions or discussing them this only encourages him. Most of the edits are nonsensical POVPUSH additions and should be reverted regardless (WP:BANREVERT). This IP was listed at the LTA and Foreverknowledge should have checked there beforehand. Gotitbro (talk) 19:42, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

FWIW, Foreverknowledge was admonished for edit warring, so the troll already got its recognition. –Austronesier (talk) 19:44, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

FWIW, I wasn't aware of that LTA. I've semi'd the page for a week in the hope they will move on. Woody (talk) 20:17, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The hindi urdu controversy

The hindi - urdu controversy (1867) made Sir syed revise his views politically urdu was a common language for both Hindus and Muslims sir Syed was shocked by the Hindu insistence on hindi written. The reaction of the Hindus to urdu and the politics of the Congress brought him up to a conclusion that the Hindus and the Muslims should always take a different paths and not come together. The idea of india having two nation Hindus and the Muslims was born and grew into Sir syed's two nation theory 182.189.91.202 (talk) 05:33, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hindi-Urdu or Urdu-Hindi?

I see that some newbie users trying to change the topic to "Urdu-Hindi controversy". No explanations have been provided. So I take it to be their personal preference.

But "Hindi-Urdu" is quite well-established terminology as can be seen in the citations. So I don't support any change to this. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 17:45, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Kautilya3 I agree, I can't see any reason for the change.

@188.248.35.211 could you explain the reason for your proposed change?

Courtesy ping to @Foreverknowledge @Adriconn as you also reverted dizzyflamingo (talk) 03:35, 8 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I don’t see any reason for the change either. It appears to be their personal preference. Foreverknowledge (talk) 20:07, 8 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Colonial India

Have reverted an unexplained edit in the lede sentence that changed colonial India to India. Surely the former is correct for the time, and is also more informative? Esowteric + Talk + Breadcrumbs 10:58, 10 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]