Talk:Indus script: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Latest revision as of 16:20, 9 November 2024

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Indus script 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: Index, 1, 2: 3 months

Archaeology 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
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

History Mid‑importance

	History portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the subject of History 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.HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Historyhistory
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Writing systems High‑importance

	Writing portal This article falls within the scope of WikiProject Writing systems, a WikiProject interested in improving the encyclopaedic coverage and content of articles relating to writing systems on Wikipedia. If you would like to help out, you are welcome to drop by the project page and/or leave a query at the project’s talk page.Writing systemsWikipedia:WikiProject Writing systemsTemplate:WikiProject Writing systemsWriting system
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Afghanistan Low‑importance

	Afghanistan portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Afghanistan, a project to maintain and expand Afghanistan-related subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.AfghanistanWikipedia:WikiProject AfghanistanTemplate:WikiProject AfghanistanAfghanistan
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

India: History Mid‑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
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Indian history workgroup (assessed as Mid-importance).

Pakistan: Sindh Mid‑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
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Sindh.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Pakistani history.

Indo-Aryan Hypothesis argument

In the Indus_script#Miscellaneous_hypotheses section the possibility of a (non-Sanskrit) Indo-Aryan language is introduced. The current texts objects to the thesis saying:

"However, there are many problems with this hypothesis. A major one includes: Since the people belonging to the Indo-European cultures were always on the move, horses played a very important role in their lives or as Parpola put it, "There is no escape from the fact that the horse played a central role in the Vedic and Iranian cultures..." (Parpola, 1986)."

but does not relate this fact to anything else- why is the centrality of the horse something that makes an Indo-Aryan language unlikely? Was text deleted, or is part of the argument missing? I also can't locate the reference given- there is a 1987 Parpola publication in the reference list, but no 1986. --Spasemunki (talk) 23:50, 8 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Most likely it meant they don't reside in one place. This automatically secludes long term interactions that could influences others. As for other arguments, the Aryans are late by over thousand years while apparently the Indus script remained the unchanged through history. This indicates the robustness of the language; the high and widespread education level of the population that resists changes or it being so simple that others cannot replace. Most likely it's all of that combined. On another note, the Indian continent was one of the origin places of ancestral horses. Maybe it's the other way around? Mightyname (talk) 00:33, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Remove Keezhadi

The finds at Keezhadi are so trivial. Only Tamil nationalists promotes this theory. The evidence is weak for any connection with Keezhadi. ChandlerMinh (talk) 09:53, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Writing direction

This talk by Rajesh Rao claims the writing was right to left, discussing both the compression and the pottery evidence. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iF_nJ4vfG-A&t=1030s T039mwftulnm0l (talk) 19:02, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Earliest discovered script

It there nothing more recent than 2006? Doug Weller talk 16:14, 1 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Broken Font link

The link referenced under https://www.harappa.com/blog/free-complete-indus-font-package-available "Go to font packages at the National Fund for Mohenjodaro" http://www.mohenjodaroonline.net/index.php/indus-script/corpus-by-asko-parpola is broken, trying to make visitors install malware. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 149.224.214.87 (talk) 14:41, 24 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Malware? Doesn't seem to be trying to install anything on my end at all, it's just a dead end that goes to a blank page. You can access the original page at the archive referenced in the section, and the download button there just gives you a zip folder with the font.

Regardless, I've added an archive link to the Harappa.com link, so that clicking through any links there should automatically take you to an archived copy of the Mohenjodaroonline.net link. – Scyrme (talk) 16:56, 24 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The Alphabet of the Sindhu Prakrit (The Decipherment of the Indus script)

It's an intial decipherment of the Indus valley civilization Mahaveer H Muhammad (talk) 05:58, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yajna Devam

There are at least two dozen papers deciphering the script as Sanskrit. You can't add just one paper just because it is popular on social media. Papers uploaded on Academia.edu is not WP:RS ChandlerMinh (talk) 15:48, 5 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The paper is published on academia.edu and it is well written with all references included, not sure what is the objection of user to include all 12 papers and let reader make decision about their content. After all it is only linking in relavant information to article, no need of unnecessary censorahip. 59.102.43.48 (talk) 04:19, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Someone edited the article recently to add a link to the same paper. It's still just a PDF uploaded to a website. Not peer reviewed, not reliable. AnAbandonedMall (talk) 02:54, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Semantic scope

of Indus inscriptions comprising taxation, trade and craft licensing, commodity control and access control: archaeological and script-internal evidence

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41599-023-02320-7

This new paper adds some information.- Nizil (talk) 17:51, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sumerian

World’s oldest writing system may have its origins in mysterious, undeciphered symbols. Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 16:20, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 {{skip to talk}}
 {{talk header}}
+{{WikiProject banner shell|class=B|vital=yes|1=
-{{Vital article|topic=Society|level=5|class=B}}
-{{WikiProject banner shell|1=
+{{WikiProject Archaeology|importance=mid}}
-{{WikiProject Writing systems|class=B|importance=high}}
+{{WikiProject History|importance=mid}}
-{{WikiProject Pakistan|class=B|importance=mid|Sindh=yes|History=yes}}
+{{WikiProject Writing systems|importance=high}}
-{{WikiProject India|class=B|importance=mid|history=yes|history-importance=mid|pre=yes}}
+{{WikiProject Afghanistan|importance=low}}
+{{WikiProject India|importance=mid|history=yes|history-importance=mid|pre=yes}}
-{{WikiProject Archaeology|class=B|importance=mid}}
+{{WikiProject Pakistan|importance=mid|Sindh=yes|History=yes}}
-{{WikiProject History|class=B|importance=mid}}
-{{WP1.0|class=B|importance=Low|v0.7=pass|category=Langlit}}
 }}
 {{User:ClueBot III/ArchiveThis
@@ Line 21: / Line 20: @@
 }}
+== Indo-Aryan Hypothesis argument ==
-== "Defuncted" ==
+In the [[Indus_script#Miscellaneous_hypotheses]] section the possibility of a (non-Sanskrit) Indo-Aryan language is introduced. The current texts objects to the thesis saying: {{quote|"However, there are many problems with this hypothesis. A major one includes: Since the people belonging to the Indo-European cultures were always on the move, horses played a very important role in their lives or as Parpola put it, "There is no escape from the fact that the horse played a central role in the Vedic and Iranian cultures..." (Parpola, 1986)."}} but does not relate this fact to anything else- why is the centrality of the horse something that makes an Indo-Aryan language unlikely? Was text deleted, or is part of the argument missing? I also can't locate the reference given- there is a 1987 Parpola publication in the reference list, but no 1986. --[[User:Spasemunki|Spasemunki]] ([[User talk:Spasemunki|talk]]) 23:50, 8 August 2020 (UTC)
-Even if we ignore the fact that it is uncertain that the Indus script was a writing system, what purpose does the word "defuncted" serve here? Did someone or something come along and defunct it? Meaningless. I'm removing it again and per [[WP:BRD]], please discuss your category here and get consensus for its inclusion before re-adding it. Best. --[[User:RegentsPark|regentspark]] <small>([[User talk:RegentsPark|comment]])</small> 05:48, 4 May 2018 (UTC)
+: Most likely it meant they don't reside in one place. This automatically secludes long term interactions that could influences others. As for other arguments, the Aryans are late by over thousand years while apparently the Indus script remained the unchanged through history. This indicates the robustness of the language; the high and widespread education level of the population that resists changes or it being so simple that others cannot replace. Most likely it's all of that combined. On another note, the Indian continent was one of the origin places of ancestral horses. Maybe it's the other way around? [[User:Mightyname|Mightyname]] ([[User talk:Mightyname|talk]]) 00:33, 11 August 2024 (UTC)
-== Why shouldn't this new discovery be covered in the article? ==
+== Remove Keezhadi ==
-i recently made some additions on the discovery of an anthropomorh which is being said to contain both brahmi an indus symbols which was reverted, why this earth shaking discovery which can practically lead to validating brahmi origins from indus script and in turn give much credibility to scholarship which claims to decipher indus script based on brahmi?. There is no question about the artifact being a fact as two such have been discovered and also displayed in international exhibitions. [[User:Rameezraja001|Rameezraja001]] ([[User talk:Rameezraja001|talk]]) 01:24, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
-:I reverted your edit because the leap from the exhibition detail to the deciphering of the script was uncited (that's the OR part). Generally, when you make a claim that a discovery is going to lead to something big, you need a reliable scholarly source that says just that. If you have such a source, then no worries, add it and cite the source. --[[User:RegentsPark|regentspark]] <small>([[User talk:RegentsPark|comment]])</small> 01:34, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
-:: the article clearly quotes the art curator who definitely is a representative of indian government and not a representative of a private art collector that the script is a mix of indus symbol and brahmi, i didn't claim anything, this just what is cited in the report, even if you argue about nature of the script, but  it still coincides with late harappan script period and very much related to indus script. This is a massive discovery and i think it definitely needs to have some place in the article. it may lead to many breakthroughs in the future. [[User:Rameezraja001|Rameezraja001]] ([[User talk:Rameezraja001|talk]]) 01:57, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
-::: You need to source the massive discovery and the breakthroughs in the future part. These are conclusions that you are drawing, but we need scholarly sources to attest that the discovery (not sure if that is appropriately sourced either) is significant. The entire text following "This could lead to possible breakthrough in deciphering indus script ....." is what is OR unless it is sourced to reliable scholarly secondary sources. --[[User:RegentsPark|regentspark]] <small>([[User talk:RegentsPark|comment]])</small> 02:08, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
+The finds at Keezhadi are so trivial. Only Tamil nationalists promotes this theory. The evidence is weak for any connection with Keezhadi. [[User:ChandlerMinh|ChandlerMinh]] ([[User talk:ChandlerMinh|talk]]) 09:53, 23 August 2021 (UTC)
-:::: I remember looking into this sometime back and will add that:
-::::* Manjul and Manjul's original paper in ''Pragdhara'' dates back to 2007
-::::* Even the [http://ec2-79-125-124-178.eu-west-1.compute.amazonaws.com/articles/Little-man-with-huge-potential/30885 news report] relating to the art exhibition is 5 years old.
-:::: However, when I last looked, in the last 10+ years there has been no solid follow up in any scholarly literature about the artifact (Manjul ''et al'' had a 2011 conference paper saying that the boar figure bore resemblance to [[Varaha]] form of Vishnu; again, nobody seems to have picked that up. [[Subhash Kak]] recently penned a [https://medium.com/@subhashkak1/a-reading-of-the-br%C4%81hm%C4%AB-letters-on-an-anthropomorphic-figure-2a3c505a9acd Medium post] on the topic but that, um, hardly improves the credibility of the claims). Given that history, I too would recommend against including any of such thinly sourced [[WP:REDFLAG|redflag]] claims in the article. [[User:Abecedare|Abecedare]] ([[User talk:Abecedare|talk]]) 02:23, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
-:::::there are lots of artifacts which have not been picked up and clearly reflects more like, a bias you can call it, or reluctance to give any importance to this very crucial piece of evidence connecting indus valley to vedic civilization. the 34 symbol copper inscribed tablet has also been ignored but it doesnt matter since the artifact has been proven as authentic, my question is, there are two such artifacts of anthropomorhpic figures not just one, if it is falsified why they are being exhibited in the international exhibition by the indian govt an ASI has archived it and why scholars who backed brahmi indus connection only talking about it? why not others? and secondly if they do contain an inscription, why is it not being ''picked up'' by the scholars, because it proves the presence of literacy if not anything else in vedic period of india while indus scripts are thought to not go beyond 1900 BC? the figures themselves are stated to be evidence of vedic period, and what is the ''redflag'' you are talking about, maybe redflag is for people who are rival supporters of other theories or people who are hell bent on disproving indus script as representing any language system at all. [[User:Rameezraja001|Rameezraja001]] ([[User talk:Rameezraja001|talk]]) 04:38, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
+== Writing direction ==
-:::::You seem to have forgotten your one week block in June for personal attacks. So far as the Indian government goes, governments by their very nature are political and not reliable sources for history or archaeology. Let's wait for peer reviewed publications. [[User:Doug Weller|<span style="color:#070">Doug Weller</span>]] [[User talk:Doug Weller|talk]] 13:44, 20 August 2018 (UTC) {{re|Rameezraja001}} I completely agree with Abecedare by the way.   [[User:Doug Weller|<span style="color:#070">Doug Weller</span>]] [[User talk:Doug Weller|talk]] 14:00, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
-::::::{{re|RegentsPark|Abecedare}} speaking of discoveries, I'm not happy with this series of edits[https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=List_of_inventions_and_discoveries_of_the_Indus_Valley_Civilisation&type=revision&diff=855707561&oldid=853271745] at the [[List of inventions and discoveries of the Indus Valley Civilisation]]. Ignoring the spelling change to "civilization" which needs reverting, some of these are just things found with no claim for discovery/invention. I suspect some of this is copied from other places, perhaps our articles. I've posted to the talk page there. [[User:Doug Weller|<span style="color:#070">Doug Weller</span>]] [[User talk:Doug Weller|talk]] 14:44, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
-:::::::Commented at the [[Talk:List_of_inventions_and_discoveries_of_the_Indus_Valley_Civilisation#Recent additions are dubious|IVC inventions talkpage]]. Also [https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Brahmi_script&diff=855766621&oldid=855671717 removed] claim of discovery of Indus/Brahmi scripts' [[Rosetta stone]] from  [[Brahmi script]] article (it's weird/revealing that everyone seems to cite the same " The Art Newspaper" and an irrelevant youtube video, instead of making an effort to dig up the underlying ''Pragdhara'' article!). [[User:Abecedare|Abecedare]] ([[User talk:Abecedare|talk]]) 18:10, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
+This talk by Rajesh Rao claims the writing was right to left, discussing both the compression and the pottery evidence. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iF_nJ4vfG-A&t=1030s [[User:T039mwftulnm0l|T039mwftulnm0l]] ([[User talk:T039mwftulnm0l|talk]]) 19:02, 30 December 2021 (UTC)
-=== recent reverts ===
+== Earliest discovered script ==
-i dont suggest removing a properly sourced journal, Farmer's article which is also considered fringe theory is also mentioned here, the dispute of Brahmi origin is still not resolved, the article itself states that many scholars do believe the Indus origin, so i dont think that citing the journal is a fringe theory or a monumentous claim not already backed by scholarship especially Cunningham. [[Special:Contributions/60.50.173.223|60.50.173.223]] ([[User talk:60.50.173.223|talk]]) 23:38, 5 June 2019 (UTC)
+It there nothing more recent than 2006? [[User:Doug Weller|<span style="color:#070">Doug Weller</span>]] [[User talk:Doug Weller|talk]] 16:14, 1 August 2022 (UTC)
-:Context: This above coment is about [https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Indus_script&diff=900476112&oldid=900448079 this] recent edit, which I had reverted. Similar edits were also made by {{user|60.50.173.223}} at [[Brahmi script]], [[Copper Hoard Culture]], and at [[Indian copper plate inscriptions ]].
-:Setting aside issues of whether ''other claims'' in these articles need to be re-examined (which can be discussed separately), lets focus on whether the [https://ia802805.us.archive.org/18/items/CompositeAntrhomorphicFigureFromHaryanaPragdharaSKManjul/Composite%20Antrhomorphic%20figure%20from%20Haryana%20(Pragdhara)%20-%20SK%20Manjul.pdf Manjul and Manjul paper] from 2007, which claims to have discovered a script said to be a bridge between the [[Indus script|Indus]] and the [[Brahmi script|Brahmi]], is worth mentioning. This would indeed be a momentous discovery but, as I [https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Talk%3AIndus_script&type=revision&diff=855680298&oldid=855678697 said in the above discussion], other scholars have not taken the claim seriously. Therefore it would be [[WP:UNDUE|undue]] to include it in these wikipedia articles; see also [[WP:REDFLAG]].
-: As for the [https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Brahmi_script&diff=prev&oldid=900478988 2015 secondary source] that the IP recently added in support of their edit (full text of the article by Joseph Manuel available [http://www.jorhsa.com/Edition_2015/Copper.pdf here]):
-:* First, note that the ''[http://jorhsa.com/about.html Journal of Religious History South Asia]'' (JORHSA) is a non-peer-reviewed "bi-annual" journal with unknown publishers, which only ever produced [http://jorhsa.com/archive.html one issue] (in Fall 2015). Four of the five articles in that [http://jorhsa.com/current.html issue] were written by persons on [http://jorhsa.com/editorial.html the editorial board] of the publication. TLDR: this is closer to a group blog than an academic publication, and should not be used as a source in article-space.
-:* Secondly, the Joseph Manuel paper argues ''against'' the Manjul and Manjul's interpretation of the script on the copper artefact, in part by citing {{tq|Jai   Prakash,   Dy. Superintending Epigraphist (Personal communication) on the basis of the script on the anthropomorph, has opined that ‘all letters  have  great  resemblance  with those  of  Mauryan  Brahmi  except  partial  difference  in  the  first  letter  of  the  first line and first letter of the third line.’}} and concludes with, {{tq|In the light of the above it is clear that minor variations in script may not be construed as a hallmark for declaring the legend on the anthropomorph to be  prior to Mauryan Brahmi}} (see pages 18-19). Incidentally, in the article's conclusion (pages 52-53), Manuel ridicules "Vedic Harappa proponents" and "scholars bent upon proving that the Vedic people were the authors of the Harappan Civilization", and dismisses them as "lobbyists".
-:In short: while JORHSA is not a reliable source per wikipedia standards for inclusion in article-space, to the extent that we treat the Manuel paper as a [https://asi.academia.edu/DrManuelJoseph credentialed expert's] opinion to be considered in talk-page discussions, it only strengthens the argument for not including  Manjul and Manjul's claims and interpretation in wikipedia articles. [[User:Abecedare|Abecedare]] ([[User talk:Abecedare|talk]]) 19:02, 6 June 2019 (UTC)
+== Broken Font link ==
-:: wikipedia does allow mentioning primary source given it should not be paraphrased [[WP:PRIMARYNOTBAD]], but you are removing the entire source, why are you doing that. As for your claim that 'since there is no secondary source, no scholar has taken the claim seriously' that is entirely your argument, no scholar has tried to prove the object as a fake or a forgery except [http://www.safarmer.com/fake.post-Indus.object.pdf steve farmer] which is also not a good source. According to WK rules, the artifact should be stated in the article since it is a genuine discovery and endorsed by the government agency as published in its journal. As for [[WP:UNDUE]], this is unjustified, the artifact is mentioned along with other discoveries of bet dwarka and i have added no other argument except the one mentioned in the source itself, your argument of [[WP:REDFLAG]] that the source is making exceptional claim of this script being a bridge between harappan and brahmi is also unjustified as i have already stated that it the paper is only stating ''similarity'' with early brahmi and harappan script so its not making a claim which you have stated, and this argument of linking harappan with brahmi has been made by other scholars as well, so there is nothing new proposed which hasn't already been done by various other scholars, so your argument here is very unjustified, As to your reference to the secondary source, the source does endorse the primary source conclusion and also another POV of an epigraphist, i am fully open to mentioning any argument which is made in the secondary source, but im not in favour you completely removing reference to a genuine discovery from this or other articles. please restore them. im fine with your assessment of not mentioning the secondary source for not being peer reviewed. In the article [[Indian copper plate inscriptions]] you have reinstated a claim made in the intro without proper citation and only added a tag there, so you are on one hand trying to remove a genuine primary source on one hand, and trying to reinstate a claim which is not backed by any source which i think is contradictory editing. you have removed this source even from copper hoard culture article despite its the only artifact of its kind based on your linguistic argument, which i really dont understand why you are doing it. I think you are trying to act as a scholar and trying to enforce your own argument which you shouldn't do, you are not the scholarship here, so in my opinion you cannot remove a primary source or reject an archaeological find because it doesnt suit your argument.[[Special:Contributions/60.50.173.223|60.50.173.223]] ([[User talk:60.50.173.223|talk]]) 22:13, 6 June 2019 (UTC)
+The link referenced under
+https://www.harappa.com/blog/free-complete-indus-font-package-available
+"Go to font packages at the National Fund for Mohenjodaro"
+http://www.mohenjodaroonline.net/index.php/indus-script/corpus-by-asko-parpola
+is broken, trying to make visitors install malware.  <!-- Template:Unsigned IP --><small class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/149.224.214.87|149.224.214.87]] ([[User talk:149.224.214.87#top|talk]]) 14:41, 24 September 2022 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
+: Malware? Doesn't seem to be trying to install anything on my end at all, it's just a dead end that goes to a blank page. You can access the original page at [https://web.archive.org/web/20201101112146/http://mohenjodaroonline.net/index.php/indus-script/corpus-by-asko-parpola the archive] referenced in the section, and the download button there just gives you a zip folder with the font.
+: Regardless, I've added an archive link to the Harappa.com link, so that clicking through any links there should automatically take you to an archived copy of the Mohenjodaroonline.net link. – [[User:Scyrme|Scyrme]] ([[User talk:Scyrme|talk]]) 16:56, 24 September 2022 (UTC)
+== The Alphabet of the Sindhu Prakrit (The Decipherment of the Indus script) ==
-:::The Shindea and Willis source has had no citations by relevant academics in the 5 years it's been available. That makes it [[WP:UNDUE]]. The IP has claimed elsewhere it has had "almost 3" citations, which is I guess 2, but evidently hasn't put in the effort to find out that they are the same paper which is in a marketing journal. They don't count. [[User:Doug Weller|<span style="color:#070">Doug Weller</span>]] [[User talk:Doug Weller|talk]] 09:47, 7 June 2019 (UTC)
-:::: mate you can do what ever you want, and you are evidently doing that, tbh. [[Special:Contributions/60.50.173.223|60.50.173.223]] ([[User talk:60.50.173.223|talk]]) 13:03, 7 June 2019 (UTC)
+It's an intial decipherment of the Indus valley civilization [[User:Mahaveer H Muhammad|Mahaveer H Muhammad]] ([[User talk:Mahaveer H Muhammad|talk]]) 05:58, 23 October 2022 (UTC)
-== Indus writing tablet terracotta models from mohenjo daro, indus style mesopotamian seals ==
+== Yajna Devam ==
-vasant shindhe in one of his [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MSx4vyGEHfY&t=2652s presentation] available online has shown two terracotta model tablets used for writing discovered from mohenjo daro. i think its a very big discovery  and dont know why scholars have not covered this discovery which nullifies the argument that indus script was traffic signals/smileys etc. Any one, who find any scholarly source please add it to the article. [https://blog.nationalgeographic.org/2013/04/17/revealing-india-and-pakistans-ancient-art-and-inventions/ There are two mesopotamian seals] which are shaped, carved and inscribed in form of indus seals according to Dr. Mark Kenoyer which might represent translation of an indus seal. This argument should also be added to the indus script being a writing system. [[Special:Contributions/60.54.13.118|60.54.13.118]] ([[User talk:60.54.13.118|talk]]) 19:57, 10 January 2019 (UTC)
+There are at least two dozen papers deciphering the script as Sanskrit. You can't add just one paper just because it is popular on social media. Papers uploaded on [[Academia.edu]] is not [[WP:RS]] [[User:ChandlerMinh|ChandlerMinh]] ([[User talk:ChandlerMinh|talk]]) 15:48, 5 October 2023 (UTC)
+:The paper is published on academia.edu and it is well written with all references included, not sure what is the objection of user to include all 12 papers and let reader make decision about their content. After all it is only linking in relavant information to article, no need of unnecessary censorahip. [[Special:Contributions/59.102.43.48|59.102.43.48]] ([[User talk:59.102.43.48|talk]]) 04:19, 27 October 2024 (UTC)
-== longest examples ==
+Someone edited the article recently to add a link to the same paper. It's still just a PDF uploaded to a website. Not peer reviewed, not reliable. [[User:AnAbandonedMall|AnAbandonedMall]] ([[User talk:AnAbandonedMall|talk]]) 02:54, 27 October 2024 (UTC)
-I am puzzled by the statement
-:{{xt| [Mahadevan] found ... that the longest inscription contained only 14 symbols in a single line}}
-when [[:File:Longest Indus script inscription (colour).jpg]] shows about thirty symbols in five lines.  Perhaps that example was not available to Mahadevan; okay, why quote an obsolete observation, near the top of the article? —[[User:Tamfang|Tamfang]] ([[User talk:Tamfang|talk]]) 20:37, 30 November 2019 (UTC)
-: It looks like the source was misquoted- the [https://www.nature.com/news/ancient-civilization-cracking-the-indus-script-1.18587 source] says 26, which probably refers to unique characters. I fixed the reference in the article- it may have been misquoted or just changed by a vandal. --[[User:Spasemunki|Spasemunki]] ([[User talk:Spasemunki|talk]]) 00:35, 1 December 2019 (UTC)
-::{{re|Spasemunki}} WikiBlame brings up [[Special:Diff/753207246|this edit]]. --[[User:Florian Blaschke|Florian Blaschke]] ([[User talk:Florian Blaschke|talk]]) 01:56, 28 April 2020 (UTC)
+== Semantic scope==
-== Indo-Aryan Hypothesis argument ==
+of Indus inscriptions comprising taxation, trade and craft licensing, commodity control and access control: archaeological and script-internal evidence
+* https://www.nature.com/articles/s41599-023-02320-7
-In the [[Indus_script#Miscellaneous_hypotheses]] section the possibility of a (non-Sanskrit) Indo-Aryan language is introduced. The current texts objects to the thesis saying: {{quote|"However, there are many problems with this hypothesis. A major one includes: Since the people belonging to the Indo-European cultures were always on the move, horses played a very important role in their lives or as Parpola put it, "There is no escape from the fact that the horse played a central role in the Vedic and Iranian cultures..." (Parpola, 1986)."}} but does not relate this fact to anything else- why is the centrality of the horse something that makes an Indo-Aryan language unlikely? Was text deleted, or is part of the argument missing? I also can't locate the reference given- there is a 1987 Parpola publication in the reference list, but no 1986. --[[User:Spasemunki|Spasemunki]] ([[User talk:Spasemunki|talk]]) 23:50, 8 August 2020 (UTC)
+This new paper adds some information.- [[User:Nizil Shah|Nizil]] ([[User talk:Nizil Shah|talk]]) 17:51, 9 January 2024 (UTC)
-== Remove Keezhadi ==
+== Sumerian ==
-The finds at Keezhadi are so trivial. Only Tamil nationalists promotes this theory. The evidence is weak for any connection with Keezhadi. [[User:ChandlerMinh|ChandlerMinh]] ([[User talk:ChandlerMinh|talk]]) 09:53, 23 August 2021 (UTC)
+[https://edition.cnn.com/2024/11/05/science/origins-of-writing-cuneiform/index.html World’s oldest writing system may have its origins in mysterious, undeciphered symbols]. [[User:Joshua Jonathan|<span style="font-family:Forte;color:black">Joshua Jonathan</span>]] - [[User talk:Joshua Jonathan|<span style="font-family:Monotype Corsiva;color:black">Let's talk!</span>]] 16:20, 9 November 2024 (UTC)
-== A comparison with Turkish Runes ==
-Undeciphered Indus script and Turkish runes
-*
-Turkish Orhun runes seem to be the simplified/stylized versions of Indus signs. Very interesting, isn't it? Look at the link below!
-I compared them to each other.
-Where is the junction?
-[https://uzunbacakadem.blogspot.com/2021/12/undeciphered-indus-script-and-turkish.html Comparison Indus Script vs Turkish Runes]
-*
-Source for Indus Script signs:
-[http://www.mohenjodaroonline.net/index.php/indus-script/table-of-pua-codes Indus Script signs]
-[[User:UzunbacakAdem|UzunbacakAdem]] ([[User talk:UzunbacakAdem|talk]]) 10:38, 5 December 2021 (UTC)
-== Writing direction ==
-This talk by Rajesh Rao claims the writing was right to left, discussing both the compression and the pottery evidence. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iF_nJ4vfG-A&t=1030s [[User:T039mwftulnm0l|T039mwftulnm0l]] ([[User talk:T039mwftulnm0l|talk]]) 19:02, 30 December 2021 (UTC)