Talk:Goa

Velha Goa

Under the History section, the last sentence of the second paragraph: ...Adil Shahis of Bijapur who made Velha Goa... I doubt the city was known by that Portuguese name in the years prior to European contact. Does anyone know the original name? 128.148.5.109 (talk) 22:24, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Inappropriate Image description

I feel that the following image description is inappropriate:

Mangueshi Temple, Goa - One of the tourist Industry 's best atraction.

It is a place of worship, not some amusement park and deserves a better comment. The existing comment reduces it to a trivial tourist spot, no different from a beach? Any suggestions?--Deepak D'Souza (talk • contribs) 04:41, 21 April 2007 (UTC) i agree with Deepak D'Souza. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bluegoa (talk • contribs) 11:29, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Take a look at the [:Image:File112.jpg|image description page]]. I'd be happy with a more plain description like "Mangueshi Temple, a Hindu temple in Old Goa". I think I'll change it to that now. If it is popular then maybe the word "popular" should be added? Graham87 04:53, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

From my point of view this is a fantastic web site that gives quite a graphic account of the state of Goa. Regards Mangueshim Temple, it is a tourist attraction in it's architectural beauty. Just as other Churches and Temples are also architecturally beautiful. One scene which I cannot forget is if you stand at the river bank of Mandovi at Divar and look back at Old Goa, you see the green trees ( coconut trees) linning the bank with their green tops and above that sie the yellow spires of the Churches. It is a fantastic view prticularly at sun rise. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 80.41.34.62 (talk) 20:21, 24 April 2007 (UTC).

Date Inconsistency

The article says "Goa has a long history stretching back to the 3rd century BC, when it formed part of the Mauryan Empire," but the Mauryan empire ended in 185 BC (see the article on the Mauryan Empire). One of the two articles must be wrong. RajeevA 03:51, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Potential Copyright Violation

The line: "Goa soon became their most important possession in India, and was granted the same civic privileges as Lisbon." strongly resembles the copyright-protected content in Encyclopedia Britannica. I don't know which is the original and which the copy. Perhaps it can be modified in Wikipedia to avoid copyright problems. RajeevA 04:01, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

If you could point to the version it would be great . I believe that the 1911 version of EB is now outside copyright zone and, if it is taken from there it wont hurt. A simpler solution would be to reword the statement and avoid an issue. --Deepak D'Souza (talk • contribs) 04:57, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

I accessed the article online. The preferred citation styles that Encyclopedia Britannica has are, "Goa." Encyclopædia Britannica. 2007. Encyclopædia Britannica Online. 16 May 2007, and Goa. (2007). In Encyclopædia Britannica. Retrieved May 16, 2007, from Encyclopædia Britannica Online. Hard to say when the article was written, but the lines in question refer to the state of affairs circa 1600. The exact line in Britannica is "It was granted the same civic privileges as Lisbon.".RajeevA 19:52, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Fine! it needs to be rewritten to avoid copy vio. Go Ahead!--Deepak D'Souza (talk • contribs) 04:54, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

mention of Bollywood films shot in Goa

What I was trying to say in my recent edit summary was that I don't think Bollywood films should be mentioned in the article. To me it's quite obvious that people will choose to film in a place close to them. Mentioning Bollywood films in this article would be like mentioning in the Queensland article that many films in Australia are shot in Queensland. Graham87 12:16, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Copyright status of video ?

Can someone confirm that the video Image:Goa 1955 invasion.ogg is indeed public domain ? Th file information says that it is a Universal newsreel from 1955, which would mean that it is still copyrighted, as per my understanding. Abecedare 07:16, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Goa nominated for WP:FAR

Goa has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. --Dwaipayan (talk) 08:31, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Education

Currently the section is more conversational than encyclopedic. Perhaps we can use Karnataka#Education as a model to follow. Here are some pertinent refs:

• 2001 Census: literacy rates
• School enrollment statistics
• Various education related statistics
• Where East Looks West: Success in English in Goa and on the Konkan Coast Interesting book, may be relevant for education, demographics, culture and media sections.

I'll work this information into the article over the next few days. Abecedare 02:29, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Sub Headings

As part of the shortening of the article, I've noticed that some sub-headings have been removed. Eg. in the section 'Media and Communication', the subheadings used to be 'Radio', 'Television', 'Telecom', 'Print media', etc. I feel that these subheadings improve the readability of the article, and they should be included. Similarly, we could also have subheads like festivals, music, cuisine, architecture in the section 'culture', and also subheads in other sections like transport. The Discoverer 05:50, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

I concur...Gaimhreadhan^{(kiwiexile at DMOZ)} • 08:44, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

India's invasion of Portuguese Goa

Is it worth having a separate article on that? Most of the other Portuguese overseas colonies have their own article. I don't think I know enough about it to write it Speedboy Salesman 17:17, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Demographics Section

The following statement is not true:

Goa's major cities include Vasco, Margao, Marmagao (also known as Murgaon or Mormugão), Panjim and Mapusa. The region connecting the last four cities is considered a de facto conurbation, or a more or less continuous urban area.

Vasco and Marmagao is more or less a conurbation, however the other three are not. The distances between the four places (Vasco-Marmagao, Mapusa, Panjim and Margao) is about 20-30 kms each at the very least and there are enough recognised villages and smaller towns along the way.

Feel free to make the changes yourself and to support them with a source or sources. Also, please sign your additions to this page by striking the tilde key four time. Yours, GeorgeLouis (talk) 17:45, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

I am wondering why no mention is made of the striking difference in the child mortality rates of the North Goa and South Goa: http://goagovt.nic.in/gag/arepop.htm Anonymouslyfornow (talk) 11:47, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

We were waiting for you to add it. :) ChildofMidnight (talk) 20:51, 21 December 2008 (UTC) It may take a while :) Anonymouslyfornow (talk) 19:20, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Merge from Gomantak

• Support A separate article is not necessary. A redirect will do. --Deepak D'Souza (talk • contribs) 09:08, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

NPOV in architecture

The language under "Architecture" has some unnecessarily poetic and flowery language: "Their vision was lofty and ambition sky high, but it blazed a short trail like a meteor," "a delightful combination," "this little jewel," "The friendly harbours that had sent out sparkling blue ripples to the world were to backflow and become the road of conquest and colonization," etc. Some of the pieces in question have pertinent information, but they need to be written in a neutral tone appropriate for an encyclopedic article.(JorgenMan (talk) 19:14, 1 November 2008 (UTC))

Inclusion of other territoties of Goa (India)

This is for your kind information that there exist other territories within the territory of Goa. The teritories comprises of village communes called as 'COMMUNES OF GOA'(also called as 'Comunidades' in Portuguese and 'Gaunkaries' in Konkani). There are a total of 223 Communes in Goa. More than two-third of the land of Goa (other than forest) belongs to the Communes and the rest belongs to the Government of Goa. As of today the Govt. of Goa stands illegally on the Comunidades. The mentioned area of 3,702 sq. km includes Govt. forest, private forest, Govt.land, and private land of Communes. Please make necessary corrections to geographical area of the state of Goa. A grave error has been committed by not including 'Communes of Goa' in the 'Subdivisions' section. Please include the following;

Subivisions

223 Communes of Goa

A link on 'Communes of Goa' is desired on the Goa page. Same has been requested on the India Page.

I request members to be well informed before making rude statements especially if ignorant of the facts. Kindly make necessary changes immediately because a comprehensive article on 'The Communes of Goa' is due to be published on wikipedia.

References are given below;

For more information; http://www.geocities.com/newagegoa/Chapter8.html?1146661378765 --59.95.35.27 (talk) 08:04, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Why is WIKI sleeping? Discuss here; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:INB#Comunidades_Of_Goa_.3F--Gaunkars of Goa (talk) 16:45, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Dear Gaunkars, wikipedia never sleeps, please value people's contributions, there is no need to loose temper. As far as Comunidades are concerned, yes, they should have rightful place on wikipedia since they are the founding establishments of Goa. The geographical territories are in question, this situation has arisen because State of Goa was formed in a haste without due considerations to Constitutional obligations, also Comunidades somehow got missed out from the special status/provisions (schedules). Your references though give enough insight into the Comunidade instituions and it's legal basis, we would still need help of experts on this subject. A few court orders would be very helpful. --Ad1970india (talk) 04:46, 15 June 2009 (UTC)