Talk:Mohenjo-daro

Initial discussion

Mohenjo-daro is quite small town but there's nothing else to do and see in town except its archaeological site. Does Mohenjo-daro merit its own article? --Saqib (talk) 17:24, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

I suspect the modern suburb of Pompei is a lot bigger, but the way the Pompeii article deals with things is to fold coverage of the modern city into coverage of the excavations (though there could be more hotels and restaurants added if anyone wanted to do so). It looks to me like the same thing has been done with this article, which is a good thing. Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:31, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

I've deleted the optional "Do", "Drink" and "Connect" sections. --Saqib (talk) 19:26, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

It's an important site. It has a UNESCO listing, a Wikipedia article and National Geographic coverage. Beyond question it rates an article if someone cares to write one. An example of a similar site, ruins not in a modern town, is Troy (Turkey). Pashley (talk) 22:40, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

Do you guys think it is at guide level now? --Saqib (talk) 22:45, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

I think so. The Larkana guide needs improvement, but a very good job on this guide! Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:01, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

I'm bit hesitating to nominate it for OtBP, do you think it can be nominated now? --Saqib (talk) 09:46, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

Maybe Larkana should be improved first? I tried looking on Commons for photos of Larkana and found nothing of the city. Is there anything to see or do there? The guide for that city is practically empty. Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:49, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

I don't know much about Larkana, but I will try to fill the article a bit. --Saqib (talk) 10:11, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

Mohenjo-Daro looks quite OK and you've done a good job at it, Saqib. I copyedited the text a little bit, but I think it would be best to have some native English speaker look at it as there might be some details that I didn't spot - and in the worst case some things that were right from the beginning but I've now accidentally messed up... The same goes for Larkana of course. ϒpsilon (talk) 20:05, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

ϒpsilon, thank you for copyediting both the Mohenjo-daro and Larkana article. I hope this article will be the first Pakistani OtBP destination. --Saqib (talk) 20:36, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

Nice work! And quick; the article has grown quite rapidly in the last month or so.

I wonder if it needs a bit more historical background. Many travellers wiil have little idea what the Indus Valley civilisation was, or why it was important. Pashley (talk) 23:33, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

Yes right Sandy but I don't think I can write a well explained history section. --Saqib (talk) 23:37, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

Buddhist?

One photo claims to show "The ruins, with the Great Bath in the foreground and Buddhist Stupa in the background", but the city was abandoned long before the Buddha was born. Should we just delete "and ... background"? Or is there a better term we could insert? Or is it actually Buddhist, and do we need an explanation of ancient ruins vs. later building? Pashley (talk) 14:45, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

First of all, I don't know when the Buddha was born, but I think he was died around 400 BCE, whereas Mohenjo-daro was built around 2600 BCE. Second, and secondly, the stupa was built much later than the underlying ruins, during Kushan Empire. --Saqib (talk) 15:07, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

Amazed foreigners?

Pashley, do you think we really need forth paragraph in the lead "Something that tends to amaze foreign …." ? The ruin structures are interesting and amazing themselves then why mention about pottery? --Saqib (talk) 15:00, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

That was one of my strongest impressions travelling in Asia, and I think definitely worth mentioning. For me at least, it is a fascinating aspect of Asian cultures. I'm from Ottawa; the oldest building in the city is from 1831, so this sort of thing really knocks me back.

I'm not certain where it belongs, though. When I wrote it, it was at the end of the Understand section. It looked too much like an insignificant footnote there, so I moved it to the head of that section. In that position, it broke the narrative flow, so I moved it into the intro. I thought about putting it in See, but I'm still not sure.

Other opinions? Pashley (talk) 15:19, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

I think I'd prefer a statement like "the pottery created by the advanced civilization at Mohenjo-daro is similar to types of pottery still being made and used today." If we don't phrase the remark carefully, it may seem like we're claiming that the civilization of the Indian Subcontinent hasn't advanced much in thousands of years, rather than that this particular technology was already so advanced thousands of years ago that it's still usable and used today. We should tread carefully, because the allegations about "stagnated" civilizations were part of the racist, pseudo-scientific cultural-evolutionist thinking of the colonialist period. I know none of us want to seem to advance that type of warped thinking. Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:30, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

I certainly was not trying to claim anything like that when I wrote it, but if it can be read that way, then it certainly needs re=phrasing. Pashley (talk) 00:10, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

I'm of course well aware that you would not have meant it that way. Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:13, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

I removed the paragraph from the lead section, put in a sentence along the lines Ikan suggested down at the end of Understand. Pashley (talk) 15:09, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

Tooting our own horn?

The intro section currently includes the text "This travel guide is the only complete, up-to-date and reliable travel guide on Mohenjo-daro." I would take that out, partly because I cannot be certain it is or will remain true but more because I do not like the style of promoting our guide quite so confidently. Other opinions? Pashley (talk) 17:22, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

During my trip to Philippines few years back, I used LP's Philippines guide book and I noticed they mentioned something like "this is is the only comprehensive travel guide" so I thought if we can do the same here. --Saqib (talk) 17:57, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

Motel description

This description is a little hard to decipher:

The motel has nine both air-conditioned and non air-conditioned rooms and a good restaurant.

If there are nine of each, we should change it to:

The motel has nine air-conditioned and nine non-airconditioned rooms and a good restaurant.

If there are nine in total, we should change it to something like:

The motel has nine rooms, some with air conditioning and some without, and a good restaurant.

Texugo (talk) 12:00, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

The motel has nine in total actually. --Saqib (talk) 12:05, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

Do we really need more photos as requested here and here. And if yes, then photos of which spot or views? --Saqib (talk) 15:12, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

I recently added one of the Dancing Girl. I do not think we have few enough to be a problem, but if there are other good ones we should look at where they might fit. Pashley (talk) 15:30, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

I might suggest replacing the first image with another one from a different angle, or at least moving it away from the banner image that was obviously cropped from it. Texugo (talk) 16:16, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

The page banner has been replaced. Can't you see the new one? --Saqib (talk) 16:22, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

Ah! Only after purging my cache. Disregard my last comment then. This new banner is much better. Texugo (talk) 16:34, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

Map?

French map

Why delete the Indus Valley Civilisation map? I think it is needed to put Mohenjo-daro in context. Making it small because it is not central to the topic I would agree with; readers can ignore it or click on it for detail as they choose. However, I do not think outright deletion makes sense. Pashley (talk) 17:27, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

Good, please point me to the right map and I will transform it into WV-styled map. --Saqib (talk) 20:03, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

I put the original one back, but one to right might be better because it shows modern borders and has only a few key, named archaeological sites. On the other hand, it would need an English caption instead of French and it shows far wider expanse for the IVC than the better-sourced current one. Pashley (talk) 11:53, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

Map added, let me know of changes required. --Saqib (talk) 10:49, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

Image alignment? Please?

Can we please keep the priest king to the right? This article does not have an overabundance of images so there is no particular reason to make an exception from the traditional right-alignment used in 99% of our articles... Texugo (talk) 19:41, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

I liked Pashley's movement of image to the right side, as you can see our "Buy" section is really too small so images of both the relics seems fine to me floating in Buy section otherwise either The Priest-King or the Dancing Girl will float in "Sleep" section which maybe confuse our reader. No? What do you think? --Saqib (talk) 20:09, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

I heartily disagree. I do not think it could be in the least confusing - is someone going to think the statue is a place to sleep? It wouldn't even be confusing if one were moved to the understand section. I think it makes most sense where I put it, so that the two pictures bridge the See and Buy sections, since both are mentioned in both sections. I certainly don't see any compelling justification to make an exception to our traditional right-alignment, especially for a single lone item on a page that doesn't even have that many images to begin with. Texugo (talk) 21:05, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

Go ahead then. --Saqib (talk) 21:47, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

Name

It's good to include the different spellings in the intro, but it would then be good to use one spelling (presumably Mohenjo-daro) throughout the rest of the article, except where a variant is used in a proper name. Just a suggestion for getting to Star status. Nurg (talk) 09:58, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, Nurg. Fixed. Texugo (talk) 11:58, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

New page banner

Thoughts please? If we use this, then we can replace the lead image with the image of the ruins site which is currently in the "Get in" section. --Saqib (talk) 11:41, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

Unfortunately, I really dislike the new proposed banner. A bunch of blue with one little statue in the extreme right may be unique, but not in a good way, in my opinion. Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:52, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

Agreed. Btw, I was wondering whether you noticed this as well? --Saqib (talk) 11:55, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

I agree too. The current banner is fine and the priest-king works well as a lead image, different from the banner. Leave it as is. Pashley (talk) 12:04, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

I also think it best to leave it as it. Texugo (talk) 12:09, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

I hadn't seen the new proposed Karachi banner. Remarks at Talk:Karachi. Ikan Kekek (talk) 12:10, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

Don't?

According to our article it's prohibited to climb the pyramids in Giza and dangerous too. At some ruin in Italy or Greece (can't remember which, I read it somewhere else a year ago) if you are caught taking a stone as a souvenir from the site the penalty was an gargantuan fine (was it even €10 000). I wondered if there's something similar one should absolutely not do at Mohenjo-daro, and if there is then it should definitely be added to the article in a Stay safe section. ϒpsilon (talk) 17:00, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

Good point. Yes, obviously it is prohibited to climb over the structures but as far as I know, this is not generally followed upon due to lax on-site management and lack of strictness. This is Pakistan and everyone is allowed to do whatever they want to. LOL. --Saqib (talk) 17:50, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

Some thoughts

At the star nominations page, Saqib asked the following: Hi Julia, so I'm planning to visit the site soon, May I know apart from mentioned above asked information, anything else which I should gather? --Saqib (talk) 12:57, 3 December 2013 (UTC). I'll answer here, as this is probably a better place for the discussion. Sorry for the late reply Saqib, I was travelling myself. The article is much improved since I last saw it! Here are some ideas which in my mind would be helpful:

• Check out the details about getting there and around, and include more prices. For example, when arriving by plane, how often do those shuttle buses go, and what do they cost? Are there private rickshaw's available too? What should they typically charge? Just coming back from Asia I've been reminded of how important that is for travellers, to have a rough idea of what they should be bargaining for. If you have no real idea of local prices, it's very hard to negotiate with taxi drivers and such, because you want to be fair but you don't want to be ripped off. What's the price for the trains and should one reserve seats in advance? How cheap is a cheap shared motorcycle rickshaw or a public bus from Larkana?
• The article says: it is easy to get around on foot; the entire archaeological site can be covered in couple of hours. Exploring for several hours in the sweltering Asian heat can be very hard if you're not used to it though and not everyone wants to walk several km. Is it allowed to explore by bicycle, and do the hotels rent out any, or can one maybe hire a rickshaw to be driven around?
• The article has opening hours for the museum, but what about the site as a whole? Can one just go there at any time or are they somehow guarded? If the site as a whole does have opening hours, what are they? Can you e.g. go there early to watch sunrise and beat the heat?

JuliasTravels (talk) 12:38, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for suggestions. I'll get the information asap. But as to your second point, the circumference of the entire archaeological site is really very small that nobody would really need a bicycle or a rickshaw to get around and one can easily do it on foot. On the other hand, bicycle or rickshaws are not even allowed inside the archaeological site complex. A few years back, when I visited the site, I myself took less than 1 hours to see the major structures. --Saqib (talk) 13:29, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

Okay, that's fine, but then the article should probably just say it's small enough to be covered on foot and no other means of transport are allowed inside, rather than suggest a couple of hours and several kilometres. Have fun on your visit, hope you can find out some more info :-) JuliasTravels (talk) 14:51, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

Done. --Saqib (talk) 16:44, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

Entrance fee

The entrance fee and the hours are currently described twice, once for the complex as a whole and again (with the same prices but different hours) for the museum. I removed the former as redundant and Saqib promptly put it back. My guess would be that he's right, but I don't actually know.

If there is one fee then it should be described in only one place; if you pay on entry to the complex, then the museum should not mention a price. Same for hours. If there are separate fees or if admission hours for the complex & the museum are different, then the article needs clearer text. Pashley (talk) 15:47, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

Both the complex and museum which is inside the complex charge separately. --Saqib (talk) 16:15, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

Third paragraph (Some of Mohenjo-daro’s best-known relics...) has been opted-out from the museum listing. This is relating to museum so I think it should be inside the listing. --Saqib (talk) 14:06, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

I disagree. I think it is better to keep the listing simple and put the extra info outside it. Pashley (talk) 14:13, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

Okay. What do you think if we incorporate this pattern into the article? --Saqib (talk) 14:16, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

That looks like an improvement. Pashley (talk) 14:48, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

New Photos and page banner

I uploaded many new photographs (photos of the ruin structures, photos of relics showcased inside the museum, photos of rest house rooms, complex entrance gate and few others) on Commons which I took recently during my visit to Mohenjo-daro. I also took a panoramic photo of the site which can be a good alternative to current page banner so please support if it is and we will change it. Also, please feel free to illustrate the article with new photos. --Saqib (talk) 16:20, 9 March 2014 (UTC)

I think your proposed new banner is an improvement; I'd say by all means put it in.

On the other hand, I think the current photos in the article are pretty good. In a quick look on Commons, I see quite a few photos that could be added, but nothing that stands out as needing to be. Pashley (talk) 19:06, 9 March 2014 (UTC)

While I really like the image current being used in article but I doubt whether this image is licensed under free license because I found this image being used on various websites and most of the websites says that this is a copyrighted image. Since we've some free licensed images on Commons so we can replace it if you also think this might be a non-free image. Thoughts please? --Saqib (talk) 11:52, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

That is a discussion to have on Commons, especially since the image page there shows use on several other wikis. Commons says it was created by the uploader. I see little reason to imagine that is false, but if you do, step one would be to check his/her other contributions. If many of them look suspicious, then we have a problem. If he/she uploads lots of images, many clearly own work, then there is no reason to worry here; it is far more likely others are taking a Commons image and claiming copyright than that he/she stole this one. Pashley (talk) 13:54, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

You're right. I should take this matter on Commons. Btw, before making above comment, I duly checked contributions of the uploader of this image and I found this is the only contribution the uploader made so far on Commons. --Saqib (talk) 14:03, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

It's a very nice panorama but I have a feeling that it's slightly tilted, the right side is lower than the left side, can this be fixed? Jjtkk (talk) 14:01, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

I don't know how to fix the tilt but I will ask it at commons:Commons:Graphic Lab/Photography workshop. --Saqib (talk) 14:06, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

Other names?

Saqib just took out the other names Moenjodaro & another with an edit summary saying they weren't need since this isn't an encyclopedia. I'd say keep them if travellers are likely to see them in use. Also, we should create redirects for them if they are likely search terms.

Other opinions? Pashley (talk) 21:29, 17 March 2014 (UTC)

Saqib's pictures (to right) show other spellings in use, so I think keep. Pashley (talk)

I agree with you guys. I think mentioning the alternate spellings is helpful to travellers and not merely encyclopedic. Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:08, 17 March 2014 (UTC)

Done. --Saqib (talk) 06:21, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

Motel?

Text has "There is only one lodging facilities in Mohenjo-daro.." then a listing for the Archaeology Guesthouse. However, the map shows "PTDC office and motel" on the other side of the museum. Should we list that and change the text? Pashley (talk) 16:47, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

PTDC motel has been closed last year unfortunately. PTDC is having bad time due to financial crises. --Saqib (talk) 16:54, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

I added a note about that in the text; it seemed better than removing it from the map. Pashley (talk) 18:17, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

Seven years later, my note is still there:

"The PTDC Motel shown on the map was shut down in 2013 and remains so as of late 2014."

Has it re-opened by now? Web search turns up many review or booking sites that list it, but I found no obvious link for the place itself. Pashley (talk) 06:30, 20 June 2021 (UTC)

Has anyone got current, or even recent, info? Pashley (talk) 22:39, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

Star

I believe this article have a good potential to become a start-status guide but it need copyediting. Back in 2013, it was nominated for star status but due to insufficient information, I had to slush it. Now that it is complete and previously featured. I'm sure it is almost ready for being nominated again for star status but I relealised it is still not yet "stylistically superior and effective" as said by User:JuliasTravels, especially in the "SEE" section. Would appreciate if native English speakers could help with fixing it. Pashley, IK: What do you think? --Saqib (talk) 15:41, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

I'll be without my computer for a week or more, starting later today, but I don't think any article has yet become a star thanks in any significant part to my edits. Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:00, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

I think Saqib is correct on both points: it is close to star level & it needs a copy edit. I'm busy with other stuff so I'm not likely to do that anytime soon. Pashley (talk) 20:55, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

I guess it is ready for nomination and I'm going to nominate it. It certainly can make a good star example for many destinations of small size such as this. --Saqib (talk) 21:58, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

Priest-king photo

Someone, I think Saqib, replaced a good priest-king photo (right) with what I think is a far inferior one (left). I reverted but am commenting here in case there is some reason for the change. Pashley (talk) 04:57, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

I also prefer the one on the right. The out-of-focus background of the one at left adds nothing but distraction and seems likely to have been photoshopped anyway. Texugo (talk) 11:14, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

On closer inspection, the one at left appears to be a cheap plaster imitation of the real one at right. Texugo (talk) 11:15, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

No problem guys! BTW, should we mention anything in the guide about an upcoming Indian film set in Mohenjo-daro? Film actor Hrithik Roshan said in an interview that the "film story is about a love story and will gives a sneak peak into the Indus Valley Civilization. The story will depict how beautiful the history of Indus Valley is." The actual shooting of the film will be done in South Africa, though. --Saqib (talk) 11:45, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

I'd say the film is worth a mention, but perhaps not until it is released. Pashley (talk) 12:26, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

Right. BTW, I have placed a link to this guide on the movies' entry on WP. The movies' WP entry is getting good page-views so I hope it will help increase this guide readership as well. --Saqib (talk) 23:43, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

Too much detail?

The article currently includes this paragraph:

Among the other structures in lower settlement are the remains of trenches, public wells, bathing platforms from which branch off several drains and private homes, some of which may have been the residences of priests. Bastions and a tower built of baked brick are also located on this mound, monastic cells, Divinity street, a private bath, a dust bin, Main Street, the double ring well, a drain with a corbelled roof, a series of public bathrooms, votive stupas, an oval-shaped well, a shell working shop, the well with the largest circumference, as well as a mud-brick embankment between the stairs, a tower, a deep excavated well, a rubbish water chute, a well preserved house, the chief's house and its ovens, a room with a double staircase, a low lane, the guard room, and a cesspit.

I think this reads too much like a catalog. A visitor has no need for this information in planning either a trip to M-daro or a day among the ruins. Any he or she needs to know will be seen on site. I'd shorten it to something like:

The lower settlement has a variety of structures — residences, workshops, and public facilities such as stupas, wells and a guardhouse.

Other opinions? Pashley (talk) 12:17, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

I can agree with you. This is something I was going to propose myself, too. --Saqib (talk) 12:19, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

Should we mention the streets? Divinity Street, Main Street, ... are there others? Can we describe where these are, or put them on a map? Using the names without doing that seems wrong to me. Pashley (talk) 12:22, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

I'm afraid we won't be able to get the streets listed on the map. --Saqib (talk) 12:25, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

I've removed the para as suggested. If anyone have concerns, please raise them here. --Saqib (talk) 12:35, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

BBC article

The BBC on The ancient city that's crumbling away. Texugo (talk) 22:39, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

That's really sad. I hope Wikivoyage's promotion of Mohenjo-daro helps in some slight way to advance the protection of these historic ruins. Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:55, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

Yes. Mohenjo-daro often get such press coverage, in the hope that concerned authories will give their maximum attention to site. But I don't think Pakistan will be able to put their attention on tourism and such sites until we eliminate terrorism from the country. Anyways, the last paragraph of this BBC article seems very promosing and offcourse in the best interest of Mohenjo-daro. --Saqib (talk) 22:56, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

BTW, while doing some research, I came across Lonely Planets' Pakistan guide which says "When the Europeans were dressed in animal skins and the USA was known only to the native Indian tribes, the men and women who lived on the land that is now Pakistan were part of one of the most sophisticated societies on earth." And I started to wonder how true is this. --Saqib (talk) 23:47, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

It might be true, but it's probably a good idea not to include it. Besides, what's wrong with dressing in animal skins? Many of us still wear leather jackets and shoes to this day. Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:54, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

LOL! You gave me good chuckle. --Saqib (talk) 00:01, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

We do not compare M-daro to primitive backwaters like contemporary Europe or the Americas, but we do have a paragraph in Understand that starts "Other civilisations were at a similar level of development in about the same time period. Cities contemporary with Mohenjo-daro included Thebes in Ancient Egypt, Nineveh and Ur in Mesopotamia and Knossos in Minoan Crete. ..." I think that is enough. Pashley (talk) 04:29, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

Stay safe

Is this section absolutely necessary here? Text The highest temperature recorded was 53.5°C (128°F) on 26 May 2010, which is the highest reliably measured temperature in Asia and the fourth-highest temperature recorded anywhere in the world. is historical and was fittingly looking good inside the infobox. Most of the remaining text is repetitive to what already covered earlier in "Best time to visit" infobox and "Eat and drink" section. Extreme heat not only applies to Mohenjo-daro but to the entire region during summer. --Saqib (talk) 12:39, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

I think it serves the traveller well. It's OK if the notice is on another page and linked here, but I see no compelling reason to delete it. Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:48, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

I moved that text out of the infobox and created the Stay healthy (not Stay safe) section because I think that infobox text should be kept short, so historical info does not belong there, and that the hazard of such temperatures is severe enough to warrant separate treatment, not being off to the side in a box whose title, "Best time to visit", does not indicate it has safety information.

I debated creating a warning box about high temperatures but decided just adding Stay healthy was a better option. Pashley (talk) 03:37, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

Mohenjo-daro Star nomination discussion

Copied from Wikivoyage:Star nominations This guide is being nominated for star status, second time. Previously the nomination was slushed because the guide was missing some information (previous version) and so concerns were raised which has been properly addressed as far I can see. I believe this guide mention everything that this small destination have to offer, Lets see if it can become the first star rated guide from South Asian. The guide certainly can make a good example as star status for many destinations of small size such as this. --Saqib (talk) 22:10, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

I'd like to be able to support this nomination, but I notice that you opposed the nomination of Okayama when that article had no climate info. I don't see any climate info in this article. Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:33, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

Please look for infobox "Best time to visit". --Saqib (talk) 22:36, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

I see. That's a fine solution, in my opinion. Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:41, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

[unindent] This article probably still needs a bit more copy editing for Star status. I did a bit more just now. I won't stand in its way, though. Once any copy editing is done that will satisfy the most discerning of critics, this article should be approved for Star status. Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:49, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

The number of images seems excessive; on my screen, they extend past the bottom of the page and push one of the infoboxes down with them. I would suggest culling the photos to just the best of the best. Powers ^(talk) 20:01, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

I'm wondering if this has already been changed. On the notebook computer I'm borrowing, the last photo, of the Dancing Girl, takes up the right side of the "Buy" section and less than half of "Eat and Drink", and the rest of the article has no images. Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:41, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

I freely admit different computers can display it differently. But this article has more photos than many that are twice as long. With the relatively small amount of prose, we have to reduce the number of images accordingly. Powers ^(talk) 21:04, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

Have removed 3 images. In my opinion, it does look good and useful to have good quality photos filling-up the right side, but anyways. --Saqib (talk) 21:59, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

We can't have images filling the right side because it doesn't work for everyone and can cause formatting issues. Powers ^(talk) 19:07, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

I'm doing a copy-editing pass, finding only a few very minor issues & fixing them. I support the nomination.

Current text has "The PTDC Motel shown on the map was shut down in 2013 and remains so as of late 2014." Can we get more recent info? Pashley (talk) 14:42, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

Just noticed this comment. The PTDC motel is no more in business. Last time when I was there, it was going through renovation but I think it may take years since the work is very slow. --Saqib (talk) 06:13, 21 November 2015 (UTC)

Are we there yet? Pashley (talk) 21:46, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

Yeah support. This looks complete, well done and cohesive. Not that I know anything about the area. --ButteBag (talk) 15:15, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

I wonder what else needs to be done on the article. Its been around two years since this nomination was made. --Saqib (talk) 14:08, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

Maybe try writing the infoboxes into the article somehow? Four could be too many? Actually, what template is this supposed to be based off of? --ButteBag (talk) 15:09, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

Support. This article has come a long way, great work. I don't mind the info boxes at all. JuliasTravels (talk) 15:42, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

• It's been nearly two years now; we've now got four support votes, no non-support votes, and all objections appear to have been addressed. It's been awhile since we've had a new Star article. Are we ready to pull the trigger with this one? -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 16:25, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

Make that five support votes. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 16:27, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

Indeed. With no non-support votes, and no obvious outstanding issues, there's nothing to keep us from promoting this article. So let's do that now. Who can update the map on the stars page? JuliasTravels (talk) 20:19, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

OUTCOME: Promoted to star

WOW. I just found that this was promoted to star status article. Many thanks Julia and Andre. I have made changes to the map. Next time you guys need help with map making or SVG editing, feel free to let me know. --Saqib (talk) 13:46, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

Expansion

I have recently expanded the guide. Tried to write with lively writing but I guess some words were puffery. Would appreciate if anyone could just give a cent on my latest addition. Since this is star rated article so I want to make sure it complies with our WV standards and guidelines. Perhaps @Pashley:? --Saqib (talk) 22:55, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

Well, I do think you've introduced a few too many adjectives now :) Almost every mention of the ruins or civilisation now comes with (sometimes multiple words like) great, magnificent, marvellous, remarkable, epic, thrilling, amazing etc. A few such words do make for lively writing, but too many of them makes it read like a tourist brochure. I hope one of our native English speakers can also help with bringing the new additions up to star level in terms of grammar. Now that it's a star, we need to keep a more precise eye on the language. JuliasTravels (talk) 14:48, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

You're right Julia. (grin) The more I read about this civilisation, the more I become fan of Mohenjo-daro which tempt me to to add more and more puffery wods. Sorry but I've no issue if those removed. --Saqib (talk) 16:01, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

I do think you have overdone it, though some additions were definitely improvements. I'll make a copy-editing pass through it sometime soon. Pashley (talk) 03:00, 4 March 2017 (UTC)

@Pashley: reminder. --Saqib (talk) 16:35, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

Copy editing now. I'm reminded of the old joke:

Ladies, if your husband says he will do something, he will.

There is no need to remind him every six months.

I took this paragraph out of the lead section:

A melting pot of traders, fishermen and farmers, Mohenjo-daro was one of the largest and most advanced cities of its time, with remarkably sophisticated civil engineering and urban planning. Given its impressive ruins, one can only imagine how magnificent the city was and how intelligent its ancient inhabitants were 5,000 years ago.

The Understand section covers those issues. Also, 2600 BCE was not "5000 years ago". Pashley (talk) 06:44, 20 June 2021 (UTC)

Still a star?

Indus Valley Civilisation used to be a redirect to this article, but then someone started an independent IVC article (a fine idea IMHO). I therefore moved some large chunks of text from this article to that one, more-or-less everything that was about the civilisation rather than the city.

Is this article still a star with that text removed? I'd say yes, but it was a rather large change so it seems worth asking for other opinions. Pashley (talk) 03:51, 19 November 2021 (UTC)

Star article with no "do" section?

Surely someone would've noticed it by now. As it's a standard section that is required even for outline articles, I really don't want to downgrade this from star to stub. --SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 23:07, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

In an archaeological zone, the thing to do is to visit the ruins. So if you think it's important to include the heading, make "See" "See and Do." Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:00, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

Don't be silly. "See" is a standard heading & should be left alone. Omitting "Do" if we have nothing to say there is quite normal. The question of downgrading the article should not arise.

SHB2000 made the change Ikan Kekek suugested. My instinct is to revert, much as I've often reverted various newbies or vandals who tampered with standard headings.

Other opinions? Pashley (talk) 02:52, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

Make your argument at Wikivoyage talk:Section headers if you think one of the seven core section headers should be omitted. Until then, the article should follow the manual of style. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta) 02:58, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

The Do section was deliberately deleted by our most active Pakistani editor, Saqib. See #Initial_discussion above. Pashley (talk) 03:02, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

So? There was absolutely no mention of whether "do" should be omitted, and that also wasn't a discussion to make this article an exception. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta) 03:06, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

OK, the manual of style does allow, but not require, such combining. I will not revert, though I still think in this instance it is completely unnecessary. Pashley (talk) 03:13, 29 September 2022 (UTC)