Jump to content

Talk:Adam's Bridge/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3→Archive 5

Name and Argument about English speakers

The only argument I see for having this article named Adam's bridge is that "Generally, article naming should prefer to what the majority of English speakers would most easily recognize, with a reasonable minimum of ambiguity, while at the same time making linking to those articles easy and second nature. This is the English Wikipedia."

Although, a lot of arguments have been made about WP:bias and other valid arguments, the proponents are just using the above argument to name it as Adam's bridge. I would like to refute that as well. As per the English language article, "India now has more people who speak or understand English than any other country in the world". So that would mean that the name that is common in India should be used. Also, the landmark is of more interest and is more well known in India. So, we need to rename this article. The only other argument that the proponents of Adam's bridge can make is that it was named as Adam's bridge by the westerners and is known as such in the west (althought it can be argued about how many people in the west actually even know this place exists).

Would appreciate any counter arguments, otherwise this article would be renamed. Please do not rehash the same arguments, its like clutching at straws!

- Jay —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.12.24.52 (talk) 02:14, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Name

First, this should have been at the bottom. Secondly, at the bottom you will see what the name is what it is. It isn't our role to name the bridge but to name the article, and we use the most common names. In this case, Adam's Bridge. Tsunami sinking mountains? Any geological reports for that anywhere? Anyway, read the geology on this. Dougweller (talk) 12:51, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

The physical location of a landmark should play a role in identifying it. This landmark is "Rama's Bridge" - there's little disputing that considering where it is and Rama in Indian history. Whether religion is true or not has nothing to do with the history of it. This is Rama's Bridge. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.100.16.3 (talk) 15:15, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Structural Information Required

From the image it looks like the bridge has been built neatly with a fixed width. Any information on the width, plese post... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.92.5.104 (talk) 09:16, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Reference for the Islamic legend is needed.

Don't you think that there should be some citation, reference needed for this so called legend about Adam's penance ? Does this legend mention the location of this place? The Britanica's encyclopedia doesn't talk much about this legend. Where did they find this legend ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Prashantva (talk • contribs) 16:43, 14 December 2008 (UTC)


Why would it be Adam's bridge?

Well first of all; I am not sure if Rama's wannar sena built it or not. But I think the story of Adam doesnt go well either. The reason I think like this is simple;

1. The bridge is pretty huge to be built by a single person.
2. As Adam was the first man, it means there were no men on earth before Adam.
3. If we say above two statements are true then either Adam was not the first man or the bridge is not Adam's bridge.

--~~Manoj Shirgurkar 22:03, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

It isn't a bridge, for a start. It's just a name and the name is used in a large number of academic, etc. publications. And our policy is to use the name commonly used. Plus, this talk page is meant to be in chronological order, the top section being the earliest and the bottom the latest. dougweller (talk) 07:05, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

Comment

Related to this:

When did this become "Rama's" bridge I always thought it was called "Adam's bridge". And i think that this whole article needs cleaning up. This is an article about a piece of land there could be a separate article about the bridge's religious importance.Aniket ray 09:57, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/cms.dll/html/uncomp/articleshow?msid=273107&Curpg=1

Comment

Do you know or do you have one good reason to believe why it is called Adam's Bridge? Without knowing the complete history of Ramayana, I think you have no rights to talk about this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by RamaDandu (talk • contribs) 21:17, 10 April 2009 (UTC)


How do you name it as Adam's bridge? Is there any history about Adam? I know Rama and his story but who the hell is this Adam and what is he doing around INDIA.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Himalayas2madras (talk • contribs) 21:19, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

I doubt the last paragraph - if archaelogists believe it is man-made it cannot be 1.5 million years old, as at that time it had no Homo sapiens yet. andy 09:30, 19 Feb 2004 (UTC)

That's right, there is a contradiction: either the geologists are mistaken, or the archeologists and the belief in Ramayana as historical fact are. You get to choose for yourself which to doubt :-) Mkweise 11:15, 19 Feb 2004 (UTC)


This bridge has been described in ancient Valmiki Ramayana, written thousands of years ago and it is very apt to continue to call it Rama's Bridge. This bridge- its precise location, way of construction, time to build it, number of people, number of machines used are very well described in Valmiki Ramayans. It is very difficult to argue that an ancient text has foreseen all this without any real bridge. Also, is there any parallel of such a natural bridge anywhere in the world- None. The ASI studies are based on corals which are grown on the bridge which anyone with common sense would know does not indicate the age of Rama's bridge. The studies on the actual bridge date to precisely the times and alignment of stars mentioned in Ramayana. Think for a minute how silly it sounds to say that a long bridge of this magnitude (50KM) is naturally formed whose precise location has already been described in Valmiki Ramayana and has been proven to be deadly accurate.

Dr. Srinivas Telukunta —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dr Srini (talk • contribs) 11:11, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Can anyone add more info on the possible plans of contructing a tunnel and/or bridge across to the other side? I am also quite curious as to whether any steps have been taken to decide to build infrastructure links across the:

Anyone with inside knowledge on any of these? I've posted similar requests elsewhere. Gruesome Twosome! 8v] //Big Adamsky 20:45, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

I think were taking the term 'man-made' to lieraly. Archealogist just mean that it is not natural.
I bet it is indeed quite possible to not only build a bridge or tunnel along with a shipping channel, but it's financially feasable. The watetr is what? 30 feet deep, and the islands can be used as anchorages...the road can be designed like the Chesapeake Bay Bridge-Tunnel. This can be done, if both India and Sri Lanka were willing to do this. User:Raccoon Fox • Talk • Stalk 00:04, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

they made the bridge to go shopping at sri lanka. seriously!

What idiot named it Adam's Bridge? Ram and his alies built, no white person has say over the naming, only a true patriotic Indian, Hindu, Sikh, Muslim, Christian ould calll it by its name,RAM@S BRIDGE, say it, then get it right... This is very man made.

Sorry, the proper name is "Adam's Bridge". The bridge is a natural formation and not man-made. --vi5in[talk] 15:11, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Changing Rama's Setu to Adam's bridge shows ONLY wrong information. Truth will remain the same that it is Rama's Setu/Bridge. So please remove Adam's bridge reference, or be ready to suffer from what life gives you by cheating. God bless you!!!

Truth is Truth

Changing Rama's Setu to Adam's bridge shows ONLY wrong side of this information. Truth will remain the same that it is Rama's Setu/Bridge. So please remove Adam's bridge reference, or be ready to suffer from what life gives you by cheating. God bless you!!!

Nobody is "changing" anything. Adam's Bridge is the correct English name. English is only one of many languages in the world, not the ultimate arbiter of what everybody has to call things. But this is the English Wikipedia, and we use the English names of things here. --Tkynerd 02:46, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

By the way no one near adam's bridge (both tamilnadu & srilanka) understands the word 'rama sethu' . The only sethu they know of is 'sethu kaalvai thittam' ..i hope the hindi word is deleted from this english section. if you want to mention, then mention it the same way as locals call a bridge i.e.,'paalam' although adam's bridge is ideal for this section. REPEATING A LIE 1000 TIMES WONT MAKE IT A TRUTH even if it counter's a person's firm belief Lieskillme (talk) 16:19, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Claim from Hindu groups

I have received forwards about the claim of Rama's Bridge being the actual bridge built by Rama and his Vanara army. The article uses some weasel words to describe this - it says "Some Hindu groups"; any idea on which ones? Or perhaps all of this could be written in a better way. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Vivin (talk • contribs) 20:46, 19 March 2007 (UTC).

Sorry, the proper name is "Ram's Bridge"Raghav03 18:25, 25 April 2007 (UTC)Raghav03

Moved

I have moved this article to "Adam's Bridge", which is the common title. --vi5in[talk] 23:34, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

No it isn't, go to india or sri lanka, not america or UK, ask anyone in india or sri lanka, its called "Ram's Bridge" Stop being so overpowering. The bridge is the rama's bridgewhat other name should it be. Just because Hindus are passive our religion should not be re-claimed in order to glorify Christianity. The adam and eve theory has been proven to be a hoax, just like Noah's arc and david and goliath. This bridge is living proof on the authenticity of Hinduism. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.59.95.87 (talk) 20:28, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Let it be Rama's Bridge

Hi, Need not be a Hindu to call it as Rama's Bridge, because this bridge was found only some time earlier by Nasa but the epic has been for a period dating back to 1,70,000 years and accurately coinciding with the building of the bridge to reach Srilanka. I think there is connection with Adam to name it after him.Thanks.Bye —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 122.164.2.224 (talk) 17:55, 25 April 2007 (UTC).


Who the hell is adam?Raghav03 18:24, 25 April 2007 (UTC)Raghav03

From what i heard, Sri Lanka was the Garden Of Eden. Evidence people? There is evidence of Ravan's existence. He rode in a chariot which flew in the air, called pahspuk viman, in Sri Lanka they found a place which is perfect for its landing, 1-0 to Ram's Bridge! Stop adding a's to names, like rama, or hanumana, or ravana, its wrong.Raghav03 19:22, 25 April 2007 (UTC)Raghav03

If you have any evidence to support your claims, please bring them forward. Simply stating them, doesn't make them true. Until then, your changes will be removed/reverted. The existence of a large flat surface (like a plateau?) is not evidence of there being a flying machine. I am sure in AD 1600 there were plateaus in, say, North America. Does that mean there were aircraft in North America in the 1600's? I think not. Also, adding the vowel "a" to names is not wrong. It is the original pronunciation. Pronouncing it without the inherent vowel is prevalent in some Indian Languages, but it is by no means the rule. --vi5in[talk] 20:21, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
Exegesis is not necessary. And insults must be avoided, thanks. Assume good faith : the article has been renamed, not because Vivin is an idiot, but simply because he followed Wikipedia naming conventions : "Foreign names should be used only if there are no established English names; most places do have established English names." (see the examples). I'm not from an Anglo-Saxon culture, so I personally can't tell whether Adam's bridge is the common english name or not, but the fact that Encyclopedia Britannica calls it Adam's Bridge is a clear evidence that the article's name is correct from a linguistic point of view. Conversely, on the Hindi Wikipedia, I guess the article would be named Rama's bridge. — Xavier, 21:19, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Ok ok, my bad, i should have given evidence, but, adding "a" is wrong, i know, i duscussed with a person who got a phd in sanskrit at oxford university, that is not the original pronounciation, thats made to make it mro econvinient. Ram's bridge isnt foreign, it is correct, adam (who?) has nothing to do with this bridge, your sterotypical views about planes in that time are just terrible. PhD from Oxford? Obviously. Sir, It is not a case of adding "a" but subtracting it. And that is the result of the influnce of persian and arabic on Sanskrita Bhaashaa.


Chapter 1, Verse 46 of the Bhagavad Gita is called Arjuna-visada-yoga. Do you notice the 'a' at the end of "Arjun"? Both ways are correct. I am not sure who you talked to, but if you look at the vedas and if you look at the Ramayana, Mahabharata, or the Gita, a lot of proper nouns have 'a' at the end. Rama may have had nothing to do with this bridge either. It is a natural formation, not an artificial one. You are entitled to your views about there being aircraft during that time period, but know that it is a Fringe theory and Pseudoscience. Therefore, it is not taken seriously. --vi5in[talk] 17:03, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

While I agree with Raghav in regards to the idea that the article should be renamed Rama's Bridge (because it is easily recognizable... I really did not know there ever was an Adam's Bridge), I must disagree with him about the 'a' issue. Sanskrit grammar rules dictate that the inherent vowel is usually present, unless otherwise indicated. This is unlike other Indian languages like, say, Hindi which dictates that it is usually not present (hence, it is Ram and Ravan in Hindi). This is also unlike other Indian languages like, say, Tamil (the classical language on both sides of this Bridge as a matter of fact), whereby words usually do not end with a vowel; thusly, in Tamil in is Raman, Ravanan, etc. Different languages use different grammatical rules. In India, usually the original Sanskrit term prevails when it comes to formalities (ie. the official name of this bridge), and when speaking informally in one's regional language (such as Hindi or Tamil or the numerous other Indian languages), one changes it in accordance with the grammatical laws of their language. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.188.87.114 (talk) 23:58, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

YOU ARE WRONG

Please plwase please call it rams bridge, why must we, the west just tell the east what to do? First we name their own countries, we erase all their history, we loot their nations, i think they desreve their own bloody bridges, deserve their own fasctfile, not NASA's who frankly nothing more then liers, moon landing... We need to show them respect, India, China, Pakistan... We will feel the backlash, stupid little things like this spark things. Were all going to feel this, the ones who respected them won't. Small things like, naming their own bridges correctly will surely be good... Come on!!! 82.13.72.99 16:56, 28 April 2007 (UTC) Steven and Louise

Ok... so the Moon-landing is a hoax... right. Anyway, this has nothing to do with the West telling the East what to do. This name is more prevalent than the other. --vi5in[talk] 17:04, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
In Hindi, it is pronounced "Ram". BUT, in Sanskrit (which is the language of the Bhagavad Gita, the Vedas, and all other Hindu Holy Books of the Shaivas, Smartas, and Vaishnavas) ALL use the "a" at the end of names and such. That is how Sanskrit is - how can you sit there and say "No, it's wrong" when the OLDEST SANSKRIT BOOKS IN THE WORLD uses the "a" at the end of names? Rama was a Sanskrit-speaking person, thus his name should be Sanskrit and not Hindi. Armyrifle (talk) 15:06, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

NPOVizing

This article needs work on its mythological section, as it makes it sound credible, which is quite the opposite of the reality - it is a natural geologic formation and that is the interpretation of all mainstream scientists on the matter. Titanium Dragon 18:32, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Adams Beuracracy

Why the hell is the main page called Adams Bridge? We've been living there for over 5000 years. And we were writing our spoken words much before you white Christians were. The British started looting India in the 1700s only. So how is the Christian name more important? We named the Himalyas, not you. And we built and named Ram Sethu, not you. Racist. Tri400 18:55, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Why? This is why, specifically this statement: Generally, article naming should prefer to what the majority of English speakers would most easily recognize, with a reasonable minimum of ambiguity, while at the same time making linking to those articles easy and second nature. This is the English Wikipedia. If you want to call it Ram Sethu in your Wikipedia, that's your call. This Wikipedia is intended for English speakers, and consequently must and will use the terms that English speakers recognize. --Tkynerd 19:01, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
The bridge is not man-made. Nobody "built" it, unless you are intent on anthropomorphizing Mother Nature, in which case "she" built it. Like what Tkynerd said, this is English Wikipedia. It is the most common name. That's also what Encyclopaedia Britannica calls it. Also, tone down the drama. Racist??? Seriously. --vi5in[talk] 21:27, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

as far as i know, most of my friends know it as ram's bridge...It's nice to see an uncoconutized indian, most new gen indians hate india??? Its the root of life...

Undue weight

Undue weight has been given to the crank Hindu "scientists" claiming the bridge to be a non-natural feature. I think this needs to be addressed somehow. Titanium Dragon 22:26, 23 June 2007 (UTC)


Rama's Setu

I've created the article on Rama's Setu. BalanceΩrestored Talk 07:16, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

It has been redirected to Adam's Bridge. Do not create a content fork or duplicate article. Abecedare 07:22, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
Rama's Setu is the Bridge Built by Rama and Adams Bridge is something else. BalanceΩrestored Talk 07:28, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
Both are different mythological concepts and need separate attention. BalanceΩrestored Talk 07:30, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
There's is no scientific proof that what currently seen is the Adams Bridge or the Rama's Setu. These are assumptions. There has to be details on Adam and Eve at Adams Bridge and the details of Ramayana on Rama's Setu. They are different mythological concepts of the east and the west.BalanceΩrestored Talk 07:37, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Please see these Encyclopedia Britannica and The Times, London articles, which say that the terms are synonymous. Unless you have an equally strong reference which specifically says otherwise, I don't see any point of creating a content fork or duplicate article. PS: The question of whether the mythological bridge mentioned in Ramayana corresponds to the physical shoal of islands is a separate issue that should be (and is) discussed in the article body. Cheers. Abecedare 07:45, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
And here are articles from The Hindu and the Economic Times Abecedare 08:04, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Not a problem. I've created Antient Rama's Setu. I hope not one will have any problem to the same. BalanceΩrestored Talk 07:53, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
Sigh .. that is again a content fork and a misspelled neologism to boot. I would highly recommend that you consult with your mentor before creating fore such duplicate articles. Abecedare 07:56, 27 August 2007 (UTC)


This news paper is addressing the setu as 'Ramar sethu' (Adam's bridge). The adams bridge is in the brackets?BalanceΩrestored Talk 08:30, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

BBC too quotes Rama's Setu and mentions that it is sometimes called Adam's Bridge, "Hindu activists say dredging the canal will damage the Ram Setu (or Lord Ram's bridge), sometimes also called Adam's Bridge." [1] BalanceΩrestored Talk 07:31, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Sethusamudram

First off, let me say that I have no stance on the issue of whether this formation is natural or man-made. I'm only interested that facts be presented as they are from reliable sources. That being said, I have removed the reference from N. K. Raghupathy, CEO of Sethusamudram, saying that Rama's Bridge is not a natural formation. First of all, Raghupathy claims that NASA has "disproven" the notion of Rama's Bridge being man-made. However, if you read the outside article that is cited for that, NASA only says that it "cannot prove" that Rama's Bridge is man-made. In fact, NASA goes so far as to say that they only took the photographs and don't want to be tied to any interpretations. In other words, Raghupathy is putting words in NASA's mouth. NASA officially has no position on this matter. I should also note that Raghupathy has a serious conflict of interest in this story and has quite a motivation to twist NASA's words in his favor. The Sethusamudram Corporation is tasked with building a shipping route right through Rama's Bridge, which would require destroying the formation. So, Raghupathy has a strong incentive to "prove" that the formation is not man-made and thus is not a reliable source in any sense of the word. Hence, I removed his comments. --Hnsampat 14:01, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

I think Dr. Raghupathy needs to show any such typical formation at other parts of the world too. His statements are currently not including any. If the formations are natural, then other parts of the world too should have such well formed sea bridges. See http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/ea/Adams_Bridge_aerial.jpg, how perfect are the edges of the Bridge. From this photo, one can assume that strong water currents should have broken the mid portions of a very straight looking bridge. BalanceΩrestored Talk 09:02, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

The Origins of Adam

Surprisingly, in it's present state, the actual substance of the article doesn't even contain the word Adam. Just one Google link as an external link and not even a reference is there for this mysterious Adam fellow. Other than that, the name is baseless. However, Ram or Rama is consistently mentioned throughout the article. Throughout history, in fact. May I kindly request for more emphasis to be laid on the origins of the name Adam and perhaps some evidence(s). And by the way, Wikipedians have always been content with the title Sri Pada, not Adam's Peak. Take care, Usedbook 18:31, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Walking the bridge

Has anyone walked the full length of the bridge? I can't seem to find any info on this anywhere. -Rolypolyman 12:48, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Naming of the Bridge

Regardless of who built this bridge or whether if its a man-made structure or not, its important to note the location of this bridge. This bridge is within the territorial waters of India and srilanka and in this area its widely known as Rama'a bridge. Adam's historicity or the theory that he crossed this bridge to go to sri lanka and stand on one foot is as disputed as Rama. So why label this as Adam's bridge? The point that the name is english and this is english wikipedia doesnt make any sense. No name is English/Chinese etc. Name is what a place is called by. Its more apt to call this place by what most locals call it as the local's have more right than the outsiders to give a place a name within their territory. 159.148.225.11 17:00, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

As has been pointed out above, wikipedia naming policy relies on the name commonly used by English sources, and as Encyclopedia Britannica and other sources cited in the article attest, the name "Adam's Bridge" is more common in published literature. Abecedare 17:34, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
Anon, just because the policy doesn't make sense to you doesn't mean we shouldn't follow it, or that it doesn't make sense to most editors. We use English names on English wikipedia; that is why we call the country "India", for example. (See WP:ENGLISH)... However, we also have part of the MOS (WP:ENGVAR) that says to use the appropriate "National variety of English" for "strong national ties to a topic". You may have a good case that "Rama's Bridge" is the correct name in "Indian English", and that this article title should therefore favor Indian English because of the strong national ties, per WP:ENGVAR. Til Eulenspiegel 17:41, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
this is whaat i mean sorry if i was not clear. In indian english its called Lord Ram's bridge. if it was just indian language like tamil or sanskrit it would be called Sri Ram Sethu. i never asked the title to be sri ram's sethu but as Lord Ram's Bridge. I see that it has been corrected now. thanks til.159.148.225.11 18:16, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Here are references used in the article which attest that the geographical feature is referred primarily as "Adam's bridge" in neutral non-ideological contexts:

  • Adam's bridge. Encyclopædia Britannica (2007)
  • Ripley, S. Dillon; Beehler, Bruce M. (Nov. 1990). "Patterns of Speciation in Indian Birds". Journal of Biogeography 17 (6): pp. 639-648.
  • Francis, Jr., Peter (2002). Asia's Maritime Bead Trade: 300 B.C. to the Present. University of Hawaii Press. ISBN 082482332X.
  • Rodd, Rennell (April 1930). "Major James Rennell. Born 3 December 1742. Died 20 March 1830". The Geographical Journal 75 (4): pp. 289-299.

While there is no doubt that "Rama Setu" is a name for this feature, even in terms of ghits the use of that name (and its variants) is less common (~23,000) versus "Adam's Bridge" (~57000). Abecedare 18:43, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

I came across this article while reading about Rama and would like to give my opinion on this issue.

(A)A quick search for recent news headlines gives 100s of results like:

  • Ram Setu: BJP to launch agitation.
  • Setu affidavit taken back, project to be reviewed - Times of India
  • Ram Sethu: CPI(M) defends withdrawal of affidavit - Hindu
  • Ramesh has a dig at Ambika on Ram Setu affidavit - Times of India
  • Karunanidhi cautions Centre on Ram Sethu issue - Sify
  • SAD flays Centre's affidavit on Ramar sethu - Hindu
  • Ram Setu row: Jairam has a dig at Soni, latter offers resignation - Zee News

- This shows that the said bridge is identified in India by locals with Rama and definitely not with Adam. Also all these are English language newssources although it is Indian English.

(B)The Supreme Court of India while issuing restraining orders said the following: “Till September 14, the alleged Rama Sethu/Adam’s bridge shall not be damaged in any manner. Dredging activity may be carried out so long as it does not damage Rama Sethu.”

- This shows that the Supreme court also officially identifies the structure by the name Rama Sethu while also noting that its also referred to sometimes as Adam's bridge (Note that the court system and court orders in India are given exclusively in english only)

(C)The Encyclopedia britannica clearly says in the opening of the Adam's bridge article that its also called Rama's bridge.

(D)While I do not dispute that the said bridge is also called Adam's bridge, but as pointed out by one user WP:ENGVAR asks to use the local english version for strong National ties to the topic. The above clearly proves that in Indian English this is referred to as Rama's bridge only. Very few locals would identify with a structure called Adam's bridge in India.

(E)Again, I strongly see a ulterior motive in the name Adam's bridge. This article mentions as Islamic legend which talks about the biblical adam crossing this bridge and standing on one foot for 1000 years creating a foot-print in srilanka. The existence of Adam and this legend is as much disputable as the existence of Rama for some people. So why should there be a cultural bias in naming this bridge? If anything, it must identify with the local culture.

For the above reasons, I strongly think that the name of this article must be Rama's bridge. 213.114.118.44 19:28, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Since there is a current dispute in India over claims that this geographical structure was made at the direction of (historical) Rama or if it is a natural formation, it is not surprising that the related news articles refer to the bridge as Rama Setu (which indeed is a valid name for the chain of islands) However as established by the sources cited above, the bride is predominantly called "Adam's Bridge" in non-ideological contexts unrelated to the recent controversy.
PS: If you would like to continue to discuss this, I would highly recommend that you sign up for a wikipedia account instead of using open proxies in Latvia, Scandinavia etc. Abecedare 20:04, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
There are clear GUIDELINES at wiki with respect to the naming of the article. Shall we follow them and change the name to Rama's Bridge as per WP:NCON and Kindly read the details given under "How to make a choice among controversial names". As per the guidelines stated Rama's Bridge is an appropriate name for the current article. BalanceΩrestored Talk 10:22, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
Ok, using the guidelines:
The three key principles are:
  • The most common use of a name takes precedence; - In this case, the most common name is Adam's Bridge. It's known by this name everywhere else, except India.
  • If the common name conflicts with the official name, use the common name except for conflicting scientific names; - I don't know what the official name is in India. Even assuming that it is Rama's Bridge, this guideline would suggest that we still use Adam's Bridge
  • If neither the common name nor the official name is prevalent, use the name (or a translation thereof) that the subject uses to describe itself or themselves. - The common name is prevalent.
A number of objective criteria can be used to determine common or official usage:
  • Is the name in common usage in English? (check Google, other reference works, websites of media, government and international organisations) - Sources (provided by Abecedare) show that it is known internationally as Adam's Bridge
  • Is it the official current name of the subject? (check if the name is used in a legal context, e.g. a constitution) - Irrelevant in this case since common name is more prevalent than the official name.
  • Is it the name used by the subject to describe itself or themselves? (check if it is a self-identifying term) - Not self-identifying.
Subjective criteria (such as "moral rights" to a name) should not be used to determine usage. These include:
  • Does the subject have a moral right to use the name? - N/A
  • Does the subject have a legal right to use the name? - N/A
  • Does the name infringe on someone else's legal or moral rights? - No.
  • Is the use of the name politically unacceptable? - No.
Using the guidelines, it would seem that Adam's Bridge is the correct name. --vi5in[talk] 22:44, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
MY VIEW

I am a reader of wikipedia although I do not edit page here. I was looking to read about bridge of rama to read more about it and found this page.

  • As someone has pointed out above, all the newslinks and sources in India mention Rama's bridge (setu) and not Adam's bridge. This is because in India the general population does not know the bridge as Adam's Bridge. Abredabre tried to refute by sayng that this is only because of controversy. This is not correct because the news papers can also say in the headline 'Adam's Bridge: BJP to launch agitation' or 'Adam's bridge affidavit to be taken back' etc. The reason they are not saying this is that the local population does not identify this as Adam's bridge. In fact this is one of main reasons for the controversy. If everyone identified this as Adam's Bridge this controversy wouldn't have caused. Now using WP:ENGVAR rules, it is clear that the bridge has strong national ties to India (not many people know adam's bridge in india as compared to rama's bridge? rama's bridge is knows even in the villages) and also it is identified in Indian English as Rama's Bridge. hence using wp:ENGVER it should be called rama bridge.
  • aslo one user above says "Is it the official current name of the subject? (check if the name is used in a legal context, e.g. a constitution) - Irrelevant in this case since common name is more prevalent than the official name."

-> it was pointed out that the india supreme court mentions the bridge as rama's bridge primararily in the decision. so hows this irrelevant?

  • so finally as per wp:engver this should be called rama bridge.

(On a personal note i also did not know its called adam's bridge until recently. i always thought its called rama's bridge and so do many people i know. i know my personal knowledge does not matter here but like I pointed above, in India this bridge is known as Rama's bridge although its international name might be different.) ->by RainDew

  • Just forgot to note about Abredabre's google search. I also found that the word 'RAM SETU' brings up close to 300000 matches! and all of the websites mentioning the word are in english although its peobably indian english. now although the word setu is indian which means bridge, it further demonstrates that the bridge is associated with Rama more than Adam. additional point for using wp:engvar to rename this page.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by RainDew (talk • contribs) 05:12, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

I fully agree with this. Also with regards to what's the bridge known Internationally it's not very clear if it's called Adams Bridge at all. BBC too quotes Rama's Setu and mentions that it is sometimes called Adam's Bridge, "Hindu activists say dredging the canal will damage the Ram Setu (or Lord Ram's bridge), sometimes also called Adam's Bridge." [2]. So, even BBC say it's sometimes also called Adam's Bridge. So, it's very clear that Rama's Setu is the correct name for this article. So, I do not know why this article is named otherwise. BalanceΩrestored Talk 05:41, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
... and this BBC article says, "Hindu devotees believe the area between India and Sri Lanka - now known as Adam's Bridge - ...", so BBC is hardly consistent
Anyway, check out the other reliable sources (number 1-8) listed in the article that are unconnected with this controversy. All invariably call the causeway, "Adam's bridge" while some such as EB label "Rama Sethu" as an alternate name. I hope more effort was spent trying to improve this article (Hint: the "Geological history and ecology" section needs work ) rather than arguing about its name. Abecedare 05:50, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

By the way, WP:ENGVAR is a guideline for the variety of English used in an article, and determines the spelling of words like color/colour and suffixes -ise/-ize. It does not relate to use of proper names for which WP:Name is appropriate. See American and British English differences, for the kind of issues WP:ENGVAR deals with. Abecedare 05:59, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Was this article not originally Rama's Bridge? [3] I don't see a good explanation on renaming this article. Why did all the administrators not find it important to give appropriate explanations while renaming a 2 year old article [4]??? Also if there where explanations, I do not see them now.BalanceΩrestored Talk 06:12, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
Where are the discussions those are necessary to move this article???

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Rama%27s_Bridge&redirect=no and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Adam%27s_Bridge ???? BalanceΩrestored Talk 07:11, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

It was Adam's Bridge, and then it was renamed to Rama's Bridge, and I changed it back to Adam's Bridge because of reasons cited above. If you care to look into the talk archives, you will see that I have cited the reasons for doing so. Regarding the Indian Supreme Court's use of the name "Rama's Bridge", it is still irrelevant because like I said the common name is more prevalent. It is not known as Rama's Bridge anywhere else in the world. Going by this logic you would have to change every name to its regional name. For example, the Suez Canal is known in Egypt as Qanat As-Suways. Does that mean we have to change the article name to Qanat As-Suways? No. It's because Suez Canal is the more common name. Like Abecedare pointed out, BBC's use is inconsistent. All international sources overwhelmingly call this bridge "Adam's Bridge". --vi5in[talk] 16:05, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
If you look here, you will see my reasons for changing the name. --vi5in[talk] 16:13, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
MY RESPONSE

Thank you everyone for your views. Let me make my point again my using some of the guidelines that vi5in used: 1. vi5in says "The most common use of a name takes precedence; - In this case, the most common name is Adam's Bridge. It's known by this name everywhere else, except India." How do you define the most commonly used name? It doesnt mean the name used by maximum number of countries. It means the name maximum number of people know the structure by. If people around the world INCLUDING india are asked about Adam's bridge not many people will know (Adam's bridge is not a popular structure world wide like the suez canal). If the same question was asked about Rama's bridge, again not many people around the world will know but most people in India would immediately identify with the structure. this point can be seen from the fact I mentioned about google search. Google search for 'Adam's bridge' brings 57000 matches as per Abredare but if you search 'Rama Sethu' which is the Indian name for this structure you will find around 300000 matches. A variant of this 'Rama Setu' brings 171000 matches. Thats more than 500000 matches together compared to Adam's Bridge. This disparity shows that the common name for this structure would be the local name. Such a search for 'suez canal' vs Qanat As-Suways shows 2150000 vs 937 matches. So this comparison proves that suez canal is indeed the common name regardless and this comparison is inaccurate. It would be improper to identify this bridge by a name used in many countries rather than the common name just because the most people who use that name are in India. What needs to be understood here is that the structure is much more well-known in India than abroad.

2. vi5in says: "If the common name conflicts with the official name, use the common name except for conflicting scientific names; - I don't know what the official name is in India. Even assuming that it is Rama's Bridge, this guideline would suggest that we still use Adam's Bridge" As i mention above, ths structure's common name is not Adam's bridge

3. vi5in says: "Is the name in common usage in English? (check Google, other reference works, websites of media, government and international organisations)" I showed that Rama Setu is more common in Google. I also showed that media has consistently mentioned it by the common name "Rama Setu" (see my above post). I also showed that the supreme court of India calls it Rama Setu first. BBC also calls it Rama Setu but seems inconsistent.

4. vi5in says: "Is it the official current name of the subject? (check if the name is used in a legal context, e.g. a constitution) - Irrelevant in this case since common name is more prevalent than the official name." Yes! the name is used in legal context by the apex court (supreme court) of India. the court identifies it as Rama Setu. Now why is this irrelevant? If it was irrelevant the guideline of looking at a name in legal context would not exist. By saying the legal context is irrelevant, aren't we ignoreing the guideline?

5. So even by using the guidelines of vi5in the name should be Rama Setu or Rama's bridge. Also note that here on wikipedia French landmarks like Arc de Triomphe and Champs Elysee are acceptable in local language. In any case, like I said before Rama's Bridge is indian english so this would not be an issue.

6. In addition to these guidelines, the point about made by one user still stands as there are clearly strong national ties to the bridge. In fact if we look at both these guidelines, Rama's bridge should be the only choice. Clearly the name Adam's bridge is not appropriate for WP:NCON and would not stand at all on WP:ENGVAR. Again like i showed, the name Rama's bridge is appropriate as per both guidelines. RainDew 04:50, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Also the article was seen live with the name Rama's Bridge since Jun 12, 2004 as per http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rama's_Bridge. When was that Adam's Bridge? There are policies with regards to moving an article WP:RM (In some situations, the value of a move may be under dispute, and discussion is necessary in order to reach a consensus.) . Where are those necessary discussions? I assume you were not careless. It was initially http://web.archive.org/web/20040321033340/http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adam's_Bridge a redirect from Adam's Bridge which used to open at Rama's Bridge on 19 Feb 2004 BalanceΩrestored Talk 06:53, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
Like dab said, you can throw out "Rama Set(h)u", since this is "English Wikipedia". I know that India has 1.6 billion people, but that's irrelevant. I think it is safe to assume that any international news network that wishes to report on the bridge, would look up some sort of reference (oh say, like an encyclopedia maybe?) and would find that it is known as Adam's Bridge. The bridge is known as Rama's Bridge only in India. So I find it rather odd that we should go by what is known in ONE country, versus, oh I don't know... the rest of the world? So now if we search for "Rama's Bridge" (and we cannot search for Rama Set(h)u because that's Sanskrit, and this is English Wikipedia) we don't get as many hits as "Adam's Bridge". Furthermore, I can guarantee that an overwhelming percentage of those links you have for "Rama Set(h)u" are fringe sites that talk about this bridge being "artificial" and built by Rama. So keeping this in mind, it is irrelevant that the Supreme Court in India calls it "Rama's Bridge" because according to the points I have listed, "Adam's Bridge" is the more common name. "Adam's Bridge" returns 83,700 Google hits, whereas "Rama's Bridge" returns 13,600 hits. Ergo, "Adam's Bridge" is the more common name. Finally, "Adam's Bridge" appears in a lot of reliable sources than "Rama's Bridge" or even "Rama Set(h)u". --vi5in[talk] 15:36, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
both "Adam's Bridge" and "Rama's Bridge" are in use in English, and both are valid. Since we necessarily need to choose one over the other as the main title, we need to establish which is more current. Google gives 70,000 hits for "Adam's Bridge" compared to 10,000 for "Rama's Bridge". Thus, the burden of proof would seem to be on those who wish to claim that "Rama's Bridge" is more current in "reliable/respectable" sources. Now "Ram Sethu"/"Ram Setu" clearly gives more hits than either, but I doubt we should choose one of these spellings, since setu is Sanskrit, not English, and sethu even worse is misspelled Sanskrit. dab (��) 08:01, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
PS, I see that the spelling "Ram Set(h)u" is mostly associated with bogus Hindutva "science" and the usual hysteria surrounding such things. As a recentism and a clear fringe topic, this should be ignored. Why does this article dedicate an entire section to such nonsense? This should be given much less weight per WP:UNDUE. --dab (��) 08:07, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
Yes Dab. But this article was Rama's Bridge (Bridge is english) not Rama's Setu since 2004 and continued to be the same upto 2006, So, we could have let that be the same. Are articles generally moved with out knowing WP:CON? Some one has made a mistake while moving.
as I said, since "Adam's Bridge" clearly sees wider use, I see no problem with the move. The burden of proof is on you if you want to claim that "Rama's Bridge" has equal or more currency in respectable sources. --dab (��) 08:23, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
No, I haven't made any sort of mistake while moving. If you would care to look at the edit summary I already provided above, you will see my reasons for doing so. --vi5in[talk] 15:36, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
hello deb. I already explained my point using common name and strong national ties criteria of wp:ncon and wp:engvar above. First of all, I do not agree of your point of sethu being 'misspelt'. While writing a word from a completely different language in English, the spellings need to be corrected. You have not refuted the point of 'common name' I made. I have clearly shown that many more people identify this structure as Rama Setu than Adam's bridge. So thats the common name proved by google searches. Let me say once more that this structure is most well known only in India. Rest of the world are not much aware of either Rama's bridge or Adam's bridge. We have to go by what MOST people identify this structure by, regardless of where they are located. (I already refuted the incorrect comparison made to suez canal). Also the criteria in WP:NCON asks for name used in legal context. I showed that the Supreme Court of India is calling it Rama Setu first. Again, you have not refuted the 'Strong National Ties' point. The name Rama's bridge or Rama Setu stands by both criteria WP:NCON and WP:ENGVAR

You ask for 'reliable/respectable' sources. Supreme Court of India is an extremely reliable source. I would say that the name given by the Supreme Court would be much more valid than any other source since the structure is within the territory of India. It is the prime authority for anything within the juristiction of India just like the UK or US Supreme court would be for those countries. Disregarding it is like insulting the Indian judicial system. Again I have shown many reliable media sources above. Here are some more from today's news search.

  • The Rama Setu Controversy: Mauritius Times, Mauritius
  • Uma threatens fast unto death over Ram Setu affidavit, Times of India
  • UPA trying to divert attention from Ram Setu: NewKerala
  • Sethusamudram project: Rama Setu not to be damaged, says SC: The Hindu (Note that Supreme Court mentions Rama Setu)

I am sorry to say that you resort to name calling by saying that Rama Set(h)u is something associated with 'bogus Hindutva science'. You have thus accused all the media outlets and also the apex court of India of being associated with Hindutva science. This is a sheer allegation unless you prove it. sir, it could be your personal opinion that all media and supreme court are involved in 'bogus hindutva science'. Someone else could clearly say that Adam and story of Adam travelling on that bridge to Adam's Peak is 'bogus semetic science'. These are all personal opinions. The fact remains that maximum number of people who are aware of and know this structure identify it only with Rama. Whether Rama built it or not is not a part of discussion here.

On a side note, Adam's peak is named Sri Pada on wikipedia (by its common name and national ties). Again like I pointed out, French names like Champs Elysees and Arc de Triomphe (rather than english name Arch of Triumph) are used on this very English Wikipedia. This wikipedia also calls Bombay(English Name) as Mumbai (recently changed local name). So what exactly is wrong with Rama Setu or Rama's bridge? there is no reason why the uncommon name of Adam's bridge should be forced on this structure. We must go by what the Indian Supreme Court calls it. Again thinking from the perspective of users, since most users who know this structure identify it as Rama Sethu or Rama's bridge, it would not be user-friendly to give a less well-known title to the article.RainDew 16:05, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

L'Arc de Triomphe is more common than "Arch of Triumph", which mandates that we use it. The guidelines for naming use reliable sources, (of which EB is one). EB calls it Adam's Bridge and not Rama's Bridge. I would think that Sri Pada should be renamed to "Adam's Peak". Since I have heard of "Adam's Peak" many more times and in many more contexts than Sri Pada. City names are a different matter entirely. Bombay is now known as Mumbai officially and is also reported the same way in all international sources, thus making it more common. So you see, the crux of this argument is the commonness of the name. And I'm sorry to say "Adam's Bridge" is far more common than "Rama's Brigde". Also, no one is name-calling here. Dab merely said that "Rama Set(h)u" is used by a lot of fringe groups and seems to be associated with them. Meaning, very few "reliable" sources use the name. I don't think you understand why I said the naming of the bridge by the SC is irrelevant. The official name is used only if there is no clear winner in the common vs. official name criteria. In this case it is overwhelmingly clear the there are more references to "Adam's Bridge" rather than "Rama's Bridge" or "Rama Setu". This is why it is irrelevant. --vi5in[talk] 17:24, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
  • L'Arc de Triomphe is more common than "Arch of Triumph", which mandates that we use it.

Similarly I showed that Rama Set(h)u is more common than Adam's Bridge. Maximum number of google hits shows it. Also in ENGLISH LANGUAGE MEDIA in India as well as some places like like mauritius calls it Rama Setu. Why would an English Language Media use a name that is not English? why would they not write the headline as something like "Uma threatens fast unto death over ADAM's BRIDGE affidavit?" The obvious reason is that IT IS MORE COMMON. I re-state the point that Adam's Bridge or Rama's bridge is NOT popular else where in the world so the point of 'what is it known elsewhere in the world' is not really important. Lets look at what is it commonly known as REGARDLESS of where the most people who know it stay

  • The guidelines for naming use reliable sources, (of which EB is one). EB calls it Adam's Bridge and not Rama's Bridge.

EB clearly says "Adam's Bridge or Rama's Bridge is a ..... The Supreme Court of India says that "Rama Setu or Adam's Bridge should not be damaged in any manner..." So why is EB to be held 'more reliable' than the supreme court of India? Should not the verdict of the highest court in a country be given priority over other source for a structure in its territory? You have not refuted this point. Note that EB makes it clear that the structure is also called Rama's bridge. So the name Rama's Bridge is NOT controversial

  • Dab merely said that "Rama Set(h)u" is used by a lot of fringe groups and seems to be associated with them. Meaning, very few "reliable" sources use the name.

Sorry to say but he did involve in name calling. By calling the Hindu belief of Rama having built the Rama Setu as 'bogus Hindutva science' is name calling. Lord Ram is respected by a billion Hindus and they do believe that he built the bridge. He has no reason to call this belief a 'bogus hindutva science'. Its the same as calling resurrection and Easter as Bogus Christian Science or the story of Adam crossing the bridge and standing on that peak for 1000 years as bogus Muslim science. As for 'fringe' groups do you think that all the Media outlets shown above like Times of India, Sify, CNN-IBN as well as THE SUPREME COURT is a fringe group and not reliable? You will have to prove this point.

  • Again you have not spoken about the National ties issue which should be considered in this case.
  • What would you say about user-friendliness? Most people who read this entry would be familiar with the term Rama Setu than Adam's bridge. I am again saying that this structure is mostly popular in India and Hindu community abroad. Its not a well-known place otherwise. So using a name which the users are not commonly aware of is not right.
  • The reason I showed those French names and also names like Castel del Monte (Castle of the Mount in English), Bibliothèque nationale de France (National Library of France in English) etc was to refute the point that someone made like "throw the name Setu out because this is English Wikipedia" I just wanted to respectfully point out that there is nothing like English name and foreign name. English Encyclopedia MEANS THAT THE CONTENT SHOULD BE IN ENGLISH. IT DOESNT MEAN THAT WE TRANSLATE A NAME INTO ENGLISH OR USE A NAME WHICH IS USED IN ENGLISH WORLD ALTHOUGH ITS NOT COMMON AMONG MOST USERS. In any case, the English language media does NOT have a problem with the word "Rama Setu".

So please lets get real and name it as such. On a side note, the sea between India and SriLanka is called Sethusamudram officially by the Govt clearly referring to Rama Sethu and not Adam Bridge. —Preceding unsigned comment added by RainDew (talk • contribs) 18:54, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

It seems rather obvious that you are disinclined to see the obvious. That being "Adam's Bridge" is far more common than "Rama's Bridge" and, "Rama Set(h)u" is mentioned ONLY in Indian publications. National ties are completely irrelevant in this case. The issue is how common the name is. If you cannot see that, it's not my fault.
ONLY English Language media from India and Mauritius mention Rama Set(h)u. How on earth can you say that most readers who see this page will be "more comfortable" on the basis of "user friendliness"? Do you have any statistics? I have already shown you that there are more (international and reliable) google hits for "Adam's Bridge" rather than "Rama's Bridge". By your very own admission, "Rama Set(h)u" is mentioned only be Indian English media and something else in Mauritius.


  • What is the name of the EB article? It's Adam's Bridge - point proven and case closed. The exact same thing is said in this article. It is mentioned that the Adam's Bridge is also known as Rama's Bridge. You can't pick and choose what you want. On one hand you say that it is not controversial because EB mentioned Rama's Bridge while conveniently ignoring the fact that the very same EB article is titled Adam's Bridge.
  • How many times have I mentioned that it is not just EB? There are a number of international sources that call it Adam's Bridge. Additionally, as far as naming conventions are concerned, on Wikipedia it is accepted to use EB names because EB is reputable and reliable encyclopedia. The issue is not whether the SC of India is less reliable than EB. Of course, the SC of India would use the local/national name. That doesn't make it any more reliable. Just like I am certain official publications in Egypt call the Suez Canal "Qanat As-Suways". So?
  • It is faith and nothing else. I don't think dab was calling the belief that Rama built the bridge "bogus". I believe he was referring to the (pseudo)science that is used to justify that belief. There is no scientific evidence to support such a belief, because its just a matter of faith.
  • National ties are completely irrelevant in this case. Once again, the issue is how common the name is.
Ok, I suggest you read the naming conventions again. The fact remains we overwhelmingly use English names in English Wikipedia. Obviously there are exceptions to the rule, like the L'Arc De Triomphe, because that name happens to be the most common name. So although I sound like a broken record, I will say this again. Adam's Bridge (by virtue of google hits and reputable/reliable references) is more common than Rama's Bridge. Rama Set(h)u, though returning a larger number of hits, has a very little by way of diversity, meaning they are almost ALL from Indian publications. That doesn't make it more common. So I have no idea on what basis you claim that it is "more familiar" to readers or that "more readers are used to it". Perhaps Indian readers, but Indian readers aren't the only ones reading this article. This is the end of my involvement in this particular thread of discussion. I suspect a lot of this clamouring about "wrong naming" has to do with a misplaced sense of nationalism than actually trying to name the article correctly. --vi5in[talk] 19:16, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
No I said that its called as Rama Setu in Mauritius ALSO.

You are again trying to google Rama's Bridge. Here are the google comparisons for Ram Setu and variants (overwhelming 475000) [5] vs Adam's Bridge (~80000) [6] It is based on these google hits that I am claiming that Rama Setu is a more popular name than Adam's Bridge. This is the same case as Arc de Triomphe or Castle del Monte. Why not we got for the name with MOST GOOGLE HITS as per WP:NCON? That name is obviously "Ram Setu". I constantly brought up those French names to show that the word SETU is not to be "thrown out" since this is English Wikipedia. A name is a name. The common name is NOT Adam's Bridge NOT Rama's Bridge but its Ram Setu. I was saying Rama's Bridge just for the sake of this "english wikipedia" controversy. but since there are names in other languages and Ram Setu has maximum number of hits, lets just make it "Ram Setu".

The reason I keeep on bringing supreme court is that WP:NCON asks us to see what is the name used in LEGAL CONTEXT. And that is Ram Setu.
I do know that EB has titled it Adam's Bridge. The only reason said I brought up EB is that you constantly keep mentioning EB and even as per EB the bridge is ALSO called Rama's bridge. So my point was that EB does mention that name too and so its not controversial in a sense that its a completely unknown name internationally.
Yes I do know that EB is reputable source but there is clearly a controversy here. So we must follow the guidelines for WP:NCON. This is where the supreme court comes in for the "legal context"
So as per WP:NCON,
  • Is the name in common usage in English? (check Google, other reference works, websites of media, government and international organisations): google searches show that Ram Setu is the most common. Government (Supreme Court) says the name is Ram Setu
  • Is it the official current name of the subject? (check if the name is used in a legal context, e.g. a constitution): Supreme Court says its Rama Setu. Also the official name of the sea on which this bridge is present is called Sethusamudram which clearly refers to Ram Setu.
  • Is it the name used by the subject to describe itself or themselves? (check if it is a self-identifying term): N/A

So the name is clearly "Ram Setu" so lets name this article "Ram Setu"RainDew 20:07, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

usage in Indian newspapers

Found the actual supreme court verdict. [7]. Now the supreme court mentions "Till Sep 14, the alleged Adam's Bridge or the Ramarsethu will not be damaged in any manner. The dredging activity may be carried out but without damaging the bridge,". This article needs to be changed to Ramarsetu if we go as per supreme court's actual verdict. The use of Proper noun "Ramarsetu" (An english variation) is very clear. Now as per WP:ENGVAR there are strong tie ups for the word Ramarsetu in India. The article should be renamed to "Ramarsetu" as per the nomenclature used by the supreme court. BalanceΩrestored Talk 06:58, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
Points to prove strong connection between India and Ramarsetu and it's variations "Rama Setu", "Ram Setu", "Rama's Bridge". I considered referring the nomenclature used by the 5 important news papers in India, who have their online websites, so that we see what's being used in India.
  1. Times of India (The most neutral news paper) "Rama Setu" OR "Ramarsetu" OR "Ram Setu" OR "Rama's Setu" OR "Rama's Bridge" site:timesofindia.indiatimes.com (2500 Hits) for [8] and (625 Hits) for "Adam's Bridge" [9]
  2. Hindustan Times "Rama Setu" OR "Ramarsetu" OR "Ram Setu" OR "Rama's Setu" OR "Rama's Bridge" site:hindustantimes.com (1530 Hits) for [10] and (8 Hits) for "Adam's Bridge"
  3. Indian Express (76 Hits) for Rama Setu [11] and (2 Hits) for Adam's Bridge [12]
  4. Deccan Herald (34 Hits) for Rama Setu [13] and (3 Hits) for Adam's Bridge [14]
  5. Mid-Day (815 Hits) for Rama Setu and [15] (0 Hits) for Adam's Bridge [16]
The numbers speak themselves. I understand there has a been a long confusion. Now I think there should be no problems for anyone here in renaming this article to Ramarsetu, respecting the statement from Supreme Court of India "Till Sep 14, the alleged Adam's Bridge or the Ramarsethu will not be damaged in any manner. The dredging activity may be carried out but without damaging the bridge,". I am sure nobody here is Biased, all wanted to do right. Some stuck with Adam's Bridge because it was found in Britannica. But, now I think, we have the Supreme Court's clear verdict. We should have no problems renaming the article. We have the policy WP:ENGVAR under "Strong national ties to a topic" that has asked wikipedians to use the nomenclature which has strong national ties. BalanceΩrestored Talk 10:26, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

ironically, the first page that comes up in your timesofindia.com search is titled "Not Ram Setu, just Adam's bridge"[17] and makes plain that the insistence on "Ram Setu" is just BJP hysteria. The 3,000 hits for "Ram Setu" (the most common "Rama" name variant) are ostensibly about the noise BJP makes about this, not about the Bridge itself[18]. It does appear that once again people are trying to "saffronize" Wikipedia towards preferred BJP terminology. This topic is also a recentism. last week, there was prancing about in the Indian goverment concerning the "historicity or Ram". This is silly nonsense. If anyone wants to cover this in detail, go to wikinews, or try compiling a 2007 Ram Setu controversy article and see how it evolves. dab (��) 11:15, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Puh-leez. Your crude analysis really is a joke. The term Ram Setu is much more common than Adam's Bridge, arguments of Macaulayism and Hindutva aside. If all the mainstream papers use Ram Setu, its not up to us to argue with that is it, unless you have some sort of training in journalism and get hired by an Indian newspaper. Baalu will obviously call it hysteria, hes a minister for the DMK, and its very consistent with the "oppression of the Tamil people/Hinduism is evil/Periyar" junk him and big daddy spew.Bakaman 17:14, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Incidentally, the Indian minister most closely connected with this issue has said [19],

The Minister said he did not see any such thing as 'Ram Sethu' and he knew only Adam's Bridge, which was a structure formed of sand shoals and such structures existed in many parts of the world. The Indian map since independence showed only Adam's Bridge and he was not aware of any Ram Sethu, he said.

(emphasis added) And as for the Indian Supreme court: its statement has been quoted differently by different newspapers. For example:

In any case, I don't see how the Supreme Court statement is being used to somehow imply that it has endorsed the name "Rama Sethu", especially given the use of the word "alleged". Abecedare 15:20, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

See above. TR Baalu is a member of the DMK, it is obvious he will toe the line of "big poppa" and the assorted insanity the DMK spews to keep its voter base happy. Why we care about a politicians views here is beyond me. 3 cherrypicked titles really prove nothing, except that you painstakingly looked through titles to find one that supported your hypothesis. Gnews has Ram Setu with 175% more hits than adams bridge, and Wikipedia should merely report what the mainstream news sources are saying.Bakaman 17:14, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
"Ram Setu" is in the news now because the BJP is making a fuss about it. Since when do we decide on toponymy based on news reports? Once the Indian government formally renames the thing, like they renamed Bombay to Mumbai in 1995, we can follow suit. Until then, what we want to know is, are there any English language maps that label the thing as "Ram Setu"? dab (��) 17:26, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
I am surprised to see comments like "Ramsethu is Sanskrit name so it should not be used as title for English wikipedia". Then we may have to consider changing English wikipedia titles for Singapore, Brazil, Andhra Pradesh etc etc.... Name is normally used as it is without translation. Title should be more prominent name which is used by public in general. It need not be title acknowledged by Minister or title used by historians. If more people know particular location by Ramsethu then it is more apt than Adam's bridge. I don't agree that it is BJP's terminology. Even if we consider it as BJP's terminology, whether Wikipedia prohibits using BJP terminology if same terminology is also used by public. Moreover T.R.Baalu is shipping minister, how he would become authorised source for particular place name. He is only responsible for dredging in particular area. If name quoted by minister has to be used for place then we have to call Kashmir as Pakistan occupied Kashmir or Indian Occupied Kashmir based on comments by Indian/Pakistan foreign ministers. --Indianstar 16:01, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
I'm not saying BJP invented the name. They are appropriating it, turning the thing into yet another propaganda stunt. It is obviously no coincidence that the matter is brought up now, at the same time BJP is making noise about this in parliament. We use the name most current in respectable sources. Abecedare's quote that "The Indian map since independence showed only Adam's Bridge" should put the matter to rest. Show us any major English language map that has "Ram Setu" and we can reconsider. (multimap has "Adam's Bridge"). No case for the move has been made except that BJP would like us to. --dab (��) 17:22, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
Most of the reputed map services does not have any name for this coordinate. Can we say place does not exist and ask for deletion of this article?. These map services covers US/Canada in detail and does not cover other countries to that extent. It is equivalent of Systematic bias. Few map services have used official names. I feel names used by reputed news agencies/public(can be proved by Google hits) is more important than offical name or names used by map services. If official name has to be used as article title then we have to change names for Bangalore, Rajinikanth Pope Benedict XVI articles. --Indianstar 18:25, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
Like dab said, has India officially named this bridge "Rama Setu" or "Ram Setu"? No one is even considering the fact that "Ram(s) Set(h)u" brings up sites that are overwhelmingly India, and justifiably so because it is only known by this name in India! The rest of the world knows it as Adam's Bridge. That should put this whole issue to rest right there! There's no need of this misplaced sense of nationalism here. It serves absolutely no purpose! If we change the name of this article, we'll have to change every other article name to its "regional name" regardless of how common it is. So Suez Canal should be changed to Qanat As-Suways then? Some places are known by their regional name because the regional name is more common. This is not the case here. --vi5in[talk] 19:42, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
I have mentioned this before and I repeat. 'Suez canal' brings up 1500000 matches on google compared to 908 for Qanat As-Suways. Ram Setu and variants bring up way MORE matches than 'Adam's bridge' (see my post above). In fact by naming this article as Adam's bridge you are going against your own argument. In fact using the logic that has been used for naming this article Adam's bridge, Suez canal should indeed be named Qanat As-Suways!!
I keep on repeating the reasons for more websites from India to be coming in google search. This structure REGARDLESS OF ITS NAME is only popular in India. So isnt it OBVIOUS that most sites that come up would be from India????? Just to give an example. Imagine a place called timbaktoo in Congo which is popular in that country and relatively unknown elsewhere. Would you imagine lots of websites in Singapore, Hong Kong, China, US etc to be actively dedicated to this place? How many times do I have to explain myself over and over? If you want to refute my point you would have to prove that this structure is indeed a popular all around the world so that websites elsewhere to be discussing this. The logic which is being followed here really surprises me.
Again no one has commented on the wikipedia guidelines that I had asked to be followed. Here they are again:

So as per WP:NCON,

  • Is the name in common usage in English? (check Google, other reference works, websites of media, government and international organisations): google searches show that Ram Setu is the most common. Government (Supreme Court) says the name is Ram Setu
  • Is it the official current name of the subject? (check if the name is used in a legal context, e.g. a constitution): Supreme Court says its Rama Setu. Also the official name of the sea on which this bridge is present is called Sethusamudram which clearly refers to Ram Setu.
  • Is it the name used by the subject to describe itself or themselves? (check if it is a self-identifying term): N/A
Has my argument gone over your head? Despite the fact that there are more hits for Ram(a) Set(h)u", they almost all overwhelmingly Indian sites! That doesn't make it more common! Do you realize that for it to be common, it has to be a) diverse and b) numerous. Ram(a) Set(h)u fulfills (b) and fails (a). "Rama's Bridge" fulfills (a) and fails (b). "Adam's Bridge" fulfills both (a) and (b). So your name fails this test. This structure is indeed popular all over the world because it shows up in a bunch of news reports and in a bunch of encyclopedias as well, where it's called "Adam's Bridge". I mean, just look up webster online. So no, I am not contradicting myself. --vi5in[talk] 18:38, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
As pointed out by one user, this article's name was indeed rightly given as Rama Setu and then one user suddenly changed it to Adam's Bridge WITHOUT any discussion. Why were there no discussions on this? In fact the first thing that should be done is that revert the name of the article and then then we will continue to discuss the change of its name. REVERT BACK THE ARTICLE TO ITS ORIGINAL NAME AS ITS NAME WAS CHANGED INAPPROPRIATELY IN THE FIRST PLACE.RainDew 22:23, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
Perhaps you don't understand what really goes on in Wikipedia. I gave my reasons when I moved the article. I can't be bothered to post the link again because I have already posted it in this thread. Go ahead and look at my reasons. You will also notice that other Wikipedia editors supported my view in this matter as well in further discussion. This article is going to stay Adam's Bridge. --vi5in[talk] 18:38, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Encyclopedia Britannica and Indian Places

Inspite of giving various arguments for changing the article name to "Ram Setu" based on clear guidelines of WP:NCON (seen in many of my posts above) the only argument that a couple of resistant users seem to keep bringing up is Encyclopedia Britannica. Now lets see the consistency of Britannica for naming Indian places.

  • Cambay is officially named Khambhat, but EB still calls it Cambay [20]
  • Most people might be aware that Bangalore is officially named Bangaluru and Mysore as Mysuru and but EB still labels the articles under Mysore [21]and bangalore [22]. Note that while the Bangalore article atleast mentions that its officially called by a different name, the Mysore article has no such mention. How consistent and accurate is that?
  • Madras is known as Chennai but still the label is 'Madras' [23]

Bold text* Cochin is officially called Kochi but again no updates or even mention of the official name [24]

  • Before anyone brings up the argument that "oh they are using the ENGLISH name" please note that Mumbai [25] Kolkata [26] and even Beijing (formerly Peking) articles are named CORRECTLY [27]
  • SO CAN WE REALLY RELY ON BRITANNICA WITH THESE INCONSISTENCIES AND INACCURACIES ABOUT THE NAMES OF INDIAN PLACES TO ACCURATELY LABEL THIS ARTICLE WHICH IS ABOUT AN INDIAN PLACE?
  • Also please note once again that English Wikipedia doesnt mean that we TRANSLATE the names of people and places in English. It just means we use scientific and other nomenclature and words in English. Names of people and places do not come under this rule so PLEASE STOP BRINGING THAT ARGUMENT UP.

SO WITH ONE MORE NEW EVIDENCE WE NEED TO IMMEDIATELY RENAME THIS ARTICLE AS "RAM SETU". IN ANY CASE IT WAS INAPPROPRIATELY RENAMED BY A USER WITHOUT ANY DISCUSSIONS.RainDew 23:56, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

This is not evidence at all. This just shows that you fail to understand what "common" means. Mumbai and Chennai are both official names, and references to both names are both diverse and numerous. The only time we don't use EB is when the alternative name is more diversely referenced and more numerous than the EB name, which is the case with the examples you suggested. But in this case, Adam's Bridge is both diverse and numerous. Rama's Bridge is only diversely referenced but not as much as Adam's Bridge. Ram(a) Set(h)u is very numerous, but almost exclusively used by Indian sites. So it's not diverse in the least. Hope you understood it this time. Also, stop shouting please. --vi5in[talk] 18:42, 23 September 2007 (UTC)


The EB thing I wrote above is not to contest the diverse and numerous issue, it was to show that EB is NOT RELIABLE AND CONSISTENT in its articles about Indian places. Sometimes it labels the article with its official name, sometimes with a older name and sometimes there is no mention at all about its official name. So, although EB is a valid source, it cannot be held a reliable source for naming Indian places with all these inconsistencies I pointed out. The only point of this 'evidence' was that the argument of "EB says its Adam's bridge, so thats what it is, case closed" was being brought up continuously.
Okay so your 'diverse' logic goes like this. Suppose there is a structure which is named as 'A' on 10 websites belonging to different countries but its labelled as 'B' on overwhelming 1000 sites in the country which it is SITUATED IN, still the appropriate name is 'A' because its more diverse? You will have to point to guidelines which say this.RainDew 19:26, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
Pretty much. Also add to it that these sites and references are reliable (which is the case for Adam's Bridge) like for example, this map and this map which both call the bridge "Adam's Bridge". The sites that all talk about "Ram(a) Set(h)u" all talk about the current controversy that's going on. --vi5in[talk] 19:42, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
That map you showed is clearly a map of colonial times from 1700s where the Ram Setu was named as Adam's Bridge by the colonialists. That doesnt changed the fact that the common name of this structure is "Ram Setu" and has remained so for many centuries. Again, you have not pointed to the guideline which points to the 'diverse' argument and the analogy I made above. "Suppose there is a structure which is named as 'A' on 10 websites belonging to different countries but its labelled as 'B' on overwhelming 1000 sites in the country which it is SITUATED IN, still the appropriate name is 'A' because its more diverse?" There is nothing which points at something like this in WP:NCON. Clearly Ram Setu is outnumbering "Adam's bridge" by ~ 1:8 ratio. I have already refuted the 'controversy' point. Why are not the English Language Media and other sites calling the controversy "Adam's Bridge" controversy other than the obvious fact that the common name for the structure is "Ram Setu"? Not once have you explained why is it more difficult for the English Language media to call the controversy as Adam's Bridge controversy if that is the common name (according to you).RainDew 20:03, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
Because it is the English Language media in India. Did you not get the "diverse part"? Can you point out any reputed and reliable sources that call it Ram(a) Set(h)u? Do you even have a map that calls it that? Yes there is something that points to it in WP:NCON. In fact, it's the very first point about "common name". I've shown you the criteria that I've used to show that "Adam's Bridge" is the common name. I don't care if Rama Setu outnumbers Adam's Bridge in a 1:8 ratio. Rama Setu is still overwhelmingly used by the Indian Media (English or not) and so is not diverse at all. I'm done splitting hairs with you. If you can't understand this, it's not my fault. The article's name is going to stay the same. --vi5in[talk] 20:34, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
Show me the wikipedia guideline which asks for this diversity. Common name doesnt ask for diversity. Just to see what the place is commonly known as. If the common guideline meant 'diverse' it would be clearly stated. Also the "legal" guideline clearly asks for what is the legal name in that country. This would work against the 'diversity'. I am asking this for the 3rd time. Where is the guideline which asks to follow this logic: "Suppose there is a structure which is named as 'A' on 10 websites belonging to different countries but its labelled as 'B' on overwhelming 1000 sites in the country which it is SITUATED IN, still the appropriate name is 'A' because its more diverse?" I have shown how the name 'Ram Setu' meets the guidelines of WP:NCON 2 times.RainDew 20:42, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
you are dodging the issue. The question is: which is the official name in India? That is, which is the name printed on official English language maps printed in India? Mumbai was officially known as Bombay until 1995, even though it had always been "Mumbai" to Marathi speakers. In 1995, the name was officially changed to Mumbai, which is why we now have it at Mumbai. If "Adam's Bridge" was similarly renamed to "Ram Setu", we can also move the article. So far, no evidence to this effect has been presented. Google counts will not work, because there is a propaganda stunt in progress. The question is controversial in India, and you are part of an effort to make your preferred name the de facto standard by google count supremacy. The efforts to move the Wikipedia article are part of this, and it is circular to argue that we have to submit to the campaign because the campaign is in progress. dab (��) 06:30, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
Dab: Which wikipedia rule says official name should take more precedence than commonly used name. Do you want to create your own rule? Why don't you take initiative to change name of Pope Benedict XV1 article as Joseph Alois Ratzinger which is his official name. Rajinikanth article name as Sivaji Rao. I can give another dozen examples if you want. Do you want evidence for Ram sethu names being used even before this issue has come up today. --Indianstar 12:35, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
Unfortunately there seems a clear propoganda for forciblynaming this article as 'Adam's Bridge'. We already argued that common name takes precedence over official name. In any case IT IS NOT CLEAR that the official name is Adam's bridge. I already pointed out that Britannica is not a reliable source for Indian place names. However it is very clear that the common name is Ram Setu. So just like Pope Benedict, Rajnikant, Akshay Kumar, Bangalore etc, this article should be named by its common name according to WP:NCON. I dont understnad why we cant follow the clear guidelines. I have showed it above 2 times how the guidelines clearly favor Ram Setu. Again ENGLISH language is continuously brought up when it has been mentioned several times that names of places and people do not fall under English Language rules. Otherwise chinese names, korean names, french names etc will all start getting translated for use in 'English Wikipedia'. The Supreme Court verdict goes like this and I QUOTE: “Till September 14, the alleged Rama Sethu/Adam’s bridge shall not be damaged in any manner. Dredging activity may be carried out so long as it does not damage Rama Sethu.” Note that the court uses Rama Sethu 2 times. So it is defintely known as Rama Setu in legal context (if not official). As per WP:NCON we have to name articles as per what they are used in legal context. This should end the controversy but some people just keep bringing their own rules like 'Diverse', 'official', 'recent' etc. It is clear that the name of this structure has been Rama Setu BEFORE it became Adam's bridge. Does anyone think that the ancient Indians named this structure as Adam's bridge? So the name Ram Setu is not recent at all. In fact Adam's bridge is a recent named.RainDew 20:21, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Adam%27s_Bridge/Archive_1&oldid=1142529788"