Jump to content

Talk:Adam's Bridge/Archive 5

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1←Archive 3Archive 4Archive 5Archive 6Archive 7Archive 8

Requested move 24 July 2018

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Not moved. There is no clear consensus in favor of the proposed move at this time. Opposers have made a reasonable argument that the proposed target is not the clear common name in English language sources. bd2412 T 01:36, 5 August 2018 (UTC)

Adam's Bridge → Ram Setu – Reading the previous page move discussions and all, it seems that the proposers didn't had idea about the correct WP:COMMONNAME. Time has also significantly changed throughout these years. When it comes to the usage in the majority of references, then "Ram Setu" is clearly more preferred per WP:COMMONNAME.

  • Google:-
Adam's bridge = 1,05,000
Ram Setu = 4,76,000
  • Nearly 5 times higher.
Adam's bridge = 479
Ram Setu = 2,120
  • 5 times higher and shows that reliable sources, media and the recent coverage prefers using "Ram Setu" more often.

As such, I support moving the current page to "Ram Setu". Lorstaking (talk) 03:37, 24 July 2018 (UTC)

I support to change the name from Adam's bridge to Ram setu as it is common name. শক্তিশেল (talk) 04:08, 24 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose for the moment. Google hits are a poor indicator of general use and common name. For one thing there are many mirrors and it's just not very reliable. What we do want to know is the most common name in English sources. This Google Ngram, which searches books, shows "Adam's Bridge" in some use, while Ram Setu and Rama Sethu don't show at all. No ref is perfect, but Google Ngram is better than just raw google hits. Next, we want to know what notable sources in English use, for instance the popular atlases. I don't have any handy right here, but let's crack open a few.
It's a tough question because, in India, Latin Alphabet text is in English. This contrasts with, for instance, Germany where most uses of a geographic name are in German and thus ignorable. So I dunno yet. But at this point, based on the Ngram, I would say no. Herostratus (talk) 06:35, 24 July 2018 (UTC)
We can say "Adam's Bridge", that such name has results only because sources are mirroring Wikipedia and if the name was "Ram Setu" then most of those sources would be using the name "Ram Setu", not Adam's Bridge. Accesscrawl (talk) 07:08, 24 July 2018 (UTC)
What do you mean? The Google Ngram results are not Wikipedia mirror sites - the raw Google results on the other hand will contain a number of WP mirrors. Wikipedia mirrors are if course irrelevant to the discussion and any such search hits should be ignored if possible. --bonadea contributions talk 07:28, 24 July 2018 (UTC)
Right... Google has digitized very many English-language books going back to the 19th century and has a huge database... Google Ngrams searches this database. It's not perfect: 1) they have not digitized all books, 2) I'd guess that books published in India might be somewhat under-represented, and 3) it does not differentiate between an entry in the Oxford Atlas and a comic book (to the extent that matters... the common name is deduced from comic book usage too, but we maybe should give more weight to major atlases atc.). Also I don't know if ten instances in one book counts as one or ten.
It's much much more scientific and useful than just Google hits tho, for all that, and carries a lot more weight I would say.
Also, re Google News hits: don't know if that's reliable and useful (not, I would guess),but that would show current usage, right? But it's the area under the curve that counts, or at least counts somewhat. That is, the respective area under the curve for each term (in an Ngram; in this case there is no curve for the proposed term, so...). In other words, if a term is somewhat prevalent now, but a different term was more prevalent in 2000 and 1970 and 1940 etc... that counts; that's not nothing. Sure, give more weight to current usage, but not all the weight. A lot of our readers are old after all. And a lot of the sources that people are using are old. So the question is what term would be least surprising to most readers? That is the crux of the question. Herostratus (talk) 00:08, 26 July 2018 (UTC)
  • In my comment I was giving weight to the results from Google News. What I see is the prevalence of sources in Google News provides a clue that which name is being used more often by the news and media sources. Capitals00 (talk) 07:52, 24 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose - On the English Wikipedia we go by the English common name (WP:COMMONNAME), however ridiculous. BTW, I get "About 5,120,000 results" for "Adam's bridge" vs "About 1,080,000 results" for "Ram Setu" using Google, so that is clearly subjective. —PaleoNeonate – 07:50, 24 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Qualified support I was open-minded to the thought of a page move for a long time but proposals were not convincing as also noticed by nom. While Google results may be different for some, Google News seems to confirm that "Ram Setu" is more common. Other than that, we need to see what reliable sources say about this:
The BBC report from 2007 writes: "Hindu activists say dredging the canal will damage the Ram Setu (or Lord Ram's bridge), sometimes also called Adam's Bridge." It tells that "Ram Setu" is a more common name. This same quote was also used by Wendy Doniger in her book The Hindus:An Alternative History.
Christophe Jaffrelot is a reliable source on the issue of this bridge. In his book Religion, Caste, and Politics in India, Jaffrelot has used the term "Ram Setu" dozens of times but he used "Adam's bridge" only two times and only when he was quoting someone else.
In literature, "Ram Setu" seems to be more commonly used while Adam's Bridge is an alternative term. --RaviC (talk) 09:13, 24 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Support Per nom and Ravi C . I agree with the statement that this is a English Wikipedia and hence should follow English Comman names but at the same time English Wikipedia or even English language in general is not restricted to Anglosphere , common terms can also come up from other part of the world. Ram Setu is clearly the most favorable term in the English language press. After having a careful look at all the arguments , I fully support this page move. Razer(talk) 09:26, 24 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose Google Scholar gives 558 hits for Adam's Bridge[1] and 85 for Ram Setu[2], with 6 hits having both. Google books gives about 14,600[3] for Adam's Bridge and 1140 for Ram Setu[4] - of both, 784 mention both, considerably more than have of those including Ram Setu.[5] Google news gives me vastly different numbers than Lorstaking got but more of those mention Ram Setu. Just plain Google searches are worthless for this. As for Jaffrelot, he's French, right? Sure, his book is translated into English, but... Anyway, he's just one source. We're not looking for "the most reliable source uses" but what most reliable sources use. Doug Weller talk 10:03, 24 July 2018 (UTC)
  • But we are searching the more common use in modern sources than those that are over 200 years old. If you select search on Google books as 21st century,[6] you would find 22 results  for "Ram's Bridge", 20 results for "Adam's Bridge", 20 results for "Rama Setu", 13 for "Ram Setu" and 11 for "Ramsetu". Google books results are mostly reprints of Wikipedia as you can find "LLC" as the publisher. Google scholars is not different, mostly repeating the chapters from 1800s. Since name more depends on the modern use, it seems that multiple names  are more common than "Adam's Bridge". As for the common name, we can't decide it as that would be WP:OR. BBC source concluded that Ram Setu is more common which is effectively backed by the sources on Google News which is definitely an authority on deciding what is the more commom name at this moment. Accesscrawl (talk) 10:29, 24 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Google books results are mostly reprints of Wikipedia as you can find "LLC" as the publisher. I'm sorry, but that is wholly incorrect - why do you think that? Google books results are not reprints of Wikipedia articles and "LLC" is nothing to do with Wikipedia. Google scholars is not different, mostly repeating the chapters from 1800s. This is also not true. The majority of the Scholar hits are much more recent than that: 180 of the "Adam's Bridge" hits are from the 21st century, another 150 are from the span 1950-2000. (There are 35 hits for "Rama Setu" and 78 hits for "Ram Setu" in the 21st century Scholar hits, so even combined, there are fewer hits than for the English form of the name in scholarly articles from the last 18 years.) --bonadea contributions talk 11:42, 24 July 2018 (UTC)
    • It simply isn't true that most of the hits from Google books are Wikipedia reprints, I see only a dozen or so. When I search on 21st century they disappear. Which is odd. But in any case, there aren't many sources in the last 17 years and we shouldn't restrict ourself that much. I think there is something broken with the search by century searches. I disgree entirely with your statement about Google Scholar. Hm, if I set for 2000 and later, I get 183 for Adam's Bridge, 78 for Ram Setu with 6 using both. As for the BBC, despite your claims it actually says "Hindu activists say dredging the canal will damage the Ram Setu (or Lord Ram's bridge), sometimes also called Adam's Bridge." which given the context I think means in India - I note we already have Indian sources using "Adam's Bridge" and in any case it's not a reliable source for our purposes, there's no suggestion the author did a study. Doug Weller talk 11:56, 24 July 2018 (UTC)
As to looking for current usage, yes that's most important, but it's not everything. Paying attention to sources from 200 years ago makes little sense, but paying attention to a 40 year old source makes some sense -- a non-zero number of readers are going to be coming here from a 1978 copy of the National Geographic Atlas or whatever... those things are expensive and get kept. Or from another book or article printed in 1978. You can't say that this doesn't count at all. Herostratus (talk) 00:15, 26 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Your source "commentisfree" is an opinion piece and not representative of its publisher. Read WP:SPS. We don't consider self-published opinion pieces as "neutral". Also, it doesn't dispute the fact that "Ram Setu" is a more common name. RaviC (talk) 11:41, 24 July 2018 (UTC)
Can you name some of those modern scholarly English language sources? D4iNa4 (talk) 12:02, 24 July 2018 (UTC)
I won't insult your intelligence by posting the same links yet again :-) --bonadea contributions talk 12:16, 24 July 2018 (UTC)
Consider pointing to the diff. Lorstaking (talk) 12:20, 24 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Support - Modern scholarly sources find more support for Ram Setu than Adam's Bridge. Christophe Jaffrelot has been already mentioned and he also published a journal with title including the word "Ram Setu".[7] Except Jaffrelot, Amrita Basu in her book,[8] published by Cambridge University Press has made numerous mentions of "Ram Setu" but not "Adam's Bridge". Another relevant source, "Academics as Public Intellectuals",[9] makes mention of the bridge as "Ram Setu". When we are actually looking for what is actually "still the more common form in scholarly English-language sources", the answer is "Ram Setu", not Adam's Bridge. It would be very concerning that if "Adam's Bridge" is really a common term then why these sources mentioning the bridge as "Ram Setu"? Unless someone can provide as good quality modern sources as Christophe Jaffrelot and Amrita Basu, I remain convinced that Ram Setu is a more common term. D4iNa4 (talk) 12:02, 24 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Those who are getting different results, they need to try searching intitle:"Ram Setu"[10] and intitle:"Adam's Bridge". There are 8200 results for "Ram Setu" and only 3,000 results for "Adam's Bridge". Many of those saying "Adam's Bridge" are Wiki mirrors. Just saying that if we were to care more than just passing mention, the indepth coverage seems to be more in favor of "Ram Setu" as also evidenced by above scholarly sources. Same with Google News,[11] that there are 144 for "Ram Setu", while there are 46 for "Adam's Bridge". Per WP:TITLE: "it is reasonable to consider the usage following the change in reliable, English language sources." Lorstaking (talk) 12:20, 24 July 2018 (UTC)
    • intitle is useless for Google books as it turns up nothing. For Google scholar, intitle:"Adam's Bridge" turns up 14 and intitle:"ram setu" turns up 2 but one's a news site. The other one is "Hindu Nationalism and the (Not So Easy) Art of Being Outraged: The Ram Setu Controversy"[12] - which, although about mobilising religious outrage, may be the context for this discussion. Doug Weller talk 14:21, 24 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Support- Rather funny to have Mr Adam's bridge in India, there may be lingual implication on correct pronunciations, but does not mean that we keep a totally not known strange name:) Shrikanthv (talk) 14:33, 24 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose. I think we should ignore google searches because google posts results based on many criteria (including the location of the user). I, for example, get 5.5M for Adam's Bridge and 1.2M for Ram Setu but I don't think that's indicative of anything since the actual articles may include either name in the title. Google scholar for exact matches shows me 85 for "Ram Setu" and 558 for "Adam's Bridge". JSTOR has 118 results for "Adam's Bridge" while 11 for "Ram Setu" or "Ram Sethu" (most of these 11 refer to the religious movement behind the renaming, BTW). Somewhat like in the Ganges/Ganga naming issue, I think that, as long as both names are generally acceptable in India, the name predominantly used by English language sources outside India should be accepted as the common name. That is especially true when the entity is also in another nation outside India. --regentspark (comment) 15:07, 24 July 2018 (UTC)
    And, um, those of you quoting Jaffrelot's use of Ram Setu (note that Jaffrelot italicized it in the title) should probably read the article as well. Quite interesting. --regentspark (comment) 15:13, 24 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Hell, that's the article I linked to above. Ironic. But you're right, Google searches are extremely tricky. I'm pretty sure general G searches have always been rejected. It's pretty clear that scholarly sources use Adam's Bridge more. User:Shrikanthv, you may never have heard of the name but it is certainly not "totally not known" in India. This sort of false argument doesn't help your case. Doug Weller talk 15:32, 24 July 2018 (UTC)
    Based on what I'm seeing, an article Ram Setu controversy would probably work since most of the references on JSTOR are about the renaming attempts on the part of the Hindu right. But the bridge article should fairly clearly stay at our current title. --regentspark (comment) 19:59, 24 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Support The term Adam's Bridge is archaic. It was coined by those who knew only bible and adam (and eve) and did not know much about Indian mythology and traditions. The term is no longer used in India. India is where this geographical structure is located. Over 1.3 billion Indians now call this structure Ram Setu and no citation of google searches can override this fact. Is Wikipedia only for those few (such as User Bonadea) who insist on continuance of archaic terms that are no longer used in the location to which they refer? Ram Setu is the term now used in India. The Sanskrit word Setu is written as Sethu in south India. Both spellings are accepted. User Bonadea who repeatedly presents illogical arguments based on searches may kindly ponder why the Wikipedia article on Burma is redirected to Myanmar and article on Ceylon is redirected to Sri Lanka. These two articles show the way for changing the article's name to Ram Setu and redirecting the existing article to Ram Setu.Rao Ravindra (talk) 18:53, 24 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment User PaleoNeonate says, "On the English Wikipedia we go by the English common name (WP:COMMONNAME), however ridiculous." Please wake up to the fact that Adam's bridge was an English common name; it is no longer so. Now Ram Setu is a common name in English for 1.3 billion Indians. Burma was an English common name; it is no longer so. Ceylon was an English common name; it is no longer so. Times change and names change. Now sun hardly rises over an empire where it was said to never set (and Scotland may become a separate republic post-Brexit). One has to move on and move with time. Clinging to archaic terms does not make Wikipedia acceptable to a large number of users.Rao Ravindra (talk) 14:14, 25 July 2018 (UTC)
    • Comment @Rao Ravindra: no, WP:COMMONNAME says "most commonly used (as determined by its prevalence in a significant majority of independent, reliable English-language sources", your argument is irrelevant to our policy and guideline. And simply false. You've asserted that 1.3 billion people know the name Ram Setu (very unlikely) and that all of them speak English. I don't think you really believe that. Doug Weller talk 16:04, 25 July 2018 (UTC)
      • Comment Did I write that "1.3 billion people know the name Ram Setu" and that "all of them speak English"? No, I did not. I wrote "Now Ram Setu is a common name in English for 1.3 billion Indians." You are paraphrasing it wrong. The name Ram Setu is common to all languages spoken in India. English is one of those languages. A large number of uneducated or ill-educated Indians (several hundred millions) would not have even heard of Taj Mahal. So, does it mean that Taj Mahal is not a common name in English or Taj Mahal does not exist? What is equally likely is that apart from a handful educated English-speakers, most English-speakers would not have heard of the term Adam's Bridge. Pardon me, but most Americans are so US-centric that they know almost nothing of India or other Asian or African countries. I know this not just from a lot of reading, but from personal meetings with them in the US. (A person in West Virginia did not know that Washington was also a state in the US; for him it was just the capital.) So what "our" policy you are quoting. Quite irrelevant policy if it ignores ground realty. An ostrich hides its beak in the sand and make-believes that there is no predator around.Rao Ravindra (talk) 16:39, 25 July 2018 (UTC)
    Wikipedia aims not to be US-centric (and the origin of editors is irrelevant). But your comments made me think: the official name of countries may indeed change and the policy is different in relation to this. Which makes me wonder if for other geographical things like this bridge, if there are national reasons to prefer a certain name, if policy allows (or should allow) it. I certainly understand that many Indians dislike the English/western name for it. —PaleoNeonate – 16:49, 25 July 2018 (UTC)
    many Indians dislike the English/western name for it. I'm not sure if that is an accurate statement, or, at least, there is no evidence to support it. When reading the articles with Ram Setu in the title, I get the impression that it is a set of Indians on the Hindu right who dislike the name. Perhaps I am wrong but, if there is no evidence in support of a general dislike, I don't think that assumption should figure in this debate. --regentspark (comment) 18:57, 25 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Support. Having dug deeper, I can safely say that "Ram Setu" is indeed a more common name. WP:NAMECHANGES also applies here. "Adam's Bridge" is not an official name, and Ram Setu clearly appears to be more in use. "Adam's Bridge" also seems to be an outdated term. As it has been said above, Google Scholars mostly show the results from the 19th century that have been heavily republished for decades but those sources are no longer reliable. I'd say that the term "Ram Setu" is more usable when it comes to modern authors and scholars.
The vast majority of the sources use "Ram Setu" for the title of their story, and so should we. My Google search turns up 1,17,000 hits for the term "Adam's Bridge" and 1,83,000 hits for "Ram Setu". A search in Google News turns up 508 hits for the term "Adam's Bridge" and 2,020 for "Ram Setu". In addition, the search also turns up 912 hits for the term "Ram Sethu".
Below are the results from HighBeam:
Moreover, it should be noted that the sources stemmin from the first two links mentioning "Ram Setu" and "Ram Sethu" are talking about this bridge, while ~70% of the sources for "Adam's Bridge" are talking about Abbott Adam's Bridge in Scotland and Tom Adams Bridge in Englewood, Florida.
As I demonstrated above, Ram Setu is clearly more common than Adam's Bridge. MBlaze Lightning talk 17:33, 25 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose Ignoring the arguments by assertion ("X is common name") and emotive 'reasoning' ("1.3 billion Indians!!!"), I believe the issue boils down to weighing the following two facts:
    1. Common name in recent news reports: As User:Lorstaking in their nomination, and User:MBlaze Lightning and User:RaviC in their comment, have adequately demonstrated, the name 'Ram setu' (or, their variants 'Ram Sethu', 'Rama Setu', 'Rama Sethu') appear more often than 'Adam's Bridge' in contemporary news reports (mainly Indian). This is easy to understand since as Christophe Jaffrelot, who has been oft-cited but apparently little-read so far, notes in his article, the shoals have been a subject of a religio-political controversy recently. And though the crux of that 'outrage' is not the name per se (it is whether the origin/character of the shoals is geological or sacred), it is natural to prefer the name 'Ram Setu' in context of that controversy.
    2. Common name in scholarly sources: As User:Herostratus, User:DougWeller and User:RegentsPark have already demonstrated 'Adam's Bridge' is the much more common name, used 5x-10x more often, in scholarly sources as seen through Google Books, Google Ngram, Google Scholar and JStor searches. Let me focus on JStor: it finds 119 citations for 'Adam's Bridge' and 11 citations for 'Ram sethu' and its variants. Notably, all 11 of those 'Ram Sethu' articles are post-2000 and afaict use the term only in context of the religio-political controversy; there are 13 post-2000 articles on JSTOR that use the term 'Adam's Bridge' both within and outside (example) that narrow frame. This belies the claims that references to 'Adam's Bridge' are outdated, or that the name has "changed" either officially or in terms of usage.
Given the above, I'll come down on the side on following scholarly sources (per WP:ENC and WP:RECENTISM), and retaining the current name of the article.
Lastly, I have seen some suggestions above about 'Ram Sethu' or 'Adam's bridge' being or not-being the "official name" for the feature. I haven't been able to find anything definitive to back that up or even determine what national/international body exists for naming such shoals (contrast with SCUFN for undersea features). The best source I found was the 1974 India–Sri Lanka maritime boundary agreement, whose Article 1 says, The boundary between India and Sri Lanka in the waters from Adam's Bridge to Palk Strait shall be... (emphasis added; see also enclosed map in that as well as the 1976 agreement). Of course, wikipedia article titles do not always follow official names, but if that were to be used as an argument, it would weigh in favour of the 'Adam's Bridge' name too. Abecedare (talk) 19:21, 25 July 2018 (UTC)
"Ram Setu" per "“The Government of India intends to explore an alternative to the earlier Alignment of Sethusamudram Ship Canal Project without affecting/ damaging the Adam’s Bridge/Ram Setu in the interest of the nation"[13], according to the affidavit filed by Anant Kishore, Director, Ministry of Shipping in March 2018. Raymond3023 (talk) 19:54, 25 July 2018 (UTC)
Abecedare, I would add #3: Common name in non-scholarly sources. If a comic book has Iron Man fighting the Crimson Dynamo at "Adam's Bridge" (or conversely at "Ram Setu"), that counts also. (IMO opinion scholarly sources should count somewhat more, but I don't think that's codified in the rules, and it's a matter of opinion.) This is why I don't mind using Google Ngrams, which does not different between scholarly works and comic boos, for these matters -- and Google Ngrams is usually accepted as a valid data point (not a deal killer, but something to consider). And Google Ngrams favors "Adam's Bridge" (see above). Herostratus (talk) 00:25, 26 July 2018 (UTC)
Abecedare: JSTOR is not a reliable source for deciding relevance as it gives more recent for every single outdated name. For example it gives 115,665 results for the old name Bombay[14], but only 22,864 for new and current name Mumbai.[15] Clearly we can't use that logic for this page unless we are ready to change "Mumbai" back to "Bombay". Accesscrawl (talk) 02:32, 26 July 2018 (UTC)
@Herostratus: I agree. I am using 'scholarly sources' as a precis form for books and academic articles catalogued by GBooks/GScholar/JSTOR etc as opposed to news stories (and of course news stories count; it's just that in this instance the differing usage pattern has an underlying cause, which is relevant to our discussion). I focused on JSTOR since that is the 'cleanest' database with greatest editorial control, and since I didn't want to repeat the points already made by you et al.
@Accesscrawl: Two points:
  1. I have already discussed post-2000 JStor results in my original comment to check for whether we are just looking at "outdated" articles. We're not.
  2. Also please see WP:NAMECHANGES, which is applicable to the cases of Mumbai, Chennai, Kolkata etc, but not applicable to 'Adam's bridge' unless someone can point me to exactly when and who changed the name (as can be easily done for the cities mentioned). Note that Encyclopedia Britannica continues to have its article at Adam's Bridge while, just like wikipedia, its articles for cities whose names were officially changed are at the new titles.
Hope that helps. I'll try to limit my replies so that we can all have our say without redundancy, and the other participants/closer have a fair chance of reading it all. Abecedare (talk) 03:09, 26 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Support - A number of suggestions have been provided above and I have looked into each of them while carrying out same searches with other similar names that have gone through the similar history. I have analyzed results of the names as follow:-
Names Google Books Google News Use as title by others Current Wiki name
Madras
Vs
Chennai		 Madras = 1,34,00,000 results
Chennai= 16,90,000 results		 Madras = 14,70,000 results
Chennai = 2,96,00,000 results		 Madras = 14,70,000 results
Chennai = 2,43,00,000 results		 Chennai
Bombay
Vs
Mumbai		 Bombay = 1,58,00,000 results
Mumbai = 29,40,000 results		 Bombay = 1,64,00,000 results
Mumbai = 6,85,00,000 results		 Bombay = 20,90,000 results
Mumbai = 3,78,00,000 results		 Mumbai
Calcutta
Vs
Kolkata		 Calcutta = 1,73,00,000 results
Kolkata = 12,90,000 results		 Calcutta = 13,60,000 results
Kolkata = 1,36,00,000 results		 Calcutta = 13,60,000 results
Kolkata = 1,36,00,000 results		 Kolkata
Adam's Bridge
Vs
Ram Setu		 Adam's Bridge = 14,500 results
Ram Setu = 1,150 results		 Adam's Bridge = 466 results
Ram Setu = 2,415 results		 Adam's Bridge = 2,740 results
Ram Setu = 8,325 results		 Adam's Bridge

According to the naming standards the last one (this article) needs to be changed to "Ram Setu" like the rest of the mentioned examples. If you are going to use "Google Books" as the evidence (while ignoring the modern publications) then you will have to change the title of "Mumbai" back to "Bombay". That's contrary to WP:NAME which supports the use in modern sources. Reliable sources are now using "Ram Setu".

The former names will obviously get more search results in Google Books because they had been used in the writings throughout 1800 - 1950, but that content is outdated and no longer relevant. Google Scholars is not any different than Google Books and gives more results to former names for example Chennai Vs Madras or Bombay Vs Mumbai, but that doesn't means that the former name is commonly used in the present times. Such searches don't prove the relevance.

Relevance is proven by use in present times. Per WP:COMMONNAME, "Ram Setu" is definitely more in use among modern sources and since others including general media, modern scholars are using the term "Ram Setu" as well as other reliable sources. This all means that we should also "Ram Setu" as the title. Raymond3023 (talk) 19:51, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

If you mean "Relevance is proven only by use in present times", that's a matter of opinion, an opinion which I don't necessarily share. A lot of our readers are old, or are using old sources. Herostratus (talk) 00:34, 26 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Question: in much of the above, raw hits from Google Books (also Google News) seem to be given more weight than results from the Google Ngram Viewer. Is there a good reason for this? And if so, what is it? Or are people just less aware of the Ngram Viewer? Or what? Herostratus (talk) 00:34, 26 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Because it is irrelevant to naming regulations. Old name Bombay easily beats new name (and present title) Mumbai according to Google Ngram Viewer[16] just like old name Madras beats Chennai.[17] And same happens with Google Books that you find more results for outdated name than the presently popular name and this is why Google News is more important and in fact only important factor (for deciding name of a location), and it supports "Ram Setu". Accesscrawl (talk) 02:40, 26 July 2018 (UTC)
Oh but I think it is more complicated than that? Which is why Ngrams are typically considered a very good data point in these discussions. "Google News is... [the] only important factor" is overvalorizing the present I think. As I said above the relative area under each line matters, some. Why should it not? Trend lines certainly do matter, yes. But what 30 year old atlases say also matters. The point here is to serve the reader, so use a name that will be most findable and recognizable to most readers. We have to guess at that really, but we can make informed guesses. Our readership includes schoolboys in Delhi, but also someone reading a 1974 novel in Akron... is the person reading that 1974 novel, seeing this geological structure mentioned in the novel and wanting to learn more, more likely to search on and recognize "Adam's Bridge" or "Ram Setu", hmnh? That person matters too.
Anyway, the Bombay/Mumbai Ngram you mention is not an argument for ignoring Ngrams, but rather for moving that article to Bombay (there may be good arguments for not doing that, too; an Ngram is only one data point). You are kind of begging the question... "The article about Madras/Chennai should self-evidently be named Chennai, Ngram does not support this, therefore Ngram should be discounted". But not that many things are really self-evident. That we are having this discussion is perhaps evidence that things that are self-evident to you are not necessarily self-evident to everyone. Herostratus (talk) 03:59, 26 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Support "Ram Setu" is used by Government of India, Courts, etc. for referring this bridge as per these sources:[18][19][20] Even 10 years ago the term "Ram Setu" was more heavily used than "Adam's Bridge".[21][22]

Like the already mentioned source of BBC that says "the Ram Setu (or Lord Ram's bridge), sometimes also called Adam's Bridge."[23] We have another BBC source which says:-

"Scientists and archaeologists say the Ram Setu (Lord Ram's bridge) - or Adam's Bridge as it is sometimes called - is a natural formation of sand and stones."[24]

Usage of "Adam's Bridge" as a name for the bridge happens "sometimes", which tells that it is not a general name. It is perfectly valid to say "Ram Setu" is a more WP:COMMON name. शिव साहिल (talk) 05:16, 27 July 2018 (UTC)

I see that you say "even 10 years ago" etc citing the Hindustan Times. So how do you deal with the fact that in May of this year the same paper reported the government filing an official statement saying that it "intends to explore an alternative to the earlier alignment of Sethusamudram Ship Channel project without affecting/damaging the Adam’s Bridge/Ram Sethu in the interest of the nation”? I also note that your first source for the government uses "Adam's Bridge" as well as Ram Sethu. Your second source repeats the same government statement I've just quoted, which uses "Adam's Bridge/Ram Sethu" - with Adam's Bridge first. Your third source doesn't seem to quote the government at all and is about a proposal dear to Hindutva supporters and later rejected. You are misrepresenting the sources. Doug Weller talk 13:23, 27 July 2018 (UTC)
Hindustan Times is a mainstream reliable source. Last source [25] is statement of a relevant professor I included as "etc.".. I just said that "Ram Setu" is used in general, not "Adam's Bridge". Not only BJP[26] but UPA government used "Ram Setu" and "Setu" in their statements.[27] If "Adam's Bridge" has been used, then "Ram Setu" has been used more often. The use of "Ram Setu" over "Adam's Bridge" has been frequent for long and you can find that in the sources that have been reporting about this bridge throughout these years.[28][29] शिव साहिल (talk) 14:47, 27 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Support: per COMMON NAME. 86.97.131.24 (talk) 08:17, 27 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment. Let's address the elephant in the room: this is, to a large extent, a political issue. Indian people, tired of colonial names, want to use an Indian name. There's nothing wrong with this, politics is part of life, and why shouldn't Indian people feel this way. Also IMO there is some merit to this. The thing is of more interest to Indians than to others, and let's not go out of our way to be egregiously offensive if we can avoid it.
I would call on the person closing to consider, if she feels that the issue is close -- and it seems to be -- to consider giving some weight to the desires of the Indian people. (I say this as someone who opposes the move, in the interest of being fair.)
In addition, let's assume that Indian people would be better served by "Ram Setu" -- a separate issue from the political-desire question -- and the rest of the Anglosphere maybe not so much. So let's see... The native-speaking core of the Anglosphere is a bit under half a billion souls; the population of India is about three times that. However, it says here that maybe 10% of Indians speak English at all, and maybe 2% speak it well... but as far as reading, let's say 10% of the Indian population can read English well enough to use the English Wikipedia as a first choice... so that'd be 150 million (lets assume that this 10%, tending toward being elite, have similar levels of internet access as the average for the core Anglosphere). That's a lot less than half a billion... BUT... probably Indian people are more interested in this subject than Canadians. So if they are three times more interested -- that is, if you plucked a random English-reading Indian and a random American, there's a (say) .3% chance that the Indian person has accessed this article or will someday, while for the American it is a .1% chance -- then it comes out in the wash: half the readers will be Indian, half from the core Anglophere (ESL Germans and Nigerians etc. we are not considering). Who knows? But it seems reasonable that this would be so.
So this certainly complicates the issue. But if this 3-to-1 ratio is true, another reason that the issue hangs on the knife edge. Maybe there's some data somewhere on this. Herostratus (talk) 20:20, 27 July 2018 (UTC)
@Herostratus: of course that assumes all Indians think alike. The problem for me is that what I see happening here is that within a few hours of this move request we have 10 editors show up who haven't edited the article or the talk page so far as I can tell all arguing for the same position, which is a cause of a particular sector of Indian politics. And oddly enough, no Sri Lankan's although we've had some before.its hard not to wonder how they all found out about it so quickly.. Doug Weller talk 20:57, 27 July 2018 (UTC)
@Herostratus and Doug Weller: It is incorrect to frame this as an Indian vs. Western thing. As the oft mentioned, but unfortunately mostly unread, Jaffrelot article points out, the "Ram Setu" movement is closely tied to the Hindutva movement which posits that the bridge is "man made" and was thus constructed by Ram, leading to the conclusion that the Ramayana is based on real events. Which is why a large number of the scholarly hits on "Ram Setu" are about the roots of the naming controversy in the Hindutva movement. To use these hits that talk about the controversy to somehow conclude that Indian people prefer this name is incorrect, unwarranted, and perhaps even condescending. Like I say elsewhere, the hits support the existence of a Ram Setu controversy or Adam's Bridge naming controversy article but they do not support moving this article to that name. --regentspark (comment) 15:17, 28 July 2018 (UTC)
Hmnh well OK, but then my questions would be:
  1. If you plucked some random Indian people and asked them, what percent would prefer "Adam's Bridge" do you think?
  2. If "Adam's Bridge", why?
  3. Given that a lot of colonial names/spellings/pronunciations are being replaced with Indian ones -- Mumbai, Chenai, and so on -- why would many Indians feel that Adam's Bridge should be an exception (if they do)?
  4. Would Sri Lankan people prefer the colonial name? Why?
  5. OTOH, would many Muslim Indians prefer "Adam's Bridge", given that (according to the article) it was, in legend, used by the legendary Muslim personage Adam? (About one Indian in six is Muslim.)
Lot of these can't be answered easily, true. Herostratus (talk) 17:06, 28 July 2018 (UTC)
@Herostratus: Exactly. We can't answer these questions and that's why we look at what scholarly sources say. We can't overweight what wikipedia editors are saying because it is relatively easy, with some off-wiki collaboration, to create a false impression of a western bias and focusing on scholarly sources helps make sure we don't get mislead. --regentspark (comment) 12:59, 29 July 2018 (UTC)
@RegentsPark: I agree entirely. This isn't a western-eastern controversy. I reverted someone today who was suggesting that the measurement of the circumference of the earth was a "western science" thing. Doug Weller talk 16:07, 28 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose per @Abecedare: and @Doug Weller:. I would also add: Which spelling? Why Ram Setu? Someone will argue it should be Sethu. Or Rama. Or some permutation of those. In addition, the Sinhalese (the majority of Sri Lankans, who also have a claim on this landmass) have a name for it as well. Sri Lanka's Tourism Promotion Board, which is a government agency, refers to this landmass as Adam's Bridge on its English site. For what it's worth, here's the Google Trends. I don't know where the original suggesting user got those numbers (I would note that they appear to be in the Indian numbering system, so they may reflect usage in India alone). Paris1127 (talk) 23:05, 27 July 2018 (UTC)
    • Comment A couple of additional thoughts and findings: a lot of people seem to be overlooking the fact that it's not just Hindus who have a legendary creation story for this former bridge. From the article itself: Some early Islamic sources refer to a mountain in Sri Lanka as Adam's Peak, where Adam supposedly fell to earth and describes Adam as crossing from Sri Lanka to India on what became known as Adam's Bridge.. Last I checked, there were still Muslims in India and Sri Lanka (although not as many as there used to be). Also found an opinion piece about the site's sacred nature to Muslims and Christians (but, again, it's an Op/Ed, so some independent additional research may be warranted). Although not a scholarly work, Ken Jennings, writing for Conde Nast Traveler, refers to it as a "Giant's Causeway" per Islamic tradition (don't worry, he doesn't ignore Hindu tradition about the structure). The Sri Lankan newspaper The Sunday Leader has an article about the dredging controversy, and the article title refers to the structure as "Adam's Bridge", and uses both names in the article body. Oh, and here's a fun fact: Wikipedia has a Rama Setu article. Paris1127 (talk) 17:35, 28 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose per WP:COMMONALITY ("Use universally accepted terms rather than those less widely distributed, especially in titles."). Like Ganga vs. Ganges, "Ram(a) Set(h)u" may have more usage in India than "Adam's Bridge", but Wikipedia is global in scope and should use titles that are more common globally (and in Sri Lanka?). —  AjaxSmack  01:04, 28 July 2018 (UTC)
WP:COMMONALITY is irrelevant as it is not a guideline about page moves. Worldwide sources like BBC have already clarified that "Ram Setu" is a more common term thus your argument is still not standing. Accesscrawl (talk) 04:28, 28 July 2018 (UTC)
Irrelevant? "Use universally accepted terms rather than those less widely distributed, especially in titles." —  AjaxSmack  14:55, 28 July 2018 (UTC)
Title of sections or articles? Your opinion is still OR. Which mainstream news network calls this a "Adam's bridge" and more often than "Ram Setu"? Accesscrawl (talk) 15:44, 28 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Support - See no arguments that refute the fact how Ram Setu is not a WP:COMMONNAME and used more commonly among reliable sources as Google News makes it evident. Oppose votes fail to show any similar example where we are using an outdated name over a more commonly used name, nor they refute how general standards don't apply to this particular RM. Accesscrawl (talk) 04:40, 28 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose When I visit Google Maps and search for "Ram Setu" I am shown a map but the text in the sidebar says "Adam's Bridge". The sidebar includes a panaromic photograph dated Jan 2018 and titled "Adam's Bridge". An offical Sri Lankan tourist map is here. It shows "Adame's Bridge" (Adame might be a typo because this article says "Adam's Bridge"). Encyclopedia Britannica is content with Adam's Bridge. The above attempts to count Google hits are misguided as such results depend on the user's location and Google history, and the numbers are bogus. The COMMONNAME for the English Wikipedia is Adam's Bridge–what reliable sources (new from previous move attempts) support a claim that "Ram Setu" is the more common English name? Johnuniq (talk) 09:38, 28 July 2018 (UTC)
BBC, quoted here. Would you argue that it is regional? 86.97.131.24 (talk) 12:09, 28 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Since when we are following Britannica's titles when we reject them often for promoting honorific titles? Britannica calls "Bangalore" a "Bengaluru"[30] while our article says Bangalore. I think you have ignored Google News, which has been confirmed by both support and oppose voters to be giving more results for "Ram Setu" than "Adam's Bridge" and it provides accurate knowledge as to what is the more WP:COMMONNAME now. You can read these two sources as pointed above:-
"'Hindu activists say dredging the canal will damage the Ram Setu (or Lord Ram's bridge), sometimes also called Adam's Bridge." (From BBC)
"Scientists and archaeologists say the Ram Setu (Lord Ram's bridge) - or Adam's Bridge as it is sometimes called - is a natural formation of sand and stones."(From BBC)
These sources confirm that "Adam's Bridge" is a less known name while Ram Setu is more common. Which English source or source from any language says that "Adam's Bridge" is the more common name compared to Ram Setu? शिव साहिल (talk) 15:50, 28 July 2018 (UTC)
@शिव साहिल: BBC News has mentioned 'Adam's bridge' or 'Ram Setu' exactly five times. You quote two of the mentions; here are the more recent three citations that you left out:
  • Hindu devotees believe the area between India and Sri Lanka - now known as Adam's Bridge - was built...scientists and archaeologists say Adam's Bridge, or Ram Setu, is... Sep 15, 2007
  • Hindu scripture says the area between India and Sri Lanka - now known as Adam's Bridge - was built ... scientists and archaeologists say Adam's Bridge, or Ram Setu, is... Sep 19 2007
  • An Indian Ocean island, it is almost linked to the Indian mainland by Adam's Bridge, a mostly submerged atoll barrier, which lies between the offshore island of Mannar and India itself. 28 September 2010 (no mention of Ram Setu at all, when talking of the feature outside the context of the controversy)
Selective citation of evidence is not conducive to an honest discussion. Abecedare (talk) 16:12, 28 July 2018 (UTC)
None of the source fetched by you, mentions that Adam's Bridge is a more common name than Ram Setu. You are only mentioning the use of "Adam's Bridge", no that it is more commonly used than "Ram Setu". Where as the two sources[31][32] I linked make it clear that "Adam's Bridge" is only sometimes used as the term.
Aside from this, Gulf News has also used the name "Ram Setu" 9 times and only used "Adam's Bridge" once for saying "Ram Setu, also known as Adam's Bridge".[33] Treatment of "Adam's Bridge" as a less common name is clearer than what we have researched until now. शिव साहिल (talk) 16:32, 28 July 2018 (UTC)
  • For the record, the term "Ram Setu" has more common usage even in Sri Lanka, as this scholarly source tells us:

    Many in India and Sri Lanka call it Ram Setu Bridge. Their claim is that this was the remains of the bridge built by the Hindu Lord Ram to reach Sri Lanka to rescue his wife Sita who was abducted by Ravana the demon king of Sri Lanka as depicted in the Hindu epic Ramayana.

    This invalidates the argument that Sri Lankans prefer to refer to this bridge as "Adam's bridge" upon which several users have apparently based their !votes.
MBlaze Lightning talk 17:44, 28 July 2018 (UTC)
I see several mentions of Sri Lanka above from those who have opposed this move. The source says explicitly that "many" people in India and Sri Lanka refer the bridge as "Ram Setu". On the other hand, I am yet to see a source that says "Adam's bridge" is a prevalent term in Sri Lanka.  MBlaze Lightning talk 19:08, 28 July 2018 (UTC)
This is the English Wikipedia where names that are most common for English are used. The links provided show that Sri Lankan sources use "Adam's Bridge" for English-speaking tourists. Johnuniq (talk) 00:43, 29 July 2018 (UTC)
English wikipedia or any other territory of wikipedia, the names used are based on WP:COMMONNAME which in this case is Ram Setu. WP:COMMONNAME doesn't implies that how English speaking "minority" like it the "way". Accesscrawl (talk) 03:55, 29 July 2018 (UTC)
That is quite wrong. One example is Ganges which uses the common name applicable for English-speaking countries. Johnuniq (talk) 04:09, 29 July 2018 (UTC)
You cant draw conclusion by yourself because that is WP:OR. You have to find reliable source which "says explicitly" that Adam's Bridge is prevalent as a name, contrary to the academic source above which says Ram Setu is the prevalent name in Sri Lanka. Accesscrawl (talk) 04:42, 29 July 2018 (UTC)
Can we please stop claiming that source that says "Many in India and Sri Lanka call it Ram Setu Bridge" really says that that name is prevalent in Sri Lanka? All that it means is that a lot of people use the name, which is entirely irrelevant here. While I'm here, I'm just going to repeat that the appearance of a like-minded group of editors, few if any who have edited this article or talk page, can't avoid being seeing as the result of off-wiki activity. And it's not as though this hasn't been suggested before, at least for some of you. Doug Weller talk 12:34, 29 July 2018 (UTC)::::::::The prevalent names in India or Sri Lanka are not relevant here. There are plenty of English sources above showing "Adam's Bridge" applies for English speakers. Even if it were true that Sri Lanka favors another name, the fact that their tourism authority chose "Adam's Bridge" for English speakers is all we need to know. Move discussions are not settled by finding a scientific study of what title complies with COMMONNAME. Johnuniq (talk) 05:24, 29 July 2018 (UTC)
Prevalence in the sources written in English language favors Ram Setu. To reply your Tourism authory's mention, I would expect you to support moving Adam's Peak to Sri Pada, because "Sri Pada" is used as a more common name by the same tourism authority,[34][35] not "Adam's Peak". Accesscrawl (talk) 07:08, 29 July 2018 (UTC)
No one source is going to determine anything. However, as with a number of claims above, this one is simply wrong. Your first link mentions it as "Sri Pada (Adam's Peak)" as the title of the article, but in the discussion only mentions Adam's Peak, and that twice. The second one is about a "Sri Papa Pilgramage" which it describes as an event " where thousands flock to pay homage to sacred footprint atop the Adam’s Peak." It does not refer to the mountain as Adam's Peak. Doug Weller talk 11:47, 29 July 2018 (UTC)
But if "Adam's Peak" was a more common name then it would be known as "Adam's Peak Pilgrimage" not "Sri Pada Pilgrimage". Accesscrawl (talk) 12:18, 29 July 2018 (UTC)
That wasn't your original argument. And you're expecting logic from a tourist agency?
  • I was going to say that but had an edit conflict. Yes, since a Hindutva government took power, they changed the name. That's to be expected. In a few years it may be Adam's Bridge again. Doug Weller talk 12:34, 29 July 2018 (UTC)
  • The great misunderstanding is that what counts for COMMONNAME is not how many times a name is used in India. For those new to the area, it should also be pointed out that the battle over the name concerns Hindutva moves to promote Hindu norms in India. In particular, the area is the focus of a political skirmish outlined here. Johnuniq (talk) 09:18, 31 July 2018 (UTC)
  • @Abhi88iisc: you seem to not have actually read this page, as I've pointed out that the current BJP Minister for Science has used the name Adam's Bridge (and not Ram Setu) recently. I also quoted an affidavit, from the government related to the Supreme Court case you mention above which said "The government of India intends to explore an alternative to the earlier alignment of Sethusamudram Ship Channel project without affecting or damaging the Adam’s Bridge or Ram Sethu in the interest of the nation,"[41] - both names are mentioned but Adam's Bridge is mentioned first. Your own source doesn't quote the Supreme Court so we don't actually know what was officially said, but it (the article) does say the chain is also known as Adam's Bridge. So you are wrong in your claim (which you don't actually back up with evidence) that Adam's Bridge is a term mainly used in out-dated literature. It's still used by the BJP government in official statements. Doug Weller talk 10:50, 31 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose for now: It appears clear from some of the sources that Adam's bridge still has a significant usage even among the Indian government. I am too busy to minutely check ever claim, but having joined 6 years ago, I know know not to blindly trust any website. It's not like any of them has taken a survey of the name's usage. I don't usually agree with admins but when I see so many of them opposing it, it is clear that there is a problem. So until the usage of Adam's bridge becomes very marginalised as compared to Ram Setu, I am opposing this for now. DraculatheDragon (talk) 11:12, 31 July 2018 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Semi-protected edit request on 17 August 2018

Change of Name of this Page from Predominantly 'Adam's Bridge' to 'Ram Setu' as the earliest mention of this bridge is in Indian Ithihas/Epic Ramayana. I don't think it's a better practice to name the places first described in other culture with a name which is latest appointed name by other culture. The name should be Rama Setu in title. And Rama Setu [also known as Adam's Bridge] in first line. Vvasu001 (talk) 19:33, 17 August 2018 (UTC)

 Not done: per the outcome of the very recent discussion just above this section. Favonian (talk) 19:43, 17 August 2018 (UTC)

The Border

Is the shoal that is the border, above water?

Is it named? (Hopefully that can be answered briefly).

Got a photo? (And can it be added to the article)?

MBG02 (talk) 15:50, 18 August 2018 (UTC)

Source 61 Problem

According to the text source 61 should be linked to an archaeological article stating there is no evidence the structure is man made. However, the link description is at this time identical to that of source 60 and the link also is broken. Perhaps someone knowing about the topic could fix it. Wassermensch (talk) 12:40, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 26 September 2018

Its mentioned as Adam's Bridge, while the Bridge first reference is much before it came into existence as Adam's Bridge. Hence looking at the chronological order of its nomenclature similar to the rules used for any other items concerned to scientific or non-scientific items, the name should be changed to Ram Setu in the headline. Although its name as Adam's Bridge can be kept within the explanation text. Naming Ram Sethu as Adam's bridge can be rather insulting to Hindu faith within India. Please comply and change the heading name as Ram Sethu. Vikram ShenoyK (talk) 06:36, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

 Not done: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit semi-protected}} template. — fr + 06:52, 26 September 2018 (UTC)
Please see the previous failed requested move: Talk:Adam's Bridge#Requested move 24 July 2018. Thanks, —PaleoNeonate – 13:18, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

The name should be Shri Rama Setu. There is no proof having name Adam bridge. But we have proof having name Shri Rama Setu.

The name should be Shri Rama Setu. There is no proof having name Adam bridge. But we have proof having name Shri Rama Setu. Rgovindm (talk) 03:29, 28 September 2018 (UTC)

Merge

I propose to merge Rama Setu (Ramayana) into this article as a subsection, since Rama Setu already redirects here. Capankajsmilyo(Talk | Infobox assistance) 12:33, 4 November 2018 (UTC)

Rama Setu (Ramayana) was a redirect to Ramayana#Yuddha Kanda], while some of the content was taken from Nala (Ramayana). I have restored the former redirect.[42] Raymond3023 (talk) 14:00, 4 November 2018 (UTC)

Needs amputation...

That is Ramasethu not Adams bridge please amputate... Bhaskarpattar (talk) 11:27, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 5 January 2019

Better deserving name should be Rama Setu instead of Adam's bridge. Adam has nothing to do with making of the bridge.On the other hand Shri Ram is hindu deity whoes involvement in making the bridge is strongly believed in India as well as Sri Lanka (two countries between which the bridge exists), so the name should be changed to Rama Setu. Neeraj.garg.35513 (talk) 13:34, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

Not done - please see the previous discussions in the talk page history. Vsmith (talk) 14:41, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

Exact location of land border

There does seem to be a land border, at least part of the time, according at least to Google Maps, as when you insert the coordinates N 9.08684 E 79.57118, which fall on the border, and go to satellite mode, it lands on a small shoal. The border is very short but it appears to exist after all. Sea Captain Cormac 01:02, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

Change of name to RAM SETU

There is no sense of naming ram sethu as adams bridge.. there is no connection with adams to RAM sethu .... As RAM sethu was build by devotees of LORD SREE RAM... WE have proofs for it from archeology department you can find it out and we have many more proofs for the existence of ram sethu. Kindly change the name of adams bridge as Ram sethi.. Lokesh shanakala (talk) 16:39, 16 February 2019 (UTC)

That won't be happening, see the previous discussion. Johnuniq (talk) 22:45, 16 February 2019 (UTC)

its not Adams bridge and the indian scriptures which are far old mentions it first. Thehindunationalist2012 (talk) 08:17, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

Please see the earlier discussions. The English language Wikipedia uses the most usual name found in English reliable sources. Different language Wikipedias use different names, which is appropriate. Note that we also use Indian sources using the name, including government ones. Doug Weller talk 08:49, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

re Disputed origins section

This structure was not made by people, or gods. It's like 100,000 years old, at least the foundations are, according to the article, and it is very large, a deep-sea engineering project that we would be stretched to do even today. Also, there are no gods -- they're made up. Since they're made up, they can't have built anything could they have. Similarly, our article Lightning does not suggest that one realistic possibility is that they are actually made by Zeus or Thor or whatever. Also, the moon is not a hologram, the sun is not 100 meters away, the Earth is not flat, and Finland exists. Considering that we are an Enlightenment entity, here's no "dispute" about anything here.

If some people say otherwise, so what? This is an extreme fringe theory, and its not a service to the reader to indicate otherwise. I understand about Hindu fundamentalism and Hindu nationalism and the Ram Setu movement, but that has nothing to do with geology. Consequently I've made some changes, re-ordering mostly, and renamed the section. Herostratus (talk) 11:16, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

Agenda pushing

Please explain this revert in entirety. Even if I discount the horrible prose quality, I remain curious about what qualities made Alan Lester, an ordinary lecturer, a renowned geologist. Also, why shall volumes of quotes from a non peer-reviewed view-bait program be provided at all, so as to set up a false contrast? Also, w.r.t your re-titling of the section, the claims about Adam's Bridge being a Ramayan-ic man-made structure are not recent at all and this appropriation has been a prominent locus of Hindutva politics in India since its birth. The sole thanks shall be for changing fundamentalist to nationalist, true to the sourcing. ∯WBGconverse 07:31, 19 April 2019 (UTC)

To which I can only add WP:REDFLAG. Johnuniq (talk) 07:50, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
I've given them a warning about misrepresenting sources, those quotes were by the narrator,[43] so it's also a BLP violation. Doug Weller talk 08:14, 19 April 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 8 April 2019

The Ram Sethu cannot be know as Adam's bridge as it steals its very identity. The first mention of it was in the 19th Century and the existence of it goes deep into ancient Indian literature. This needs to be changed to Ram Sethu also knows as Adam's Bridge. Pillai392 (talk) 08:02, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

We only reflect what English sources most commonly use (WP:COMMONNAME and WP:ENGLISH). You can also see the previous discussion on this. – Þjarkur (talk) 09:22, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

Well boy howdy

OK, so regarding the name of this (and I guess other) articles, here's something I just discovered, Google Trends. (It's old, so mabye I'm the last to know; but I've never seen it referenced in naming discussions). Google Trends shows us nothing about what reliable or other sources say. It tells us what people searched on. This'd bear on arguments regarding WP:COMMONNAME quite a bit, I'd think. It is specific to people using that particular proprietary search engine, so there's that. But hella people do use it.

According to this Google Trends query of worldwide searches:

  • "Ram Setu" is searched on a fair amount more than "Adam's Bridge". ("Rama Setu shows up a distant third, and other terms not at all). This matters IMO.
  • For whatever reason, people searched on "Adam's Bridge" more than on "Ram Setu", until March 2012 when Ram Setu jumped ahead and has stayed ahead consistently since. Unlike Google Ngrams, only the current status really matters, the area under the curve doesn't matter. We do care what term sources used in 1975, but we don't care what term Google users searched on in 1975 or 2015, really. We only care what they're searching on now (and will in the future, to the extent we can predict that).
(The odd thing is, it's not really that one term replaced another. It's that, beginning in March 2012 and continuing consistently since then, the world has just been more interested in this entity than it was before, and that all of these newly-interested people use the term "Ram Setu". I suspect some sort of artifact -- maybe Google was not used much in India up til then or something -- but whatever.)
  • In India, almost every searcher was searching for Ram Setu: 95%. In the rest of the Anglosphere, more searchers were looking for Adam's Bridge: America (83%), Britain (85%), Canada (69%), Australia (57%). Sri Lanka was not shown.
  • However, if I'm reading the page correctly, a lot more total people were looking for this structure in India, under whatever name, than in anywhere else. It says... "search interest" in America vs India for Adams Bridge was 18-16 (about equal number of total people were searching on the term "Adam's Bridge" in India as in America), but "search interest" in India vs America for Ram Setu was 100-1... This is why the overall graph shows that, worldwide, about 75% of the searches for this entity are for "Ram Setu" and 25% for "Adam's Bridge". If I'm reading all this right.

Hmnh. I'm not sure how solid Google Trends is, or if it's more just an interesting toy. But if it's not a toy, then a new look at the name for this article might be in order. Herostratus (talk) 02:22, 20 April 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 7 May 2019

Please change "To rescue Siva, Rama needed to cross to Lanka." to "To rescue Sita, Rama needed to cross to Lanka." because it is a misprint and "Siva" was a different character. Joydipdns (talk) 14:16, 7 May 2019 (UTC)

Rename the topic to ram setu

It has to be ram setu and not adams bridge. If you are too keen on calling it adams bridge it can be said some people call ram setu as adams bridge (i even oppose that,but worst case senario that can be accepted) Vivekvallayil (talk) 13:15, 11 May 2019 (UTC)

@Vivekvallayil: what do you have to say that isn't covered in the discussions above? Note that this is the English language Wikipedia, other language Wikipedias will use different names. Doug Weller talk 14:13, 11 May 2019 (UTC)

Mr.weller, Which ever language you use, the name of a place can’t be altered. And its clearly mentioned there ram setu is connected with lord sri rama. And when your name is doug weller it feels awkward to call you by other names.. right.. And this is connected with our faith, religion and history. Request you to please change the name. Thanks and regards.. Vivekvallayil (talk) 12:56, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

See the previous discussion. Johnuniq (talk) 23:56, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 4 May 2019

It is not a "Adam's Bridge". Its real name and ancient name is "Rama Setu". Please don't use colonial term. Respect native people faith. AnkurSingh26 (talk) 07:48, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: See the RM discussions mentioned at the top of this page. The English language Wikipedia uses the most usual name found in English reliable sources. ∯WBGconverse 08:15, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

Change the name to ramsetu Nareshsaraswatoo7 (talk) 21:14, 16 May 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 11 June 2019

Please make a hatnote for Damia Bridge. 93.142.121.55 (talk) 16:46, 11 June 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Saucy[talk – contribs] 01:15, 12 June 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 18 June 2019

I Just want to do simple changes in the page, like Name of the page. I will change the head to Ram setu bridge. And also just a line below this saying that, Ram setu bridge also known as Adam's Bridge. Kundank191 (talk) 12:32, 18 June 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: See the previous discussion Begoon 12:35, 18 June 2019 (UTC)

Change it to its real name “Ramsetu” or “Ramasetu” Bridge

What is this Adam’s Bridge? Since ages it has been known as Ramsetu bridge. I request you to change its title asap. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shivangi1111 (talk • contribs) 04:22, 4 July 2019 (UTC)

  • Shivangi1111 this has been discussed numerous times in the past (see the RM discussions mentioned at the top of this page). The English language Wikipedia uses the most usual name found in English reliable sources, hence Adam's Bridge. Dan arndt (talk) 05:46, 4 July 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 23 August 2019

"Change Adam's Bridge to Ram Sethu". Seshadrisampath (talk) 16:47, 23 August 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: Did you by any chance look at the other requests on this talk page? See previous discussion. Favonian (talk) 16:52, 23 August 2019 (UTC)

Please change its name to Ram Setu. In this article it is also written that this bridge was first mentioned in ramayan as Ram Setu. So why it is not named as Ram Setu ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 176.203.90.98 (talk) 19:00, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Adam%27s_Bridge/Archive_5&oldid=1184402914"