Talk:Undivided Goalpara district

Goalpara region

Please do not keep redirecting the Goalpara region to Undivided Goalpara district. The first article deals with an amorphous region, though largely congruous to the the district, and reflects the current usage in the literature. This article would deal issues such as if the duar regions, currently within BTC are no longer considered Goalpara. The second article deals with the historical administered region with a definite boundary. They are two different entities. Chaipau (talk) 09:32, 22 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Goalpara is never a separate political entity historically, this cultural region united as Undivided Goalpara district. You should know that creation of most parts of BTAD are controversial because Kamrupi and Goalparya are majority in them which leads in protests in different times. So Undivided Goalpara district is cultural area as well. Creation of another article for same is duplication. भास्कर्bhagawati Speak 05:29, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Undivided Goalpara district was not a cultural region, but an administrative unit created by the British that came together following, among things, wars. For example, the Bhutan War of 1865, when the Duars were added to the then existing Goalpara and Kamrup districts. Rennel's map of 1776 clearly shows that the Duars were not under British control then [1] Goalpara region is, like all regions, amorphous and changing entity, defined by, among other things, controversies which you mention above. Chaipau (talk) 09:40, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]