This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Indus script article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the subject of the article.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Archaeology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Archaeology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ArchaeologyWikipedia:WikiProject ArchaeologyTemplate:WikiProject ArchaeologyArchaeology
This article is within the scope of WikiProject History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the subject of History on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Historyhistory
This article falls within the scope of WikiProject Writing systems, a WikiProject interested in improving the encyclopaedic coverage and content of articles relating to writing systems on Wikipedia. If you would like to help out, you are welcome to drop by the project page and/or leave a query at the project’s talk page.Writing systemsWikipedia:WikiProject Writing systemsTemplate:WikiProject Writing systemsWriting system
This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pakistan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Pakistan on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PakistanWikipedia:WikiProject PakistanTemplate:WikiProject PakistanPakistan
Malware? Doesn't seem to be trying to install anything on my end at all, it's just a dead end that goes to a blank page. You can access the original page at the archive referenced in the section, and the download button there just gives you a zip folder with the font.
Regardless, I've added an archive link to the Harappa.com link, so that clicking through any links there should automatically take you to an archived copy of the Mohenjodaroonline.net link. – Scyrme (talk) 16:56, 24 September 2022 (UTC)Reply
The Alphabet of the Sindhu Prakrit (The Decipherment of the Indus script)
Latest comment: 3 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
The paper is published on academia.edu and it is well written with all references included, not sure what is the objection of user to include all 12 papers and let reader make decision about their content. After all it is only linking in relavant information to article, no need of unnecessary censorahip. 59.102.43.48 (talk) 04:19, 27 October 2024 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 2 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
of Indus inscriptions comprising taxation, trade and craft licensing, commodity control and access control: archaeological and script-internal evidence
Latest comment: 4 months ago6 comments2 people in discussion
@Metta79: Do you have more information about those copper plates being forgeries? Their not appearing in books describing the corpus of inscriptions doesn't necessarily mean they are fake, as the major books by Parpola and Mahadevan are now fairly old and predate the publication of these plates. I'm not saying you're wrong; just asking for more information. – Scyrme (talk) 22:17, 4 April 2026 (UTC)Reply
The Indian journal cited has poor peer review and is not reliable. Indian nationalists who cannot accept the possibility of the script being non-linguistic created this fake artifact. You can see the style is almost modern cartoony and completely at odds with the actual genuine seals from the Indus Valley Civilisation (compare the seated deity for example). Particular the copper plate with 34 characters was created because of the critiques that the Indus script was non-linguistic and could not encode natural language (as it highly unlikely a script with only 5-6 symbols on average in each text could represent normal human language). Metta79 (talk) 22:26, 4 April 2026 (UTC)Reply
If they were authentic, the difference in style could be attributed to a difference in medium (clay impression vs copper inscription). However, one of the two co-authors (Rick Willis) on the paper writing far outside of his field is a red flag, especially if the journal has poor peer review, so I'm content to leave them out of the article. Especially so, as Steve Farmer (who is cited in this article here on Wikipedia) is very clear that he dismisses them as forgeries. However, I was hoping for a formal publication that either appraises the plates and states that they're forgeries or formally criticises the paper in which they were published. It would be helpful to provide a reference on Wikimedia Commons to discourage their use on other Wikipedias/Wikimedia projects. – Scyrme (talk) 22:53, 4 April 2026 (UTC)Reply
ah yes, I don't think there is a formal reference. The established aforementioned authorities have just disregarded them with silence. There are new materials still being published in the standard Parpola corpus, the latest being 3.3 Indo-Iranian borderlands.Metta79 (talk) 19:54, 6 April 2026 (UTC)Reply
I think I got it
Latest comment: 3 months ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Informasi ini disarikan dari Wikipedia dan disajikan kembali untuk tujuan edukasi. Konten tersedia di bawah lisensi CC BY-SA 3.0. Kami tidak bertanggung jawab atas ketidakakuratan data yang bersumber dari kontribusi publik tersebut.
The information displayed on this website is sourced in part or in whole from Wikipedia and has been adapted for the purpose of restating it. We strive to provide accurate and relevant information, however:
There is no guarantee of absolute accuracy. Wikipedia is an open, collaborative project that can be edited by anyone, so information is subject to change.
It is not intended to constitute professional advice. The content displayed is for informational and educational purposes only. For important decisions (e.g., medical, legal, or financial), please consult a professional.
Content copyright. Wikipedia is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License (CC BY-SA). This means that content may be reused with appropriate attribution and shared under a similar license.
Responsible use. Any risk arising from the use of information from this website is entirely the responsibility of the user.