Contents

Talk:The Great Banyan

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Plants Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Plants, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of plants and botany 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.PlantsWikipedia:WikiProject PlantsTemplate:WikiProject Plantsplant articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. India: West Bengal Low‑importance 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 articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject West Bengal (assessed as Low-importance). This article was last assessed in April 2012.

Untitled[edit]

Any photos or website with photos of it during its existence? --Bobak 17:54, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The dates given in different sections contradict each other. --Chuck Sirloin 16:18, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to go ahead and round the figures given for dimensions, per Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style_(dates_and_numbers)#Numbers.
I'm guessing that the extreme precision in the source cited is (a) probably due to converting from some other units and (b) no longer exactly correct anyway.
-- 201.37.230.43 (talk) 00:32, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I wish to know who planted this great Banyan tree in Kolkata, if any one has any record please include that as well. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.169.143.133 (talk) 05:32, 13 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thimmamma_Marrimanu --117.201.245.74 (talk) 09:06, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Kindly please update the area covered by the tree.. it was more than 5 acre in 2017 2409:40D0:D:F4F3:8000:0:0:0 (talk) 04:55, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The figures don't match: If the circumference of 1km is correct, the area would be ~80.000 sqm. If the occupied area of 14500 sqm is correct, the circumference would be ~420m.2.240.164.8 (talk) 12:49, 6 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If the original trunk is gone, how can it be a single tree? If it has so many trunks, how can it be a single tree? Grandma Roses (talk) 20:42, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It's something called a Clonal colony 92.5.203.1 (talk) 05:41, 23 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The opening line reads "The Great Banyan This information is being published by Satyanarayan Kumawatis... )" I'm not sure who Satyanarayan Kumawatis is but I'm thinking of removing it. Unless someone says otherwise I'll remove it in a few days. 92.5.203.1 (talk) 05:45, 23 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Both this article and the one for Thimmamma Marrimanu read that they were the largest tree specimen in the world in the 1989 Guinness Book of World Records. Obviously this can't be true for both of them. Ardsamurai (talk) 19:33, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]