This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 |
The result of the proposal was restore the established page name, which is Bangalore. A look through the deletion history of Bengaluru shows that the page was tagged as CSD-G6 and speedy deleted on August 23. This is a valid method for the uncontroversial reversal of a redirect, but extensive discussion in the archives, as well as the debate here, shows that this move was known to be a controversial change. Further, the redirect from the original title was altered upon the initiation of this discussion. This prevented any users from moving the page back themselves. It has been made clear by ArbCom that an RM discussion is not necessary to restore the original title in such a case. A future discussion may show a consensus in favor of changing the name of this article to Bengaluru, but the evidence here is that no such consensus has yet been reached. Everyone need not be happy with this close, but please respect the integrity of established titles and try to make yourself aware of previous discussions when thinking about renaming an article. Thank you. Dekimasu よ! 13:47, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
Hello,
I have some concerns about the recent move of the page from Bangalore to Bengaluru. It seems this was done by a user (
User:Naveenpf) without any discussion or consensus. My concerns are:
In light of this, I propose we restore status quo and move the article back to Bangalore, pending official announcements and acceptance of the changed name (atleast by major news services). I hope this will be alright. If you have any objections, I will be glad to answer them. Thank you, Max - You were saying? 19:10, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
In the interests of keeping the survey clear, though, please do not use use it as a place to argue against (or otherwise comment upon) the opinions of others. Please use the "Discussion" for that.
The move to Bengaluru was done in opposition to consensus, so you don't really need a requested move to move it back. -- Yath 09:36, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
(Commenting on the "Oppose" of
KNM)
With all due respect, since when has Rediff replaced official sources such as a government notification in a gazette? As for your second point, it is only because of the time factor that the articles have been known by their new names. Consider this - Bombay was renamed in 1995, Madras in 1996 and Calcutta on 1st January 2001. Wikipedia didn't even exist back then. In the meanwhile, the new names of these cities were officially changed and widely accepted in English usage. Hence, the articles began with their new names when Wikipedia was in its formative years. I'm sure if Bangalore's name had been changed then, we could've had an article with the new name a lot earlier, but that's not how the circumstances are, are they? -
Max -
You were saying?
09:03, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
(Commenting on the "Oppose" of
Sarvagnya)
The link is being passed around because it highlights the official procedure before a name change takes place. So what if it's from October '06? Plus the link is from Deccan Herald, and despite the fact that it is an English language newspaper published from Bangalore, it doesn't refer to the new name in any of its reports till date. That was only an example. DH is just a small regional paper. What is more important is that almost all of the major Indian or international news outlets still use "Bangalore". As for Rediff, it cannot be a replacement for official sources (see reply to KNM above). You will also notice the glaring irony of the same Rediff article being written by a certain Vicky Nanjappa in Bangalore. Clearly, no one has adopted the new name yet. So yes, I think we do need to wait for a green signal from outside, until there's a proper government notification and the new name enters widespread English usage. Who says that Wikipedia is supposed to play the role of a trendsetter? Aren't we supposed to base our facts on stuff that already exists and is well-accepted? -
Max -
You were saying?
09:03, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
(Commenting on the "Oppose" of
Baka)
Not quite. Not that ghits should be taken as the litmus test, but just thought I'd clarify: Calcutta gets 10.7 million ghits versus 8.6 million for Kolkata. OTOH, Bangalore generates 18 million against a whopping 250,000 for Bengaluru (total of all spelling combinations).
Lotlil
03:35, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
(Commenting on the "Support" of
Lotlil)
Govts., dont run the encyclopedia but travel agencies do. Right. And linking to Indian govt., sites is an extremely poor argument. Indian government sites are notoriously shoddy at updating info; its probably a miracle that the sites even show up. For that matter, according to
this GoK website, "Sri T.N.Chaturvedi" is still Ktaka's governer. Now,
go figure.
Sarvagnya
05:47, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
Comment - this entire "most common english name" argument is bogus. Pondicherry, Ooty, Calcutta etc., are all easily the 'most common English names'. But they all sit pretty at Puducherry, Ootacamund, Kolkata etc.,. Sarvagnya 06:16, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
Comment on the nom -
Reply to comments: First of all, let me clarify to everyone that I'm sure the article will be moved sooner or later. I just think it's not the right time to move it yet. Now on to the replies.
Dishonesty unlimited; dishonesty unabated - Maximvs once again misrepresents and misquotes a source. He says ".. the TOI was having us believe that Bengalooru was official one year ago.."! However, on a closer look, this is what that TOI report says - " Bengalooru: Using the platform, nearly a year after his predecessor N Dharam Singh said Bangalore would be renamed as Bengalooru, he said: "I am formally stating that 10 cities including Bangalore will use their Kannada names in English also. The process to make this official is on." Since when did we start citing newspapers 'headlines'?! Or is that the way Mr. Max works?
It was on then and now it is "official" (see rediff) now. And the Puducherry circular is besides the point. Point is, no 'govt., source' was asked for or provided (rightly, understandably and justifiably so) when the move was made. Come back in a year and I'll get a pdf of the GoK circular for you, if need be from RTI. Several govt., websites still call it Pondicherry. Same with Trivandrum and other cities. (Try an imaginative "<search string> site:nic.in" to see what I mean) So let us leave the fact checking from primary sources to reliable secondary sources and get on with it.
And like I've pointed out below, almost all(nearly every single one of them) Indian cities and towns were created by Ganeshbot. And I am positive that Ganeshbot used a database with "official" names in it. There is no reason why B'luru has to be an exception. Sarvagnya 21:49, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
And oh btw, thanks for pointing out that EB also acknowledges that it is "officially" Bengaluru. Thats good enough for us. As for why they havent moved their article yet, feel free to write to its editor and ask for an explanation. But please keep that off-wiki. We dont control their editorial practices and we're not interested either. Sarvagnya 22:26, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
Reply to Gizza - The common name is used and not the official name? Can you show me few examples from among Indian city articles on wikipedia? Almost all Indian city and town articles were created by Ganeshbot(right?) using a database that had "official" names in it. Right? Or did Ganeshbot conduct an sms poll to gauge what the 'most common english name' was?
Also, comparing city/country articles and people articles is futile. Wikipedia treats both very differently. For starters, we dont have a WP:BLP equivalent for places and countries. Or we'd be deleting "Allegations of...." articles on sight. Your analogy is not valid. 19:56, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
Well, The Deccan Herald even today seem to think it's still Bangalore. so does the Karnataka Tourism website as well as numerous other 'official' websites of Karnataka. What is the haste in changing the name in Wikipedia? - Parthi talk/ contribs 03:53, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
As I've been asked by a few editors to elaborate upon my closing comments, I'll do so here. I'd like to clarify that I didn't close this move request as "restore" for purely procedural reasons. If I had felt that the discussion showed a consensus in favor of Bengaluru, I would have left the article there. It is not my role here to determine the philosophical merits of Wikipedia:Naming conventions (common names); the opinions presented here show it continues to enjoy support, and it is based in policy. It was only after I reviewed the whole discussion and came to the conclusion it showed a lack of consensus that I considered the procedural issues making up the bulk of my closing comments. It was at that point that I considered 1) a requested move which results in a "no consensus" close should be at its original title, not the new one, because stability in titling is a positive thing, and 2) it is likely that non-admin editors would have reverted the move to Bengaluru if it hadn't been blocked by an edit to the redirect. I hope that this will explain my reasoning satisfactorily, even if it fails to engender more support. Dekimasu よ! 10:08, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
Why in the name of Darwin was this article moved? There is one more vote for keeping it! Reginmund 17:22, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
“ | Wikipedia decision making is not based on formal vote counting ("Wikipedia is not a majoritarian democracy"). This means that polling alone is not considered a means of decision-making, and it is certainly not a binding vote, and you do not need to abide by polls per se. | ” |
Then it would seem quite pointless to have a poll to move the article back if it was going to be moved anyway. Reginmund 19:17, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
It makes no sense why Wikipedia should resist natural change. Bangalore should be replaced by Bengaluru. Thanks. Kanchanamala 08:58, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
Just as a note, Bangalore is not the only Indian city to be listed under a name other than its official name. Udhagamandalam remains at Ootacamund, though it's been well over a decade since its English name was changed. It's been moved to the official name once or twice, but the moves have been swiftly reverted. -- Arvind 14:41, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
Folks, there is absolutely no reason why now "Bangalore" should not be replaced by Bengaluru. A spelling imposed by the foreign rulers should not be allowed to continue simply because it was in use during their long reign, and for some years until now. It took 190 years to oust the British, and 60 more years eventually to correct the spelling of this city. I would urge that someone will make the change in the article. If some people don't like it, tough luck. Thanks. Kanchanamala 03:35, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
P.S. Wikipedia has no problem with Chennai, Kolkata, Mumbai, Pune, and Varanasi, to quote a few, why all the fuss about Bengaluru? I insist that Bangalore in the article is changed to Bengaluru without further delay. I shall start the process. Thanks. Kanchanamala 05:12, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
See proposed rename for this body's Wikipedia page at Talk:Bangalore_Mahanagara_Palike. Imc 22:19, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
Please don't revert the edit of the name Bengaluru. Thrash out your differences here on this page. When Wikipedia has no problem with Chennai, Kolkata, Mumbai, Pune, and Varanasi, to quote a few instances, why all the fuss about Bengaluru? Thanks. Kanchanamala 04:33, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
Guy, it is a matter of Wikipedia convention, not consensus. It is not reasonable to revert the edit from Bengaluru to Bangalore. Please thrash out your differences on this page. Thanks. Kanchanamala 05:21, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
The common name of is "Bengaluru". Dineshkannambadi 12:56, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
Will someone stop LonewolfBC from reverting Bengaluru to Bangalore against reason and Wikipedia convention in this regard? If he has special powers, will someone please strip him of his special powers and bar him from unnecessarily messing with the article on Bengaluru? I wish I could. Thanks. Kanchanamala 05:51, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
This is a topic for discussion related to a new Urban Layout section that User:SBC-YPR has added to the article. I have reverted it for two reasons:
I want to open up this topic for discussion among other editors for their view-points on this and to arrive at a consensus. Thanks -- ¿Amar៛ Talk to me/ My edits 14:31, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
Friends, I'm not computer savvy. Hence the request. The name Bangalore in the heading of the article, and suitably elsewhere in the article, needs to be changed to Bengaluru, in keeping with the Wikipedia convention as noticed in the articles on Chennai, Kolkata, and Mumbai. Will someone please make the change. Thanks. Kanchanamala 23:34, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
I did the Google test. Bengaluru with about 225,000 entries indicates that this new name for Bangalore is gaining popularity at a fast pace, and will soon replace "Bangalore" as a more common name. It is interesting to note that Google now gives the map of that city as "Map of Bengaluru, Karnataka, India." Do we have to be restrictive in asking the question whether Wikipedia is descriptive or prescriptive? Let us be normal and change the name of the city in the article to Bengaluru. Thanks.
Kanchanamala
19:45, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
Image:Volvo B7Rle,Bangarore.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot ( talk) 20:30, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
I labled the article peacock. may be it was unfair but juts to note some sentences in current article --
... and is today counted among the best places in the world to do business.[2] -- no explaining why, just citing an article/survey. may be its ok, it did not seem to me. Home to prestigious colleges and research institutions ... (like this and that) dont get me wrong, for someone who knows little about Bangalore, their are parts of the article that assume you know the city is great, or otherwise just believe. thanks.-- BBird ( talk) 17:01, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
I have been feeling for sometime that this article has been inundated with images, most of which have at best a tenuous relationship with the section they have been added to. For example, I can't understand what the Public Utility building image is doing in the "Civic Administration" section. The image also bleeds into the next section ("Economy"). What does the Public Utility building have to do with Civic Administration?
The "Economy" section looks even worse, filled as it is with gawdy and ungainly images of objects that look like extracts from Star Treck. Of the three images in the section, two have nothing to do with the content described in the section, only the Infosys image, perhaps has any relation to the section. While I applaud Nikkul's interest in adding quality images to articles, these images have got to go from this article. Many of these buildings, I'm sure, are architectural delights to those interested in that sort of thing, but I don't think they fairly represent the Bangalore that I know. The negative impact they are having on page formatting is another issue altogether. I am therefore going to go ahead and delete them. AreJay ( talk) 06:31, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
" BANGALORE: The biggest commercial property project in the city centre will be ready in the next few months. The landmark UB City, coming up on some 13 acres of land on Vittal Mallya Road, will add 1 million sqft of high-end commercial, retail and service apartment space. "
[1]
Please do not revert without consensus Thanks Cheers Nikkul ( talk) 10:20, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
You just completely missed the point. The scope of my discussion wasn't about the intricasies of retail in the economy of a state or city, but rather over the relevence of your images in the various sections. You are dead wrong on this Whitefield business. Firstly, there is no mention of Whitefield in the section or article, so where is the relevence. Second, you can't self reference Wikipedia articles (see Wikipedia:Reliable source examples). I can go to the Whitefield article and write absolutely what I please..where's the verifiability? It was not a village back then and neither is it now.
You also didn't answer my question about why the UB City image is inlcuded in the Economy section. For all this talk about UB City, there is but a 1 sentence mention of it in the section..something about a high-end commercial zone. What is the relevence of a high-end commercial zone over revenue from large-scale heavy industry manufacturing in Bangalore?
Bangalore's retail market value is approximately ₹33,727.50 crore (US$4.0 billion) [6]..what is UB City's contribution to this??? Contribtuion of Heavy Industries of HAL, BEL and ITI alone amounts to ₹61,325 crore (US$7.3 billion) [7] [8] [9] and there are 14 other Heavy Industry PSUs in Bangalore I've not even mentioned! Compared to them this so called "high-end commerce" is but a drop in the pond!
I never inferred that you were "inferior" to me or anyone. I am more than aware of the issues you are having with images on the India article and other articles. I do not say that this is all your fault, however, this obsession with adding images unrelated or insignificant to the overall theme or section has got to stop. As for your other imgaes, the pictures of the auto and the Bull Temple are bleeding into the other sections.
For all your apparent liking for "building consensus", let me ask you this question — did you build consensus when you added these random images to the article?? I don't think so. So let's play the game the way you want it played...I'm going to remove these images, if you'd like them added, please start a section in the talk page and build consensus.
Also, for the last time, stop removing content that has clearly been cited (ie. the size of Bangalore's population). AreJay ( talk) 00:09, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
Comments:I would like provide my 2 cents in this discussion. First of all, there should not be any dispute over the size of Bangalore's population. The article List of most populous cities in India still doesn't have valid and current references, and the only reference it has is Census of India website, which corresponds to year 2001 census data, that is, 7 years older one. On the other hand, World-Gazetteer.com has more up-to-date statistics on this. However, the given citation still ranks Bangalore at number 3, so we can still mention it this way and leave it with the given citation.
Regarding images, IMO the UB city image is highly undue to this article. Personally I feel, the statement made by Nikkul above, "The UB City image shows an upcoming very very important zone in Bangalore" is exaggerated, and there are way too many very very important zones in Bangalore compared to the upcoming UB City. Is it (going to be) much important than Majestic? KR Market? MG Road? Airport Road? Corporation Circle (Hudson Circle)? At this point of time, I would say it just a speculation.
Some of the other images are really dull are not having enough relevant information in it. For example, the hesaragatta lake image, the book stand image etc just do not have information in them. What does a caption like Hundreds of magazines can be found in Bangalore's newstands this mean? Every news-stand in every city will typically have hundreds of magazines. Isn't it? Few months back, the article had Image:Vijaya-karnataka.jpg image, and it was well-captioned ( Vijaya Karnataka, the largest circulating Kannada newspaper in Bangalore) and was explained in that section as well. If there is no objection, I would like to bring this image back to the article.
This article is one of the best articles, and will need to have best possible images, both in terms of quality of the image, and the relevance of it in the article. It would be better to have images of KSRTC / BMTC Bus stand (also called Kempegowda Bus Terminal), Railway Station (either the one in Majestic or the one in Cantonment), Bangalore Doordarshan TV station / Akashavani Radion station. Thanks - KNM Talk 02:12, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
I'm sorry, AreJay, there is no rule on wikipedia that says that every edit must be discussed on the talk page. These images have been there for a long time and no one has had a problem with them. There is a rule that if there is a dispute, that the dispute should be sorted out through a consensus. If you dont like them, then you have to build a consensus to get rid of them.
These images have been around from 07:19, 23 October 2007 203.91.209.250. Thats 4 months. Many people have edited the page since then and No one else has had a problem with the images. If you have a problem with them, you have to talk it out here. I agree that the newstand image doesnt contribute much, but the newspaper image is copyrighted.
About the population; the info arejay is adding is wrong. Bangalore is NO WAY the second most populous city in India. Unless Mumbai or Delhi are wiped of the map, Bangalore is going to stay 3rd populous. Just look at the source!
Industries in UB City include Brewery, Alcoholic Beverage, Airline, Chemicals & Fertilizers, Information Technology, Pharmaceuticals And for your info, heavy industries like hal do not have anything to do with retail. retail is like stores,and unless HAL has a store where you can go and buy an airplane, it doesnt constitute retail. I think you should read what economy is before replying. Thanks Nikkul ( talk) 04:55, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
You telling me that Bangalore is the second largest city in India is wrong. According to your argument, if I had a source, I could say Bangalore is in pakistan. Theres a difference between having a source and having correct information. I have used the same source u used and I have shown through the source that bangalore is the 3rd largest, not 2nd.
Second of all, you fail to recognize the importance of ub city as an economic zone in downtown bangalore. Perhaps its time you take a trip to Bangalore soon, cuz you obviously havent been there recently. And I know no one had a problem with the images because the images have been there for months and hundreds of people have edited the article, but not one has changed the image. That says something. If you have a problem with it, please discuss it before changing it. This is wikipedia, there are rules. Nikkul ( talk) 01:02, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
What rubbish! Nikkul I didn't know that you had all of a sudden become my travel advisor to recommend tourist destinations to me. I've presented financial data to show why images from PSUs should be included in the economy section, while you've just been harping on about UB City without any source or citation to prove it's importance over PSUs...and the reason for that is because there are no such sources. Let me break it down very simply to you, since you clearly have trouble understanding my point...
1) Just 4 of the 17 PSUs in Bangalore (HMT, HAL, ITI, BEL) contribute ₹95,897 crore (US$11 billion) to Bangalore's economy
2) The entire retail market in Bangalore is worth only ₹33,727.50 crore (US$4.0 billion).
3) Bangalore's entire contribution to IT is ₹47,590.62 crore (US$5.7 billion).
Therefore, not only are the PSUs the largest segment in Bangalore's economy, just those 4 PSUs contribute more to Bangalore's economy than the entire revenue from retail + Information Technology! This is because Bangalore was, is, and has always been a big PSU base.
Here's why I bring this up..there are two images in the Economy section. Both are related to IT. If this doesn't qualify for UNDUE, I don't know what does (remember Wikipedia's Summary style guidelines). One of them (and I don't care which one) needs to go to make way for a balanced representation. The image that I had added this afternoon ( SU-30MKI India.jpg) is a manufactured product of Hindustan Aeronautics Limited, which is a big PSU in Bangalore. Additionally, it is a public domain image and is free of any sort of copyright (as opposed to both your images which are CC images). Instead of purile reverts of my edits, I challenge you to tell me (since clearly, you seem to object to it) why this image, representing a product manufactured by a PSU in Bangalore should be supressed over two images of IT buildings whose companies' revenues total to only a fraction of Bangalore's PSU revenue. And please, spare me your "please discuss it" lecture, as you very clearly bend and pick and choose which rules you want to use and when. I haven't rv'ed your edits right now but I'd like you to come here and address my discussion above. AreJay ( talk) 03:02, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
First of all, Bangalore is known around the world for its IT. Everyone who knows about Bangalore, knows it because of the IT revolution that Bangalore stands for. If you think people who know about Bangalore around the world know about it because of HAL or ISRO, you're totally wrong. Also, UB city is the central business district of Bangalore- it has office blocks for companies and is already changing Bangalore's skyline. It has offices for Brewery, Alcoholic Beverage, Airline, Chemicals & Fertilizers, Information Technology, Pharmaceuticals. I feel that you seriously do not know Bangalore and especially the economy if you would like to eliminate an image showing IT. Anyway, hundreds of people have edited the bangalore page since the images were put on, but none of them removed it or changed it. Hence, youre the only one who has a problem with it.
Nikkul (
talk)
08:20, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
An IT image in the economy section is needed because:
Lockheed Martin and Boeing have also made deals with infosys [3] [4] whats your point? Nikkul ( talk) 09:43, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
[7] [8] [9] [10] [11]POV? Please! I could provide another 100 sites that say that Bangalore is known for its IT
Financials Heavy Industries mentioned in econ section: HAL has a revenue of $1.2 Billion HMT doesnt even have a working website. I doubt its revenue is more than $1 billion ISRO has a budget of .815 billion
Umm...what??? Can you please click on the links that I added? All PSUs are managed by the Department of Public Enterprise in India. I had added links to all their financials. How do you doubt it is more than $1 billion? Based on what? Your opinion?? Your opinion is impremissible. If your opinion is that it is not more than $1 billion, then it is my opinion that its revenue is $2 trillion. Where do our opinions leave us? And do you understand the difference between a budget and revenue? What was the purpose of dragging ISRO's budget into the discussion?? AreJay ( talk) 04:39, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
IT companies
Infosys has a revenue of 3.2 billions dollars
Wipro has a revenue of 3.4 billion dollars
TCS has a revenue of 4.3 Billion dollars
Hmmm...which type makes more money???
I have no idea where you got your numbers from.
Anyway, you need to have a consensus and resolve the dispute before you can change the images. Please be civil. You will get blocked if you engage in an edit war. Nikkul ( talk) 03:17, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
There are 1721 IT companies in Bangalore How many PSU's are there?
Nikkul (
talk)
04:33, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
References
User:AreJay reverted an edit [18] by User:202.62.92.102 who left her name in the intro ("Rashmi Karanth"). AreJay has accused me of adding this comment in his edit summary. I would like to stress that accusing others without evidence is uncivil. I am not a user who will add the sentence:
"It is also called the Silicon city because of its many industries. Banglaore is a city full of lush greenery,kind people and malls,shops and markets. Its also modern and a great hangout for youngsters who like to party everyday.-- 202.62.92.102 ( talk) 12:54, 15 January 2008 (UTC)Rashmi Karanth "
Accusing me of writing this edit is an insult to my efforts to improve Wikipedia. It is also considered lying. I use my account when I edit and I also have an American IP address, hence this is proof that it was not I who did this, besides the fact that whoever did edit, left her name as attribution. I hope User:AreJay will not make such baseless accusations in the future. I am very offended that I was blamed for such vandalism Nikkul ( talk) 19:38, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
Nevermind, just kidding! Cheers Nikkul ( talk) 06:55, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
In re Nikkul's constant rv's to this article, it needs to be pointed out that there was a prolonged discussion above where I presented financial statements from the Department of Public Enterprise which indicated the importance of PSUs to Bangalore's economy. User:Nikkul has referred to these as "false sources"; clearly, this indicates that he is not willing to listen to reason, given the fact that the Department of Public Enterprise is the only body in India that is authorized to manage PSUs. Under the circumstances, there can be no "consensus" if one is not willing to look facts in the face. In addition the the above discussion, let me point out the following:
Expand to view excerpts |
---|
NPOV says that the article should fairly represent all significant viewpoints that have been published by a reliable source, and should do so in proportion to the prominence of each...[a]n article should not give undue weight to any aspects of the subject, but should strive to treat each aspect with a weight appropriate to its significance to the subject. Note that undue weight can be given in several ways, including, but not limited to, depth of detail, quantity of text, prominence of placement, and juxtaposition of statements. |
User:Nikkul's rv's without ryhme or reason are not constructive and are serving as a hinderence to people interested in improving the quality of the article. He has reverted the edits of multiple editors on many occasions stating "please obtain consensus" or "please discuss". Clearly, he has not familiarized himself with WP:CONSENSUS (extracts included):
Expand to view excerpts |
---|
While the consensus process does not require posting to the discussion page, it can be useful and is encouraged. It is also a good idea to check the discussion page before making an edit, because someone may have thought of it before, or discussed something that sheds more light on the subject. Otherwise " be bold"; ultimately, improving articles is what Wikipedia is all about. |
I would also ask that he realize that it is Wikipedia's policy that editors be bold in making their edits. Disputed edits must be discussed; however, if an editor is going to dispute every single edit made by other users, the editor's good faith is questioned. Clearly, people have been editing and improving this article long before Nikkul appeared on the scene; he should stop acting like he owns this or any Wiki article. AreJay ( talk) 15:57, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
I observed recent reverts regarding, "one of the best places to do the business". As such, it appears to be only the opinion of CNNMoney.com so mentioning it as the fact may not be a good idea, but attributing it to the source explicitly is more suitable here; like "according to CNNMoney.com". If the same opinion is shared by multiple reliable sources, then it could be considered as a fact based on reliable sources. My 2 cents. - KNM Talk 16:32, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
All, over the last few days the conflict on which images should be used in Economy section of this article. Here by I am starting a discussion thread, for building the consensus. I request all the editors especially the contributors to this article, to provide their opinions, suggestions and comments. Also, while this discussion is in progress, let us avoid the revert war that has been going on for sometime. For this reason, only for now, I will be removing all the images from this section. I am also going to provide my proposal on the images to be used, and similarly would be interested in seeing other proposals with supporting comments.
The UB City image shows an upcoming very very important zone in Bangalore. It is literally downtown Bangalore. UB City is already operational. UB City is not just a commerial shopping area; it houses the headquarters to large groups and has office space for other companies. And UB City also houses commercial offices, banks, high-end retail stores, a five star hotel, serviced apartments, restaurants, food courts.
Whitefield is an important hub for IT services. Read this from the whitefield, india page: Whitefield was a small village which was a retirement colony for Anglo-Indians. It has since become a major hub for the Indian technology industry. The Export Promotion Industrial Park (EPIP) at Whitefield of one of the country's first information technology parks - International Tech Park, Bangalore (ITPB) which houses offices of many IT and ITES companies. The EPIP zone also has offices of other IT and R&D giants like Symbian (Symbian India Ltd.), GE (John F. Welch Technology Center), Wipro- GE Medical Systems, iGate Global Solutions, Sapient_(company), Manhattan Associates, SAP AG, Perot Systems, Dell, IBM, Intel and Oracle,TATA Elxsi,Geometric Software. An Intel Xeon processor code named Whitefield was being developed (but was scrapped later) in Intel's ITPB campus (Intel has since moved its campus from ITPB).
The Public Utility Building doesnt show economy. I dont think it should be used.
I agree with KNM's approach. I will present some of the images that I think would make sense below, but basically I think two images are sufficient for the Economy section. As far as what sectors to represent, certainly, I think IT should be represented. I think, however, that it is hard to include a "generic image" of IT (I'm not sure we currently have such an image in Commons either). For that reason, I think it's perfectly alright to include an image of the HQs of say, Infosys or Wipro.
As far as the "other sector" to represent, I don't know how valuable the Public Utility building is. From my understanding, the Public Utility building has a mish-mash of shops and officies — while it definitely is a landmark of Bangalore, I don't know if it is the first thing that springs to mind when we think of Bangalore's economy. I would ideally like to see a PSU represented since that has been the backbone that has driven Bangalore's growth immediately before and after independence (notwithstanding the recent growth of IT). Finding good PSU images is a problem though because public sector enterprise isn't exactly glamorous. As in the case of IT, it is hard to conceptualize PSU services into images — for this reason, I recommend the SU-30MKI India.jpg image or the PD image in PSLV that was developed by ISRO. This article has a nice synopsis of Bangalore's economy, not just related to the growth of PSUs and IT, but also private sector enterprise like MICO and WIDIA.
Additionally, I've been working offline on code that can randomize images on Wikipedia articles. For the time being, we can narrow down the search to two images, but if the code works as intended, we will be able to shortlist 5-10 images and ensure that at least two of them appear each time an article is refereshed. Thanks AreJay ( talk) 22:01, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
Gentlemen — the prototype for the random image generator is ready. Please take a look at
User:AreJay/rotation and provide your thoughts. Just FYI, I've loaded dummy images into the generator..these are not the images that I am proposing we use in the article. The image to the top right of the page will change every 14 minutes, while the image at the bottom right will change every 8 hours Both images rotate hourly. Obviously, these values can be tweaked as necessary. Thoughts and comments are greatly appreciated. Thanks
AreJay (
talk)
02:15, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
{{
Bangalore Image Rotation|economy}}
I have made a rotation template for the bangalore economy. You can find the code,which uses parser functions, at template:bangalore image rotation. I suggest that we have one rotation of all the IT images like infosys and whitefield image and one rotation for the other sections like retail and PSU's. This seems better than a "random image generator". Since this code has been tried and has succeeded on the india culture section, this seems to be the optimal answer. Nikkul ( talk) 02:59, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
References
User:AreJay has been consistently adamant about his point of view. I have discussed his opinions with him above, and he has consistently derided my efforts and has passed sarcastic comments that do not help make his point any clearer. If he doesnt have his way, he has threatened me with an edit war.
AreJay would like to add an image of an airplane, which apparently shows Bangalore's economy. I would like to point out that the images that were on the Bangalore page have been there for a very long time. For this reason, and also because there is a difference of opinion on which images should go on the page, I asked AreJay to discuss the issue on the talk page. His "discussion" has often included sarcastic remarks and unreasonable claims.
User:AreJay feels that he does not need consensus and that he must have his way. If he doesnt have his way, he has said that he is ready for an edit war. I would like to point out that this attitude is not one that will help wikipedia and that being adamant does not help anyone.
User:AreJay has brought evidence that suggests that PSU's apparently contribute 24 billion dollars to Bangalore's economy. Now, when I read his references, some did not mention Bangalore at all, and instead mentioned New Delhi. And the total of the claimed revenues did not add up to 24 billion. Nikkul ( talk) 21:19, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
A common source of mystery, the Public Utility Building seems like it falls under the category of civic administration (public utilities). Others have suggested that this building is a center of commerce. What really goes on in this place? Who works there...the government or the private sector? Nikkul ( talk) 08:43, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
Based on the discussion initiated by User:KNM yesterday, I've taken the liberty of creating the table below for us to keep track of the support and opposition for various images being debated. Please add your name in the columns "Support" or "Oppose". I've taken the liberty of adding some names based on the discussion above; if this is not accurate, please feel free to add your name in the appropriate column. Please update the tally count after your vote. Thanks.
To add a new image to the poll, please use the code below (making changes where appropriate) and insert it on the line that preceeds the text <!-- ** END OF TABLE ** -->
|-
|[[:Image:<!-- Insert Image name here -->]]
|| <!-- Insert image description here -->
|| <!-- Insert name of proposal sponsor -->
|| <!-- Insert users supporting image -->
|| <!-- Insert users opposing image -->
Image | Description | Proposed by | Support | Object | Tally (Support/Object) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Bangalore UtilityBuilding.jpg | Utility Building | User:KNM |
User:Nikkul
User:KNM user:Dineshkannambadi User:Indiandefender2 |
User:AreJay |
3/2 |
Bagmane Tech Park, CV Raman Nagar, Bengaluru, India (2007).jpg | iFlex building, Whitefield | User:Nikkul |
User:Nikkul User:Indiandefender2 |
User:AreJay User:Dineshkannambadi User:Sarvagnya |
2/3 |
Image:BangaloreInfosys.jpg | Infosys HQ | User:Nikkul |
User:Nikkul User:AreJay User:Dineshkannambadi User:Indiandefender2 |
User:KNM | 4/1 |
Image:Downtown Bangalore.jpg | UB City downtown | User:Nikkul |
User:Nikkul User:Indiandefender2 |
User:AreJay User:KNM User:Dineshkannambadi User:Sarvagnya |
2/4 |
Image:SU-30MKI India.jpg | Sukhoi SU-30MKI Flanker | User:AreJay |
User:AreJay User:Dineshkannambadi User:Sarvagnya |
User:Nikkul User:Indiandefender2 |
3/2 |
Image:Bangalore HAL.jpg | HAL Airport | User:AreJay | User:AreJay |
User:Nikkul User:Sarvagnya User:Indiandefender2 |
1/3
|
That picture isnt in Whitefield. The address is
i-flex Park C/o Embassy Business Park C.V Raman Nagar Bangalore - 560 093 karnataka India [21]
Hence, that image is perfectly qualified for inclusion. Sorry for the mixup Nikkul ( talk) 23:31, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 |
The result of the proposal was restore the established page name, which is Bangalore. A look through the deletion history of Bengaluru shows that the page was tagged as CSD-G6 and speedy deleted on August 23. This is a valid method for the uncontroversial reversal of a redirect, but extensive discussion in the archives, as well as the debate here, shows that this move was known to be a controversial change. Further, the redirect from the original title was altered upon the initiation of this discussion. This prevented any users from moving the page back themselves. It has been made clear by ArbCom that an RM discussion is not necessary to restore the original title in such a case. A future discussion may show a consensus in favor of changing the name of this article to Bengaluru, but the evidence here is that no such consensus has yet been reached. Everyone need not be happy with this close, but please respect the integrity of established titles and try to make yourself aware of previous discussions when thinking about renaming an article. Thank you. Dekimasu よ! 13:47, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
Hello,
I have some concerns about the recent move of the page from Bangalore to Bengaluru. It seems this was done by a user (
User:Naveenpf) without any discussion or consensus. My concerns are:
In light of this, I propose we restore status quo and move the article back to Bangalore, pending official announcements and acceptance of the changed name (atleast by major news services). I hope this will be alright. If you have any objections, I will be glad to answer them. Thank you, Max - You were saying? 19:10, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
In the interests of keeping the survey clear, though, please do not use use it as a place to argue against (or otherwise comment upon) the opinions of others. Please use the "Discussion" for that.
The move to Bengaluru was done in opposition to consensus, so you don't really need a requested move to move it back. -- Yath 09:36, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
(Commenting on the "Oppose" of
KNM)
With all due respect, since when has Rediff replaced official sources such as a government notification in a gazette? As for your second point, it is only because of the time factor that the articles have been known by their new names. Consider this - Bombay was renamed in 1995, Madras in 1996 and Calcutta on 1st January 2001. Wikipedia didn't even exist back then. In the meanwhile, the new names of these cities were officially changed and widely accepted in English usage. Hence, the articles began with their new names when Wikipedia was in its formative years. I'm sure if Bangalore's name had been changed then, we could've had an article with the new name a lot earlier, but that's not how the circumstances are, are they? -
Max -
You were saying?
09:03, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
(Commenting on the "Oppose" of
Sarvagnya)
The link is being passed around because it highlights the official procedure before a name change takes place. So what if it's from October '06? Plus the link is from Deccan Herald, and despite the fact that it is an English language newspaper published from Bangalore, it doesn't refer to the new name in any of its reports till date. That was only an example. DH is just a small regional paper. What is more important is that almost all of the major Indian or international news outlets still use "Bangalore". As for Rediff, it cannot be a replacement for official sources (see reply to KNM above). You will also notice the glaring irony of the same Rediff article being written by a certain Vicky Nanjappa in Bangalore. Clearly, no one has adopted the new name yet. So yes, I think we do need to wait for a green signal from outside, until there's a proper government notification and the new name enters widespread English usage. Who says that Wikipedia is supposed to play the role of a trendsetter? Aren't we supposed to base our facts on stuff that already exists and is well-accepted? -
Max -
You were saying?
09:03, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
(Commenting on the "Oppose" of
Baka)
Not quite. Not that ghits should be taken as the litmus test, but just thought I'd clarify: Calcutta gets 10.7 million ghits versus 8.6 million for Kolkata. OTOH, Bangalore generates 18 million against a whopping 250,000 for Bengaluru (total of all spelling combinations).
Lotlil
03:35, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
(Commenting on the "Support" of
Lotlil)
Govts., dont run the encyclopedia but travel agencies do. Right. And linking to Indian govt., sites is an extremely poor argument. Indian government sites are notoriously shoddy at updating info; its probably a miracle that the sites even show up. For that matter, according to
this GoK website, "Sri T.N.Chaturvedi" is still Ktaka's governer. Now,
go figure.
Sarvagnya
05:47, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
Comment - this entire "most common english name" argument is bogus. Pondicherry, Ooty, Calcutta etc., are all easily the 'most common English names'. But they all sit pretty at Puducherry, Ootacamund, Kolkata etc.,. Sarvagnya 06:16, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
Comment on the nom -
Reply to comments: First of all, let me clarify to everyone that I'm sure the article will be moved sooner or later. I just think it's not the right time to move it yet. Now on to the replies.
Dishonesty unlimited; dishonesty unabated - Maximvs once again misrepresents and misquotes a source. He says ".. the TOI was having us believe that Bengalooru was official one year ago.."! However, on a closer look, this is what that TOI report says - " Bengalooru: Using the platform, nearly a year after his predecessor N Dharam Singh said Bangalore would be renamed as Bengalooru, he said: "I am formally stating that 10 cities including Bangalore will use their Kannada names in English also. The process to make this official is on." Since when did we start citing newspapers 'headlines'?! Or is that the way Mr. Max works?
It was on then and now it is "official" (see rediff) now. And the Puducherry circular is besides the point. Point is, no 'govt., source' was asked for or provided (rightly, understandably and justifiably so) when the move was made. Come back in a year and I'll get a pdf of the GoK circular for you, if need be from RTI. Several govt., websites still call it Pondicherry. Same with Trivandrum and other cities. (Try an imaginative "<search string> site:nic.in" to see what I mean) So let us leave the fact checking from primary sources to reliable secondary sources and get on with it.
And like I've pointed out below, almost all(nearly every single one of them) Indian cities and towns were created by Ganeshbot. And I am positive that Ganeshbot used a database with "official" names in it. There is no reason why B'luru has to be an exception. Sarvagnya 21:49, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
And oh btw, thanks for pointing out that EB also acknowledges that it is "officially" Bengaluru. Thats good enough for us. As for why they havent moved their article yet, feel free to write to its editor and ask for an explanation. But please keep that off-wiki. We dont control their editorial practices and we're not interested either. Sarvagnya 22:26, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
Reply to Gizza - The common name is used and not the official name? Can you show me few examples from among Indian city articles on wikipedia? Almost all Indian city and town articles were created by Ganeshbot(right?) using a database that had "official" names in it. Right? Or did Ganeshbot conduct an sms poll to gauge what the 'most common english name' was?
Also, comparing city/country articles and people articles is futile. Wikipedia treats both very differently. For starters, we dont have a WP:BLP equivalent for places and countries. Or we'd be deleting "Allegations of...." articles on sight. Your analogy is not valid. 19:56, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
Well, The Deccan Herald even today seem to think it's still Bangalore. so does the Karnataka Tourism website as well as numerous other 'official' websites of Karnataka. What is the haste in changing the name in Wikipedia? - Parthi talk/ contribs 03:53, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
As I've been asked by a few editors to elaborate upon my closing comments, I'll do so here. I'd like to clarify that I didn't close this move request as "restore" for purely procedural reasons. If I had felt that the discussion showed a consensus in favor of Bengaluru, I would have left the article there. It is not my role here to determine the philosophical merits of Wikipedia:Naming conventions (common names); the opinions presented here show it continues to enjoy support, and it is based in policy. It was only after I reviewed the whole discussion and came to the conclusion it showed a lack of consensus that I considered the procedural issues making up the bulk of my closing comments. It was at that point that I considered 1) a requested move which results in a "no consensus" close should be at its original title, not the new one, because stability in titling is a positive thing, and 2) it is likely that non-admin editors would have reverted the move to Bengaluru if it hadn't been blocked by an edit to the redirect. I hope that this will explain my reasoning satisfactorily, even if it fails to engender more support. Dekimasu よ! 10:08, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
Why in the name of Darwin was this article moved? There is one more vote for keeping it! Reginmund 17:22, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
“ | Wikipedia decision making is not based on formal vote counting ("Wikipedia is not a majoritarian democracy"). This means that polling alone is not considered a means of decision-making, and it is certainly not a binding vote, and you do not need to abide by polls per se. | ” |
Then it would seem quite pointless to have a poll to move the article back if it was going to be moved anyway. Reginmund 19:17, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
It makes no sense why Wikipedia should resist natural change. Bangalore should be replaced by Bengaluru. Thanks. Kanchanamala 08:58, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
Just as a note, Bangalore is not the only Indian city to be listed under a name other than its official name. Udhagamandalam remains at Ootacamund, though it's been well over a decade since its English name was changed. It's been moved to the official name once or twice, but the moves have been swiftly reverted. -- Arvind 14:41, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
Folks, there is absolutely no reason why now "Bangalore" should not be replaced by Bengaluru. A spelling imposed by the foreign rulers should not be allowed to continue simply because it was in use during their long reign, and for some years until now. It took 190 years to oust the British, and 60 more years eventually to correct the spelling of this city. I would urge that someone will make the change in the article. If some people don't like it, tough luck. Thanks. Kanchanamala 03:35, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
P.S. Wikipedia has no problem with Chennai, Kolkata, Mumbai, Pune, and Varanasi, to quote a few, why all the fuss about Bengaluru? I insist that Bangalore in the article is changed to Bengaluru without further delay. I shall start the process. Thanks. Kanchanamala 05:12, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
See proposed rename for this body's Wikipedia page at Talk:Bangalore_Mahanagara_Palike. Imc 22:19, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
Please don't revert the edit of the name Bengaluru. Thrash out your differences here on this page. When Wikipedia has no problem with Chennai, Kolkata, Mumbai, Pune, and Varanasi, to quote a few instances, why all the fuss about Bengaluru? Thanks. Kanchanamala 04:33, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
Guy, it is a matter of Wikipedia convention, not consensus. It is not reasonable to revert the edit from Bengaluru to Bangalore. Please thrash out your differences on this page. Thanks. Kanchanamala 05:21, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
The common name of is "Bengaluru". Dineshkannambadi 12:56, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
Will someone stop LonewolfBC from reverting Bengaluru to Bangalore against reason and Wikipedia convention in this regard? If he has special powers, will someone please strip him of his special powers and bar him from unnecessarily messing with the article on Bengaluru? I wish I could. Thanks. Kanchanamala 05:51, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
This is a topic for discussion related to a new Urban Layout section that User:SBC-YPR has added to the article. I have reverted it for two reasons:
I want to open up this topic for discussion among other editors for their view-points on this and to arrive at a consensus. Thanks -- ¿Amar៛ Talk to me/ My edits 14:31, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
Friends, I'm not computer savvy. Hence the request. The name Bangalore in the heading of the article, and suitably elsewhere in the article, needs to be changed to Bengaluru, in keeping with the Wikipedia convention as noticed in the articles on Chennai, Kolkata, and Mumbai. Will someone please make the change. Thanks. Kanchanamala 23:34, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
I did the Google test. Bengaluru with about 225,000 entries indicates that this new name for Bangalore is gaining popularity at a fast pace, and will soon replace "Bangalore" as a more common name. It is interesting to note that Google now gives the map of that city as "Map of Bengaluru, Karnataka, India." Do we have to be restrictive in asking the question whether Wikipedia is descriptive or prescriptive? Let us be normal and change the name of the city in the article to Bengaluru. Thanks.
Kanchanamala
19:45, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
Image:Volvo B7Rle,Bangarore.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot ( talk) 20:30, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
I labled the article peacock. may be it was unfair but juts to note some sentences in current article --
... and is today counted among the best places in the world to do business.[2] -- no explaining why, just citing an article/survey. may be its ok, it did not seem to me. Home to prestigious colleges and research institutions ... (like this and that) dont get me wrong, for someone who knows little about Bangalore, their are parts of the article that assume you know the city is great, or otherwise just believe. thanks.-- BBird ( talk) 17:01, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
I have been feeling for sometime that this article has been inundated with images, most of which have at best a tenuous relationship with the section they have been added to. For example, I can't understand what the Public Utility building image is doing in the "Civic Administration" section. The image also bleeds into the next section ("Economy"). What does the Public Utility building have to do with Civic Administration?
The "Economy" section looks even worse, filled as it is with gawdy and ungainly images of objects that look like extracts from Star Treck. Of the three images in the section, two have nothing to do with the content described in the section, only the Infosys image, perhaps has any relation to the section. While I applaud Nikkul's interest in adding quality images to articles, these images have got to go from this article. Many of these buildings, I'm sure, are architectural delights to those interested in that sort of thing, but I don't think they fairly represent the Bangalore that I know. The negative impact they are having on page formatting is another issue altogether. I am therefore going to go ahead and delete them. AreJay ( talk) 06:31, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
" BANGALORE: The biggest commercial property project in the city centre will be ready in the next few months. The landmark UB City, coming up on some 13 acres of land on Vittal Mallya Road, will add 1 million sqft of high-end commercial, retail and service apartment space. "
[1]
Please do not revert without consensus Thanks Cheers Nikkul ( talk) 10:20, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
You just completely missed the point. The scope of my discussion wasn't about the intricasies of retail in the economy of a state or city, but rather over the relevence of your images in the various sections. You are dead wrong on this Whitefield business. Firstly, there is no mention of Whitefield in the section or article, so where is the relevence. Second, you can't self reference Wikipedia articles (see Wikipedia:Reliable source examples). I can go to the Whitefield article and write absolutely what I please..where's the verifiability? It was not a village back then and neither is it now.
You also didn't answer my question about why the UB City image is inlcuded in the Economy section. For all this talk about UB City, there is but a 1 sentence mention of it in the section..something about a high-end commercial zone. What is the relevence of a high-end commercial zone over revenue from large-scale heavy industry manufacturing in Bangalore?
Bangalore's retail market value is approximately ₹33,727.50 crore (US$4.0 billion) [6]..what is UB City's contribution to this??? Contribtuion of Heavy Industries of HAL, BEL and ITI alone amounts to ₹61,325 crore (US$7.3 billion) [7] [8] [9] and there are 14 other Heavy Industry PSUs in Bangalore I've not even mentioned! Compared to them this so called "high-end commerce" is but a drop in the pond!
I never inferred that you were "inferior" to me or anyone. I am more than aware of the issues you are having with images on the India article and other articles. I do not say that this is all your fault, however, this obsession with adding images unrelated or insignificant to the overall theme or section has got to stop. As for your other imgaes, the pictures of the auto and the Bull Temple are bleeding into the other sections.
For all your apparent liking for "building consensus", let me ask you this question — did you build consensus when you added these random images to the article?? I don't think so. So let's play the game the way you want it played...I'm going to remove these images, if you'd like them added, please start a section in the talk page and build consensus.
Also, for the last time, stop removing content that has clearly been cited (ie. the size of Bangalore's population). AreJay ( talk) 00:09, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
Comments:I would like provide my 2 cents in this discussion. First of all, there should not be any dispute over the size of Bangalore's population. The article List of most populous cities in India still doesn't have valid and current references, and the only reference it has is Census of India website, which corresponds to year 2001 census data, that is, 7 years older one. On the other hand, World-Gazetteer.com has more up-to-date statistics on this. However, the given citation still ranks Bangalore at number 3, so we can still mention it this way and leave it with the given citation.
Regarding images, IMO the UB city image is highly undue to this article. Personally I feel, the statement made by Nikkul above, "The UB City image shows an upcoming very very important zone in Bangalore" is exaggerated, and there are way too many very very important zones in Bangalore compared to the upcoming UB City. Is it (going to be) much important than Majestic? KR Market? MG Road? Airport Road? Corporation Circle (Hudson Circle)? At this point of time, I would say it just a speculation.
Some of the other images are really dull are not having enough relevant information in it. For example, the hesaragatta lake image, the book stand image etc just do not have information in them. What does a caption like Hundreds of magazines can be found in Bangalore's newstands this mean? Every news-stand in every city will typically have hundreds of magazines. Isn't it? Few months back, the article had Image:Vijaya-karnataka.jpg image, and it was well-captioned ( Vijaya Karnataka, the largest circulating Kannada newspaper in Bangalore) and was explained in that section as well. If there is no objection, I would like to bring this image back to the article.
This article is one of the best articles, and will need to have best possible images, both in terms of quality of the image, and the relevance of it in the article. It would be better to have images of KSRTC / BMTC Bus stand (also called Kempegowda Bus Terminal), Railway Station (either the one in Majestic or the one in Cantonment), Bangalore Doordarshan TV station / Akashavani Radion station. Thanks - KNM Talk 02:12, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
I'm sorry, AreJay, there is no rule on wikipedia that says that every edit must be discussed on the talk page. These images have been there for a long time and no one has had a problem with them. There is a rule that if there is a dispute, that the dispute should be sorted out through a consensus. If you dont like them, then you have to build a consensus to get rid of them.
These images have been around from 07:19, 23 October 2007 203.91.209.250. Thats 4 months. Many people have edited the page since then and No one else has had a problem with the images. If you have a problem with them, you have to talk it out here. I agree that the newstand image doesnt contribute much, but the newspaper image is copyrighted.
About the population; the info arejay is adding is wrong. Bangalore is NO WAY the second most populous city in India. Unless Mumbai or Delhi are wiped of the map, Bangalore is going to stay 3rd populous. Just look at the source!
Industries in UB City include Brewery, Alcoholic Beverage, Airline, Chemicals & Fertilizers, Information Technology, Pharmaceuticals And for your info, heavy industries like hal do not have anything to do with retail. retail is like stores,and unless HAL has a store where you can go and buy an airplane, it doesnt constitute retail. I think you should read what economy is before replying. Thanks Nikkul ( talk) 04:55, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
You telling me that Bangalore is the second largest city in India is wrong. According to your argument, if I had a source, I could say Bangalore is in pakistan. Theres a difference between having a source and having correct information. I have used the same source u used and I have shown through the source that bangalore is the 3rd largest, not 2nd.
Second of all, you fail to recognize the importance of ub city as an economic zone in downtown bangalore. Perhaps its time you take a trip to Bangalore soon, cuz you obviously havent been there recently. And I know no one had a problem with the images because the images have been there for months and hundreds of people have edited the article, but not one has changed the image. That says something. If you have a problem with it, please discuss it before changing it. This is wikipedia, there are rules. Nikkul ( talk) 01:02, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
What rubbish! Nikkul I didn't know that you had all of a sudden become my travel advisor to recommend tourist destinations to me. I've presented financial data to show why images from PSUs should be included in the economy section, while you've just been harping on about UB City without any source or citation to prove it's importance over PSUs...and the reason for that is because there are no such sources. Let me break it down very simply to you, since you clearly have trouble understanding my point...
1) Just 4 of the 17 PSUs in Bangalore (HMT, HAL, ITI, BEL) contribute ₹95,897 crore (US$11 billion) to Bangalore's economy
2) The entire retail market in Bangalore is worth only ₹33,727.50 crore (US$4.0 billion).
3) Bangalore's entire contribution to IT is ₹47,590.62 crore (US$5.7 billion).
Therefore, not only are the PSUs the largest segment in Bangalore's economy, just those 4 PSUs contribute more to Bangalore's economy than the entire revenue from retail + Information Technology! This is because Bangalore was, is, and has always been a big PSU base.
Here's why I bring this up..there are two images in the Economy section. Both are related to IT. If this doesn't qualify for UNDUE, I don't know what does (remember Wikipedia's Summary style guidelines). One of them (and I don't care which one) needs to go to make way for a balanced representation. The image that I had added this afternoon ( SU-30MKI India.jpg) is a manufactured product of Hindustan Aeronautics Limited, which is a big PSU in Bangalore. Additionally, it is a public domain image and is free of any sort of copyright (as opposed to both your images which are CC images). Instead of purile reverts of my edits, I challenge you to tell me (since clearly, you seem to object to it) why this image, representing a product manufactured by a PSU in Bangalore should be supressed over two images of IT buildings whose companies' revenues total to only a fraction of Bangalore's PSU revenue. And please, spare me your "please discuss it" lecture, as you very clearly bend and pick and choose which rules you want to use and when. I haven't rv'ed your edits right now but I'd like you to come here and address my discussion above. AreJay ( talk) 03:02, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
First of all, Bangalore is known around the world for its IT. Everyone who knows about Bangalore, knows it because of the IT revolution that Bangalore stands for. If you think people who know about Bangalore around the world know about it because of HAL or ISRO, you're totally wrong. Also, UB city is the central business district of Bangalore- it has office blocks for companies and is already changing Bangalore's skyline. It has offices for Brewery, Alcoholic Beverage, Airline, Chemicals & Fertilizers, Information Technology, Pharmaceuticals. I feel that you seriously do not know Bangalore and especially the economy if you would like to eliminate an image showing IT. Anyway, hundreds of people have edited the bangalore page since the images were put on, but none of them removed it or changed it. Hence, youre the only one who has a problem with it.
Nikkul (
talk)
08:20, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
An IT image in the economy section is needed because:
Lockheed Martin and Boeing have also made deals with infosys [3] [4] whats your point? Nikkul ( talk) 09:43, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
[7] [8] [9] [10] [11]POV? Please! I could provide another 100 sites that say that Bangalore is known for its IT
Financials Heavy Industries mentioned in econ section: HAL has a revenue of $1.2 Billion HMT doesnt even have a working website. I doubt its revenue is more than $1 billion ISRO has a budget of .815 billion
Umm...what??? Can you please click on the links that I added? All PSUs are managed by the Department of Public Enterprise in India. I had added links to all their financials. How do you doubt it is more than $1 billion? Based on what? Your opinion?? Your opinion is impremissible. If your opinion is that it is not more than $1 billion, then it is my opinion that its revenue is $2 trillion. Where do our opinions leave us? And do you understand the difference between a budget and revenue? What was the purpose of dragging ISRO's budget into the discussion?? AreJay ( talk) 04:39, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
IT companies
Infosys has a revenue of 3.2 billions dollars
Wipro has a revenue of 3.4 billion dollars
TCS has a revenue of 4.3 Billion dollars
Hmmm...which type makes more money???
I have no idea where you got your numbers from.
Anyway, you need to have a consensus and resolve the dispute before you can change the images. Please be civil. You will get blocked if you engage in an edit war. Nikkul ( talk) 03:17, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
There are 1721 IT companies in Bangalore How many PSU's are there?
Nikkul (
talk)
04:33, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
References
User:AreJay reverted an edit [18] by User:202.62.92.102 who left her name in the intro ("Rashmi Karanth"). AreJay has accused me of adding this comment in his edit summary. I would like to stress that accusing others without evidence is uncivil. I am not a user who will add the sentence:
"It is also called the Silicon city because of its many industries. Banglaore is a city full of lush greenery,kind people and malls,shops and markets. Its also modern and a great hangout for youngsters who like to party everyday.-- 202.62.92.102 ( talk) 12:54, 15 January 2008 (UTC)Rashmi Karanth "
Accusing me of writing this edit is an insult to my efforts to improve Wikipedia. It is also considered lying. I use my account when I edit and I also have an American IP address, hence this is proof that it was not I who did this, besides the fact that whoever did edit, left her name as attribution. I hope User:AreJay will not make such baseless accusations in the future. I am very offended that I was blamed for such vandalism Nikkul ( talk) 19:38, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
Nevermind, just kidding! Cheers Nikkul ( talk) 06:55, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
In re Nikkul's constant rv's to this article, it needs to be pointed out that there was a prolonged discussion above where I presented financial statements from the Department of Public Enterprise which indicated the importance of PSUs to Bangalore's economy. User:Nikkul has referred to these as "false sources"; clearly, this indicates that he is not willing to listen to reason, given the fact that the Department of Public Enterprise is the only body in India that is authorized to manage PSUs. Under the circumstances, there can be no "consensus" if one is not willing to look facts in the face. In addition the the above discussion, let me point out the following:
Expand to view excerpts |
---|
NPOV says that the article should fairly represent all significant viewpoints that have been published by a reliable source, and should do so in proportion to the prominence of each...[a]n article should not give undue weight to any aspects of the subject, but should strive to treat each aspect with a weight appropriate to its significance to the subject. Note that undue weight can be given in several ways, including, but not limited to, depth of detail, quantity of text, prominence of placement, and juxtaposition of statements. |
User:Nikkul's rv's without ryhme or reason are not constructive and are serving as a hinderence to people interested in improving the quality of the article. He has reverted the edits of multiple editors on many occasions stating "please obtain consensus" or "please discuss". Clearly, he has not familiarized himself with WP:CONSENSUS (extracts included):
Expand to view excerpts |
---|
While the consensus process does not require posting to the discussion page, it can be useful and is encouraged. It is also a good idea to check the discussion page before making an edit, because someone may have thought of it before, or discussed something that sheds more light on the subject. Otherwise " be bold"; ultimately, improving articles is what Wikipedia is all about. |
I would also ask that he realize that it is Wikipedia's policy that editors be bold in making their edits. Disputed edits must be discussed; however, if an editor is going to dispute every single edit made by other users, the editor's good faith is questioned. Clearly, people have been editing and improving this article long before Nikkul appeared on the scene; he should stop acting like he owns this or any Wiki article. AreJay ( talk) 15:57, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
I observed recent reverts regarding, "one of the best places to do the business". As such, it appears to be only the opinion of CNNMoney.com so mentioning it as the fact may not be a good idea, but attributing it to the source explicitly is more suitable here; like "according to CNNMoney.com". If the same opinion is shared by multiple reliable sources, then it could be considered as a fact based on reliable sources. My 2 cents. - KNM Talk 16:32, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
All, over the last few days the conflict on which images should be used in Economy section of this article. Here by I am starting a discussion thread, for building the consensus. I request all the editors especially the contributors to this article, to provide their opinions, suggestions and comments. Also, while this discussion is in progress, let us avoid the revert war that has been going on for sometime. For this reason, only for now, I will be removing all the images from this section. I am also going to provide my proposal on the images to be used, and similarly would be interested in seeing other proposals with supporting comments.
The UB City image shows an upcoming very very important zone in Bangalore. It is literally downtown Bangalore. UB City is already operational. UB City is not just a commerial shopping area; it houses the headquarters to large groups and has office space for other companies. And UB City also houses commercial offices, banks, high-end retail stores, a five star hotel, serviced apartments, restaurants, food courts.
Whitefield is an important hub for IT services. Read this from the whitefield, india page: Whitefield was a small village which was a retirement colony for Anglo-Indians. It has since become a major hub for the Indian technology industry. The Export Promotion Industrial Park (EPIP) at Whitefield of one of the country's first information technology parks - International Tech Park, Bangalore (ITPB) which houses offices of many IT and ITES companies. The EPIP zone also has offices of other IT and R&D giants like Symbian (Symbian India Ltd.), GE (John F. Welch Technology Center), Wipro- GE Medical Systems, iGate Global Solutions, Sapient_(company), Manhattan Associates, SAP AG, Perot Systems, Dell, IBM, Intel and Oracle,TATA Elxsi,Geometric Software. An Intel Xeon processor code named Whitefield was being developed (but was scrapped later) in Intel's ITPB campus (Intel has since moved its campus from ITPB).
The Public Utility Building doesnt show economy. I dont think it should be used.
I agree with KNM's approach. I will present some of the images that I think would make sense below, but basically I think two images are sufficient for the Economy section. As far as what sectors to represent, certainly, I think IT should be represented. I think, however, that it is hard to include a "generic image" of IT (I'm not sure we currently have such an image in Commons either). For that reason, I think it's perfectly alright to include an image of the HQs of say, Infosys or Wipro.
As far as the "other sector" to represent, I don't know how valuable the Public Utility building is. From my understanding, the Public Utility building has a mish-mash of shops and officies — while it definitely is a landmark of Bangalore, I don't know if it is the first thing that springs to mind when we think of Bangalore's economy. I would ideally like to see a PSU represented since that has been the backbone that has driven Bangalore's growth immediately before and after independence (notwithstanding the recent growth of IT). Finding good PSU images is a problem though because public sector enterprise isn't exactly glamorous. As in the case of IT, it is hard to conceptualize PSU services into images — for this reason, I recommend the SU-30MKI India.jpg image or the PD image in PSLV that was developed by ISRO. This article has a nice synopsis of Bangalore's economy, not just related to the growth of PSUs and IT, but also private sector enterprise like MICO and WIDIA.
Additionally, I've been working offline on code that can randomize images on Wikipedia articles. For the time being, we can narrow down the search to two images, but if the code works as intended, we will be able to shortlist 5-10 images and ensure that at least two of them appear each time an article is refereshed. Thanks AreJay ( talk) 22:01, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
Gentlemen — the prototype for the random image generator is ready. Please take a look at
User:AreJay/rotation and provide your thoughts. Just FYI, I've loaded dummy images into the generator..these are not the images that I am proposing we use in the article. The image to the top right of the page will change every 14 minutes, while the image at the bottom right will change every 8 hours Both images rotate hourly. Obviously, these values can be tweaked as necessary. Thoughts and comments are greatly appreciated. Thanks
AreJay (
talk)
02:15, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
{{
Bangalore Image Rotation|economy}}
I have made a rotation template for the bangalore economy. You can find the code,which uses parser functions, at template:bangalore image rotation. I suggest that we have one rotation of all the IT images like infosys and whitefield image and one rotation for the other sections like retail and PSU's. This seems better than a "random image generator". Since this code has been tried and has succeeded on the india culture section, this seems to be the optimal answer. Nikkul ( talk) 02:59, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
References
User:AreJay has been consistently adamant about his point of view. I have discussed his opinions with him above, and he has consistently derided my efforts and has passed sarcastic comments that do not help make his point any clearer. If he doesnt have his way, he has threatened me with an edit war.
AreJay would like to add an image of an airplane, which apparently shows Bangalore's economy. I would like to point out that the images that were on the Bangalore page have been there for a very long time. For this reason, and also because there is a difference of opinion on which images should go on the page, I asked AreJay to discuss the issue on the talk page. His "discussion" has often included sarcastic remarks and unreasonable claims.
User:AreJay feels that he does not need consensus and that he must have his way. If he doesnt have his way, he has said that he is ready for an edit war. I would like to point out that this attitude is not one that will help wikipedia and that being adamant does not help anyone.
User:AreJay has brought evidence that suggests that PSU's apparently contribute 24 billion dollars to Bangalore's economy. Now, when I read his references, some did not mention Bangalore at all, and instead mentioned New Delhi. And the total of the claimed revenues did not add up to 24 billion. Nikkul ( talk) 21:19, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
A common source of mystery, the Public Utility Building seems like it falls under the category of civic administration (public utilities). Others have suggested that this building is a center of commerce. What really goes on in this place? Who works there...the government or the private sector? Nikkul ( talk) 08:43, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
Based on the discussion initiated by User:KNM yesterday, I've taken the liberty of creating the table below for us to keep track of the support and opposition for various images being debated. Please add your name in the columns "Support" or "Oppose". I've taken the liberty of adding some names based on the discussion above; if this is not accurate, please feel free to add your name in the appropriate column. Please update the tally count after your vote. Thanks.
To add a new image to the poll, please use the code below (making changes where appropriate) and insert it on the line that preceeds the text <!-- ** END OF TABLE ** -->
|-
|[[:Image:<!-- Insert Image name here -->]]
|| <!-- Insert image description here -->
|| <!-- Insert name of proposal sponsor -->
|| <!-- Insert users supporting image -->
|| <!-- Insert users opposing image -->
Image | Description | Proposed by | Support | Object | Tally (Support/Object) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Bangalore UtilityBuilding.jpg | Utility Building | User:KNM |
User:Nikkul
User:KNM user:Dineshkannambadi User:Indiandefender2 |
User:AreJay |
3/2 |
Bagmane Tech Park, CV Raman Nagar, Bengaluru, India (2007).jpg | iFlex building, Whitefield | User:Nikkul |
User:Nikkul User:Indiandefender2 |
User:AreJay User:Dineshkannambadi User:Sarvagnya |
2/3 |
Image:BangaloreInfosys.jpg | Infosys HQ | User:Nikkul |
User:Nikkul User:AreJay User:Dineshkannambadi User:Indiandefender2 |
User:KNM | 4/1 |
Image:Downtown Bangalore.jpg | UB City downtown | User:Nikkul |
User:Nikkul User:Indiandefender2 |
User:AreJay User:KNM User:Dineshkannambadi User:Sarvagnya |
2/4 |
Image:SU-30MKI India.jpg | Sukhoi SU-30MKI Flanker | User:AreJay |
User:AreJay User:Dineshkannambadi User:Sarvagnya |
User:Nikkul User:Indiandefender2 |
3/2 |
Image:Bangalore HAL.jpg | HAL Airport | User:AreJay | User:AreJay |
User:Nikkul User:Sarvagnya User:Indiandefender2 |
1/3
|
That picture isnt in Whitefield. The address is
i-flex Park C/o Embassy Business Park C.V Raman Nagar Bangalore - 560 093 karnataka India [21]
Hence, that image is perfectly qualified for inclusion. Sorry for the mixup Nikkul ( talk) 23:31, 30 January 2008 (UTC)