Talk:Bangalore

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Bangalore is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do.

This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on May 2, 2006.

	Article milestones

Date

Process

Result

February 20, 2006

Peer review

Reviewed

March 24, 2006

Featured article candidate

Promoted

Current Status: Featured article

This article is within the scope of multiple WikiProjects.
Click [show] for further details

	This article is supported by WikiProject Cities, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to cities, towns, and various other settlements on Wikipedia. For more information, or to get involved, visit the project page.
FA	This article has been rated as FA-Class on the Project's quality scale. (If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the priority scale.

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.

This article has been rated as FA-Class on the quality scale. (add comments)

This article is maintained by the Indian cities workgroup.

This article is maintained by the Karnataka workgroup.

[edit] Nikkul's images

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]

The UB City image shows an upcoming very very important zone in Bangalore. It is literally downtown Bangalore. That image shows the city's new skyline. It is a very important commercial zone. And the fact that it is right next to Cubbon Park makes it all the more important.
The Whitefield image shows an area of Bangalore that is famous for the tech firms and for the way Bangalores economy has boomed in the past few years. Few years ago, Bangalore just like Whitefield was a small village. Today, both are bustling because of their economic importance.
"extracts from Star Treck."??? Im sorry to let you know that these are actual buildings...in Bangalore. I mean its not like the pics are fake. They show the different industries and the different areas of economic importance in Bangalore.
The Bangalore Water Supply and Sewerage Board (BWSSB) was constituted in 1968 to supply water to the city and to provide for the disposal of sewage. The Karnataka Electricity Board (KEB) was formed in 1957. Believe it or not, public utilities are owned and administered by the government. They are not private entities

Please do not revert without consensus Thanks Cheers Nikkul (talk) 10:20, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Nikkul, with respect, please don't tell me what I can or cannot do. One of Wikipedia's cardinal rules is "If you don't want your writing to be edited mercilessly or redistributed for profit by others, do not submit it." I have been active on the Bangalore article for years and was the main contributor that led to Bangalore's successful FA, so I can tell you I know a thing or two about this city. Below are my responses to your points:

UB City: First, this project is "upcoming". Meaning it's not even in play as yet. Second, UB City is a commercial shopping center. What does have to do with the "Economy" of the city? People in all cities shop. UB City is hardly reflective of the consumer patterns of the people of the city at large (for multiple reasons, not the least of which is the fact that the shopping center hasn't even opened yet). Thirdly, " And the fact that it is right next to Cubbon Park makes it all the more important"....umm, care to indulge me a little more on your logic here? What if I ran a taco stand next to Cubbon Park? Will you also include me in the "Economy" section of this article?
A few years ago Whitefield was not a "small image" as you believe. If anything, it was a sattelite town of the city and had been for years. And the lesser said about your comment that Bangalore was a small village a few years ago the better. Regardless, the Economy section has no discussion about this (rightly so) so as I said before, any link that you are trying to make between the Economy section and this image is tenuous.
"They show the different industries"...no they don't. One apparently shows a shopping mall. The other two are pictures of buildings servicing the same industry — IT. There is more to Bangalore than just IT (The city has a huge PSU base...over 42% of all Central PSUs in South India are in Bangalore. HQ for ISRO, HAL, NAL, etc)
Umm, I don't think you realize this but the Public Utilities building is a shopping center, among other things. It has absolutely nothing to do with the KEB or BWSSB. Nothing. Zilch. Nada. In light of these facts, I'm removing these images.
Finally, please stop removing cited material about Bangalore's population and relacing it with link from an internal Wiki source. If you have a valid reason for why you're removing it, bring it up, otherwise please stop doing it. AreJay (talk) 17:31, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

UB City is already operational and is still in construction (believe me its possible). UB City is not just a commerial shopping area; it houses the headquarters to large groups and has office space for other companies.
What does retail have to do with economy? Please! It has everything to do with economy. Guess how the average person spends his money- through retail! Retail and commerce isa drivingforcein the economy. And UB City also houses commercial offices, banks, high-end retail stores, a five star hotel, serviced apartments, restaurants, food courts.
People in all cities shop? Lol, People in all cities do IT work, and other things that people in Bangalore do. Bangalore is not the only place intheworld in which things get done. Banglaore has similar economy as other cities.
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).
Since I do not know about the Public Utilties Building, I will not add it intill more research is done. Wikipedia states that when there is a dispute, that we resolve it on the talk page witha consensus. Like you, I have been a major contributor to the Bangalore site as well as other india sites. I am not inferior to you. So let us waitand see what others have to say. Please do not revert the images till there is concensus. Thanks. Nikkul (talk) 21:06, 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 Rs 33,727.50 crore (US$ 8.59 billion)[1]..what is UB City's contribution to this??? Contribtuion of Heavy Industries of HAL, BEL and ITI alone amounts to Rs 61,325 crore (US$ 15.62 billion) [2] [3] [4] 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.

...,making it the third most populous city of India,^[2]

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)

And I think you should read and understand what I've written before replying. Your contention was that this high-end retail was "very very important" and therefore the image of UB City was justified. I just showed you that PSUs, which have nothing to do with the high-end commerce that you're talking about, far outweigh revenue from any type of retail, high-end or otherwise. So if any image of Bangalore needs to be added in the economy section, it should be that of HAL, ITI, BHEL, BEL, etc and not some silly UB City. That was my point. How is the info I've added about the cities "wrong"? I've cited the same source that Wikipedia India articles have been using for ages. Please review the source before commenting. As for this issue about discussing, I asked that you build consensus around the images, simply because you seemed to want everything discussed before edited..."contraversial edits", as you termed them in your edit summary. How do you know that no one had a problem with your images? You didn't discuss when you added them, in much the same way that I didn't discuss when I deleted them. Seems perfectly fair to me, you can't play the game both ways; please take a stance on the matter and stay with it. AreJay (talk) 15:29, 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 Rs 95,897 crore (US$ 24.43 billion) to Bangalore's economy

2) The entire retail market in Bangalore is worth only Rs 33,727.50 crore (US$ 8.59 billion).

3) Bangalore's entire contribution to IT is Rs 47,590.62 crore (US$ 12.12 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)

Umm, thanks...for your...valuable insight???? I mean I've just showed, not once or twice, but thirce that revenue differential between IT and PSUs is dramatically huge and all you can offer in response is a (badly written) character analysis of myself. You are filibustering this article, and this will not continue. Let me speak plainly — either you come up with an explaination on why PSUs shouldn't be included vs IT and back your hypothesis with financial facts (as opposed to wild conjucture as you have above) or I am going to go ahead and replace the first IT image that I choose to replace. At least one other editor has objected the status quo in terms of images in the article. Your IT images are UNDUE and will be replaced. If you want an edit war, you'll get one. AreJay (talk) 13:56, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

A little busy, I will get back to you soon. Nikkul (talk) 06:59, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

An IT image in the economy section is needed because:

Right off the bat, another classic example of you not doing your homework. I never suggested that an IT image was not needed. I said there are two IT images in the Economy section — one of them needs to go. Go back and read my reply before jumping to conclusions AreJay (talk) 04:39, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

The images in the econ section show different hubs of economic activity in bangalore. Iflex is in the banking sector, Infosys is in the it sector, and ub city is in the retail sector. Nikkul (talk) 09:43, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Joke of the century. Iflex is an IT company that provides IT solutions to the banking industry. It isn't in the "banking sector", it is in the IT sector. So, no, you can't get off of the WP:UNDUE rap through clever semantics. AreJay (talk) 17:00, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

India has emerged as a hub for IT and BPO, and Bangalore is the main center for Info Technology in India

Yes, it has. I have bachelors and masters degrees in IT and I work as an IT auditor...I am more than aware of the state of the industry that I work in, thank you very much. AreJay (talk) 04:39, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Wow! No way! a bachelors AND a masters in IT??? WHOA! You are my new god! That makes your arguement so much more credible! Nikkul (talk) 09:43, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Yes, if I am your new God, you should be willing to readily accept it without question. What was my "argument"??? You made a statement and I said that I was aware of it. I wasn't arguing with it. Now..apprently...you have a problem with what I said, ergo you have a problem..with..what..you..said?? Self-contradiction is dangerous. Hope that new god thing works out for you. AreJay (talk) 17:00, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Not having an IT image would be UNDUE

Just like not having an image of a PSU would be UNDUE. See my comments above. AreJay (talk) 04:39, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

PSU's are not as important as IT, and IT companies make more money and contribute more than PSU's. Please take your sources, convert them into dollars, and compare them with the figures I listed for IT companies. Nikkul (talk) 09:43, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

For the umpteenth time...this is your opinion. I've cited my sources and provided links, not once, but thrice. And if you can't be bothered to go read them, I'm not going to sit around spoonfeeding you. AreJay (talk) 17:00, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

An IT image has been on the Bangalore page for the last 3 years, a PSU image has never been on the page [5]

So what?? Just because there was undue bias towards a certain area for three years, does that make it right?? And anyway, as usual you continue to be wrong. I couldn't be bothered to go all the way back to 3 years, but here's an archive of an HAL image present in the article as recent as June 2007. [6]}} AreJay (talk) 04:39, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

If the image has been there for 3 years, that means you need to establish concensus Nikkul (talk) 09:43, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Wow. Do you ever read what I write?? I said there was an image of HAL as recent as June 2007. Clearly, that wasn't three years ago. I have to establish consensus when there are questions on an article's content. I do NOT have to establish content when something is in violation of WP:UNDUE...UNDUE is official Wikipedia policy, it isn't a guideline. And if something is in violation of it, it needs to go.AreJay (talk) 17:00, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Thousands of people have edited the page since the infosys image was added, but no one has had a problem with it besides user:Arejay

That's your opinion. How do you know? Did you conduct a pulse survey? Just because someone doesn't reply doesn't mean they don't have a problem. Please present solid, quantifiable facts..not POV. AreJay (talk) 04:39, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

No, that is not my opinion, that is straight up fact. People have the ability to edit all of the page,and if they dont edit out the image, it means they dont have a problem with it. its not that complicated of logic Nikkul (talk) 09:43, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Blah, blah..there's nothing "factual" about it my friend. You are making judgement call on something and that makes it your opinion.AreJay (talk) 17:00, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

No one knows Bangalore for HAL or ISRO

Again your opinion. Wake up and smell the coffee. Lockheed Martin and Boeing have been wooing HAL for ages to sell their aircraft [7] [8] [9] [10][11]. If you haven't heard of it, that's your problem. Not anyone elsesAreJay (talk) 04:39, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Lockheed Martin and Boeing have also made deals with infosys^[3] ^[4] whats your point? Nikkul (talk) 09:43, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

You said no one knows Bangalore for HAL. I just showed that it did, through some valid citations. That was my point. Simple enough for you?? AreJay (talk) 17:00, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

People all over the world who know about Bangalore know about it because it's an IT hub

Again. Your opinion. If you can't quantify this with emperical data, no one will buy this POV. AreJay (talk) 04:39, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

^[5]^[6]

^[7]^[8]^[9]^[10]^[11]POV? Please! I could provide another 100 sites that say that Bangalore is known for its IT

Wow. I said quatify your opinion with emperical data. Not send me newspaper clippings. AreJay (talk) 17:00, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Bangalore is know as the Silicon Valley of India not because of HAL
As headquarters to many of the global SEI-CMM Level 5 Companies, Bangalore's place in the global IT map is prominent.
There are more than two paragraphs about IT in the economy section
There are only two sentences about heavy industry!

Ugh, so what???? How is this proof that IT > PSUs? I mean from what angle does this present itself to be a logical argument??? AreJay (talk) 04:39, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

It has to do with this thing called relevance Nikkul (talk) 09:43, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Well then that immediately bats you out of the game, seeing as how "irrelevence" has been the central theme of your so-called "argument" thus far. AreJay (talk) 17:00, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Bangalore contributed 33% of India's Rs. 144,214 crore (US$ 32 billion) IT exports in 2006-07

Yes, I already used this number to demonstrate how this $10.56 million (32m * 0.33) is a paltry number compared to the revenue from just 4 of the 17 PSUs in Bangalore. But then, I wouldn't have to point this out..again..if you had read my reply AreJay (talk) 04:39, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Um from what I investigated, your numbers are terribly wrong. Nikkul (talk) 09:43, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Please! My numbers from NASSCOM, India's leading IT strategy group and from the Department of Public Enterprise, a Government of India undertaking which manages PSUs nationally. AreJay (talk) 17:00, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Your Source does not even list the word Bangalore in it! The location is listed as New Delhi

Delhi or Dacascus. So what? ITI is headquartered in Doorvaninagar, Bangalore [12]. During year end close of financial books, all the accounts of sub-entities roll up to the accounts of the parent entity, which is located in Bangalore...this therefore counts as Bangalore revenue. AreJay (talk) 04:39, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

If Bangalore isnt mentioned in your source, then how can you say it relates to Bangalore. Youre arguments are totally rediculious! Nikkul (talk) 09:43, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Yes, it is "rediculous" that I've been sending you a link to this website and that just be clicking on the "Corporate Profile" link you would have seen that the HQ is in Bangalore, but I guess that's just "rediculous" for me to ask you to do that. AreJay (talk) 17:00, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

IT Exports account for 35% of the total exports from India

So what? 60% of the people working in India are agrarian workers. By your logic, we will have to delete all the economy images and add photos of farmers. Please consider the scope of your argument AreJay (talk)

You dont understand anything. Youre blind to even trying to understand someone elses point of view. You just keep deriding anything anyone else has to say. I am tired of hearing your excuses! There is no point of even trying to respond to you because rather than tryingto understand, you just insult others and make excuses for why you think you should have your way Nikkul (talk) 09:43, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Oh but I do. You don't want to understand my point because I've disproved your so-called theories every single time, but yet you go on some tirade or the other and try to draw attention away from the issue at hand. Tired of hearing my "excuses". Please! AreJay (talk) 17:00, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

The biggest companies in Bangalore are IT companies; see List of Indian companies

This is supposed to be a reasoning for something? Did you even read the caveat on List of Indian companies that said "Please note that the list is highly incomplete and does not have every company of all sizes"?? And anyway, how is this verifiable?? I've mentioned before that you can't use Wikipedia articles as the basis for your claims. See Wikipedia:Reliable source examples. AreJay (talk) 04:39, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

If you feel that the biggest companies in bangalore are not it companies, please do show me which ones and how much they make because from what I see, PSU companies make a fraction of IT companies. Butif you feel otherwise, do back it up. Nikkul (talk) 09:43, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Go back and see all the links, with converted amounts posted above. I'm not going to regurgitate them again. I've shown revenue figures of how the PSU sector in Bangalore outweighs the IT sector manyfold. You'll have to go back and look at the data that I've provided..I'm not going to do that work for you. AreJay (talk) 17:00, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

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)

OK well if you believe that HMT's revenue is more than 1 billion, please do show me because from what i have reseached, its not. Nikkul (talk) 09:43, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

First, it was you that brought up HMT, not me. The companies that I brought up were ITI, HAL, BEL and BHEL. Then you claimed you "doubted" its revenue is more than $1 billion. Therefore I asked you what you mean that you "doubt" something's revenue is some amount. If HMT's revenue is less than $1 billion, what does that do to your argument? Are you under the illusion that all IT companies in Bangalore make more than $1 billion??? AreJay (talk) 17:00, 20 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???

What's your logic? You just compared three IT companies based on financial numbers to your opinion of how much some PSUs make. Do you think this argument of yours has any sort of logic? AreJay (talk) 04:39, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Well based on my EVIDENCE, Infosys makes 3.2 billion while HAL makes 1.2 billion...now who makes more???? hmmm...thats a tough one! Nikkul (talk) 09:43, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

{{Comments|First, based on my EVIDENCE, I just showed how the PSU sector makes more money than the IT sector. It's just that you cant be bothered to go read my replies and I can't be bothered to supply them to you again. AreJay (talk) 17:00, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

I have no idea where you got your numbers from.

Of course you don't. Because you obviously don't want to click on the links that I provide that show where those numbers came from. You don't have to sell me on this fact, I'm already well and truly sold. AreJay (talk) 04:39, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Your evidence said that 4 PSUs make 24 billion; I researched the revenue of one of them and foundthat it made 1.2 billion, how can the three others make 22.6 billion? Please do back that up with facts with each revenue of each company. Nikkul (talk) 09:43, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

As stated above, I've already provided links..not once, but twice. I'm not going to do that again AreJay (talk) 17:00, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

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)

No my friend, contrary to your opinion, I don't need consensus. There are two images in the Economy section that represent one and only one industry. This is UNDUE and I don't need to "obtain consensus" to remove one of them. I am however giving you the benefit of the doubt to try and establish cause for why both those images should be kept. You are yet to do this, obviously.AreJay (talk) 04:39, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Im sorry, but as far as I know, when there is a dispute, it must be resolved through concensus on the talk page. Thats official wiki policy. So you might as well resolve it now instead of being uncivil and engaging in an edit war as you have already suggested Nikkul (talk) 09:43, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

The dispute exists because you choose to make it one. Wikipedia's policies are very clear. WP:UNDUE is policy - not a guideline. The undue bias of IT images in the Economy section violate WP:UNDUE...that's fairly clear cut. No dispute. It simply exists because you choose to prolong this fracars AreJay (talk) 17:00, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Wow, outdone yourself again I see Nikkul. You want me to be civil?? What would constitute "civility" in your book? Running around accusing other editors of making "uncivil edits"? Accusing other editors of lying? Then having the almighty gall to come back and say "just kidding" without so much as an apology? Would that be civil? Please keep your threats to yourself, I've been here long enough to know what the rules of engagement are.

Look, this is all getting quite cumbersome and meaningless. I've basically been repeatedly shooting down your so-called "points". If you can't produce valid, quatifiable arguments based on strong logic, I'm just going to go ahead and change whatever I please. I've given you the benefit of the doubt thus far and that obviously hasn't worked. I've replied to each of your points in red above. AreJay (talk) 04:39, 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)

And there are 1,345,243 roadside kadalekayi stalls in Bangalore. So yes, let us go ahead, delete all the images in the Economy section and replace them with images of roadside vendors. AreJay (talk) 04:48, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Great comeback! That really makes sense! Instead of acknowledging my facts, you have once again chosen to not listen, make excuses, and deride me once again. There is no point in talking to you because it falls on deaf ears. You are not interested in resolving a dispute. All you want to do is overlook my facts and make excuse. You are wasting my time. Nikkul (talk) 09:43, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Made about as much sense as someone saying that just because there are 1721 IT companies in Bangalore that it automatically qualifies IT images to be plastered all over the Economy section. Making "excuses". What a joke. I'm the one presenting numerical facts and you're going around opining on all kinds of issues that have nothing to do with why PSUs shouldn't be adequately represented. Overlook your facts?? It's hard to overlook something that hasnt been presented as yet. I'm not telepathic. If I've wasted your time, you've wasted my time doubly, with not just having to reply to you but to go around monitoring your Talk page reverts made by you for reasons known only to you. Since you can't seem to give me a valid reason, I'm going to research online to find a good PSU image and add it to the Economy section. This whole imbroglio is leading nowhere. You or anyone else that chooses to post are more than welcome to continue, but this discussion is over for me. AreJay (talk) 17:00, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

The truth remains that it is your opinion that it is WP:Undue. Since this is a dispute, you must establish a consensus that concludes that this is indeed undue. Your shady reasons and your false sources do not help in your argument. Nikkul (talk) 02:52, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Clearly, that's not the truth. WP:Undue is policy; there is no grey area for so-called "disputes" as far as it is concerned. If you can't distinguish perception from reality, you can't be helped. AreJay (talk) 16:15, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Again, that is your point of view. It further shows that what you are adamant and unyielding. What you think is not always right. Nikkul (talk) 21:23, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] User:AreJay's Uncivil Edit

User:AreJay reverted an edit[13] 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)

Comments responded to by User:KNM at 19:54, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Nevermind, just kidding! Cheers Nikkul (talk) 06:55, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Images & Lead

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:

The iFlex image in the economy section is based out of Whitefield, which is a separate town by itself. While it is a sattelite town of Bangalore city and is part of Bangalore Urban district, it is not part of Bangalore city. it is If this image is relevent anywhere, it is in the Whitefield article; not in this one. map with distinction history of Whitefield

The UB City image - I am opposed this on account of WP:UNDUE; User:KNM has also raised his objection to it based on the same Wikipedia guideline. During the course of the discussion, no one but User:Nikkul has vehemently supported this image on account of it being a "very very important zone" in his opinion. Please refer to the extract below of WP:UNDUE (some text has been highlighted)

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 emphatically support AreJay's comments and arguments on the issue. I have followed the revert wars for the last couple of weeks, but sadly, could never find the time to chime in. Nikkul is grossly mistaken with his understanding of Bangalore's geography and economics. Quickly, Whitefield is NOT bangalore and IT is NOT the be all and end all of Bangalore's economy. Bangalore was an economic hub BEFORE I.T happened and it is an economic hub now. More later. Sarvagnya 20:49, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Business

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)

I'm actually quite happy not even having that text in there. The point of the lead is to summarize the sections below, so bringing in something specific like a CNNMoney.com article runs contrary to WP:LEAD. I only left it there and rephrased it yesterday because I wasn't sure what the intent of the editor who added it was...it looked like "one of the best places to do business" was being stated as if it were a fact and I therefore cleaned it up to at least appear like it was someone's opinion. However, I am more than happy not even having that sentence in there since it is a media outlet's POV. AreJay (talk) 17:58, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Images for Economy section

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.

First of all, there is a need for consensus on how many images to be used. Keeping all other sections in mind, it looks highly inconsistent using more than 2 images in any of the sections. For this reason, I propose we use only 2 images in this section.
I propose the image of Image:Bangalore_UtilityBuilding.jpg and an image of ITPL or a group of IT companies or an image from Bangalore IT.COM event. The idea is to have a generic image instead of an image specific to a company like Infosys or Iflex. While Software exports is the major contributor for the city's (and there by its state's and nation's) present economical growth, we will also need to consider other economical hubs, an important one being the public utility building. - KNM ^Talk 20:27, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Small update: Found another image of utility building: Image:Bangalore_Skyscraper.jpg. However, this one is not as much clear as the one mentioned above, as the earlier one is having higher resolution and a better view, IMO. - KNM ^Talk 20:38, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Let us put the different images here and do a sort of poll to bring this issue to an end. What better way to bring about agreement.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 20:50, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Whitefield is a hub for technology firms in Bangalore

The headquarters of Infosys, India's second largest IT company, is located in Bangalore.

UB City is a commercial zone in central Bangalore^[12]^[13]

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.

[edit] AreJay's Response

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)

I like this idea of a rotation, if possible. And yes, we need to provide some diversity in the image selection for the economy section rather than sterotype Bangalore's image. I dont agree with the notion that the Sukhoi image is just an "airplane". It is about a century of technological advancements in Bangalore. The HAL was first commissioned under the guidance of Sir M.V and Sir Mirza Ismail, the then Diwan's of Mysore, working with the likes of JRD Tata. It has taken the minds of many brillian people to bring Bangalore to where it is today; the "tech capital of India". Eventually, these scientific advancements have progressed into developments in IT sector. But the knowledge pool originated from the scientific advancements of the 50's thru 80's and should be represented.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 22:31, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

I concur with Dinesh. I think it is critical to fairly represent the diversity of Bangalore's economy, both from a historical and present point of view. I'm OK with using the image of the Sukhoi. It is India's flagship fighter aircraft and is a dual-threat fighter jet, along the lines of the F/A-18 Hornet. By many accounts, the SU-30MKI "Flanker" is the most powerful operational fighter jet used by the world's armed forces. And unlike the Jaguar or Mirage 2000, HAL manufactures the "Flanker" under a knowledge transfer agreement with Sukhoi — this is a matter of notability and pride, not just for Bangalore but for India.

In line with Sarvagnya's reasoning, I continue to strongly oppose any use of the UB city and Whitefield iFlex images in relation to the Economy section. AreJay (talk) 02:55, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Perhaps on rotation (in pairs): one image each representing IT (Bangalore's pride-Infosys?), Aerospace, Bio-tech?. Perhaps an image representing the construction boom which invariable is connected to the economy and happen to be sky scrapers? (I got the idea from an article on a Chinese city in a magazine). May I tentatively suggest that we include one image from the traditional economy, if available(commerce)? thanks.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 03:39, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Random Image Generator

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)

There is already a image rotation in place on the india culture section. That seems to be working fine. I think we need to decide on decent images that show bangalore's economy. i really dont feel that an airplane will show bangalore's economy. A pic of HAL's site would make more sense. Nikkul (talk) 02:31, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I'm aware of its use in the India article — the logic of the one I developed is similar to the one in the India article and is structured to accomodate the relatively small number of images we're trying to shortlist. AreJay (talk) 03:00, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Nikkul's Suggestion

UB City is a commercial zone in central Bangalore^[14]^[15]

]]

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)

It's the exact same type of template that I'm using with Parser functions. The logic is essentially the same, while I call it a "random image generator", it's being called "rotation template" on the India article. Also, please do not make any more edits by way of inserting image or image template content into the Bangalore article until consensus is reached here. I have done the same and would like you to do so as well. Not doing so does disservice to KNM's constructive attempts at building consensus and solving the edit war. Thanks AreJay (talk) 03:15, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] User:AreJay's Edits

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)

Look Nikkul stop harping on about this. I sent you a link that showed ITI to be headquartered in Bangalore, but you refuse to click on the link. If you have such doubts about the veracity of my sources, please ask any of the Bangalore-based editors on this talk page where ITI is headquartered. I have said (and provided links) a thousand times of financial statements from the Department of Public Enterprise, which manages India's PSUs. If they tell me the revenues add up to 24 billion, I believe them. DPE is part of the Govt. of India, and I have no reason to doubt their claims. They are a verifiable resource. You're claiming that I am adament, after I've provided sources all you did was personally attack me asking me to take a trip to Bangalore, etc. If I was sarcastic it was because you couldn't just stick to the editorial content and decided to get personal. I would like to point out that this attitude is not one that will help wikipedia and that being adamant does not help anyone. I'm glad you feel this way, because this is precisely the attitude you have been demonstrating right through this "discussion". In addition, you violated 3RR today and though I had every right to report you, I didn't. So drop this attitude and involve yourself in the discussion that User:KNM has started above. AreJay (talk) 22:01, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Public Utility Building

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)

It houses retail shops, offices, etc. It is located on MG road which is an important retail and shopping area of the city. It is surrounded by Symphony theater, restraurants, shops and the like. The name "Public Utility" is misleading...here's a list of shops, offices, etc that are on the first few levels of the Public Utility building...though not verifiable, it should at least give you an idea of what kinds of business are housed there. [14] AreJay (talk) 13:09, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Would be nice to have a few more choices of images in the table below.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 17:27, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

I agree with AreJay regarding waiting for concensus. We should get more people to come in and vote, not just 4 or 5 of us. Perhaps a post on a frequently visited page would help to bring in more users.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 14:28, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Images poll

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.

Image:Bangalore UtilityBuilding.jpg

PUB

Image:Bangalore India.jpg

Image:BangaloreInfosys.jpg

Image:Downtown Bangalore.jpg

Image:SU-30MKI India.jpg

Image:Bangalore HAL.jpg

Adding a new image to the poll

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

|- |[[: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
Bangalore India.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

[edit] Comments

The Whitefield picture shows an important economic zone in Bangalore. This is one of the main centers in Bangalore, and I think it deserves mention.
Infosys image has been there for years. It should def. stay because Infosys is a major contributor.
UB City is a major economic zone in Bangalore, headquarters of a huge brewery group. Industries in UB city include Brewery, Alcoholic Beverage, Airline, Chemicals & Fertilizers, Information Technology, Pharmaceuticals. This image shows Bangalore's traditional economy-- retail and commerce.
An image of an airplane doesnt show the economy of Bangalore! I do not see how this could ever make sense. There is no proof that this airplane was made by HAL and it was definitely not designed by HAL
A photgraph of a poster does that says "Welcome to Bangalore" does not mean anything! This image would be very irrelevant and subject to copyright since its a posterNikkul (talk) 19:19, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

I've shared my thoughts on the first three bullet points, so I'll just stick with the last two:
- HAL signed a knowledge sharing agreement with Sukhoi worth over $4 billion to indegenously manufacture SU-30MKIs in 2000[15]. HAL is the only manufacturer of fighter aircraft in India, it's a virtual monopoly and a well known fact...additionally the "MKI" in SU-30MKI stands for "Multi-role combat India"! No other country has a SU-30MKI...Russia has SU-30 and China SU-30MK/SU-27. That, in itself, is proof that the aircraft was manufactured by HAL.
- Regarding using an aircraft to represent a company, I sort of agree, but it is the same difficultly you face when you use an image of a building (like the Infosys HQ) to represent the IT sector. Infosys isn't a construction company — it produces software and provides IT services, which are intangible. HAL's contribution — fighter aircraft — is available for all to see given that it is a tangible product. That was the reasoning behind that particular photo. AreJay (talk) 20:34, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

I would just like to say that I agree with Nikkul for the most part, although I can see where AreJay is coming from. I believe that the pictures depict Bangalore's economy well, at least to a foreigner. Although I do concede that the PSU's have historically had a huge presence in Bangalore's economy, they no longer have as big a role and they do not represent the Bangalore that we know today. The Bangalore we know today is the "Silicon Valley of India," thus the picture of the Infosys campus works well to portray Bangalore. The picture of UB City also fits the section well as it also represents the new Bangalore her retail sector. UB city is located in the middle of what the closest thing to a business district is in Bangalore. It also represents the headquarters of the UB group which is one of the largest industries nationwide. The picture of the iflex picture also matches well with the article about Bangalore's economy. Again, although the PSU's have had a significant impact on Bangalore, I must say that the pictures AreJay has put up do not depict that at all, especially the one with the billboard saying "Welcome to Bangalore." That is the picture outside of HAL airport and does not well depict the PSU industry. The picture of the SU-30MKI also does not depict the PSU industry well. Perhaps if you had an aerial image of a plant, it might work well, but the current 3 pictures that Nikkul has put up in the Economy of Bangalore section work well. I must admit though that the picture of the Hesaraghatta Lake is rather bland and could be replaced with a picture of perhaps an aerial view of bangalore, showing her green zones? Knowing that neither one of you will back down prematurely, I thus propose that we keep the pictures of UB city and the Infosys headquarters in the section Bangalore's economy. I also suggest however that an aerial view of one of the PSU's in Bangalore be put up and that the picture of the Hesaraghatta Lake be replaced with something a little more scenic perhaps? This way both of you win. What do you guys say? Indiandefender2 (Indiandefender2) 19:08, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for your comments. I think you'll find from the financial data presented above that PSUs continue to play a huge role in Bangalore's economy, a larger role in fact, than does IT. I don't think the UB City image fits or represents Bangalore's economy in any way — it, if anything, represents a very miniscule segment of Bangalore's consumer market, which was my point all along — that the image was WP:UNDUE. Additionally, the iFlex image doesn't represent IT in Bangalore, simply because Whitefield isn't in Bangalore. I have no qualms with the IT industry, I'm actually an IT auditor and like nothing more than seeing my industry well represented. However, facts and financial data show that other industries are about as important to the economy of Bangalore as is IT. Unfortunately, PSUs just aren't "sexy" like IT is today, so monikers like "Silicon Valley of India" were never conjured up.

Incidently, let's wait for consensus to be built on this talk page before new or existing images are added to the Economy section. KNM has started a process for building consensus to which regular editors are contributing, and I'd like this process to be given a chance before any image-related edits are made to the section. Thanks AreJay (talk) 15:00, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

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 [16]

Hence, that image is perfectly qualified for inclusion. Sorry for the mixup Nikkul (talk) 23:31, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Sister Cities Deletion

There is absolutely no way one can call cities in the United States and Belarus "Sister Cities" to Bangalore. The term sister cities implies either that they are extremely similar in multiple ways (geography, culture, language etc.) or that they are next to each other - such as Hubbali-Darwad. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.135.219.138 (talk) 20:50, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

I think you've misunderstood the term "Sister cities". Sister cities is a twinning concept where geographically distinct cities and towns are linked to each other via Sister Cities International. See [17] (Cleveland) and [18] (San Francisco). I have no citation for the link with Minsk. AreJay (talk) 21:09, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Yes and Town twinning article explains this concept in greater details. - KNM ^Talk 15:59, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] rename as bengaluru

bangalore is renamed as bengaluru long back.

i request admins to rename it as bengaluru. Dsr2008 (talk) 23:34, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

I agree. I was wondering why this article still exists as Bangalore... The Bengaluru page, redirects here. I'm requesting for comments, opinions, valid references and claims for this article to exist as Bangalore. aJCfreak yAk 07:44, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

I too agree, although I hate the name bengaluru, it should definitely be renamed since the government has officially changed it. I think some fashionable WP Indian editors want it to be still Bangalore (coz it looks chic). I think we need to start a strawpoll to find a solution. --Tomb of the Unknown Warrior tomb 09:29, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

I also prefer the old names of these cities. But, it is a fact that their names are now changed and we cannot do much about it. So, it is better that this wiki page reflects the changed name appropriately, as it is there for other cities like Mumbai, Chennai and Kolkata. GDibyendu (talk) 09:36, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

I agree too. Unless we have a valid opposition on why this page cannot be moved to 'Bengaluru', this page can be moved easily. Lets wait for another day to see if we have a strong consensus here. - KNM ^Talk 15:57, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

I agree too.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 16:07, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Yes, It should be renamed to Bengaluru. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Raguks (talk • contribs) 23:56, 31 March 2008

This has come up a number of times before but failed to get consensus. Considering the quite notorious controversy, moving the page after less than a day of discussion was premature. The archives of this talkpage have become obscured, unfortunately, but the earlier discussions are in Archive 1 and Archive 2, and in the most recent material which was last on the as-was talkpage of 16:32, 22 January 2008, before being deleted but not archived. (I assume that this was a mistake -- that KNM meant to archive the material, not just delete it.)
I remain opposed to the page-move, for the same reason as before: that the title of the article should be determined by what is most commonly recognized by English-speakers in the world at large, regardless of what is official. I believe that this is still "Bangalore". -- Lonewolf BC (talk) 17:53, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

You have a point. Munich page will never be named München or Munchen, following your logic, I guess.GDibyendu (talk) 18:11, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

No. He doesnt have a point. There simply is no absolute way to determine what the most 'popular' usage is and attempting to do it by using ghits is doomed from the word go for reasons I've explained below. And as I showed in our previous discussion about this issue, WP:NAME is severely broken and is rightly being disregarded on a host of articles across wikipedia and people should stop bringing it up over and over again. Sarvagnya 20:22, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Lonewolf BC: I did not delete anything. It was archived, and it is here: Talk:Bangalore/Archive 3. - KNM ^Talk 19:55, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Archives of this talk page were not moved automatically, when the article was moved. So, {{Archive box collapsible}} template was not showing the links. Archive pages are now moved manually, resulting in the proper display of the archive links. - KNM ^Talk 20:07, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

It is not a premature action of moved the title. In fact, I saw the earlier archive. As per the survey 14 oppose & 13 supports. But keep in mind that WP works by building consensus not by the majority of votes. In this case, it is an official policy that has been approved by the Government of Karnataka and it has become officially applicable from November 1, 2006 onwards. I think that other articles for the cities have been already changed it. It is not a question of whether we like bengaluru or not. It is a fact that we must admit. And it is also true that nobody is going to call ‘bengaluru’. Everyone still call it ‘bangalore’. Local politicians and some historians who praised the move also will not call it as bengaluru. But what can we do since it is a WP:TRUTH and WP always stands for it. --Tomb of the Unknown Warrior tomb 11:16, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

News outlet	Hits for Bangalore	Hits for Bengaluru
NY Times	15,700 [41]	5 [42]
Reuters	141,000 [43]	0 [44]
BBC	6,710 [45]	7 [46]
News Limited (Australia)	2,140 [47]	2 [48]
Sydney Morning Herald	1,040 [49]	0 [50]
CNN	212 [51]	0 [52]
TIME magazine	1,320 [53]	0 [54]
The Washington Post	1,160 [55]	2 [56]
International Herald Tribune	1,090 [57]	4 [58]
The Globe and Mail	142 [59]	0 [60]

News outlet	Hits for Bangalore	Hits for Bengaluru
The Times of India	138,000 [61]	238 [62]
The Indian Express	6,970 [63]	37 [64]
Hindustan Times	6,720 [65]	33 [66]
Rediff	19,300 [67]	98 [68]
The Hindu	107,000 [69]	212 [70]

[edit] My opinion

While I would still prefer the article's name to remain at Bangalore, I won't mind a rename to Bengaluru. This small issue is simply not worthy enough of archives and archives of discussion. I imagine the Kannada editors will continue to persist a rename, and we shouldn't waste anymore time, which could be utilised on more important things. My preference for Bangalore comes from the face that its usage in English WP:RS and other sources is still minuscule.

On a fairly weakly related note, as opposed to Bombay, Calcutta and Madras, Bangalore retains its name in the Indian Premier League ([[Bangalore Royal Challengers). I'm guessing that it is because the name Bengaluru hasn't taken off yet and the team will gain more support and notability by using the former name. But of course, we Wikipedia can improve the situation by renaming the article which will help Bengaluru gain more international recognition if we desire so. :P Gizza^Discuss ^© 08:18, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

The IPL is a venture of a private club. It has no bearing on any of this. The team will be called what Vittal Mallya chooses to call it and registers with the club. For that matter, Madras High Court (no less) is still called "Madras" High Court - not Chennai High Court. Also, talking of that club, the Madras Cricket Club is still called Madras Cricket Club. Bombay (and Madras and Calcutta) still retain their old names in plenty of airline schedules. We could go on and on about this. Wikipedia's usages are not dictated by purely whimsical choices of other entities. Your IPL example is disingenuous and irrelevant. Sarvagnya 16:52, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] New survey

I had moved the page to Bengaluru & it is noticed that my edits reverted. I am again taking new survey & straw poll to find a better consensus. --Tomb of the Unknown Warrior tomb 04:59, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

There are two sub-sections created below. Please add your comments with signatures in the beginning under whichever sections you want.

[edit] Users FOR Bangalore (Users against Bengaluru)

Nikkul (talk) 21:44, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
I have resided in the town for well over fifteen years, and am still to come across a single reference to the new spelling being approved in official records, newspapers or any other source of public information. A name should be anglicised in English, not aboriginalised, in my opinion. Voltigeur (talk) 16:31, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
Common and established usage should be retained. English does not have an Academy, and the opinion of the Government of Karnataka is simply an opinion; see WP:Official names. AJCfreak gives away his case when he says Personally, I find the name Bangalore more convenient and widely accepted; so will our readers. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 20:41, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Users AGAINST Bangalore (Users for Bengaluru)

--Tomb of the Unknown Warrior tomb 04:59, 7 April 2008 (UTC) - per my comment above.
GDibyendu (talk) 05:16, 7 April 2008 (UTC) I have little bit of experience in search engine programming. From that, what I feel is that one search engine (google) result cannot be taken as benchmark. Also, a name change would take time to get used over pages. So, I searched in Yahoo, for checking. As soon I wrote Bengaluru, it gives first option as "bangalore name change bengaluru". That search gives around 62,200 links from NEWS, Media etc. I stay in this city now and I personally know that this name change is decided for sure and eventually I expect all webpages and definitely, all new ones, to reflect the name change. So, I support Bengaluru.
Personally, I find the name Bangalore more convenient and widely accepted. But on Wikipedia, I believe that it should be Bengaluru for the following reasons:

Ghits: Google returns more pages for Bangalore cos that is what the city has been called for the past so many years. If we had googled Madras or Bombay right after their renaming, we would have had more results than Chennai or Mumbai.
Wide usage: Simply because something is widespread, doesn't make it right. According to the Govt. of Karnataka, the city has been renamed. As such, the city's article has to be renamed.
Local name: Bengaluru is no longer just the local name. It is currently the English name for the city. This is quite unlike calling Munich by it's local name - Munich is still Munich in English - not so for Bengaluru.

I sincerely hope all of us could reach a consensus. However, I'm beginning to doubt the necessity of a consensus in the first place, cos propriety demands that the article be named Bengaluru. aJCfreak yAk 07:07, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

aJCfreak,

The fact that the name is new is exactly the reason why it's not widespread or accepted yet, and that obviously shows in the G-Hits results. Yes, the disparity in hits is because of history, but it's not like there has been a sudden switchover to the new name in the media, and Google is lagging behind in the updates. Major news sources in India (forget abroad) still use "Bangalore". Even Deccan Herald, a local newspaper in Bangalore, uses "Bangalore".
The thing is, we are supposed to use a name that the greatest number of English speakers would most easily recognize, with a reasonable minimum of ambiguity. "Bengaluru" doesn't fit the bill just yet. Why present an unfamiliar name before the reader (and I mean the global reader here) and confuse her when we can easily keep the title as Bangalore but make the opening line "Bangalore, officially Bengaluru, is the...". And I'm sure if Bangalore had been renamed around the time of Mumbai or Chennai we wouldn't be having this discussion.
There's no question of right name or wrong name here. Bangalore is not the "wrong" name. Wikipedia is not run by the Karnataka government, or by any government. We don't have to rename the article because the government has renamed the city. If the world still overwhelmingly uses Bangalore, WP should have no issues in using the same.
No one is saying that it's just the local name. It is not, however, a name that English speakers across the world would know.

I'm sorry that you think that a consensus is not needed. The issue is not such an open-and-shut case, because a similar argument is underway at the Burma page. Similarly, the country that is officially Timor-Leste exists on WP as East Timor. - Max ^{- You were saying?} 19:31, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Additional comments

How is a straw poll going to help find consensus?? You can't expect a vote-off to resolve the issue...it is not a substitute for ongoing discussions. If the expectation is for editors to list their names under the subsections below, then I'm afraid it will contribute little to consensus building. See WP:POLLS. AreJay (talk) 05:50, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

see our policy, a straw poll may be used when there is clear from ongoing discussions that consensus has not been reached. In this case, instead of reaching to a consensus, it is noted that roughly edit war (by moving page & blind revert of rename) is happening.
--Tomb of the Unknown Warrior tomb 06:36, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Right, but just because an edit war is happening with no current consensus, we can't use straw poll results to maintain/change status quo wrt the city's name. I'm ok with the straw poll so long as it doesn't preclude the need to form consensus through discussion. AreJay (talk) 18:06, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Absolutely agree with AreJay. Straw polls should be used to enable discussion, and not to decide the result on the basis of "majority". Polls come with a heap of cautionary statements on how to use them and interpret the results. Wikipedia is not a democracy. In fact, point #3 in the guideline says, "If it is clear from ongoing discussion that consensus has not been reached, a straw poll is unlikely to assist in forming consensus and may polarize opinions, preventing or delaying any consensus from forming." Consensus needs to be formed on the strength of discussion, not by numbers. I hope people will follow this principle and not hastily rename the article just because there are a larger number of votes for one side (because I can already see a group of users with strong regional sentiments voting en masse against "Bangalore") - Max ^{- You were saying?} 18:53, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

PS@User:Harjk: I fail to see any "edit war" or "blind revert" happening here. Reverting a hasty and one-sided move with barely a day's notice is not a "blind revert". Plus, it makes sense to keep the page in status-quo until some decision has been reached, don't you agree? - Max ^{- You were saying?} 18:53, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Names on Wikipedia

Use English words Convention: Name your pages in English and place the native transliteration on the first line of the article unless the native form is more commonly recognized by readers than the English form. The choice between anglicized and native spellings should follow English usage (e.g., Besançon, Edvard Beneš and Göttingen, but Nuremberg, delicatessen, and Florence).

Rationale and specifics: See: Wikipedia:Naming conventions (use English)

Use common names of persons and things Convention: Except where other accepted Wikipedia naming conventions give a different indication, use the most common name of a person or thing that does not conflict with the names of other people or things. Where articles have descriptive names, the given name must be neutrally worded and must not carry POV implications.

Rationale and specifics: Wikipedia:Naming conventions (common names)

Wikipedia:Naming conventions (places)-article naming should give priority to what the majority of English speakers would most easily recognize, with a reasonable minimum of ambiguity, while at the same time making linking to those articles easy and second nature.
Wikipedia:Naming conventions (geographic names)-The title: When a widely accepted English name, in a modern context, exists for a place, we should use it. This often will be a local name, or one of them; but not always.

This is the English Wikipedia. For the kannada version of the Bangalore page, users can go to the kannada wikipedia and search bengaluru! Nikkul (talk) 21:54, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Note: This is precisely what the argument is about. GoK wants to (or has already) change(d) the official name of the city, as spelled in English, from Bangalore to Bengaluru. There was never any argument on what the city was called in Kannada — it was and always has been Bengaluru. AreJay (talk) 22:38, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Unfortunately, the Kannada government doesnt run wikipedia. As per the above points, the COMMON NAME is the one which the title should bear. And Bengaluru is not the common name of the city in the English Language. Nikkul (talk) 00:49, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

I completely agree that the Karnataka government does not run Wikipedia, but they do run Bengaluru. For reference, you may refer to a poll conducted quite a while ago regarding common name usage for geographical locations at Wikipedia:Naming policy poll. The result of the poll (and accompanying discussions) was that cities Mecca and Kiev were not renamed to their locally accepted Makkah and Kyiv; however, the Calcutta article was renamed to Kolkata. The accompanying discussions and reasoning are presented in the archives of the talk page.

Simple example would be, if Google were to rename its company to something else tomorrow, we would be obliged to rename the article Google to the new name. We could begin the lead by saying The new name, formerly Google, is ... We could also have the article Google as a redirect to the new name. However, the new name is what should be used. aJCfreak yAk 08:00, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Bangalore is more common than Bengaluru. The reason other Indian cities like Chennai have the new name is because Madras is far less common. Proof Below:

[edit] Common Names of Indian cities as Measured by Hits on Google:

Calcutta- 11,700,000 hits
Kolkata- 12,100,000 hits

Madras- 9,260,000 hits
Chennai- 19,800,000 hits

Bombay- 24,200,000 hits
Mumbai- 36,200,000 hits

Bangalore-25,800,000 hits
Bengaluru- 416,000 hits

I think we see why Chennai and Kolkata and Mumbai retain those names and why Bengaluru is still not the common name of the city in the English language Nikkul (talk) 21:11, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

I think you're missing the point of the discussion; the common name for those cities is the newer, anglicised version only because the changes were effected ages ago - Mumbai in 1995 and Chennai in 1996. My point is not that Bangalore is not more common; but simply that Bengaluru is more appropriate. Personally speaking, I couldn't care less about what the city is named. But propriety counts on a site as huge as Wikipedia. Again, I'd like to refer to my Google example above - If the company was renamed, we would be obliged to change the name of the Google article on WP. Stating that Google does not run Wikipedia and that Google is more commonly used doesn't help - the name itself has changed.

Quoting examples of Munich, etc. actually don't count - English is not a national language of Germany and other countries where such debates occur; English, alongwith Hindi, is one of India's official national languages. As such, the government retains the right to rename the city - they are not saying "Everybody should call this city by the new name"; rather, they are saying "Bengaluru is the name of the city, henceforth". aJCfreak yAk 08:59, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Yup they are free to rename the city and as soon as the name change catches on we will change the name of the article. Until then no.Geni 12:10, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Why should the name change catch on for us to rename the article? aJCfreak yAk 14:10, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Because on wikipedia we use common names and well until a name has caught on it can't really be said to be common. Then of course we have the issue that this is the english wikipedia. As far as the english speaking world is concernded the current name is Bangalore regardless of the local goverment's opinion on the matter. PErhaps in time that will change. We shall see.Geni 14:15, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Has the name changed yet ?

Has the city's official English name been changed to Bengaluru yet ? I found several newspaper articles from 2006-2007 projecting that the name change will be finalized by this-or-that date or within a fortnight, but no article which said that the name had been changed. According to this Hindu article (see last paragraph) the proposal was still pending with the Union govt as of Oct. 31, 2007, and was apparently not being pushed by the Karnataka state govt. Any updates ? Abecedare (talk) 10:19, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

The change effective from 1-Nov-06. Telegraph, bbc. --Tomb of the Unknown Warrior tomb 11:21, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

In fact, it is not yet official. The delay is because of a dispute with Maharashtra over renaming Belgaum to Belagavi. See Centre mum on ‘Bengaluru’. --Mankar Camoran^talk 11:51, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Good point. I cease and will not bring up this topic again, until it is utterly clear that it is official from the Central government. aJCfreak yAk 14:13, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the later reference, Mankar. It can be perhaps replace the Oct, 2006 TOI reference number 12 in the article.

While this should settle the article renaming debate for now, may I suggest that editors who feel that the article should be moved to Bengaluru as soon as the Union govt. formalizes the decision, should propose a change to the wikipedia naming convention, to favor official names; else we'll be back to square one in a few months time. Cheers. Abecedare (talk) 15:57, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

I concur, Abecedare. But going by past trends, I suspect that it won't be long before the collective regionalistic ego bares its fangs again. Hopefully there would be someone level-headed enough to take your suggestion before that. - Max ^{- You were saying?} 18:46, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

I agree with Abecedare. There has been a group consensus that decided that the common name (not always the official name) should be the title of the article, as is said in ALL WP:Name subsections. If users want to change this policy, the battleground shouldnt be here, but on the wikipedia naming page instead. Nikkul (talk) 18:37, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

OK, I have changed reference number 12. The earlier one didn't seem to work properly. Thanks for pointing it out. --Mankar Camoran^talk 21:09, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

With regard to "official names", I am sure the Karnataka State Gazetteer is a far more reliable source than any newspaper. I have included links somewhere above on this page which shows the use of Bengaluru in officialese including a Gazette of the Karnataka government and an official tender. These are legal documents and usage in them should supercede a media report. Sarvagnya 00:54, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Sarvagnya, I could not find the link. Where is it? --Tomb of the Unknown Warrior tomb 04:24, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Jimbo Wales had commented on this issue in his talk page per my request. --Tomb of the Unknown Warrior tomb 05:02, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

@Tomb of the Unknown Warrior a.k.a. User:Harjk (Ref: Your comments on Jimbo's talk page): Your misinterpretation and misrepresentation of the stand of editors who oppose the move to "Bengaluru" is not appreciated. Do you honestly think that the reason for opposition is because these users are "chic lovers" and that they're doing this because "Bangalore sounds more chic"? Please read through the current posts, and the archived discussions of a few months ago to get proper perspective on why this is a contentious issue.

Also, please do not say that there was "consensus" to move the article since the initial move was blatantly unilateral and based on barely a day's notice (which is why it was reverted and a debate ensued). Again, I ask you to read ongoing and previous discussions to get a perspective on the issue and hope that you will avoid making such misleading remarks in the future. Thank you. - Max ^{- You were saying?} 17:39, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

@MaximVsDecimVs a.k.a. User:Max^{You were saying}, Please don’t increase your volume to a ‘maximum’ level that might infuriate other editors. The latest discussion started on 9-March-2008 on this issue progressed with a greater part of editors unanimously supported the move to Bengaluru. Due to this, I moved the page on 1-April-2008. Don’t you think that 21 days are not enough to reach into a consensus? It is also true that you are one of the ‘chick lover’ who still want it to be in the old name. The answer is clear that you don’t like the local name Bengaluru. I also wish you to go ahead and revert back move of other WP articles like Mumbai, Kolkata, Chennai and other cities to the old name, if you can.
--Tomb of the Unknown Warrior tomb 05:12, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Harjk, there was only one post there from March 9 to March 31 and nothing else. The real discussion started much later, on 31 March, after User:Ajcfreak's post. Anyway, if you feel personally offended in some way because someone else reverted your move, you shouldn't. Again, I ask you to read through the current discussion and the archives of the talk page to gain an insight into why this is a contested issue. Once there, you will also find the reasons why Mumbai, Chennai etc. are named the way they are. If you want to persist in your own belief that editors opposing "Bengaluru" are doing so because it is not "chic", no one can stop you, but please keep these thoughts to yourself. The discussion will be much more fruitful if you focussed on objective arguments and refrained from ascribing motives to people who beg to differ with your view. I have nothing further to say to you about this matter. Thank you. - Max ^{- You were saying?} 09:46, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Okay, people... This seems to be getting a little bit more personal than necessary. I'm gonna try and sum up the points put forth both for and against the move to Bengaluru, as best as I can. Please please please let's stick to the topic at hand and not get personal.

For: (Bengaluru)

Official name (if not yet, then soon-to-be)
When it becomes the official name (if not already), then it is the name of the city in English as well. Hence, quoting the examples of other cities such as Munich, Mecca does not count much, since their English names are different. When official, Bengaluru will be the English name for the city

Against (Bangalore)

More widely known, accepted and recognised
It's what a reader would most commonly enter into the searchbox (~~WP:NAMES~~ WP:NAME* states this point as of primary importance)

I strongly feel that editors should not make the following judgemental errors:

Bangalore may be more chic, but that is not the reason for keeping it this way
Bengaluru may be more regional, but the move is not just the view of editors local to the city. For example, I was born a Tamilian and have lived all my life in Madras/Chennai. I simply think it's more proper this way. It hurts a bit when accused of being regional.

Finally, as to whether the name change is official or not, is a bit confusing. The website of the BBMP (Bruhat Bengaluru Municipal Corporation has been renamed so. It was previously Greater Bangalore Municipal Corporation. Also, as previously pointed out, there seem to be official sources indicating that the name has changed. What could be possible is that the Karnataka government changed the name, but the Central Government of India is yet to approve it.

I suggest that we let the article name rest, until we all can first agree on the fact that the name indeed, has been changed. I hope we can all work together in establishing a proper agreement... This is, after all, Wikipedia. And high standards are called for. aJCfreak yAk 10:40, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

* = modified by Max ^{- You were saying?} 15:54, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Ajcfreak, for what it's worth, the "regional" comment was not directed at you or any user supportive of "Bengaluru" who had a polite and coherent point to make. My apologies if you felt offended about the same. There are, however, one or two jingoistic users who see everything with regionalism-tainted glasses, who think it's okay to behave discourteously with anyone who holds views different from theirs. Just see some of the past archives for details. And it's not just rudeness. There was a vigorous campaign to move the article way back in November 2006, where unfortunate statements such as by changing the name, we are sending out signals that we're asserting our identity were made to justify the move (there is a hole in the talk page archives from April 2006 to August 2007 due to some reason; you can refer to this version to see what happened then).

I have taken the liberty to correct the policy link in your summary (WP:NAMES leads to the MoS page for biographies). I'd also like to add to your list of points the fact that apart from WP:NAME, every major guideline stresses on names that English speakers around the world would recognize. Finally, I want to assure you that no opposing editor has ever toted the "Bangalore is more chic" line. That accusation is a figment of someone's imagination. - Max ^{- You were saying?} 15:54, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. Really appreciate it. Btw, I know that that comment was not directed at me - but when you're trying to point out something that you think is right and comments such as these get tossed around, then it does hit you somewhere. I think it was mentioned exactly twice. In my opinion, people living in Bangalore would generally prefer to keep it as Bangalore - because it is better sounding IMHO. <sheepish grin> But that's not the point here, is it? Anyways, thanks. I really do appreciate the reply. aJCfreak yAk 03:18, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Discussion on the name change policy

Hello everybody. I've started a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (geographic names)#Widely accepted name changed by authoritative governing body to help clearly define the policies on naming of articles on geographic locations, when the authoritative governing body has changed it. I thought I'd drop a note here to editors interested in actively taking part in the discussion. Please feel free to participate. Thanks. aJCfreak yAk 04:21, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Confused about the Begur inscription

The etymology section has this:

The earliest reference to the name "Bengaluru" was found in a 9th century Western Ganga Dynasty stone inscription on a "vīra kallu" (ವೀರ ಗಲ್ಲು) (literally, "hero stone", a rock edict extolling the virtues of a warrior). In this inscription found in Begur, "Bengaluru" is referred to as a place in which a battle was fought in 890. It states that the place was part of the Ganga kingdom until 1004 and was known as "Bengaval-uru", the "City of Guards" in Old Kannada.[5]

How can a 9th century inscription state the Bangalore was part of the Ganga kingdom until 1004 (11th century)? Can someone please correct the dates? I don't know the correct dates. --ashwatha (talk) 06:53, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Good catch. Obviously a minor copy edit issue. The phrase until 1004 should be removed. That'a all.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 11:07, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] I would like to change the Skyline Image

the image that i'll like put on the bangalore skyline

Bangalore is a rapidly growing metropolitan and I personally feel that a modern picture like the skyline should be represented the IT Culture and fast growing economy of Bangalore. I with many editors have worked on mordernise the Gurgaon page and I feel the skyline image should show more of the mordern side of Bangalore. Many other city's pages have changed too like Shanghai, Singapore, KL etc.Manaspunhani (talk) 09:08, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Hi Manaspunhani, I appreciate the interest in improving the article but I must object to adding the image in question. Bangalore's IT-based economy has already been represented by the Infosys image in the economy section. Additionally, Bangalore's IT industry has been extensively covered in the third paragraph of the same section. Adding any more, I feel, would be WP:UNDUE and would take away from other aspects of the city that require representation. Quality Wiki articles must strive towards presenting a fair and balanced portrayal of the subject and not so much on the presentation of "modern picture(s)". Please refer to the top of this page for earlier discussions on images. Thanks AreJay (talk) 21:23, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

I just think that the skyline image should be replaced with this one, because it is for the skyline and vidhan souda, though a great image, should go on the administration section rather than be on the skyline image. pl. keep this in mind. And others pl. decide fast.Manaspunhani (talk) 07:31, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

You also have to keep in mind Wikipedia's standards for WP:NOTE. What exactly is the notablity of this image, which I'm guessing is that of UB City? How many people know it (in Karnataka, in India, the rest of the world)? Is it more notable than the Vidhana Soudha, the city's legislative building? The Vidhana Soudha has been used to represent not only Bangalore but also Karnataka on news articles and yes, even travel brochures. Apart from the apparent glitz and glamor there isn't much to these UB city buildings. Thanks AreJay (talk) 22:16, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

See also ebooksgratis.com: no banners, no cookies, totally FREE.