Talk:India/Archive 19

message: Is the "Śakuntala" image a representation of Kerala, the home state of its artist?  Saravask, who created the rotation template and wrote much of the Kerala FA, clearly didn't think so; otherwise on October 23, he would not have made this revert.  In case this is not clear, let me explain: while the summary mistakenly points to the Toda image as an example from Kerala, it implies that it does not regard "Śakuntala" as also representing Kerala; otherwise, a few edits later, Saravask would not have allowed user:Sarvagnya to re-add the Trisoor/Pooram image (see here).  
A week later, on November 1, user:Sarvagnya deleted "Śakuntala."  What was his justification? His edit summary says: "one pic per state - rm shakuntala image. the trissur pooram is more typically picture postcard Kerala."  The "Śakuntala", however, was there in the rotation template first.  (In the straw poll, "Śakuntala" received more votes than Tagore.)  Why then did user:Sarvagnya unilaterally add the Trisoor/Pooram image if he thought "Śakuntala" already represented Kerala?  And why did he then wait one full week to delete "Śakuntala"?   Fowler&fowler«Talk» 18:58, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: PS I have reverted user:Sarvagnya's unilateral deletion of Śakuntala. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 19:04, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

text: It is a gross disrespect of other editors to remove Sakuntala image.  It is one of the few images that actually was voted on and had 6 (for) vs 3 (against).  How can you remove that image and replace it with something NO ONE HAS EVEN BOTHERED TO VOTE ON?? This is disruptive and arrogant.  --Blacksun 09:14, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Śakuntala" and Mysore Palace (continued) 

message: This page needs to be archived ASAP. =Nichalp «Talk»= 06:19, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I just added the archive bot User:MiszaBot, which will archive all discussions older than thirty days now. GizzaDiscuss © 06:31, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, in line with WT:INB, I changed it to ten days since this is a very active page. GizzaDiscuss © 06:34, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Ha, it has dropped from ~ 276kb to ~ 47. GizzaDiscuss © 03:57, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Archive 

message: "Indian cuisine is characterized by a wide variety of regional styles and sophisticated use of herbs and spices. The staple foods in the region are rice (especially in the south and the east) and wheat (predominantly in the north)."
I think having two lines to describe the cuisine of india is rediculious. There is so much variation and diversity that we need to mention. The sad thing is that actual dishes that r popular havent even been mentioned. Only four ingredients have been mentioned.
There has been a lot of talk of expanding the culture section and  I think this is one example of something that needs to be expanded. 
Nikkul 22:16, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Culture can be expanded to an infinite length. The shorter the sweeter. =Nichalp «Talk»= 04:29, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If we mention more dishes than are already there, we would have to take regional balance into account. Thats means that if we add dosa from the South and fish from Bengal, we would have to add five or six more popular dishes for every region of India. The current two sentences would then be bloated to at least six unless we list them, but then it won't flow. GizzaDiscuss © 05:53, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Culture Of India Additions 

message: I am opposed to the Ajanta image because:
# It is very unclear - I used to think my monitor was the reason I couldnt see the image, but after getting a new HP tx1000z, I still have a hard time making out the image.
# Theres already a Maharashtra image - Few people have gotten upset regarding the regional balance.
# Image isnt really mentioned in text
# The caption doesnt relate to history
Proposal:
I would like to suggest replacing the Ajanta Caves image with the Taj Mahal image under the caption: "The Taj Mahal was built in 1648 by the Mughal dynasty" (or something similar) because:
* The Taj Mahal is more a historic artefact than a current cultural thing
* It would give us more room in the cultural section.
* The caption right now relfects Taj's historic nature
Let me know what you guys think. Nikkul 19:40, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, you do have a point in your first sentence.  I disagree with your second sentence.  The construction and the continued presence of the Taj Mahal have had a profound influence on Indian culture (on later styles of architecture, on popular styles today, and on how Indians think of their culture).  Fowler&fowler«Talk» 16:52, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well again, im talking about politics section image.. It should be Image of Indian parliament right? Unanimous? Lara_bran 15:05, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ajanta Image 

message: All im saying is that you shouldnt expect to see the official language of Andhra Pradesh listed as the official language of India if India doesnt list that language as official. If you want to see the the official language of AP, then go to the AP page where ull find the official language of AP as said by the govt of AP. Here ull find the official language of India as said by the government. Also, learn to sign your comments. This is an encyclopedia not a gathering of India's forefathers.Nikkul 04:56, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: As you can see here,  was blocked for 48 hours at 00:40 on the 29th of October.  That he is editing  as an IP at 17:58, is a violation of the block.  At the very least the block should be increased by another day.  Fowler&fowler«Talk» 01:11, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Only person doing any extrapolation is you.  Everything we have said is backed by scores of respected sources, both Indian and foreign.  And please, learn to sign in.  --Blacksun 09:30, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: He can't (sign in); he's still blocked.  (Notice, he was signing in earlier.)  Fowler&fowler«Talk» 10:09, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: User BSreddy / 75.36.214.142,

message: The demographics subsection says that Christians, Hindus, Muslims, Sikhs, Buddhists and Jains make up about 98.9% of the population. That leaves 1.1% for the rest. This includes Jews, Zoroastrians, Baha'is, Sarna and others. Later it says that Tribals are 8% of the population, and in the Tribals article it says that Sarna is their majority religion. WTF? 124.185.197.226 05:38, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Religious demographics 

message: This article has been frozen from editing, so I can't do it myself, but can somebody please remove those two (incomplete) English translations of the National Anthem and Song? You can't just take the first line (not even a complete sentence!) of a poem (both the anthem and song of India are composed poems after all), translate that to English and call it the names of the National Anthem or Song. The poems ARE known as "Jana Gana Mana" and "Vande Mataram" respectively, yes, even in English, and it's utterly foolish to just translate the first line and put it out there below the real names of those poems. If English-speaking readers can't understand "Jana Gana Mana" and "Vande Mataram", well, that's just too bad, but that doesn't mean you go around putting in your own little bit of original research into this article and call it the names of the National Anthem and Song of India. In any case, please look at the articles on Pakistan and some other countries with non-English principal languages. Nobody's been translating the first line and putting in their bit of original research in THOSE articles, so why all this love for the India article, huh?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.225.2.107 (talk) 14:09, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  (Incomplete) English translations of the National Anthem and Song 

message: In Major city Gurgaon need to be add. 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gurgaon  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.161.42.120 (talk) 03:40, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Why? =Nichalp «Talk»= 05:12, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

text: I don't think it merits any attention because it has a relatively small population and it has no significant cultural, religious or historical site. If anything, Ahmedabad might be added, but I think the list is good as is.  Sseballos 23:38, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Major City 

message: Are we going to discuss the images that make the final cut for culture rotation? I think we should discuss it here since this page is the india page. Also, has the discussion started about each image? and Where? Nikkul 18:26, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Image Rotation 

message: Why is'nt this image a part of the image rotation program?Dineshkannambadi 03:29, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well.. we will get there.  We've started rotation with the Culture section for now.  Sarvagnya 03:36, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

text: I am opposed to the inclusion of the image of the nuclear missile on the the India page. — Nearly Headless Nick {C} 11:44, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ajanta painting 

message: I noticed that only Muslim and Hindu architecture was mentioned. For the sake of secularity, for which India is known for centuries, I have added the most popular Jain monuments at Shravanabelagola, recently voted the most popular among India's seven wonders. We also need to address the issue of Buddhist architecture at Sanchi or Bodhgaya.Dineshkannambadi 18:17, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There is no mandate in Wikipedia to be "secular" (which you interpret to be even-handed with respect to different religions) in any discussion of notability. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 18:54, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

text: Huh? The mandate is for notability and reliable sources. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 19:21, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

text: It is enough to mention Indian architecture, not detail everything in that article on the India page.  Fowler&fowler«Talk» 19:44, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Indian architecture 

message: Where can we add images for the culture rotation? Also,where can we discuss images that are currently in the rotation? Nikkul 20:22, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry, I dont understand it either.  --Blacksun 11:23, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Me neither.  And no one has explained why the Mysore Palace continues to be on the rotation template in spite of several attempts in four different section above to point out the myriad problems, not least of which is that there are other more notable examples from Karnataka, two of them World Heritage Sites, and  that, in addition, the palace is not even in the top five most popular tourist sites in India, let alone the most popular as is still claimed (in spite of The Hindu editor's apology.)  (See Section1, Section2, Section3, and Section4.)  There has never been any vote (let alone a consensus on the Mysore Palace image).  Fowler&fowler«Talk» 17:06, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Culture Rotation 

message: *The same US National Endowment for the Arts that was quoted by user:KNM as saying that the "Jnanpith was India's highest literary award," also says here about writer Sirshendu Mukophadhyay, "He received India's highest literary honor, the Sahitya Akademi Award, in 1989 for his novel The Human Field." 
*According to this Hindu report, the noted writer Manoj Das (in January 2007) "received the country's highest literary honour - Sahitya Akademi Fellowship." 
*The Penguin Books Asian Studies Catalogue, says about R. K. Narayan's The Guide, "Narayan's most celebrated novel which won him the National Prize of the Indian Literary Academy (Sahitya Academy), India's highest literary honour." See the bottom of Sahitya Academy Awards: English page.
Are we now also going to figure out which state has (or has had) the largest number of Sahitya Academy Fellows and list that statistic too on the India page?  How about film?  The Dadasaheb Phalke Award is the nation's highest award for lifetime achievement in film.  Are we going to say that the award has been awarded an equal number of times (ten) to West Bengal and Maharashtra?  How about the Sangeet Natak Academi's Ratna Sadasya (Fellow), which the highest honour in the country for dance, music, and drama?  Are we going to figure out which state has won the most? Or which of the three fields: dance, music and drama has won the most, and mention that?  How about the Bharat Ratna, which according to its Wikipedia page is  "India's highest civilian award, awarded for the highest degrees of national service. This service includes artistic, literary, and scientific achievements, ..."  That award has unfortunately yet to be bestowed on a literary luminary.  It has, however, been awarded for artistic achievement to Satyajit Ray (West Bengal), Ravi Shankar (Uttar Pradesh; WP has incorrectly mentioned West Bengal because of his heritage), M. S. Subbulakshmi (Tamil Nadu), Bismillah Khan (Uttar Pradesh), and Lata Mangeshkar (Maharashtra). So, should we also mention that the award has been awarded an equal number of times (two) to West Bengal and UP?  Or, if you don't like regional characterization, should we say that it has been awarded four times for music and once for film?  The point I am trying to make is that it is best not to go down the path of mentioning contemporary awards, unless you want a very very long culture section, and there is as yet no consensus for that.  Fowler&fowler«Talk» 06:27, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Slight correction ... actually, Ravi Shankar hails from Narail, East Bengal (now part of Bangladesh). His father Pandit Shyam Shankar served at the court of Udaipur, serving the Maharaja of Jhalawar. --Ragib 07:17, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi Ragib.  Glad to be corrected!  Complicating it even further is the Government of India's own web site, which lists Ravi Shankar with "United States" (probably just current residence).  This, of course, would make any mention of the breakdown of the Bharat Ratna even more convoluted.  Twice to West Bengal, once to East Bengal/Bangladesh/United States, once to UP, and once to Tamil Nadu!    Fowler&fowler«Talk» 07:38, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Quote:"This, of course, would make any mention of the breakdown of the Bharat Ratna even more convoluted.  Twice to West Bengal, once to East Bengal/Bangladesh/United States, once to UP, and once to Tamil Nadu! "
?!?!?! You are just seeing one page of the site! There are 40 awardees with 7-8 from each TN, UP and WB!! KnowledgeHegemony 09:04, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No, I meant only the awards to artists.  There were five such awards (out of the 40).  Sorry, maybe I didn't make that clear.  Fowler&fowler«Talk» 12:12, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Awards and honours 

message: *Fowler&fowler«Talk» 14:04, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Vote: Against Inclusion of Kannada writers and Jnanapeeth Awardees in Literature Section

message: What are the thoughts of users regarding removing someone's legitimate comments from talk page?  User Moreschi recently removed a set of perfectly legitimate arguments by another user regarding their thoughts on his manifesto regarding martial law on India page.  Are we not allowed to air our thoughts freely on the talk page even as long as they are petinent to Wikipedia and India article?  --Blacksun 17:13, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Simple.  It is flagrant and disgusting abuse of his tools as Nick points out here.  And talking down to editors like Dinesh who keep churning out FA after FA is as uncouth as it can get. Sarvagnya 17:49, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh, so do we want license to edit-war? Ain't going to happen. Moreschi  If you've written a quality article... 19:58, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

text:  No it bloody isn't.  It's an attempt to focus the debate on the real issues, rather than personalising it.  I'm a bit disappointed in Nick; Moreschi is right, the foolishness needs to stop. Guy (Help!) 19:37, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I understand what you mean, Guy, but I wouldn't have had any problems with the guidelines been enforced if it were some other administrator. Forcing your point down someone's throat uncivilly and without any kind of consensus was the locus of the dispute here. In any case, the appropriate development of the article is our aim and for that we need both Fowlers and Sarvagnyas to agree upon a consensual and neutral version of the article, which would be in the interest of the 'pedia. It would be relevant to note here, that it is always better to discuss changes before making them on the article page. Best, — Nearly Headless Nick {C} 05:31, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

text: That's why I told you on your talk page that you should have refactored the comments instead of completely removing them. Nishkid64 (talk) 04:31, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removal of comments from Talk page 

message: There were 11 images in the Image Rotation Template (in the culture section).  Those are the images that have been stably rotated for over two weeks and the ones that people are voting on.  Why have all these extra images been suddenly added to the vote?  I am withdrawing from the vote unless the original 11 are restored. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 21:08, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The point of the rotation was to see if we can rotate images and to see if that would work out. We had agreed that we would discuss the images being rotated later on. This is what we are doing now Nikkul 21:25, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with Nikkul.  Saying those 11 images and none else should be part of rotation is ridiculous.  Those 11 didnt get rotated "stably" for 2 weeks.  Those 11 were put there and then people got too busy to add any more and anyway 11 was sufficient to carry out trials.  Nobody spoke of any freeze.  Except, of course, I said we stick to one per state so there is some limit to how much it can bloat.  I added more comments too.  And until now, I dont see any of the self-styled watchdogs weigh in there and make a bonafide attempt at consensus while they continue to fill pages with their pointless and specious takes on everything. Sarvagnya 21:48, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Even the one per state image can be rotated after some time (maybe a few months) to avoid it becoming boring. But that is something we can decide later.Dineshkannambadi 21:52, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes.  That is precisely one of my other suggestions on that page.  I've suggested replacing the entire crop with fresh images every 3 or 6 months provided we get equally worthy replacements.  Sarvagnya 21:57, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: "Avoid being boring" should never be a criteria for image selection.  It only primarily becomes boring to us who spend way too much time on this page.  For a first time reader it is more important that the most relevant images are shown.  The reason we do rotation is because there are more than 6-7 images that fit the "most relevant" criteria.  It is not meant to entertain us.  The selection criteria needs to be extremely strict - unfortunately so far it has become free for all.--Blacksun 22:09, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It is for a reason that I added "equally worthy replacements".  And even support having a pool not larger than 8-10 pictures at the most.  And I have even proposed at some length how I propose to achieve it.  So are you going to add some value to that discussion or just nitpick and complain?  Can you for once move further than .. "ohh.. rotation is so wrong.. everything is so wrong.. i agree with rotation.. but not implementation... blah blah blah."  Sarvagnya 22:16, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think there should be a hard cap of three images per rotation of slot.  This will force people to find the very best.  If after some time we realize that we need even more images then we can raise the cap.  Starting with 8-10 is not feasible as we don't have a system in place.  Is that solid enough for you? --Blacksun 10:16, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with user:Blacksun.  I should also like to remind editors that the very idea of rotation is an experiment on this page that had no consensus, but only a narrow majority (11 to 8) for rotation with strict selection at WP:PINSPC (but without FP quality condition).  user:Blacksun voted "for" rotation; his concerns need to be taken seriously.  Fowler&fowler«Talk» 22:20, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Blacksun, I agree that the discussion should be on a higher level, but I think we all are going to have to be patient until we come up with a more refined process for choosing images. At least we're discussing here. I added an invitation at Wikipedia talk:Noticeboard for India-related topics to try and involve more editors, who hopefully aren't part of this blood feud. This is going to have to evolve, which was the understanding from the beginning of Saravask's implementation - but for now it's still a vast improvement over what was on the page previously. ॐ Priyanath talk 22:23, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

text: Rotation is a must because no image can satisfy the condition "is a must for this section" given that both India and wiki are dynamic, though I am not suggesting any deadline or timeline. However, those images that have already hogged the limelight in other sections like Ajanta paintings, Taj, Bombay stock market should be considered for immidiete replacement.Dineshkannambadi 22:27, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It is very simple.  Get a consensus for the removal of the Taj image on this page, and you'll get to remove it.   Until then, expounding principles of dynamism for the wiki or "hogging the limelight" for the Taj, serves little purpose.  Those things have been said before many times on this page, which, however, contends with many viewpoints, not all like yours.  Fowler&fowler«Talk» 22:48, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

text: No, that is not what I said.  The original vote for rotation (by a slender majority) was for "Rotation of Images (with decision on image quality made at WP:PINSPC and with no "Featured Quality" condition on image)" (See here).  As far as I am aware, only a handful of these new images have been nominated and discussed on WP:PINSPC, but rather are being crammed down our throats, all at once, in this makeshift disorganized process, in which anyone can add any image they want and have them compete for the limited time individual editors have at their disposal to attend to such tasks.  Would you like me to demonstrate this by adding a dozen more images? Fowler&fowler«Talk» 08:28, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vote or Joke? 

message: I still believe in the utility of the proposal.  However, it is a complete mess right now.  I think that it needs to start with very strict guidelines and methodology.  I propose that we have at most -three- images per slot.  I also propose that every thing is fair including Taj image.  The guidelines of selection should be same as if there was no rotation.  This is bit ambiguous and can be hammered out.  I believe that a small and hard cap will allow us to develop this into something more concrete that can be expanded if needed.  I also think that we should keep the knitty gritty of specific images to be selected on another talk page as not to swamp this one as is the case right now. --Blacksun 10:33, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree - I've said before that more important right now than fighting over specific images is coming up with a process and guidelines for rotation. I would be happy if currently non-partisan editors do this, and will be following Aksi's advice and taking a time-out from this page. I also believe a rollback to the 'stable' version is untenable - there was as much fighting over the previous image 'rotation' (taj and toda) as this. The well was poisoned long before the current brouhaha, and I believe one editor is personally responsible for the current (and long-standing) climate here. A look back in the history will show that the 'latecomers' are just the latest cannon fodder. There will be a new batch tomorrow if something doesn't change. ॐ Priyanath talk 15:51, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Image rotation implementation proposal 

message: As I have mentioned Awards and honours section above, the Jnanpith Award is not India's highest literary honour.  The expressions "highest civilian honour," (Bharat Ratna)  "highest military honour," (Param Vir Chakra) are all used for awards handed out by the government of the day (and the rank "highest" is decided by that government).  The Jnanpith, instituted in 1965, is an award handed out by a private organization.  To be sure, it is very prestigious and you could say something like "widely considered the most prestigious literary award in India" (and provide citations), but you cannot use "highest."  If there is an award that would qualify for this, it would be the election to a Sahitya Academy Fellows.  Indeed, in the section above, I have provided examples of exactly such usage.  The Jnanpith Award page itself, by including a lead sentence, "The Jnanpith Award is the highest literary honour conferred in the Republic of India," – which refers to the country by its official name – and by continuing to flagrantly display the Indian honours and decoration template, further confounds the confusion between a nation's award and an award in the nation.  All the other awards mentioned in that template are official awards of the Republic of India, which the Jnanpith Award is not.  Its inclusion in that template is the equivalent of including the Booker Prize or the Whitbread Prize on the same template with the Victoria Cross, if such a template were made for Britain.  
More importantly, there are other awards, like the Dadasaheb Phalke Award, the nation's highest award for lifetime achievement in film, or the Sangeet Natak Academi's Ratna Sadasya (Fellow) in dance, music, and drama.  Those have not been mentioned anywhere in the culture section.  Indeed the Bharat Ratna is not mentioned anywhere on the India page.  Why then the Jnanpith? Fowler&fowler«Talk» 18:49, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I guess now that the "Jnanpith episode" in relation to the India article is over lets move this discussion to Talk:Jnanpith and Talk:Sahitya Akademi. Enough of this on Talk:India. KnowledgeHegemony 07:36, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inaccurate use of "highest" in Jnanpith Award 

message: Although I am taking a break from editing both the main article and this talk page, I thought this is important enough to bring to people's notice.
Apparently, yesterday, this article was nominated for a Featured Article Removal review (please see here), which lasted 13 hours and 18 minutes.  In the future, would the editor(s) who nominate the article for a review () and those who participate in it, kindly announce its existence in a post here (or perhaps on the India bulletin board).  I know that there is no Wikipedia requirement that this be done, but it is a courtesy that would greatly help, since the presence of an additional (mysterious) icon at the top of a talk page might go by unnoticed.  Thanks very much and regards, Fowler&fowler«Talk» 15:37, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Fly by Night FAR for India? 

message: The Trial period of the Rotation is over. It is now time to vote on images that will go into the rotation. Let us comment on images one by one. Please comment in the comment section only:
===AKSHARDHAM TEMPLE===
Users For::
*Nikkul 20:37, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No the vote is on the stably rotated 11 images that people have had an opportunity to judge during the last two weeks.  Fowler&fowler«Talk» 21:11, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Im sorry, there was no deadline to submit images before none more would be considered. This is Wikipedia. Nothing is final; you can always add and change Nikkul 21:13, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I find this picture to be both traditional and modern with both feet firmly planted in reality.Bakaman 04:43, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

text: To Priyanath: The argument is not logical.  I don't see that anyone who voted "for" keeping Toda as one of two permanent images on the India page (culture section) along with the Taj, is now going to say that they are not even for it when it shares the time with 10 other images.  Perhaps, you can leave a post on all those 18 yes voters and ask them to weigh in here if their minds have changed; otherwise their vote continues to count.  Fowler&fowler«Talk» 20:55, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

text: No image should be permanent. All images are open to rotation.Dineshkannambadi 21:55, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Obviously, by "permanent" I meant "long-term" in the same mode that most images exist on most country articles like Australia, United Kingdom, United States, Peru, ... The rotation of images on the India page is an experiment, which had a narrow majority in its favor; it was not a consensus. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 22:05, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

text: Nope, it is the same Featured Picture it always was.  If you think it is a poor image, you can always try to get it de-featured at WP:FP.  Fowler&fowler«Talk» 07:21, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

text: This is exactly what we need. An ethnocentric, pastoral vision of a country.Bakaman 04:38, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Don't see how any image in the culture section represents a "vision of a country" rather than a slice of culture; otherwise, what "vision" does the "cuisine" image represent?  As for "pastoral," may I remind the editor that according to the 2001 Census of India, the country is still 67-70% rural. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 07:31, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

text: "...doesn't have any meta data.".  So?  Sarvagnya 07:38, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

text: You are right. The image was taken at Cafe 18 in Connaught Place, Delhi. However, I agree that this dish does not appropriately represent Indian cuisine.--Lokantha 00:03, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

text: Where are they?  I haven't seen them.  The one nominated for WP:FPC was abysmal.  Quality is only one problem.  No one has answered the numerous (four) discussions above why Mysore Palace is being included, when there are other more notable examples from Karnataka?  See my post here.  Fowler&fowler«Talk» 21:03, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Alternate1, is, unfortunately, much worse.  It is out of focus, has glaring JPEG artifacts, and purple fringing in numerous places.  Sorry!  Fowler&fowler«Talk» 21:59, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

text: The best image in the list. Lets have fewer images.--KeynesJohnMaynard 13:03, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

text: I agree. --Lokantha 00:05, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Bleached--KeynesJohnMaynard 13:03, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

text: The other image of the Lotus Temple is far better.- KeynesJohnMaynard 13:14, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

text: What do you mean? This statue is not artistic enough?! Explain the bronze statue part too. --Lokantha 00:09, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No, I definitely wouldn't call it a work of art, even though it's a beautifully devotional representation of Siva. Here is an example of a Chola Bronze - poor photo, but right idea as art, religion, devotion all in one.  ॐ Priyanath talk 00:21, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Look at the size of this statue!! How can you compare it to the Natraja one? Smaller statues are definitely easier to mold compared to larger ones. And again, explain art, religion, devotion all in one. How does the Shiva image not depict these qualities compared to the natraja one? --Lokantha 00:28, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: 'Art' is purely opinion, and that was mine. ॐ Priyanath talk 00:29, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmm.. I agree --Lokantha 00:31, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Culture Rotation Vote 

message: Users For::
*Nikkul 20:37, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No the vote is on the stably rotated 11 images that people have had an opportunity to judge during the last two weeks.  Fowler&fowler«Talk» 21:11, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Im sorry, there was no deadline to submit images before none more would be considered. This is Wikipedia. Nothing is final; you can always add and change Nikkul 21:13, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I find this picture to be both traditional and modern with both feet firmly planted in reality.Bakaman 04:43, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: AKSHARDHAM TEMPLE

message: Users For: 
*— Nearly Headless Nick {C} 18:57, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  '''BUDDHA''' 

message: thumb|Toda Hut
Users For: 
*A Wikipedia Featured Picture.  Has already been elected.  See my comment below.  Fowler&fowler«Talk» 20:13, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: To Priyanath: The argument is not logical.  I don't see that anyone who voted "for" keeping Toda as one of two permanent images on the India page (culture section) along with the Taj, is now going to say that they are not even for it when it shares the time with 10 other images.  Perhaps, you can leave a post on all those 18 yes voters and ask them to weigh in here if their minds have changed; otherwise their vote continues to count.  Fowler&fowler«Talk» 20:55, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

text: No image should be permanent. All images are open to rotation.Dineshkannambadi 21:55, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Obviously, by "permanent" I meant "long-term" in the same mode that most images exist on most country articles like Australia, United Kingdom, United States, Peru, ... The rotation of images on the India page is an experiment, which had a narrow majority in its favor; it was not a consensus. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 22:05, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

text: Nope, it is the same Featured Picture it always was.  If you think it is a poor image, you can always try to get it de-featured at WP:FP.  Fowler&fowler«Talk» 07:21, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

text: This is exactly what we need. An ethnocentric, pastoral vision of a country.Bakaman 04:38, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Don't see how any image in the culture section represents a "vision of a country" rather than a slice of culture; otherwise, what "vision" does the "cuisine" image represent?  As for "pastoral," may I remind the editor that according to the 2001 Census of India, the country is still 67-70% rural. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 07:31, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  '''TODA HUT''' 

message: Users For: 
*— Nearly Headless Nick {C} 18:57, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  '''TAGORE''' 

message: Users For: 
*Nikkul 18:47, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: "...doesn't have any meta data.".  So?  Sarvagnya 07:38, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

text: You are right. The image was taken at Cafe 18 in Connaught Place, Delhi. However, I agree that this dish does not appropriately represent Indian cuisine.--Lokantha 00:03, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: '''CUISINE OF NORTH INDIA''' 

message: thumb|Mysore Palace
Users For: 
*ॐ Priyanath talk 19:52, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Where are they?  I haven't seen them.  The one nominated for WP:FPC was abysmal.  Quality is only one problem.  No one has answered the numerous (four) discussions above why Mysore Palace is being included, when there are other more notable examples from Karnataka?  See my post here.  Fowler&fowler«Talk» 21:03, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Alternate1, is, unfortunately, much worse.  It is out of focus, has glaring JPEG artifacts, and purple fringing in numerous places.  Sorry!  Fowler&fowler«Talk» 21:59, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  '''MYSORE PALACE''' 

message: Users For: 
*ॐ Priyanath talk 19:52, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The best image in the list. Lets have fewer images.--KeynesJohnMaynard 13:03, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: '''PRAYER FLAG''' 

message: Users For: 
*ॐ Priyanath talk 19:52, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  '''SHAKANTULA''' 

message: Users For: 
*ॐ Priyanath talk 19:52, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. --Lokantha 00:05, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Bleached--KeynesJohnMaynard 13:03, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  '''THRISSUR POORAM''' 

message: Users For: 
*Nikkul 20:57, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: BULL TEMPLE

message: thumb|Konark
Users For: 
*ॐ Priyanath talk 19:52, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  '''KONARK''' 

message: Users For: 
*ॐ Priyanath talk 19:52, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The other image of the Lotus Temple is far better.- KeynesJohnMaynard 13:14, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  '''LOTUS TEMPLE''' 

message: Users For: 
*ॐ Priyanath talk 19:52, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  '''MAHABHODHI TEMPLE''' 

message: Users For: 
*Nikkul 20:50, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: CUISINE OF INDIA

message: Users For: 
*Lokantha 20:00, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: What do you mean? This statue is not artistic enough?! Explain the bronze statue part too. --Lokantha 00:09, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No, I definitely wouldn't call it a work of art, even though it's a beautifully devotional representation of Siva. Here is an example of a Chola Bronze - poor photo, but right idea as art, religion, devotion all in one.  ॐ Priyanath talk 00:21, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Look at the size of this statue!! How can you compare it to the Natraja one? Smaller statues are definitely easier to mold compared to larger ones. And again, explain art, religion, devotion all in one. How does the Shiva image not depict these qualities compared to the natraja one? --Lokantha 00:28, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: 'Art' is purely opinion, and that was mine. ॐ Priyanath talk 00:29, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmm.. I agree --Lokantha 00:31, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  '''SHIVA''' 

message: Users For: 
*Lokantha 20:00, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  '''DIWALI''' 

message: Users For: 
*Nikkul 20:45, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: '''DIWALI 2'''

message: Users For: 
*Nikkul 20:33, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: LOTUS TEMPLE

message: Users For: 
*--Lokantha 04:49, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: AUTO-RICKSHAW

message: Users For: :
*-Dineshkannambadi 01:52, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Taj Mahal