Talk:Bangalore/Archive 3

message: 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)
replies: text:  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  (Cleveland) and  (San Francisco).  I have no citation for the link with Minsk. AreJay (talk) 21:09, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes and Town twinning article explains this concept in greater details. - KNM  Talk 15:59, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sister Cities Deletion 

message: 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 GizzaDiscuss © 08:18, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: 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)
thread_title:  My opinion 

message: *Nikkul (talk) 21:44, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Users FOR Bangalore (Users against Bengaluru) 

message: *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)
replies: text: 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)
replies: text:  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)
replies: text: 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)

text: 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)
thread_title: Additional comments

message: Hello everybody. I've started a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (geographic names)/Archives/2008/November#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)
thread_title:  Discussion on the name change policy 

message: 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)
replies: text: 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)
thread_title:  Confused about the Begur inscription 

message: 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)
replies: text: 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)

text: 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)
replies: text:  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)

text: You have to keep in mind that Vidhan Soudha doesn't come under the skyline category. The UB City is the the business hub of Bangalore. Vidhansoudha is the legislative building and doesn't symbolise the importance bangalore business importance in India and the World. What I prepose is to fill the skyline like how it is done on the London article. In which both Vidhan Soudha and UB City can be represented in the same skyline spot..Manaspunhani (talk) 09:08, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  I would like to change the Skyline Image 

message: I would like to know the relevance of placing the image of kempfort Siva temple in demographics section. How are they related?
[[Shekure (talk) 06:51, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think there is any, aside from a tenuous relationship between the idol and the sentences that discuss religion. I would favor it being replaced with something more relevant like Nandi Temple or Ramakrishna Matt.  Thanks AreJay (talk) 15:35, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Siva temple image in Demographics section? 

message: I am amazed how some fellow users have left no stone unturned to prevent the name change. With the passage of time, the new name will gradually grow more popular than the old name. Why all the fuss? Just make the change. Thanks.Kanchanamala (talk) 02:23, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that over time Bengaluru will become more popular, but for now, Bangalore is much more popular so we keep it as is. Nikkul (talk) 16:01, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bengaluru vs Bangalore 

message: I followed this entire discussion over the name change, and I'd like to ask - Can anyone give me a link proving the OFFICIAL name change? The former state government has put forth the name change suggestion to the central government. That does NOT mean that the name change has been sanctioned. It is absurd to even consider the number of search engine results for a particular name. It may have been referred to as Bengaluru in an official document, but the name change is still just a proposal. And until the name change is made official [I hope it won't], can there be no haste in changing the name? Thanks vinayg18 (talk) 15:32, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Pretty much, yes. Wikipedia uses the most common name in English in the vast majority of cases, and at this point "Mumbai" has edged out "Bombay" in popular English usage, while "Bengaluru" is still very far behind "Bangalore" in English usage. Same reason we moved Peking to Beijing (it's now common) but we haven't moved Kiev to Kyiv ("Kiev" is still more common in English). --Delirium (talk)
Amazing. As long as Bangalore can be redirected to Bengaluru, let us change Bangalore to Bengaluru. Let us not unnecessarily use our ability to resist that change. Thanks.Kanchanamala (talk) 03:50, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: And we don't need any permission from the Karntaka government to keep the name of this article Bangalore or to change it to Bengaluru. Even if the name change was done 10 years ago and the most common name today was Bangalore, we would still keep it as bangalore according to WP:Name and disregard "official" policies of Karnataka.  The ministers of Karnataka do not decide what this article is called. WP Editiors, who have come up with the policy at Wp:name have agreed to keep the most common name Nikkul (talk) 16:00, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Just end this Bengaluru debate 

message: My fellow users, let's update the name to Bengaluru. It's now official. Let us not use our ability to resist the change. I am not computer savvy. I hope someone will redirect "Bangalore" to Bengaluru. Thanks.Kanchanamala (talk) 13:22, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Bangalore is STILL the most common name...Just because its official, doesnt mean its suddenly become the most common name for the city. See WP:Name  Nikkul (talk) 06:38, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Also, its enough to say "Bangalore, officially Bengaluru" Nikkul (talk) 06:47, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Let's update the name 

message: I think it's important to add the UB City image in the econ section and remove the PU Building image since UB City is a new economic zone in the city along with ITPL & Electronic City. Nikkul (talk) 06:42, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I disagree, because I think there should be a balance between the old and new economies.  The Infosys building represents the new, while the Utility Building represents the old (that's to say "older") economy. AreJay (talk) 14:36, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  FWIW, I'm willing to unclench about the Utility Building if there's consensus to replace it with an image of any of Bangalore's famous markets (KR, Gandhi Bazaar, Russell, Jayanagar, etc.)  There are some astoundingly colorful CC-BY and CC-BY-SA images of these markets on Flickr.  Thanks AreJay (talk) 19:12, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

text:  Feel free to work on creating one.  Maybe something that has the skyline to the top, Vidhana Soudha in the middle and perhaps an image of any of Bangalore's avenues lined with Gulmohar trees (typifying the "Garden City" moniker) to the bottom.  If you're able to build consensus for the montage on the talk page, you can add it to the article.  Thanks AreJay (talk) 19:24, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

text: For images of tree lined streets see 1 2, 3, etc.  As for the other bit about UB City, sorry, can't get behind that logic for the same reasons that have been put forward several times before on Talk. AreJay (talk) 21:54, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Enthusiast10: just a note- Wikipedia works by concensus not on AreJay's (or any one user's) approval. SO if you can get concensus, you can put which ever image regardless of one users disapproval. So dont feel that you have to get anything approved by Arejay before you can put it on. You do have to get concensus. :) Nikkul (talk) 22:42, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  I don't believe that's how Enthusiast10 approached the issue.  The user made a case for the image in an attempt to obtain consensus, during which I objected based on a position that has been documented several times over.  I don't believe that at any point Enthusiast10 requested anyone's approval, nor is such an approval from any one user forthcoming or indeed binding on what does or doesn't get to go into the article.  AreJay (talk) 23:40, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Adding UB City Image in Economy 

message: As Nikkul rightly pointed out I think I should have asked for suport in the matter of this case. 
There are currently three images of UB City and I would like to remove the MG Road building and add one of the UB City images. Pl. vote for any of the 4 images- 3 of UB City and 1 one of Utility Building. The voting format is the same as the one earlier used on this page made by Nikkul.Thanks. Enthusiast10 (talk) 11:09, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Whoa, hold up there a second.  First, we've been through this before, as you mention.  The exact same points that you've raised have been raised before, both for and against these images.  What changed now to restart the process?  Second, and more importantly, I strongly suggest you read and familiarize yourself with WP:VOTE.  At Wikipedia, we do not make decisions based on "majority rule", even if the results of this vote are binding (which they are not) and even if you were able to get several votes for your proposed images. Building support occurs through discussion and through consensus. You can't just bypass dialog and get a move on with a vote in order to get what you want. This is flat out not how things are done on Wikipedia. AreJay (talk) 18:46, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Concensus for UB City Images in the economy section 

message: I think the UB City image shows Bangalore's new business district and another aspect of its economy: commerce. 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. Nikkul (talk) 17:51, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Comments

message: This page is 161 kilobytes long. It may be helpful to move older discussion into an archive subpage.
We can use User:MiszaBot II to auto archive threads on this page. I don't see a con. But I need to have a consensus from everyone before I can configure it. Let me know if you have any views on this.--Anshuk (talk) 08:19, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree.  I don't see anything wrong in configuring MiszaBot to auto archive this page.  Please feel free to go ahead and get this set up.  Thanks AreJay (talk) 22:44, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Sure. Go ahead. aJCfreak yAk 06:01, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I will wait for customary 3 days to get everyone's consensus on this --Anshuk (talk) 05:51, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Done --Anshuk (talk) 04:28, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Anyway we can set this to 60-90 days? I think some of the ongoing discussions might stand the risk of getting archived while in progress if it's set to 7. We get a bit traffic in the Bangalore article, but not nearly as much as Talk:India.  Thanks AreJay (talk) 05:34, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  If there is an ongoing discussion, it won't archive it. It will archive only those threads on which there is no discussion in the last 7 days. Do you still think it should be 60-90 days? Also I see that the bot didn't ran yet. I think I should wait for 24hr before raising a concern. Does anyone have any idea on this? --Anshuk (talk) 21:35, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  My bad, didn't know that 7d meant no discussions on a subject within the last seven days.  Still feels like seven days is too soon, but let's just wait and see what happens when the bot runs...we'll take a call on any issues at that point.  Thanks AreJay (talk) 22:03, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thinking a little ahead, the Bangalore - Bengaluru debate has been raging for ages. Would it be possible to let the latest instance of this debate stay on the talk page? Otherwise, seven days of no discussion on the debate, and we'll come across another poster who'd want to rename it to Bengaluru, again. Hey - don't get me wrong - I'm all for Bengaluru. But I don't want the discussion to be something that keeps cropping up every now and then. I've had clear-cut reasons for bringing it up again, this time 'round, though. :) Just a thought. Actually, any hot debate could suffer this fate if the discussion is archived too soon. aJCfreak yAk 14:12, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  I don't know how to do that. Though currently bot is configured (default) to leave 5 latest threads on the talk page even if they are more than 7 days old. --Anshuk (talk) 05:23, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Auto archiving threads on this talk page 

message: In Kannada and Telugu the only languages of native bangalore, its called Bengaluru. If there are any Tamils who think otherwise, please levae your number, we will help you from where you migrated. If you are honest, you can find it with a moment of honesty! really!!!!!
There is not a single native of bangalore who speaks other than these langauages.
Foreigners have evolved funny thoughts around this. Tamils for example were forced to come hers as slaves by the brits against the wishes of the natives of Bangalore. These people have the amazing opportunity to go back to their land. If they have difficulty in finding it, It only takes a few minutes for other people to determine where they belong. This can help these people to see the obvious! The author below is a foreigner in Bangalore!
In Tamil its called "பெங்களூரு" (facinating use of Bengaluru by distant observers from the other side of the fence barely 50-60 kms from Hosur where Tamil land begins)and that "ளூரு" is from the Tamil word "ஊரு".  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.92.19.134 (talk) 06:56, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: This isn't factually accurate. Your suggestion may have something to do with received pronunciation.  The name Bangalore is an anglicized version of the native name of the city, BengaLuru, (stress is on the first syllable) , where the ringing r is very much pronounced. AreJay (talk) 05:40, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Shouldn't what Bangaloreans call their city be used as the pronunciation here? Absolutely no one calls it 'Bang-a-lore'.
- Actually every native calls it bengaluru. I wonder how foreigners remain so ignorant even after staying for decades!  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.252.10.2 (talk) 04:31, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  Again, I'd encourage you to read received pronunciation.  Pronunciation of the ringing "r" may manifest itself in varying degrees of prominence, but nowhere, least of all in Bangalore, is the last syllable pronounced "law". AreJay (talk) 04:36, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

text: I agree. No one pronounces it as law. Sounds like something that an Americanised/Australianised version of the name might sound like. :) aJCfreak yAk 15:06, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Bangaloreans do pronounce it Bang-a-law, but if you guys don't want the 'received pronounciation', I'm O.K., with it.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.166.14.189 (talk) 08:00, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  They do? Never heard such a pronunciation from anyone in the last 36 years in Bangalore. Benga-Lu-Ru is more appropriate, the 'R' is very pronounced (pun intended)  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 164.164.104.137 (talk) 10:34, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: This is the English language Wikipedia, so how the majority of English speakers would pronounce it is appropriate. Not just English speakers who have lived in Bangalore, but the majority of them worldwide. That being said, I for one can't imagine an American pronouncing it with "law." Beeblebrox (talk) 05:16, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Phonetics 

message: Could anybody help me with an Ulsoor lake photo for the article Lakes in Bangalore? Regards, Raise lkblr (talk) 06:53, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Try this or this.  Thanks AreJay (talk) 15:21, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks, I am confused about the license thing, I have now uploaded :Image:Ulsoor_lake_morning.jpg. You can just verify the license once. Thanks! Raise lkblr (talk) 03:53, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Yup, you've tagged it correctly.  PS: It might be better to upload images to Commons going forward.  One of the benefits is that the image's license gets verified (sometimes Flickr users change CC-Attrib or CC-Attrib-ShareAlike permissions to non-free ones).  Thanks AreJay (talk) 04:27, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ulsoor lake photo 

message: The resistance offered by some users to change the name to Bengaluru is amazing. I believe that the guidelines of Wikipedia are meant to help improve it to be a most up-to-date source of information. I think that a user should use his/her skills in a positive way. Thanks. Kanchanamala (talk) 03:42, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It is not about most up-to-date information, but it is about article naming should give priority to what the majority of English speakers would most easily recognize. Requesting you to read the previous discussions to understand this point.--Anshuk (talk) 05:26, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

text: Please read Wikipedia:Naming conventions (common names), the policy that tells us to use "Bangalore" in this case. Shreevatsa (talk) 11:42, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  Shreevatsa, looking at things that way, why is the article on Mumbai NOT Bombay, Chennai NOT Madras and Kolkatta NOT Calcutta, most foreigners still refer to these cities by their old names. Wikipedia DOES NOT name articles by their ACTUAL NAME, but by their 'popular name' as per American books. Hindu-Arabic numerals was renamed to Arabic Numerals in 2006 even with majority opposition, because it was more populr among Americans. Read about the debate on the talk page. --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 07:49, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Can someone please provide a reliable citation to show that the official name change process has been completed (i.e. a link to the central government notification)? Till then, stating that it is officially Bengaluru would be unreliable. Regards,SBC-YPR (talk) 11:40, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  Well if there isn't a credible citation for it, it should be removed. AreJay (talk) 04:36, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: If it is not official then why "Bengaluru" is used everywhere in Bengaluru corporation website instead of "Bangalore". guys, learn to accept the truth.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.92.188.54 (talk) 06:56, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: There seems to be no uniform policy here - both the Government of Karnataka websites  and  use "Bangalore". Until these are changed, I doubt whether it could be termed as official. I reiterate - there must be an official notification issued before the change can officially come into effect. Regards, SBC-YPR (talk) 13:39, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The two references that were recently added - (2005), (2006) - only refer to the initial stage of the naming process, and the second one already occurs later in the article (under the Etymology section). I accidently marked them as dead (since they failed to load, but it was in fact a problem with my internet connection) but that has been set right now. The link that should be added here is to the official gazette notification (which is mentioned in the second news article). I have moved these refs to the appropriate heading (the last paragraph of Etymology). Please go through this link (2007) which appears under the Etymology section. A link to the gazette notification would be deeply appreciated. Regards, SBC-YPR (talk) 13:37, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

text: If you have read the previous few posts on this discussion, it will be clear that we are still searching for an official notification to prove that the name-change process has indeed been completed. If you find a link to the notification, please add it on as a citation. It will be deeply appreciated. Till then, Bangalore will have to stay. Regards, SBC-YPR (talk) 15:15, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  Well, if the official notification is nowhere to be seen, then the sentence that Bangalore is officially called "Bengaluru" is patently wrong and should be removed.  Having "citation needed" is unnecessary.  As far as I remember, the name change has to be officially accepted by Central Government for it to take effect. Pending this, it must be reworded to read "Bangalore, also known as Bengaluru....". AreJay (talk) 18:47, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  Update: Reworded lead sentence.  AreJay (talk) 19:01, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

text: Just a note, NHAI's map shows Bengaluru as is and not as Bangalore. --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 13:30, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bengaluru