Talk:Delhi: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively ← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 12:55, 10 March 2024 editLowercase sigmabot III (talk \| contribs)Bots, Template editors2,303,661 editsm Archiving 1 discussion(s) to Talk:Delhi/Archive 9) (bot← Previous edit		Latest revision as of 13:22, 9 January 2025 edit undoAqurs1 (talk \| contribs)Extended confirmed users, New page reviewers, Rollbackers1,022 editsm Reverted edit by 2409:4080:BEC4:42B4:0:0:5CC8:9B10 (talk) to last version by Lowercase sigmabot IIITags: Rollback SWViewer [1.6]
(48 intermediate revisions by 17 users not shown)
Line 64:		Line 64:
	{{Misplaced Pages:Good article reassessment/Delhi/1}}		{{Misplaced Pages:Good article reassessment/Delhi/1}}

			== Use of the word 'dearth' in the cuisine section. ==
⚫	== ~~Reverts~~ by ] ==

			I'm fairly certain dearth is the opposite of the intended meaning. Replace with '
	=== Repeating indefinite articles ===
			profusion' perhaps. ] (]) 23:17, 22 September 2024 (UTC)
			:I assume it was the variety of cuisines and have rewritten it accordingly. The citations don't look particularly reliable but, I guess, that's the best we're going to get for cuisines. ] <small>(])</small> 23:53, 22 September 2024 (UTC)

			== undefined references ==
	It’s redundant to repeat indefinite articles unless distinctness of their nouns is ambiguous. I don’t think any reader would misread that “city and union territory” is a one entity (different from both ‘cities’ and ‘union territories’), it's obvious we’re talking about two distinct things (‘city’ and ‘union territory’). I’m reinstating my edit on this issue.
			Hello {{u\|Jagadeesh93}}! In {{diff\|\|prev\|1247494381\|this edit}}, you added a reference to a citation named "GSDP". But no such citation exists, so the article generates an error. Are you able to provide a citation for the figure that you entered so that the material can be verified and the error fixed? -- ] (]) 16:29, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

			== Raj-era sources (historical religious demography ==
	=== “Straddling” and the “right bank” ===
		⚫	Per my discussion with ].

			Original reply on user talk page:
	==== “Straddling” ====
			Decreeing sourced data is acceptable versus which is not based on one premise is faulty, given the very same Raj-era sources have been used in academia for decades, if not close to a century at this point in time.

			There are thousands of papers, journal entries, media articles and other forms of encyclopedic material that reference census data from the Raj-era, many of which are sourced on a plethora of Misplaced Pages articles that either specifically delve into demographic-related topics or have sections that are dedicated to the demographic-related topics.
	The current phrasing

			Proceeding under the premise regarding the the removal of every single mention of these topics, any historical demographic-related note, table, or refrence from the colonial period of South Asia would be required to be purged, not just from Misplaced Pages, but also from all of academia and various media sources as well as anything else which has been published across the public and private spheres since 1947.
	{{quote\|Lying on both sides of the Yamuna river, but chiefly to the west, or beyond its right bank, Delhi …}}

			This indicates a complete contrast regarding the constant addition of encyclopedic-related data and materials on a free, publically available website such as Misplaced Pages. Rather than proceeding with a complete purge, I would suggest a compromise that would benefit the reader(s): Any page that sources Raj-era censuses should include a disclaimer regarding the contemporary discussion surrounding potential inaccuracies. Any source(s) that can serve as further reading on the subject would also be helpful.
	is the worst out of all the variations.

			Regarding this page specifically, the censuses of 1951, 1961, and 1971 were also removed in the removal, which to my knowledge are not as controversial as the prior decadal censuses? ] (]) 14:16, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
	''Straddle'' does mean to be on either side of—but all definitions of it include some sort of ‘imbalance’ or ‘irregularity’ in that positioning (on either side), so as to speak. I believe the meaning of ''straddle'' used here is in the sense of an ‘irregular sprawl’ (MWO, , V. (1): intransitive verb #2). “Chiefly straddle” is a fine construct—it means the sprawl is much larger to the west of the river, which it is; ‘straddling the Yamuna, chiefly its western bank …’ is an identical construct in meaning, I don’t understand why Fowler wouldn’t have issue with the usage of ''chiefly'' in one but not the other.

			:Please take this generic defense in recondite English prose to ] where I have opened a thread to elicit the participation of a wider WP audience. And please do not edit war until a consensus appears there on what I consider to be spamming of a combination of ] and ] in anything but English prose. ]] 14:26, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
	I removed that bracketed clause and replaced it with “chiefly on the west bank” because I felt the former was unnecessary. It wasn’t incorrect, but the prose felt tighter without it.

	But the current wording of that sentence is much worse. It’s not wrong to say ‘lying between’, but it’s needlessly wordy. ''Straddle'' was a great word to describe that the river flows through the city, there’s no reason to make it more verbose the way that Fowler has; I think they’re mistaken about the meaning of ''straddle'' somewhere if they think “chiefly straddle” is an incorrect usage of that word here.

	==== Right bank ====

	And I disagree that “right bank” needs to be mentioned in the lede at all. I can think of two reasons:
	# The Yamuna isn’t navigable at Delhi to begin with, how often are the right or left banks of the river mentioned for directions by Delhiites?
	# The “or” there in “western ''or'' right bank” throws me off, the fact that it’s an inclusive-or isn’t intuitive. Maybe ‘western and right bank’ is preferrable? Personally I would like to cut “right bank” from there entirely.

	I’m sure there’s a place down in the article somewhere to mention that most of Delhi lies on the right bank of the Yamuna, but I fail to see why it needs to clutter the second sentence of the lede.

	—] (]) 13:59, 26 September 2023 (UTC)

	:Sorry, I did not see this. You are looking at one of the secondary meanings of the intransitive verb straddle; we, however, are using the word transitively. Straddle is not used transitively in the meaning of sprawl. ]] 14:30, 26 September 2023 (UTC)
	::PS Oxford English Dictionary (subscription required): 1.d. 1565– intransitive. transferred of a thing, esp. of a thing having legs; also, to divaricate, sprawl. Also with complement and figurative.
	::Example:
	::1875
	::"Lubber prose o'ersprawls, And straddling stops the path from left to right." R. Browning, Inn Album i. 1 ]] 14:37, 26 September 2023 (UTC)
	:The right bank has little to do with navigation. Most rivers don't flow (in all scales) in a direction with respect to which "west" is clearly defined. Indeed the Jumna river has twists and turns in its course, one in Delhi's northeast, and several just beyond its southeast.
	:Also, although the word "bank" has come to imply relatively large areas, e.g. ] or the Left Bank of Sartre and Camus, it does not extend beyond the flood plain of a river, i.e. beyond the visible valley. So we can't say: Delhi lies on the west bank of the Jumna. ]] 14:57, 26 September 2023 (UTC)
	::Or for that matter, "Delhi lies on the right bank of the Jumna." ]] 15:00, 26 September 2023 (UTC)
	::See my map: ]. The headwaters are hardly navigable. See also the larger-scale maps: ] or ] ]] 15:09, 26 September 2023 (UTC)
	:Finally, "a city and a union territory." When the coordinate nouns X, Y, in X and Y act as one unit an article (whether indefinite (a/an) or definite (the)) does not need to be repeated. Example, "the horse and jockey surged ahead in the closing minutes." But "the horse and the jockey were thrown in different directions by the unexpected interruption," unless you are aiming for poetic or literary effect.
	:A ] is a different entity than a city; it is more like a state, e.g. ]. You wouldn't say, "Delhi is a city and state in India." ]] 15:31, 26 September 2023 (UTC)
	::Also American English tends to drop articles (i.e. use the 0-article) more than Commonwealth English. E.g. Artist John X was commissioned by the city. (AmE) The/An artist John X was commissioned by the city. (ComE). I'm assuming that ] follows the rules of ], which in its standard variety is no different from standard Commonwealth or standard British English. ]] 15:41, 26 September 2023 (UTC)

	== Municipal Logo ==

	I am writing to request that the ]’s logo be added to the Delhi Misplaced Pages page in the logo section. As you may know, many cities without a flag or logo use their municipal logo as a symbol of their identity. Examples include Lucknow, Ankara, and New Delhi, etc.
	The Municipal Corporation of Delhi is the governing body of most of Delhi, providing civic services to a population of about 20 million citizens in the capital city 1. It is one of the largest municipal bodies in the world, with an annual budget of over ₹16,000 crore (~US$1.95 billion) 1. The corporation covers an area of 1,397.3 km² (539.5 mi²).
	Adding the Municipal Corporation of Delhi’s logo to the Delhi Misplaced Pages page would help to provide a more complete picture of the city’s identity and governance. I believe that this would be a valuable addition to the page and would help to make it more informative and engaging for readers.
	Thank you for your consideration.
	Sincerely, ] (]) 06:39, 13 November 2023 (UTC)

	:{{ping\|Fowler&fowler\|Tamjeed Ahmed}} ] applies in this? - ] (]) 10:46, 13 November 2023 (UTC)
	::Yes, ] does apply to logos. Unless there is something particularly identifying about the logo, it is better not to include it. ] <small>(])</small> 12:26, 13 November 2023 (UTC)
	:::But most Indian cities do have a logo. I think Delhi should have one too. ] (]) 14:22, 13 November 2023 (UTC)
	::::Let's add both the state government emblem and the municipal logo as well? ] (]) 17:41, 14 November 2023 (UTC)
	:::::What do they add to the article? --] <small>(])</small> 19:07, 14 November 2023 (UTC)
	::::::So, by this logic we should remove the logos and emblems of all Indian states and cities. Right? ] (]) 15:44, 22 November 2023 (UTC)
	:::::::??? ] (]) 11:33, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

	== Infobox tweaks ==

	I did not mean to use the 'rollback' tool but the changes need a consensus. ] (]) 07:59, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 13:22, 9 January 2025

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Delhi article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9Auto-archiving period: 3 months

This

level-3 vital article is rated C-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Cities: Core / National capitals

	Cities portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cities, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of cities, towns and various other settlements on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CitiesWikipedia:WikiProject CitiesTemplate:WikiProject CitiesWikiProject Cities
	This article is on the project's core list.
	This article is supported by the project's national capital taskforce.

India: Cities / Delhi Top‑importance

	India portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Misplaced Pages's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Indian cities (assessed as Top-importance).
	This article is supported by WikiProject Delhi (assessed as Top-importance).
	This article is a selected article on the India portal, which means that it was selected as a high quality India-related article.
	This article was a past Indian Collaboration of the Month.

This article is written in Indian English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, analysed, defence) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

Delhi is a former featured article. Please see the links under Article milestones below for its original nomination page (for older articles, check the nomination archive) and why it was removed.

This article appeared on Misplaced Pages's Main Page as Today's featured article on November 3, 2008.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
August 16, 2006	Good article nominee	Listed
January 4, 2007	Peer review	Reviewed
January 20, 2007	Featured article candidate	Not promoted
February 17, 2007	Featured article candidate	Promoted
May 26, 2010	Featured article review	Demoted
July 18, 2012	Good article nominee	Listed
January 22, 2023	Good article reassessment	Delisted
Current status: Former featured article

GAR

Delhi

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch article reassessment page • Most recent review

Result: No response to issues; thus delisting on basis of silent consensus. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 11:27, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

A GA made in 2012. Now has multiple unsourced claims that need to be addressed for this article to remain a GA. Onegreatjoke (talk) 17:19, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

This article is a mess right now. I'm gonna try to remove blatantly bad sources and content out of the article. CactiStaccingCrane (talk) 12:26, 8 January 2023 (UTC)

CactiStaccingCrane, do you intend to continue? Also pinging potential contributors for their opinions: RegentsPark, Fowler&fowler, Vanamonde93, Kautilya3. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 12:12, 18 January 2023 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Use of the word 'dearth' in the cuisine section.

I'm fairly certain dearth is the opposite of the intended meaning. Replace with ' profusion' perhaps. Duncanbadham (talk) 23:17, 22 September 2024 (UTC)

I assume it was the variety of cuisines and have rewritten it accordingly. The citations don't look particularly reliable but, I guess, that's the best we're going to get for cuisines. RegentsPark (comment) 23:53, 22 September 2024 (UTC)

undefined references

Hello Jagadeesh93! In this edit, you added a reference to a citation named "GSDP". But no such citation exists, so the article generates an error. Are you able to provide a citation for the figure that you entered so that the material can be verified and the error fixed? -- mikeblas (talk) 16:29, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

Raj-era sources (historical religious demography

Per my discussion with User:Fowler&fowler.

Original reply on user talk page: Decreeing sourced data is acceptable versus which is not based on one premise is faulty, given the very same Raj-era sources have been used in academia for decades, if not close to a century at this point in time.

There are thousands of papers, journal entries, media articles and other forms of encyclopedic material that reference census data from the Raj-era, many of which are sourced on a plethora of Misplaced Pages articles that either specifically delve into demographic-related topics or have sections that are dedicated to the demographic-related topics.

Proceeding under the premise regarding the the removal of every single mention of these topics, any historical demographic-related note, table, or refrence from the colonial period of South Asia would be required to be purged, not just from Misplaced Pages, but also from all of academia and various media sources as well as anything else which has been published across the public and private spheres since 1947.

This indicates a complete contrast regarding the constant addition of encyclopedic-related data and materials on a free, publically available website such as Misplaced Pages. Rather than proceeding with a complete purge, I would suggest a compromise that would benefit the reader(s): Any page that sources Raj-era censuses should include a disclaimer regarding the contemporary discussion surrounding potential inaccuracies. Any source(s) that can serve as further reading on the subject would also be helpful.

Regarding this page specifically, the censuses of 1951, 1961, and 1971 were also removed in the removal, which to my knowledge are not as controversial as the prior decadal censuses? Van00220 (talk) 14:16, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

Please take this generic defense in recondite English prose to WT:INDIA where I have opened a thread to elicit the participation of a wider WP audience. And please do not edit war until a consensus appears there on what I consider to be spamming of a combination of WP:OR and WP:SYNTHESIS in anything but English prose. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 14:26, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

Categories: