Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 10:32, 8 February 2008

	This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
Dravidian civilizations (inactive) This article is within the scope of WikiProject Dravidian civilizations, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.Dravidian civilizationsWikipedia:WikiProject Dravidian civilizationsTemplate:WikiProject Dravidian civilizationsDravidian civilizations

	South India is a former featured article candidate. Please view the links under Article milestones below to see why the nomination was archived. For older candidates, please check the archive.
Article milestones Date Process Result November 4, 2005 Peer review Reviewed March 10, 2006 Featured article candidate Not promoted
Current status: Former featured article candidate

Template:Archive box collapsible

Inclusion of Trivandrum.

Hi all., Trivandrum is a major city, a capital city etc., etc., I definitely agree. But it's not as major as the others that are listed. Moreover, it's not as populous as the other cities and the list is "List of large metropolitan cities", which Trivandrum is 42nd. I think, it was removed previously also for the same reason. Just entered this in the talk page to prevent further edit warrings... This is just my view. If yours differ, do reply.Mugunth 15:41, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

I have just added a "Subdivisions" section to the article; I am looking to add a map of the states and districts if available. Maybe we can identify Trivandrum and other capitals on this map. Please let me know if anyone has such a map/map-template. I tried to create it one myself, but there are over 100 districts in South India and the level of detail is making it impossible to complete. Thanks AreJay (talk) 18:03, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

can we use maps from live local? (local.live.com) I'm not sure of the copyrights...Mugunth 09:17, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Nope...they are copyrighted Microsoft data...and plus this would be a raster image and would lack quality. I've worked on a SVG version based on the blank SVG India map. I just need some help editing it...will have a better picture on if I need to reach out to any resources this weekend. AreJay (talk) 14:36, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

User:Rajithmohan has reinserted Trivandrum with the explaination that the section was about major cities, not most populous cities. The section's title says "major metropolitan areas". A metropolitan area is defined as follows:

A metropolitan area is a large population center consisting of a large metropolis and its adjacent zone of influence, or of more than one closely adjoining neighboring central cities and their zone of influence

The defining feature of a metropolitan area is its population; therefore a large population center is implicit in the definition of a "metropolitan area". I'm therefore going to rv his addition; like I said, I'd be happy to include Trivandrum in the map that I'm working on, but to include the 40th largest city over the inclusion of larger (and therefore more major) metropolitan areas like Madhurai, Mysore and Vijayawada doesn't make any sense. AreJay (talk) 19:00, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Trivandrum is the largest city (both in area and population) in Kerala. Moreover, it is the capital of Kerala. When you say about major cities, how Tvm can be excluded? The Southern Air Command is headquartered at Tvm. The city has an international airport. Around 80% of the states IT exports comes from this city. The list says about populous Urban Agglomerations. More populous doesnt implies more important. Is Pimpri a major city when compared to Chandigarh, whose population is lesser? Also, the list is about the urban agglomeration, not the city population. Here is the list of most populous cities in South India :

Hence, I suggest to include Trivandrum also in the major cities section, as it is an important city down South.
Cheers, -- Rajith Mohan 03:56, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Not sure where you got this list from, but the most populous city in South India is Bangalore while the most populous metrololitan area (urban agglomeration) is Chennai (links 1, 2). When we use the term "city" is refers to the jurisdiction of one municipal corporation, while the term urban agglomeration implies a larger, more populous area, perhaps spanning multiple municipal corporations. To your point about notability of Trivandrum, every city is noted for something (if not multiple things). I have no doubt that Trivandrum is an important city (I've visited the city and I think it's beautiful) — it's just that we are trying to restrict the list to the top 25 urban agglomerations and Trivandrum doesn't fall into that list. If we were to make a case for the inclusion of Trivandrum, we'd have to make a case for the inclusion of Madhurai, Mysore and Vijayawada, which are all, I'm sure, important and notable in their own right. If you refer to the map in the Infobox, I've included only the capitals of South Indian states and Trivandrum is very clearly mentioned there. Thanks AreJay (talk) 04:31, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

I prepared the list based on the information from the Census website. Go here and search for the population of Bangalore, Chennai and other cities. What you stated regarding Bangalore and Chennai is wrong. According to 2001 census, Chennai is the largest city as well as largest UA. Check world gazatter also. Btw, I have provided the link too. Btw, if you are very much particular about the exclusion of Trivandrum, why to keep and inappropriate section name? Instead of major metropolitan areas, change the title to Populous metropolitan areas. This can convey the message more clearly.. -- Rajith Mohan 06:41, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Umm, not sure which World Gazetteer data you're talking about, but there's no ambiguity listed here . In fact even if you look at the source data for your citation in the list that you created it is contrary to what you are claiming...the source is for a list of cities, not urban agglomerations, and indicates that Bangalore is the largest city in SI as of 2008. And even on this list Trivandrum is ranked 53rd, below Bangalore, Chennai, Hyderabad, Visakhapatnam, Coimbatore, Mysore, Vijayawada, Madhurai, Hubli and Salem. However, I do take your point that the naming convention in the infobox is ambigious. I will change it to "Most populous metropolitan areas (2008)". AreJay (talk) 13:57, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Now that the info-box has been modified to the "Most populous metropolitan areas (2008)", the above discussion may not be very relevant, but let me make a few points. Firstly, the 2001 Census never took into consideration even outlying suburbs of Trivandrum when designating the U/A. This was due to a number of factors, not the least of which was the then-recent expansion of the Municipal Corporation. Secondly, the latest Election data (as of 2005) shows that the city had already expanded beyond a million people and it has consistently recorded one of the fastest urban growth rates in India. Finally, I believe that classifying the importance of cities just by population over factors like their economic, social, historical and geographical significance is an incorrect methodology. If it were true, then Mexico City would have beaten the likes of London, Paris, Shanghai and Washington D.C. to the post. Anyways, just my two cents. Let's not kick up another argument. Good work on the article. Cheers! - Ajaypp (talk) 13:30, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Definitely agree with you. Thanks AreJay (talk) 15:01, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Now, after the change of the section name, the ambiguity is removed. The discussion can be archived. Btw, regarding the population of Bangalore, you pointed out the same link that I provided along with the list. I sorted it with the 2001 census data, while you maintained the rank as per the 2008 calculation. The 2008 population is just estimation, but not an authentic one. It reflects a guess figure based on the statistics of population growth. That’s why, I preferred the 2001 census population, which is officially declared and is more genuine. According to 2001 census, Bangalore is not the second populous city in India. However, in the list I created, I missed out Vijayawada and Hubli, which is having more population (2001). I will update the list soon. Thank you for pointing out.
Any ways, great effort in improving the article contents. Go ahead. Cheers, -- Rajith Mohan 03:52, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Coorg and Murudeshwar

I be including some contents from these two articles into this.... Murudeshwara, kodagu. Your comments? Mugunth 05:07, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

The Murudeshwara article doesn't seem to have a lot of content while the Coorg article is certainly not lacking in it. What type of contents were you planning on including? Thanks AreJay (talk) 15:01, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

May be something from Coorg into the Geography section and some thing into the Culture and heritage section from the Murudeshwara article?Mugunth 04:50, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Sounds like a good idea! AreJay (talk) 20:51, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Few more sections

After comparing with other country articles, I felt that, we have to add Education, Transport and probably Tourist attractions to this article. Education should not be just a list of univ in SI, but should focus on Govt policies regarding compulsory education, may also state the reason for higher literacy rates in the South etc., Similarly, Transport, focussing on Southern Railways, road transport, BMTC Volvo (Volvo services for the first time in India) etc., etc., should be added. Tourist attractions, could be sort of a list of important places of interest, Kanyakumari, Ooty, Kodaikanal, thekkadi, Kochi, Coorg, etc., can be added. Mugunth 03:38, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Actually, I had given this some thought previously and had held off simply because of the fact that SI isn't a official political entity like a state/UT, so there's not one government enforcing policies on education, transport, etc. In that regard, I except to see differences b/w the SI article, and others, say, India. However, if you have the time, perhaps you'd like to take a shot at drafting these sections (Education, Transport, Tourism) and see what we come up with...I can definitely help fine tune them as necessary...just remember to keep them in Summary style. Also, I think we can definitely add the "Tourism" section, since, while each state has a tourism authority, there's still enough general information about tourism in SI that can be covered in the article. Thanks AreJay (talk) 04:18, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

I just noticed that Tourism isn't a major section for India-related articles as prescribed any of the WP:INSTATES, WP:INDIA or WP:INCITIES. In seeming some Indian articles, it looks like mention of tourist destinations is made in the culture or flora/fauna sections. We might need to do that as well. AreJay (talk) 04:31, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Colonial - Euro Centric Images

There are four images showing people. Two of them are colonial images. Would someone please add images representing actual South Indian people? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.47.249.252 (talk) 23:57, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

• All unassessed articles
• WikiProject templates with unknown parameters
• Old requests for peer review