Talk:InfoPark Kochi

Employee strength in Infopark.

Mr Dileepks, The employee strength figures in Infopark is quite unbelievable. In a report dated 21st may 2009 it is clearly mentioned that the strength is around 8000 (http://www.thehindubusinessline.in/2009/05/21/stories/2009052150781700.htm). There is no proof that employee strength almost doubled to 15000 in hardly one and half years. I believe the latest report is just a figment of imagination from the reporter. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.88.239.184 (talk) 09:36, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Dear IP Editor. There are very many things editors believe, but for Wikipedia, it is the credibility/acceptibility of sources that matters. The Hindu is a reputed news paper, and the figure comes from its reporter. It is clearly reported as a fact, not as an opinion, either of the reporter or a reported party. Such news are routinely accepted as valid reference for articles. I can show you many examples of such use. I can also show you arguments by a number of editors supporting the use of Hindu reports as reference.

It is a valid reference, as long as another reference contradicts it. Do you have any source that contradicts this number?

DileepKS(talk) 10:59, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Dileepks, Thanks for the clarification. I believe I can get the numbers soon. Till then let it stay. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.17.228.74 (talk) 11:36, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Dileep, the master of Koch hype, the information in the article is referenced which states the employee strength is 8000. Also there is another report here here, which also states that the employee strenght is 8000. Unlike the Hindu report you provided which is by some editor Praveen, these reports says that the CM quoted the figures. If you want to remove, provide valid reference from Infopark official site. Yours Lovingly :-) --Samaleks (talk) 15:57, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Samaleks, your criteria on references is intriguing. It seems to be skewed depending upon which location it refers to.

Just moments ago, on Technopark page, you support something that isn't even alluded in the references, and is clearly false by other reliable sources. Here, you discount a clear statement by a news reporter. Very very intriguing. Also, too many days hadn't passed since your similar dual standards in the TRV and COK pages. You are doing great service to your city sir.

Your newsclip is from 2009. The reference given in the article is from 2011. Newer information take precedence on older ones.

Anyway, IP Editor 125.17.228.74 promised to get new reference. Based on WP:BRD, I am reinstating the info that is blindly reverted by an IP Editor.

DileepKS(talk) 01:24, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

I've the RTI document with me. It says the employee strength is only 4954 for Infopark SEZ. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.17.228.74 (talk) 13:13, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

User: 125.17.228.74 - Can you please share the RTI document? Thanks - MountainWhiskey - talk 04:12, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

Infopark has both SEZ and non-sez units. Need to see the RTI document, and the date of it, before it could be accepted.

DileepKS(talk) 04:52, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

A valid and convincing reference is added and edited..http://www.keralait.org/about_project.php?project_id=1&location_id=1

It seems the figure of Infopark SEZ,4954 is correct and the total with 9500 including non-SEZ.

Hope this will clear the things.

Thanks --59.98.80.60 (talk) 07:26, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

That information is outdated. Note that it mentions Athulya as under construction. The building was inaugurated in June 2010, so this information should be at least an year old. The news article that is referred for the original text is from Feb 2011.

DileepKS(talk) 07:48, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

From where the newspaper got this info??Did they made any head count there?

You mean other than SEZ, it is 10046 to make 15000???

Thanks --59.98.80.60 (talk) 08:16, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

Dileep, You are not here to do any research, but to just put what is available in the references. Keralait ref is more valid than Hindu report. Moreover, the Keralait website says the employee strength is 9500. The details about Athulya is in another section. It is also possible that they havent updated the Athulya section; right? So, I can also draw conclusions like you; which may not be always correct; right?. As of 2011 Jan, the employee strength in Infopark is 4954 and CSEZ(IT/ITES Only) is 4338. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.193.160.9 (talk) 08:20, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

Please note that unlike many of the editors here who believe in revert first, talk never, I haven't undone the 9500 number. I will try to get a more accurate ref. If you have RTI proof, please share it. Thanks. DileepKS(talk) 10:20, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

Doesn't Physical verification takes precedence over web pages?

Stop the madness.

IP Editor 59.98.80.60 insists that the Infopark Expressway is only 4 lanes based on a press release by the Kerala IT Mission. The expressway is there for anyone to see, and it clearly has 6 lanes for its entire length. There is photographic evidence available here : [[1]]. Those are unedited photos as can be verified from the EXIF data. The question is, which reference is more reliable? Physical verification, photograph, or a press release? DileepKS(talk) 11:21, 5 April 2011 (UTC) @DileepKS : In one of our previous talks,I already mentioned that Don't expect others to comment as soon as you make a statement...Previously it was a request..Now it is a WARNING (not call me as admin).. Now to the subject....Can you please explain how you physically verified,how you read the photographs which you referring (it seems its your photographs;good). We will discuss about the press release later... --Induzcreed (talk) 05:12, 7 April 2011 (UTC) I live and work in the general area, and I drive on that highway often. I see six lanes clearly marked on the roadway. Anyone who can visit the place can see the six lanes marked. If you want to verify it yourself, all you need to do is to come over to location and look!! Yes, those photos are clicked by myself. Soon after it was opened, I took some photos which I posted on Flickr, which is linked. Now, what are you accusing here? Do you accuse that I lied that I see six lanes marked? Do you accuse that I am having some kind of hallucination that I see six lanes? Do you accuse that I photoshopped the images to make it look like six lanes? What is your point? BTW, in strict accordance with WP:BRD principle, I put back the 6 lane ref. IP Editor 59.98.80.60 did the B, I did the R and now, let us do the D DileepKS(talk) 06:09, 7 April 2011 (UTC) Dileep, I was editing through IPs. I thought of creating an id to reply you here. Boy, it seems you have no knowledge of the concept of Expressways. How can you judge a road class just by the marking?? Since you said you are living nearby or in Ernakulam itself just go to Angamaly-Perumbavoor road and see the markings and judge how many lanes are there. Lets take one by one of the photos. IMG_2700 & IMG_2683 : This is a kerbed section and as you said the markings are three.. Kid, you need to understand the width of the carriageway and the difference in carriageway and shoulder. The last part near to the raised kerb is none other than "Paved Shoulder". IMG_2694 : In this picture,also a kerbed section,the width is very much clear. The "Paved Shoulder" is having less width and it shall generally be 1-1.5m or sometimes 2.0m. IMG_2693 : Same as above IMG_2692 & IMG_2691: Same as above and is MORE Clear. IMG_2687 : This is nothing but unkerbed section. Here also the "last lane" as you claim is a "Paved shoulder". Also see the width. Check here, Example for a 6 lane expressway with paved shoulder and markings: File:Mumbai_Pune_ExpresswayDec2007.jpg Finally,It is not an expressway.. Infopark Expressway is the SPV formed by Infopark to execute this road project. Similar examples are : Guruvayoor Expressways : The SPV formed between KMC Constructions & SREI for the execution of Angamaly-Mannuthy 4-lane of NH-47 and Thrissur Expressways is for Mannuthy-Wadakkancherry..and the lists go on. So this is not a 6 lane road and moreover an expressway in its class. It is just a 4 LANE ROAD. --Ochanthuruth (talk) 08:30, 7 April 2011 (UTC) Dear Mr. Ochanthuruth, thanks for getting out of the IP curtain. I sure hope you would continue to use the ID, rather than the IPs. I see that you have silently reverted the info. It is in violation to the WP:BRD principle. Please restore the information while we do the discussion. The paved shoulder should be marked with a continuous white line, not the dashed white line which is used for lane separation. This road doesn't have a paved shoulder. Instead it have another lane. There is no standard that says there should be a paved shoulder. IRC-35 section 8.6 says shoulder should be marked if there is no kerb. This road have kerbs, so no shoulder marking is needed. There was no SPV formed for this purpose. Please provide reference for that. The press release itself clearly calls it Infopark Expressway. What else you need? Yes, I'd been to the MC Road. It is a well marked 2 lane rural highway. It do have border edge lines (as IRC calls them), the reason being the absence of kerbs. Hope it is clear. BTW, calling someone kid is not wikiquette. Be civil is a very important factor in Wikipedia. DileepKS(talk) 09:56, 7 April 2011 (UTC) Dileep, There is no rule in wiki that edits need registration. I wont be using my id frequently, and doesnt believes that login is a must for wiki editing. Calling kid is of affection; boy. Anyways, if you are kidding nothing wrong to call as kid. Wikipedia is NOT a place for kidding and joking. You have falsely made an allegation against me that I have reverted the change; infact I havent. Please be patient boy, rather than jumping on the gun to make conclusions. Anways, coming back to topic: How can you ascertain that this road is not having a paved shoulder?? Are you kidding...A nd you claim that this road is having kerbs. I guess you have no idea what you observed. Please take a look at the picture IMG_2687. Also, you claim that it is another lane. Boy, see what is the width of the "so-called" lane. See the reduced width compared to the main carriage way (other two lanes) width. It is ONLY 1.0-1.5 or 2.0; I REPEAT. Of course there may be some variations if you look into the entire section. Don't try to make yourself ridiculous. Now marking for shoulder.. Section 8.6 of IRC 35 says about Rural highways. Also,8.6.2(I) says The Pavement edge lines are desirable at the section where the shoulder is paved and is of similar texture and colour to the main carriageway. You are claiming that these edge lines shall be continuous.. Yes it is true.. It is already marked there confirming to IRC 35 i.e.;150mm from the kerb edge. See the Photo IMG_2691. While in some other pictures as you said the works are still in progress. The SPV details can get from through an RTI and you are an expert in RTI. Infact RTI specialist !! Look out next time whether the kerb section also have the shoulder line and edge line. Please try to understand the difference between edge line and shoulder line. Also,IRC 35 is NOT the final one it is having a lot of sub-references. It is a false claim that roads don't have shoulder. It should be there, whether as paved or unpaved. Of course,you can ask the person who helped you with the IRC code about such details. I request you not to change the article, if you don't have minimum exposure in the subject. --218.186.16.233 (talk) 12:53, 7 April 2011 (UTC) Dear IP Editor, Ochanthuruth, ajith, ajay or whatever you choose to call yourself at this moment of time, You have pointed out the deficiency of using IP Address. An IP Address did the revert, and it is normal to assume that it is the IP editor who is currently active. I suggest you read the page WP:Wikiquette and the page personal attack. You are making a personal attack by calling me kid, boy, and claiming that I do not have minimum exposure. You are bringing up one image where the kerb is still to be built, while ignoring all the other images with properly built and painted kerbs. I agree that the lane at the extremes are narrower than the other two lanes. Still that is a lane, and NOT shoulder. If it is shoulder, it MUST be marked with a continuous line. Let me also mention that roads with such narrow lanes at the edges are routinely claimed to be 6 lane in other articles. And alleging that I need someone's help to obtain and figure IRC-35 is another form of personal attack. It is YOU who claimed that Infopark Expressway is the name of the SPV, and the burden of proof is upon YOU. The road is officially called Infopark Expressway, and it shall be called so. DileepKS(talk) 16:10, 7 April 2011 (UTC) Dear Dileep or Kuttappan or Chandi or whatever you choose to call yourself at this moment of time, You need to understand the difference of Shoulder and a carriageway or lane. Simply you cannot say a MUST. For that,better you construct a road as per your fantacy ideas and use MUST there. Only edge line SHOULD be marked with continuous line NOT the shoulder line.Read carefully the sentence which is there in IRC 35 and its sub-references. I don't see obtain someone's help and figure IRC 35; is a form of personnal attack, since you have ZEROknowledge in this. As you allege,I didn't ignore all other images. I pointed out one example where the edge line is continuous and the 1,5m paved shoulder is also there.. See the above reply. Also,by putting a kerb on the edge doesn't mean that it is a lane. Yes, I REPEAT; YOU DON'T HAVE THE MINIMUM TECHNICAL KNOWLEDGE OR EXPOSURE IN THIS. If you had, you will never reply blindly like this. The road is called Infopark Expressway but NOT an Expressway in class.So many such examples can be pointed out for such cases. This is some what "Pottante Mumbil Shanghu Oothiyittu Kadhayilla". And please remember that the discussion is about whether the road is a 4-lane or 6-lane; not about what it is "called". — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ochanthuruth (talk • contribs) 03:02, 8 April 2011 (UTC) Hey hey hey,Whats going on here?Is it the discussion about whether the road is 4 lane or 6 lane OR something else?? Dear DileepKS,I don't understand what is wrong with you?Your user profile says you are an electronics engineering graduate and you are blindly arguing a technical matter which you never exposed into;I hope. Do you think the pavement composition of the carriageway and shoulder remains the same.Simply seeing a marking how can you classify it as a lane.Boy,there are so many factors to be considered which you DO NOT KNOW Even a KG kid is better than you on basic common sense.and of course it is very easy to make understand even a layman. This is NOT a forum to show off your fanciest ideology and to make others to BELIEVE what you say. --59.98.85.44 (talk) 04:21, 8 April 2011 (UTC) This shows the problem with IP editing. There is no way to know if the above two posts are from the same person or two. Editor Ochanthuruth claimed that he was the IP editor 59.xx.xx.xx, but now another edit from the same group of IPs. Since these gentleman (or men) apparently decided to use the confusion to his (their) advantage, got to indulge it. Yes, I am BTech in Electronics, and I know people with BTech in Electronics or related fields get into infrastructure field and become (or at least claim to be) expert in that field. You haven't provided any info on your credentials on expertise in the field. You could very well be a commerce graduate working at a totally unrelated field. At least I show the honesty to put my credentials and real name on the profile, and the integrity to always edit with my own ID. You, my dear sir, hide behind an IP and try to game the wikipedia system. How do YOU know the edges of this highway is not paved same as the rest of the carriageway? How do YOU know or sure that the edges are paved shoulder and not a traffic lane? Do you have any proof/reference for that? Bring it, and then we will debate that. DileepKS(talk) 05:22, 8 April 2011 (UTC) I think this discussion is futile. User:DileepKS69 is trying to push a fact which is NOT a fact on paper. The user says that the Infopark Expressway is 6-lane. It is true - if you go by the standards we have for such roads in Kerala. In Trivandrum, there is a road called the Sasthamangalam - Vellayambalam road and a lot of people call it Six-Lane. That is laughable to say the least because, the 3rd lane is just wide enough to carry an autorickshaw and you cannot do a comfortable u-turn on this road. Now, where in the world would you find a six-lane road where you cannot do a u-turn in one go? Now, I was talking facts derived from experience. On Wikipedia, Paper Facts take precedence over Actual Facts. Paper says Infopark Expressway is 4-lane and it should be called 4-lane and NOT 6-lane. ::: Has anyone heard of a Hill Resort called Mukkunimala in Thiruvananthapuram? Well according to some Senior Editors on Wiki, it is! I questioned the claim and I was shown a Government publication that called it a Hill Resort, and so it was allowed to stay. Next time, make sure you visit Mukkunimala (especially during winter) before you visit Kovalam. Infopark Expressway is called Expressway on a publication and it should be allowed to stay as Expressway. So the correction should be "4-lane Infopark Expressway". I don't understand why everytime there is a discussion, there is a sudden spurt in the number of new editors, mostly here for 'one night stands'. And very unfortunate that we have so many IP editors like 59.x, 218.x, 110.x, 192.x all using the same abusive language and making personal attacks. I think it is high time this page goes into Semi-Protection as well. - MountainWhiskey - talk 06:12, 8 April 2011 (UTC) Hey,I didn't claim that I'm Ochanthuruth or anybody else. Open your eyes and closely watch the images which you produced for your claim and it is mentioned by the editor Ochanthuruthu that the width of the shoulder is 1.0-1.5 or may be 2.0m ONLY. Also, for a lane the desirable width shall be a of 3.5m on highways;NOT less.It is very very clear from the picture that the width of the claimed lane is very much less than the width of the carriageway and that portion is called SHOULDER whether it is paved or unpaved. Already it is mentioned above that The Pavement edge lines are desirable at the section where the shoulder is paved and is of similar texture and colour to the main carriageway.Since you have color blindness you might have not seen this colour properly.Normally, the colour of the paved shoulder will be BLACK as the colour of the bitumen is same as the case for carriageway. So,this is a 4-lane road with a name "Infopark Expressway"...NOT a 6-lane Expressway in its class... Thanks, --59.98.86.134 (talk) 06:17, 8 April 2011 (UTC) And Dear Mountain Whiskey aka Arun,I don't know what type of car you are using to take a U turn..Hope it is NOT a Cadillac.. How can you conclude that the last lane can't even accomodate an autorickshaw.May be it is used for parking.Anyhow a car can park there..Right apart from autorikshaw.How funny you are?Come with a tape and measure the width there and here.See the difference.Anyway,that is an off topic subject in this page is concerned. Also,you need to learn..what is expressway & a six-lane URBAN ROAD..Mandan I partly accept your point,Yes.The document calls the road as Infopark Expressway...No objection.I accept. The sentence may re-phrased as The park is connected to the Seaport-Airport Road via a 4 lane road called Infopark Expressway. Thanks --59.98.86.134 (talk) 06:25, 8 April 2011 (UTC) Finally, 59.x with an Identity Crisis has accepted my argument. Also, I don't see the need to get personal with someone without an identity. Call names as much as you like, I ain't gonna be affected. Oh btw, I have seen and driven more expressways than you can ever imagine, in different countries. Maybe you should enjoy a skiing holiday in Mukkunimala. - MountainWhiskey - talk 06:38, 8 April 2011 (UTC) MountainWhiskey, the key to the facts in Wikipedia is verifiability. Something that is physically verifiable needs no documentary proof. I have seen photos of the 6 lane roads in Trivandrum. The lane structure is the same as the infopark expressway, except that the former is a city road. If the former can be called 6 lane, the latter can be too. DileepKS(talk) 06:45, 8 April 2011 (UTC) Mountain Whiskey aka Arun,Yes I do know how you tragically ended in TVM all the way from aus/nz.Ha ha...argument accepted..I told partly only.See above comments.Since you seems more clever than POOR Farmer DileepKS. DileepKS,How the lane structure is similar.Did you were in the design or even execution of either of these roads.Don't bluff.How you physically verified boy??Again trying to be Joker??Can't help you boy.We were verifying physically through the photographs which you were taken.If you unaware of something;please accept that.Leave the arrogant attitude I'm ALL,Whatever I say is Correct and everybody needs to accept that. Thanks --59.98.86.134 (talk) 06:52, 8 April 2011 (UTC) @DileepKS - My point exactly! Physically speaking, you may be right. But, like most senior editors put it, Wiki is not a place for physically-verified claims/opinions, rather only paper facts from reliable sources. The paper sources in this case call Infopark Expressway 4-lane and it should stay that way on Wiki as well. There are a lot of such physically verifiable claims on many wiki pages and I would be looking around to remove it. Moreover, I think it is high time, this revert war by IP editors (without an identity of course) is stopped. To stop the vandalism (something done by people when they are at a loss of reasonable arguments), we must stick to the paper facts and edit accordingly. I am done. - MountainWhiskey - talk 06:55, 8 April 2011 (UTC) @the IP User 59.98.86.134 - I know which stable you come from. Hiding behind an IP is not going to mask your real identity. Before you make personal attacks, please do not forget that you are editing with an IP. It can be put to good use, if you know what I mean. - MountainWhiskey - talk 06:59, 8 April 2011 (UTC) Yes.I know very much..and your experience in that..Better don't forget that too. --59.98.86.22 (talk) 07:02, 8 April 2011 (UTC) Well, Did YOU were involved in either? You advised me to take a closer look. Did you do that on the TVM road? It is you, sir, who show the arrogance of Whatever I say is Correct and everybody needs to accept that. Compare these images: [[2]] [[3]] The leftmost line width is very similar.

Stop the madness

This madness ends now. Stop the bickering, you two. I'm very close to opening an RfC on both of you. - Philippe 07:09, 8 April 2011 (UTC) And insulting someone based on his social background is the worst form of personal attack. You should be permanently blocked for that. I need an apology

DileepKS(talk) 07:04, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

Dear DileepKS,What social background you are talking??I didn't get you.Please explain.

Also,I didn't involved either of these two.I already told you need to see the difference in URBAN ROAD and a HIGHWAY

There is specification difference in both including the width of median;that you can see in both.URBAN ROAD in TVM follows both IRC & AASHTO whereas IP road is IRC.

You cannot compare a city or urban road with a highway or expressway.The space allocation is different ex:width of lane required is 3.0m for city roads and 3.5 m for highways.

Atleast now,you understood.

Thanks.