Talk:Mumbai

This reference page has been destroyed by the addition of the Nov 26 terrorist attack information. This is not a news page people! Codeviolation (talk) 00:51, 27 November 2008 (UTC) codeviolation

Language of Mumbai

Right now there is a broken link under Demographics as to the dialect of marathi spoken in Mumbai.

Alignment of Images

Images need to be aligned in all possible directions in an oscillatory serpentine fashion. Kensplanet^T_C 06:01, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

rp template

It looks weird to me. I searched for it but could not find an FA that uses it. There was some discussion on in Wikipedia, but it does not look like a well-accepted stuff.--GDibyendu (talk) 17:35, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

I myself am not comfortable with the template. But we cannot help it since we are not using the {{harvnb}} template for books. If you check REF23

Dwivedi, Sharada; Rahul Mehrotra (2001). Bombay: The Cities Within. Eminence Designs.
It has been referenced 6 times. All References have different page Numbers. How do we solve this then. The current rp template seems to solve this problem. Something different for Harvnb since all books go in a seperate section below References.
One solution could be including the citation just after the sentence : These islands, were in turn leased to the British East India Company in 1668 for a sum of £10 per annum by the Royal Charter of 27 March 1668 (Dwivedi & Mehrotra 2001, p. 21). The population quickly rose from 10,000 in 1661, to 60,000 in 1675.
Although scholarly, but not popular, wastes spaces and is embarassing and uncomfortable for many readers.
But for implementing HARVNB as in Mangalore FA, the entire article will have to be restructured. It will consume a lot of time and is not much required. Mysore uses this kind of template. Kensplanet^T_C 18:15, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

I can help in using Harvnb and associated templates, if this change sounds good. Thanks.--GDibyendu (talk) 18:24, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

The {{rp}} template look ugly to be too, and will look even worse if we need to cite a range of pages. I too can help with converting to Harvard referencing this weekend, unless there are any objections to using that scheme. One question: How do we use {{harvnb}} with websites/news reports athat don't have an author ? Or do, we we use the template only for books and journal papers ? Abecedare (talk) 18:30, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

I am jsut picking one article from FAc: Ron Hamence with the Australian cricket team in England in 1948. Its clear that Harvnb need to be used only or Books whose page nos go on varying depending on the statement. It need not be used for Online Websites/news etc...Kensplanet^T_C 19:07, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

They seem to be using cite book (as against Harvard reference), which is usually good if a url like google book link is available. But, if Harvnb is used, it will show a link in notes section, but that link target will work only if Harvard reference is used. Else, if cite book is used, typically we can use ref like <ref>Writer, p. 150</ref> as this FAc is using. --GDibyendu (talk) 03:29, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Kens actually used Harvnb for a source. But then I told that if we use Harvnb, we have to use them in all book sources, in order to maintain regularity of ref style. Now, the article already has many cite book refs, and converting them to Harvnb will taks a lot of time. Given that we are in a FAR, my opinion was to try to improve the article overall and provide new references, rather than giving a lot of time to concert to Harvnb. However, Harvnb is definitely preferred choice. On the other hand, if we use cite book (with rp as needed), time needed will be much less. In case we decided to convert all present book refs to Harvnb, we can ask the FAR to give some more time than usual, as active work is going on. Still, it would take a lot of our time. Regards.--Dwaipayan (talk) 23:58, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Hmmm, as such I can spend time on doing this. But, there are issues. 1) Suketu Mehta's book has been cited twice, but the two use different publishers and isbns: if someone has access to this book, then please confirm that both citations appear in that or not. 2) Typically, the link generated by harvnb reads as 'lastname, year'. What should it be for Manorama yearbook?--GDibyendu (talk) 05:54, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

It's not compulsory that HARVNB should always have the (last name Year, p. xyz) format. For Manorama yearbook, it should be, (Malyalam Manorama 2003, p. 21). HARVNB sometimes can also have title of the book, instead of the preferred last name style. This is preferred for Government sources and PDFs, who do not have authors. In such cases, we can just mention title of the PDF, (Crime statistics 2004, p. 5). We can adjust HARVNB as per our convenience. Kensplanet^T_C 08:40, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

I think Dwapayanc, its better to continue with harvnb. Readers reading our articles may not be interested in Page nos. For them only the Prose and text matters. As already mentioned by Abecadare, for citing a range of pages , it looks ugly Kensplanet^T_C 08:44, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

I am now done with the cite books except that I left out 5-6 links from Maharashtra Gazetteer links, which I believe should be cite web (though I did not change them to cite web).--GDibyendu (talk) 09:20, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Great work GDibyendu!!!. Gazetters also have to be in the Reference section since they are high quality published books not ordinary low quality web pages. I'll soon move it. Anyway, do books without Page nos constitute as valid references. Some books do not have Page nos Kensplanet^T_C 13:00, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I noticed that some books do not have page numbers mentioned. But, I do not have copies or those are accessible in google books. I tried to check if a copy of Manorama yearbook can be procured or downloaded, but did not succeed in either. Maybe I should move to computer related projects, where I have books and ebooks :) --GDibyendu (talk) 14:31, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

FARC update ?

Does anyone know what sections or aspects of the article still need work ? I am going to be busy till mid-week, but can put in some hours after that. Abecedare (talk) 17:46, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Some new 'citation needed' tag has been added. We need ref for those. I think that's all for now. BTW, someone change the pic in Infobox today. Personally, I think it is not a better pic than previous one.--GDibyendu (talk) 17:58, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. I'll try to address that later this week (unless someone beats me to it :) )

As for the infobox image: I would prefer using a Gateway of India image there since that seems to most common symbol of the city; but I don't really have a strong opinion on the issue. Most of the images in the article are pretty poor, and it would be good if we can look for alternatives at some point. Abecedare (talk) 18:12, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Ridiculous Reverts

This is with reference to [1]

How could you remove 11 Citations and 2,440 bytes? Please do not revert to previous revisions henceforth thisway.

Regarding your statement reverted img edits. please discuss on talk page before making such drastic edits to a featured article

There is no need to discuss anything now. This is on a FAR. Break the rules. But save the article from being delisted. Kensplanet^T_C 10:29, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

Don't worry. This page is not going to get delisted! If you look at the WP:FA guidelines, this page is one of the best featured articles out there!

Some images are gone again. How often does this happen! Hometech (talk) 19:10, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

Note that User:Nikkul has done similar mass reversions of sourced content before and been warned about it. I suggest that if he repeats his disruptive editing, we propose that he be topic ban from this (and possibly other Indian city) pages. Abecedare (talk) 19:26, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

I'm sorry the mass revert was an honest mistake. There is no need to get upset. I have put a lot of effort into making this page the best article it could-- it would be stupid for me to make disruptive edits on this article! (And I don't intend to).

I have left a message on User:Hometechs page asking him to please discuss his image additons on the talk page before he inserts them on the main page. The addition of undiscussed images to this article by new users will only decrease the quality of the article, especially when it is under Featured Article Review. Nikkul (talk) 19:31, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

What is the need to discuss the ancient statue images. There's none so i added 2. Hometech (talk) 19:36, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

There is a need to discuss important changes here before you make them on the page. Otherwise, Wikipedia would be complete chaos if everyone added whatever they like! Thanks for discussing on the talk page. Happy editing! Nikkul (talk) 21:47, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

Agree. But If a rule prevents you from improving or maintaining Wikipedia, ignore it. In this case, the rule is the discussion. Ignore it if it prevents you from improving the page atleast for now in this FAR. Kensplanet^T_C 07:17, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

More sections

Doesn't this article need more sections? I believe a number of these could be added. Here are some suggestions. Let's all add to this list.

1. Restaurants, pubs, eating joints and popular hangout places.

2. Popular localities and real estate.

3. Bollywood (there's only a mention of this in the article; it's too huge a phenomena to be summed up in one line!)

4. Travel destinations around the city: Alibaug, Elephanta Caves, hill stations like Mahabhaleshwar, Panchgani, and Matheran.

5. Languages and dialects in the city

6. Books and art on Mumbai

Some more magazine titles can be added to the list of "media" - including Time Out and Mumbai Mirror to start with.

I'm starting with some of these changes; do direct me, add and comment.

Thanks,

TroubledTraveler (talk) 12:18, 23 May 2009 (UTC)