Jump to content

Talk:Kollegal

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Politepunk (talk | contribs) at 20:05, 13 March 2006 (commentary on edits 13th March 2006). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

I've rewritten and wikified the first part of the article. I'll have a go at the second part if nobody else rushes in...

I'm adding the cleanup-date tag. Politepunk 18:44, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Commentary on edits 13th March 2006

In the absence of anyone else wanting to have a go I'm going to be bold and I'll try to cleanup the second part of the article.

  • I reworded the sentence about Veerappan to further improve style - hopefully ;-)
  • I was bold and removed the sentence about magic in the area; this looks like it quite possibly reflects the effect of external influences on the area, but the original editor didn't provide any verification for this and, as I am unable to verify the assertion, removal seems to be the only option.
  • Being conscious of the probability of removing more content from the original article, I thought I'd better add some 'verifiable material to compensate. Thus I have added an estimate of the population of Kollegal in 2005.
  • I've removed the part about the school run by the Lion's Club; if this article is expanded then I presume that a section detailing institutions in the city/area could be added. I'm sure that the schools do have a good reputation but it is probably unlikely that this is verifiable so I didn't feel like I could leave it in.
  • I've changed the order of some of the content to group the surviving sentences more sensibly.
  • I've condensed the information about the tourist attractions of the area - I hope that I haven't confused any of the names/categories.
  • I've tried to retain the meaning (as I interpreted it) of the section about the use of Kannada and a local dialect of this (which is supported by the the film review cited).
  • I dispensed with the final sentence.

I think that my explanations are now longer than the article ;-) Feel free to add more material, I'llwatch the page and may try to expand it a little.

I hope that the editing has retained the value of the original article and made it a little more accesible. (I just came across the article when hunting typos with google.)

Let me know how you think I did. Politepunk 20:05, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]