![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
I do not think the Maidan article should be merged with Kolkata. As of now, it has no extra information, but it is a seperate and important enough entity in itself with a lot of history and atmosphere. Central Park and New York City are seperate articles ! 70.17.163.241 11:28, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
please focus on the west bengal article as well
The old Bourne and Shepherd and other old postcard pictures should be public domain now. What about the photos taken during WW2 by the American GI s ? 128.2.179.205Ray
I plan to put in a paragraph per each community, it would be great if we had more public domain Kolkata pictures though. Thanks. 128.2.179.205Ray.
After the recent round of voting which lasted for two months, I have moved the Calcutta page to Kolkata. Due to a known software bug, I had to manually merge the contents of the talk page. Results of the voting: Kolkata: 40 Calcutta: 30
= Nichalp ( talk · contribs)= 12:23, Apr 20, 2005 (UTC)
Was Calcutta High Court renamed to Kolkata High Court after the city's English name was changed? There was a recent edit that changed Calcutta High Court to Kolkata High Court but I don't believe this has been done yet officially. Could somebody shed light on this?
-- Urnonav 16:32, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)
The use of "bastardization" in this article is very POV. A more proper term that is NPOV is simply "transliteration". The British colonials/invaders weren't purposely respelling the Bengali language terms and changing them... they simply were trying to render them in English language phonology. Major difference, and the article reads much more NPOV to drop the allegatory tone of using "bastardization". If someone were "bastardizing" the term Bangla, then the result would have been something like Bae-Ni Ga-Lah or Ibn Gola or Ubi-England... One could perhaps argue that calico was a bastardization of Kolkata, but they'd be reading too much into what is simply an understandable linguistic change when two languages with very different phonological schemes come into contact.
sturmde 9 Jun 2005
We need a brief on sections like history on the man page inspite of moving the history section into a separate page.
Arunram 04:23, 16 May 2005 (UTC)
I think all the various institutions should be renamed Kolkata, it sounds better too. It's nice to hear everyone use the bengali version of the name.
Sean
I don't know about anyone else, but I would like to know more about the physical geography of Kolkata: mountains, rivers, etc. Also, some climate information--like temperatures and humidity, etc. would be nice.
I'm curious, when did the city council officially change the spelling of the name? I assume the pronunciation of the name hasn't changed and is still /kæl.ka.tə/, if not could a pronunciation guide be given using IPA.
I'm a bit perplexed, if most people and organisations still refer to the city as Calcutta, wouldn't it be better suited to keep it at
Calcutta. My main reason for keeping it at Calcutta is because we wouldn't move
Vienna to
Wien or
Copenhagen to
København, as these are estabished names in English for these cities, as is Calcutta. Doesn't this name change go against the established policy of using common names? It has been established for centuries, that the city's name in English is Calcutta. Mark 05:37, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
The synchronization between Hindi word Kalkatta and कोलकता do not match. Chirags 01:19, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
Make smaller articles on specific things, and use this main article as a summary.
In general there is a shortage of photographs of Indian cities by Indians who know their city well. If Wikepedia editors want, they are most welcome to use some of the photographs of Kolkata taken by me recently. Hopefully this helps.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/85296574@N00/sets/1261158/
Hi,
Calstreet is still not a complete portal. Don't add a link to it, unless it is pointing to an article. Chirags 22:42, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
To the guy from Calstreet: 1. Wikipedia is not for posting ads 2. On your website main page itself, you have put up a notice, "Dear Visitors,
Please note this website is still under construction. The website will take another month and a half to work in full motion. As a result of this you will find lots of features not working.
Thanking you.
Webmaster "
3. You should not be knocking off someone's comment like this. You missed yourself a chance of publicising your own site thru comment pages.. if that's what your intention was.
4. There are other more better and effective ways to increase traffic to your website. One of them is to tie up with wikipedia and provide content from wikipedia to your own website. This was a free advise.
Cheers,
Chirags 15:24, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
The sub-heading Ethnic communities in Kolkata contains very interesting information and photo.However,in the article Kolkata I think the content of the sub-heading is a bit too large,given the concern on the size of Kolkata.
If possible,can the content of the Ethnic communities in Kolkata be transferred to a new article of the same name, while there remains a summary of the content under Kolkata , along with a link to the new article Ethnic communities in Kolkata ?
I think this move would not only shorten the size of Kolkata,but it conforms to the usual rule of articles related to Indian cities,and will allow for newer sections like Economy,Administration etc.
Similarly, the section on Festival can be shortened and transferred to a new article/category.-- Dwaipayanc 08:42, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
I have made several changes in the Kolkata page.The size has been somewhat reduced.Please review the article and modify.Also, the Administration [2] section needs to be developed.-- Dwaipayanc 18:59, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
The result of the debate was no consensus, leaning on oppose. — Nightst a llion (?) 09:27, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
Kolkata → Calcutta – Calcutta is a far more common name in English than Kolkata (note Wikipedia:Naming conventions (common names)). The University of Calcutta, for example, continues to spell it that way on its website. This same rationale has been used to prevent the Mecca article from being moved to Makkah, despite the Saudi preference of the latter spelling since the 1980s.
See last vote and lots and lots of arguments on this isssue: /Archive 3#Straw poll on the move of Calcutta to Kolkata. -- Philip Baird Shearer 20:44, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
Perhaps, for the sake of consistency, the vote should include Bombay/Mumbai and Madras/Chennai (any others?), i.e. become a multiple-page vote (with the voting period extended). Or would this really roll the worms out of the can onto the carpet? Best wishes, David Kernow 15:37, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
I'd just like to note my love for Mullywood cinema...At any rate, my feeling is that we should just leave this be - it'll never be satisfied to everyone's liking, but the current situation is basically acceptable. john k 18:16, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
Do we really need this section Modern Kolkata? Though the section has good information (like the description of CBD), the theme is repeatitive, and has slightly been handled in the Economy section. Please comment.Thanks.-- Dwaipayanc 11:57, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
The history section was quite empty so I made it about 5 times bigger. There are some amazing facts relating to Calcutta's past that nobody had mentioned - I put these into the histort & trivia section.
ASIA's FIRST RAILWAY ASIA'S FIRST TELEGRAPH INDIA'S FIRST NEWSPAPER WHERE THE LINK BETWEEN MOSQUITOES & MALARIA WAS PROVED THE BIRTHPLACE OF WILLIAM MAKEPEACE THACKERAY
Mighty facts, but of course, Indians have almost written the British out of their history. )-:
Hi! We have a good number of images on Kolkata. However, there seems to be too many of them. We can choose some that can be removed. And due to browser differences, sometimes there are images are seen differently by different users ! Following is the copy of talk I had with blacksun
"Oh ! When I am seeing in my browser, the 4 photos on transport section appears in the same section i.e. transport. This may be a browser/ settings problem, I have faced similar problems earlier.I use Mozilla firefox. Anyway, I do not mind removing that old horse carriage photo, but a traffic jam photo should be there. If necessary, you can put your arguments in the talk page of Kolkata , so that other wikipedia users also can see the problem and decide ehat to do, rather than just 2 of us. I am copying this message to Kolkata talk page, please answae there." Please see so that images are used appropriately in the article so that they represent a good picture of Kolkata as a whole. Bye. Thanks.-- Dwaipayanc 09:06, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
Can we remove Kolkata in the media? The section is not that necessary. With so many red links, it seems an eye-sore.One or two words in Media may suffice.-- Dwaipayanc 09:38, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
Hi all - very good work by the collaborators. I have some suggestions to make:
Please create forks for "Geography" "Education" "Architecture." The images are great, and the balance can be achieved by distributing them into the forks.
Check out Bangalore - a great example. Good luck, wonderful work! Rama's Arrow 18:31, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
Oh boy, I am an idiot. I kept looking at top of this page for new suggestions instead of the end. Anyways, ya, I think combining those two into something generic like "Architecture" could work. I don't particularly like "Modern Kolkata" section. ( Blacksun 13:44, 20 March 2006 (UTC))
If I may make a suggestion, the article appears to be overrun by images and while images are always great, they must not become the central focal point of the article. It might help significantly if we kept the images relevent and maximized on the quality of textual content. Also, Mordern Kolkota and Colonial Buildings can be merged into a civic administration (and city planning) segment. AreJay 04:20, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
Can someone add a line or two about political scene on kolkata? No POV just something about the fact that they have a ruling communist party for so and so years. I dont know much about that topic. It can probably go at end of the history section. ( Blacksun 14:35, 20 March 2006 (UTC))
So we made a lot of changes in overall structure based on Canberra's (FA) city page. Thanks to Dwaipayanc for pointing that one out. I think even though this is a change from usual Indian city template, it works well with the needs of Kolkatta page as it has a strong focus on architecture and culture. I was wondering what is people's take on media section. Should it be kept as part of City culture or be kept as a separate section? If you think it should be separated, where would be the best spot for it? ( Blacksun 16:11, 20 March 2006 (UTC))
Actually, I moved media out now to follow the indian city format. I am guessing even the current format might not be accepted as it is not according to the convention. No reason to push it.( Blacksun 17:03, 20 March 2006 (UTC))
Hi ! I readded the radar image and the slum image in the sections in "urban structure" and "demographics" respectively. The image count is 17 now, which, I think sounds optimal. Please comment. Thanks.-- Dwaipayanc 18:20, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
This article has a rather boring first paragraph. Do we really need to dedicate entire lines at start of the article on the name change? Yes, I have gone through the talk archives related to the this topic. However, I find it rather bogus. Chennai should be used as a template here (simply say, "formerly known as" and it can be mentioned again in history. Having the entire first paragraph about this is ridiculous. Kolkata is mentioned as kolkata in most of world media except for ones connected to Britain. An introduction is supposed to be summary of important items mentioned in rest of the article. FOUR lines related to the name out of the first six lines is bit of an overkill. Please advice.
(UTC)