Talk:Chikmagalur district

Use English where possible please
"Chikmagalur played an important role, in that the saints of the Shringeri Advaita Peetha were prominent Rajguru of the founders of the empire" makes no sense if one doesn't know what Rajguru means. I'm deleting till someone can reword. Poweroid 20:18, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Peer review by India project
I have completed the remaining steps of the peer review request. Please check here for comments.

Assessment comment
Substituted at 00:58, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Chikkamagaluru district. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131019160532/http://2010.census.gov/2010census/data/apportionment-pop-text.php to http://2010.census.gov/2010census/data/apportionment-pop-text.php

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 01:23, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

Chickmangalore Eng name censored
About your revert Special:Diff/1053346529

Can you explain how adding the English name of a place in English Wikipedia is "WP:Malediting" or "WP:Mallinking"? Chickmangalore was the official name and the name in modern historical writings until the name changes were enacted by K'taka Govt

My edit mentioned both the Kanarese name and English name, there are people who use Chikkamagaluru instead of Chikmagalur.

If removing Chikmagalur is a mistake you could have added Chikmagalur back and included my contribution ie the English name as well

If you want WP:citations plz ask

It is not WP: Consensus to completely wipe out the WP:Contribution of editors who disagree with Indian nationalist/ Kannada regionalist politics of renaming Nolicmahr (talk) 10:04, 5 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Nolicmahr we always start with the article title, which you had completely removed from the opening sentence, and then mention any other names (such as "official names") afterwards. As for your unsourced description of Indo-Britonic English, I suspect this would confuse many of our readers. You may consider removal of that as "dumbing-down" but the opening of the lead needs to be simple and clear.  Best wishes - Arjayay (talk) 10:20, 5 November 2021 (UTC)

Then plz remove "Indo-Britonic English" no need to censor the English name on English Wikipedia Nolicmahr (talk) 10:24, 5 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Nolicmahr I did remove "Indo-Britonic English", and I reinstated the article title as the opening of the lead. If you want to re-add yet another spelling, please consider using the infobox, rather than the lead, as three names make it rather congested - Arjayay (talk) 10:31, 5 November 2021 (UTC)