Talk:Delhi/Archive 5

Image copyright problem with File:Commonwealth Games Federation Logo.png
The image File:Commonwealth Games Federation Logo.png is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check


 * That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
 * That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. --16:53, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Resolved - image was removed from Commonwealth Games Host Cities. Franamax (talk) 17:32, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

Confusing/contradictory terminology
It is not clear whether Delhi is a city, a territory, a state, a metropolis or a region. It might be all (though probably not a city), but I am completely confused because of the mix of terminology without an explanation. My guess is that people sometimes use the name "Delhi" to refer to "New Delhi" and that there are other cross-over references in common use, but a clear explanation is needed, IMHO. Here are some examples:

Delhi (Hindi: दहली, Urdu: دہلی dehlī), sometimes referred to as Dilli (Hindi: दिल्ली, Urdu: دلّی, Punjabi: ਦਿੱਲੀ dillī), is the second-largest city in India and, with over 11 million residents,[1] the eighth largest metropolis in the world by population.

It is a federally-administered union territory officially known as the National Capital Region (NCR).

The National Capital Territory of Delhi is spread over an area of 1,484 km2 (573 sq mi), of which 783 km2 (302 sq mi) is designated rural, and 700 km2 (270 sq mi) urban. [Where does "National Capital Territory" come from? The sentence above says that the official name is "National Capital Region."

As of July 2007, the National Capital Territory of Delhi comprises nine districts, 27 tehsils, 59 census towns, 165 villages and three statutory towns – the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD); the New Delhi Municipal Committee (NDMC); and the Delhi Cantonment Board (DCB).

The Delhi metropolitan area lies within the National Capital Territory of Delhi (NCT).

Earlier known as a special union territory Delhi, is a State and the National Capital Territory of Delhi has its own Legislative Assembly, Lieutenant Governor, Council of Ministers and Chief Minister. [I think the comma after "Delhi" should go before.]

New Delhi, an urban area in Delhi, is the seat of both the State Government of Delhi and the Government of India. [According to the New Delhi article, New Delhi is the capital city of India, not just an urban area.] Wakablogger2 (talk) 22:00, 22 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Here is another sentence that is particularly confusing: Delhi has four major satellite cities which lie outside the National Capital Territory of Delhi. Perhaps this article needs to be broken up into one on the State (?) of Delhi, one on the metropolis of Delhi, one on the National Capital Territory, etc. Wakablogger2 (talk) 22:13, 22 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Delhi is the name given to a metropolis consisting of three areas under different municipalities and lying within the National Capital Territory of Delhi (NCT). Note that terms "city" and "metropolis" are used interchangeably, so there is no problem over there. There was a separate article on the National Capital Territory of Delhi but in terms of population and land area, there is barely any difference between the two and therefore the article was merged into this. I've made changes to the lead to make the terminology used more clearer. Maybe you could contribute too. --Incidious (talk) 09:15, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Also note that a Satellite town is supposed to have its own administration. So saying that these satellite towns lie outside the NCT and hence have a different administration makes perfect sense. Also see the article on the term union territory.--Incidious (talk) 09:20, 1 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Thank you for these edits. Because I know nothing about Delhi, it is very difficult for me to contribute. I eliminated a couple of uses of "state" and "city". It is very confusing to claim that Delhi is a city because the article says that New Delhi is a city within Delhi. If there is a city called Delhi, then the relationship between the city of Delhi and the other cities (particularly New Delhi) needs to be explicitly stated. If it's the situation that New Delhi is a city within the city of Delhi, then that should be stated. I do not have time now to look at everything in detail, but one sentence in particular remains very confusing: "As of July 2007, the National Capital Territory of Delhi comprises nine districts, 27 tehsils, 59 census towns, 165 villages and three statutory towns – the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD); the New Delhi Municipal Committee (NDMC); and the Delhi Cantonment Board (DCB)." Why aren't the cities/metropolises of Delhi and New Delhi included in this? Wakablogger2 (talk) 22:39, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Censusindia
I am unable to verify the facts which are supported by reference 87 (http://www.censusindia.gov.in/). It claims I am not authorized. Is anyone authorized to access it or should we be looking for a new reference? The reason I am asking is a recent edit by which I am somewhat skeptical of. But in any case web references should be accessible. Njaelkies Lea (talk) 18:52, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
 * introduced the same facts in this article but was blocked one day before this new account appeared, quite likely the same user. I will revert the edits until someone can verify them. Njaelkies Lea (talk) 19:14, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Sister Cities section
I have deleted the section on Sister Cities because it is completely false. Sister Cities are determined by Sister Cities International and none of the cities in that section are actually sister cities with Delhi. Please do not add this section again unless you have a source.

Keep in mind that sister cities are not what WE feel Delhi should be sisters with. They are determined by Sister Cities International not us. Nikkul (talk) 01:23, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
 * That's completely incorrect. Twinned cities are determined by mutual agreement between the cities in question. Sister Cities International has nothing to do with it. Take a look at their mission statement - see how it discusses partnering with the United States? Now go buy yourself a globe and twirl it around.
 * I'll agree that twinning arrangements do need to be reliably sourced (and twin city sections are a mess across the wiki), but your assertion that the only source can be SCI is frankly laughable. Franamax (talk) 01:48, 19 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Ok you do have a point. There do exist agreements between cities that may be out of the scope of Sister Cities International. But, for anything to be added onto Wikipedia, it needs to be sourced. Furthermore, Indian law bans any city from having more than 6 sister cities, hence the list that I have deleted is totally incorrect. Further additions must be sourced and must be added to the culture section and not in a new section. Nikkul (talk) 03:43, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
 * OK, I don't mind kicking the ball through moving goalposts, but I hope they stop somewhere!
 * The list I added was different from the previous content and was sourced. Are you now changing around to say that the source is not good enough? In the edit summary of your latest reversion, you say that I need to "list the exact article, date, author, etc." - these are effortlessly available by simply clicking through to the supplied link. Do you now specify a certain template you wish used? One other than cite web? Could you link to the policy or guideline that supports this?
 * You assert that Indian law bans any city from having more than 6 sister cities - in the same breath where you tell me that sourcing is needed. So please do back that up - which law? Where can I read this law? And furthermore, you have deleted two different lists - one was unsourced, another was indeed attributed to a source.
 * You say additions must be added to the culture section - perhaps you could refer to the proper examples I've listed on your own talk page and the many many other English Wikipedia articles containing separate sections discussing sister/twin/partner cities. They're very common. Can you point me to the style guideline that dictates your preferred treatment?
 * The list of partner cities has been requested above, someone tried to provide it, I've now followed up with a sourced list, provided just where every other city article puts it. What is it that you dislike about this perfectly normal wiki-process? Franamax (talk) 04:04, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Hi all I dont have any right to talk in Delhi matter but I have faced same problem on Mumbai's article. So let me clear few things :-
 * 1) Its the muncipal corporation of two citys decide weather they want to be sister or not and not by Sister Cities International!
 * 2) Yes there is a law which probhits muncipal crporation to have a more than six sister citys (There was a article on it in Mumbai paper)
 * 3) Its better to add list of sister citys to be added under People and culture section (Since main objective of tie up to promot cultural exchange)
 * 4) Its better to verify sister citys of Delhi from its official website. Regards-- Suyog  talk to me!  08:33, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the comments! Do you have a specific link where we could all read about the law on 6-sisters? Yes of course it's always best to source from the city website, but they don't all pay attention, so we often have to look elsewhere to verify the information, newspapers, university reports, economic development commissions and such.
 * And looking at the article history now, it appears that I made an error with my showing the source and maybe that's why Nikkul reverted saying "India Times" is not enough. My mistake there, I'll now revert once, then fix it. Franamax (talk) 09:28, 19 February 2009 (UTC)


 * OK, I typed those important extra four characters, url= :) Nikkul, next time you see a broken ref, you could always take a look at the wiki-text and maybe fix it before reverting. No problem though, my mistake and fixed now so that it's a clickable ref.
 * So there is sourced content describing the twin cities. As to the exact section where it appears, the style for cities in India may differ. Most city articles have a separate section for twin/partner/sister cities (although that may be a past campaign of SCI to make themselves prominent). I've no objection to you merging the content into another section, the article style is your decision. All I care about is fixing "sister cities" where I can. Regards! Franamax (talk) 09:47, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I had a talk with Ex Mayor of Mumbai Shri Manohar Joshi few months back he also verified that Indian citys can have only  6 citys! If you get any link about this law please also inform me. (Abroard some citys can have unlimited sister citys!!)  If you want to officially verify the Sister citys of Delhi, do one thing go to site of that citys and find for Delhi's entry in there site (This is longest method) As I told Delhi is not my matter you and add sister city info in any section you can even add it in lead section I have no objection!! Regards-- Suyog  talk to me!  09:56, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks Suyog - that's good advice. I'll try to reconfirm the twinning arrangements by looking at the other twin. I've done that before actually! In the meantime, I hope that the India Times article provides a sufficient reference. Franamax (talk) 11:27, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I am glad you liked my longcut lol!! For time being ToI is sufficient. If frequent editors/ caretakers of this artice agrees on ToI article then its enough, dont go for other refrences-- Suyog talk to me!  16:22, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Capital? Metropolis? City?
As I have mentioned before, this article waffles on what exactly Delhi is, making the article very difficult to understand. It is very common for people (and the Encyclopedia Britannica even) to refer to Delhi as the capital of India. But it seems clear that New Delhi is the capital.

Here are my current guesses:


 * New Delhi - a city in National Capital Territory and the national capital
 * Delhi - a city in National Capital Territory and its capital
 * Delhi - a common nickname for the National Capital Territory
 * National Capital Territory - a special sort of region similar to a state but federally administered that encompasses Delhi and New Delhi

Can anyone help with this? Wakablogger2 (talk) 07:28, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

the terms most often used are: - Delhi: Area bound by the the state boundary (http://www.khannaresidency.com/images/map.jpg) - National Capital Region: Delhi + surrounding area (http://ncrup.up.nic.in/mainlatenew.htm)

The state boundary has remained unchanged since 1962, which is when the Delhi Master Plan first introduced the NCR concept Gautit (talk) 02:47, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

So, I'm still confused. Is Delhi a city or a some kind of territory? I'm guessing it's the same concept as District of Columbia in the United States. Correct me if I'm wrong. --Jmumman (talk) 04:41, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

I think terms like Delhi, NCR , Union Territory of Delhi , New Delhi , City of Delhi , Delhi State needs to be explained properly. Let me clarify this a bit and I propose we can edit the entry based on clarity.

1. Delhi (City) : Delhi is more then 5000 years old city and existed under several names it is said Delhi was settled and ruined some 17 times.

2. Union Territory of Delhi : As per Indian Constitution Indian union is divided in to multiple states and Union Territories, A union Territory is administered by union government. On Nov 1, 2000 Delhi was granted a state legislative assembly and the right to elect their own legislature.

Union Territory of Delhi consists of many cities: Till about 50 years ago these were distinct cities/ towns/villages but with urbanization and growth they have merged together to form a large mega city. Delhi is approximately 2000 years old city and was capital of India in middle ages. When British occupied India capital was Calcutta but in 1901 with coronation of King George V, Capital was moved back to Delhi and British laid foundation of new city ( with in region of Delhi)called "New Delhi". For next 50 years Delhi or 'old Delhi' and 'New Delhi' were 2 distinct cities but with growth of population these two have merged together. Still the seat of power or capital of India is still New Delhi which can be called a mega suburb of Delhi today.

2. Districts in Delhi : There are 9 districts in Delhi but as they all are today fused to form a mega-city of Delhi but they are technically distinct administrative/ judicial units.

3. Municipalities in Delhi : There are 3 municipalities in Delhi Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD), New Delhi Muncipal Corporation and Delhi Cantonment board.

4. Electoral Constituencies in Delhi : Delhi elects seven members of Parliament and thus divided in to seven electoral constituencies. These constituencies are Chandini Chowk, South Delhi, North East Delhi, East Delhi, New Delhi , North west Delhi and west Delhi

5. National Capitol Region of Delhi ( NCR) : This is a relatively new construct of last 20 years or so and as such not formal political or administrative unit. NCR was formulated to plan and design urban growth and expansion of Delhi and NCR is analogous to a mega-metro. NCR includes some of the districts of neighboring states of Utter Pradesh ( Gaziabad, Noida ) and Hariyana ( Gurgaon) now the NCR is being extended further to include more neighboring districts in neighboring states. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Somuji (talk • contribs) 10:15, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

Suggested addition for page
I've been having trouble getting information, but it appears that Delhi is not an official name. Can anyone confirm that the following statement is appropriate?

Properly speaking, Delhi is known as the National Capital Territory. There is no official administrative unit of India that is called 'Delhi.

Wakablogger2 (talk) 01:26, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
 * It is really confusing but it seems to me (I live in Delhi, I am also confused, but here is what I know) that New Delhi is the capital of India. New Delhi is situated in a bigger territory called Delhi. Delhi comprises of New Delhi, Old Delhi, East Delhi, West Delhi etc. Note that the area of New Delhi is under the administration of New Delhi Municipal Corporation (NDMC). Area outside NDMC administered region is administered by Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD). As far as municipal administration is concerned, NDMC and MCD are the only two agencies for whole Delhi Area. Note that Delhi is a big city and New Delhi is within Delhi but not a separate city because the city extends much beyond the New Delhi Area.


 * Politically, Delhi was governed by the central government and was thus called a Union Territory (UT) earlier. Later it was given a name National Capital Territory (NCT) to distinguish it from the other UTs. Specifically Delhi has its won legislatively assembly (which is absent in other UTs) and a chief minister, although Delhi is not a full fledged state. All departments such as Police, Fire and other civic entities/amenities are single entities and cover the whole area of Delhi including New Delhi and areas outside it.


 * Since past several years, people started referring to something called the Nation Capital Region (NCR) which includes along with Delhi, the neighbouring sub-urban areas which are actually part of other states. Such sub-urbs include NOIDA and Gurgaon, Ghaziabad, Faridabad etc etc.


 * BTW, Delhi (and New Delhi) is official as it has a Chief Minister and a Government. All else like NCT, NCR etc may or may not be official. Welcome to India where we like to keep things ambiguous and chaotic. 203.212.232.37 (talk) 13:25, 7 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Although I did make some edits, this is still unclear, making the article very difficult to understand. Perhaps a new section should be added specifically to define what the terms mean and how they are commonly and officially used. Wakablogger2 (talk) 18:29, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Small error(possibly nit-picking)
On this article it says Delhi is the sixth largest metropolitan area, but the List of metropolitan areas by population article, it is the eighth. Sean118 (talk) 21:36, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Vandalism?
The "Revision as of 05:49, 11 May 2009 (edit) (undo)" edit appears to be vandalism, but I cannot figure out how the article is affected. Wakablogger2 (talk) 05:57, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Delhi montage
There are several issues with User:Nikkul's montage:


 * 1) The images are disproportional.
 * 2) Focuses entirely on historic structures with no image on transport and other infrastructure.
 * 3) Poor quality images. The Lotus Temple image has too much contrast, the Humanyun's Tomb image is not clear and the India Gate image is taken from a pathetic angle.
 * 4) No image on urban landscape.

If User:Nikkul fails to address these issues within 24 hours, I'll be inclined to revert to the newer montage. --Nosedown (talk) 16:10, 1 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Firstly, I have already replaced the image on Delhi metro with one showing the skyline of CP. Secondly, compare the size of the Akshardham temple with other images in the montage. The Akshardham image is even larger than the Lotus temple image. In simple English, the montage is ugly. --Nosedown (talk) 19:40, 1 June 2009 (UTC)


 * All montages focus on unique symbols of cities. Trains are not unique to Delhi!!! Neither is a random pic of 4 ordinary buildings! NO other city page has a montage with trains or buses in it!


 * A monage is supposed to show the unique aspects of the city. A montage shows landmarks of the city. Four buildings in connaught palace are not landmarks and are not identifiable as Delhi landmarks


 * Delhi has immense diversity in its history...ruled by Hindus, then muslims then British, then modern India.


 * My montage has each of the following:
 * 1 pic of modern architecture in Delhi (lotus temple)
 * 1 pic of Muslim architecture in Delhi (humayuns tomb)
 * 1 pic of Hindu Archticture in Delhi (Akshadram Temple)
 * 1 pic of political arcitecture (Rastrapati Bhavan)
 * 1 pic of British arcitecture.


 * Second of all, the images are not at all disproportional. If it looks disproportional, then it must be your screen settings. I've seen this page from 10 different computers, and the montage looks proportional from all of them. Try using another computer. Nikkul (talk) 19:41, 1 June 2009 (UTC)


 * P.S. Do NOT try setting timelines for me. Thanks.

Who is talking about Delhi's diversity here? My opposition is primarily about the manner in which the montage is made. --Nosedown (talk) 19:53, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
 * 1) Lotus temple image has too much contrast and false colors.
 * 2) The India Gate image is taken for a weird angle which makes it look askew.
 * 3) The images of Humayun's Tomb and Rashtrapati Bhavan are much smaller compared to those on Akshardham and Lotus.
 * 4) There is no image representing Delhi's skyline.


 * Also, the choice of images for the montage should be made using the following guidelins:
 * Mughal era - Humayun's Tomb or Red Fort
 * Slave dynasty era - Qutub Minar
 * British era - India Gate
 * Modern era - Lotus temple
 * Delhi being capital of India - Rashtrapati Bhavan or Parliament of India building
 * Hindu-majority population - Akshardham temple

--Nosedown (talk) 19:58, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Here is the new version of the montage.
 * 1 image from modern era - Lotus temple
 * 1 image from Slave dynasty - Qutub Minar
 * 1 image from British Raj era - India Gate
 * 1 image from Mughal era - Red Fort
 * 1 image showing Hindu architecture - Akshardham temple
 * 1 image showing Delhi as the seat of the government - Rashtrapati Bhavan

I hope there will be no objections to this montage.

--Nosedown (talk) 20:14, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

I'm just going to keep it for the original image right now, as there is no consensus on which montage to use. It's just nosedown and nikkul arguing, which is not going to get us a consensus. I'm no expert on images, so I suggest you guys do a RFC and talk on the Indian wikiproject noticeboards to get a consensus from multiple editors, as I don't see you guys coming to a consensus. Deavenger (talk) 20:31, 1 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Well, all I can say is that you are quick to jump to conclusions. We started this discussion some hours ago and you concluded "I don't see you guys coming to a consensus". Sorry to be rude, but that was a very unhelpful comment. --Nosedown (talk) 20:36, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Sorry to be rude, but I don't see any consensus. Plus, you had an edit that said that you removed the old montage because of the discussion, yet there was no consensus. Also, this is a featured article under the India wikiproject. If there's an argument of something like pictures, it is better to have multiple editors instead of the two that started the discussion. Sorry if I was quck to rush to a conclusion. Deavenger (talk) 20:42, 1 June 2009 (UTC)


 * OK, I get your point. I'll raise this issue on Noticeboard for India-related topics. --Nosedown (talk) 20:57, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Delhi Montage
This montage is the best because it has excellent quality images which show all different sides of Delhi:
 * 1 pic of Muslim architecture in Delhi (Humayuns tomb)
 * 1 pic of Hindu Architecture in Delhi (Akshadhram Temple)
 * 1 pic of Political architecture (Rashtrapati Bhavan)
 * 1 pic of British Architecture (India Gate)
 * 1 pic of modern architecture in Delhi (Lotus Temple)

Nosedown's montage has dull photos with low quality. He has also tried adding a photo of a train and of random buildings. Perhaphs Nosedown does not know, but a montage is a collection of intriguing images that introduces the different aspects of a city through its unique landmarks. Nikkul (talk) 22:19, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Disruptive Edits by User:Nosedown
User:Nosedown has continued to add his images on the page, despite my multiple requests for him to wait for consensus. Wikipedia's core guideline is to discuss before changing something when there is opposition to your edit. User:Nosedown has kept adding his own montage saying that he "hopes there is consensus" with his new version.

User:Nosedown has also called me a hypocrite and has said that my edits are only to "satisfy my own ego" I would like to stress that Wikipedia is a place of good faith where such negative commentry is unhelpful. I hope user:nosedown improves his tone and behavior. Nikkul (talk) 22:28, 1 June 2009 (UTC)


 * I'm relatively new to Wikipedia and I'm still going through the learning process. I apologized to you earlier for my argumentative tone but you still bought the issue up again. That said, I'm not going to argue with you anymore since I see no point in doing so. So please carry on with the rhetoric. Fact remains, you still haven't addressed any points raised by me against your montage and keep repeating the same words &mdash; "my montage has excellent images" &mdash; again and again. Therefore, I have asked for the opinions of the other Wikipedians as it is necessary to get neutral point of view on this issue. Regards --Nosedown (talk) 17:13, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Support Nikkul's Montage

 * Support because of high quality intriguing images which show all parts of Delhi (Muslim Empire, British Rule, Hindu, Colonial Architecture, and Modern Delhi) Nikkul (talk) 21:45, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Support Nosedown's Montage

 * Comment Nosedown's img is somewhat better. The tilt of India gate was very very very awkward. Hometech (talk) 06:57, 2 June 2009 (UTC)


 * I support Nosedown's version. A lot of space is wasted in Nikkul's montage. I mean Sky. In Nosedown's version, the building's are quite clear, huge. And the tilt of India Gate is not present in Nosedown's version. Kensplanet TC 07:22, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Nosedown's version looks better to me.--GDibyendu (talk) 17:30, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Nosedown's version is preferred by me. It has the two iconic images of Delhi, Qutab and Red Fort which are both missing in Nikkul's version. --RegentsPark (My narrowboat) 17:33, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I support my version of the montage because all the monuments are featured prominently. In the other version of the montage, some images are ridiculously small and unclear. The images for this montage are selected on the basis of different eras throughout Delhi's history &mdash; Slave dynasty, Mughal, British and post-independence. Besides, the Red Fort and Qutub Minar, two of the most iconic monuments of Delhi, are missing from the other montage. --Nosedown (talk) 23:47, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I support this montage, both Qutub and Red Fort are here in the montage.--Dwaipayan (talk) 01:57, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Support No Montage

 * I also endorse the abcedare view. --RegentsPark (My narrowboat) 18:14, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Why do we need any image montage in the infobox ? It just ends up pushing down the Delhi map and infobox stats "below the fold" Instead we should include a simple map in the infobox locating Delhi on the map of India. Currently, a reader of this supposed FA would be hard pressed to find where exactly Delhi is located in India/World - even I can't make any sense of the current map in the infobox, and I am familiar with India and Delhi's geography. The images of the monuments etc should be presented in the main body of the article, where the accompanying section text and captions can explain their significance. The montage is simple eye-candy and of little encyclopedic value. Abecedare (talk) 18:02, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, the infobox of articles on various metropolises, such as New York City, London, Chicago, etc., have montages. So, I think including one for this article will not be against Wikipedia's policy. That said, we need to change the map in the infobox. This map should only be about the location of Delhi in India and nothing else. The detailed map of Delhi is already present under civic administration section. --Nosedown (talk) 18:27, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
 * To add, for a city as old and diverse as Delhi, no single image can be representative enough. So, if we are going to have a lead image in the the infobox, it should be a montage representing Delhi's various iconic monuments. --Nosedown (talk) 18:32, 2 June 2009 (UTC)


 * No Montage Whilst I don't regularly edit this article, 'tis on my watchlist and this discussion is common to many city articles. I oppose montage images in any shape or form. They degrade a city article to the level of a postcard. Each individual splendrous image is reduced to a small "among equals" democracy, which renders each useless. For any major city, no one image will convey everything - but each major city has an associated wikiproject, so coordinate there a regular rotation of significant images into the lead spot. The other images, as noted, can be interspersed throughout the article. Cramming one image editor's idea of what are the "best" images into one small space makes a mockery of them all. No to montages! Franamax (talk) 22:51, 2 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Fact remains that most of the cities have monuments with similar history and architectural designs. However, Delhi's history, culture and architecture is so diverse that a montage representing the different facets of the city becomes necessary. Therefore, to say that montage degrades "a city article to the level of a postcard" is a bit inaccurate and unfair. Besides, I fully support the idea of creating a montage with inputs from other interested Wikipedians. --Nosedown (talk) 23:40, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm not discounting your efforts and goodwill, and I recognize the diversity of Delhi. My objection is mostly based on the fact that each individual image in the montage is of necessity reduced to a less-than-thumbnail size, also that captioning becomes problematic. I'd rather see rotating lede images. Franamax (talk) 09:35, 3 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Well, the entire purpose of me creating a new montage was to show the respective monuments much more prominently. While rotating lead images has its advantages, fact remains a montage is the best way to show various iconic monuments at the same time. --Nosedown (talk) 01:00, 4 June 2009 (UTC)


 * No Montage The images become so small as to be almost meaningless, and any caption to explain them all would be far too long. The purpose of an encyclopedia is to communicate and educate. A montage doesn't do that effectively, in my opinion. Priyanath talk 18:10, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
 * P.S. The caption for the current montage is all wrong. Obviously we need to be giving more attention to the content of the article, rather than which montage to use. Priyanath talk 18:17, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
 * How many city articles have lead images with captions "explaining" them? Take the example of the article on Paris. It has one lead image and a simplistic caption mentioning the subject of the image. I'm sorry but I don't get your argument. Also, I have corrected the caption of the current montage. --Nosedown (talk) 09:33, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I much prefer the Paris approach, thanks. One clear image with a short caption that actually explains what you're seeing. Encyclopedic. Priyanath talk 16:10, 4 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Can you come up with "one clear" lead image for the article on Delhi? How can you call an article "encyclopedic" when its lead image shows only a small portion of the city's history and culture? --Nosedown (talk) 00:14, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Why we need a montage
Quite a few have voiced their opinion against having any montage and I think my reply to their opposition was logical enough. Those who oppose the montage haven't actively participated in the debate. Please go through the following points before making a decision:


 * 1) Delhi has several iconic landmarks which represent the different historical eras the city has been through. Its monuments reflect the city's diversity and therefore, having a montage showing some of these iconic landmarks becomes necessary.
 * 2) The montage created by me is of higher resolution; so you can still enlarge it to get a nice view of all six photos.
 * 3) Lead images have to-the-point captions just mentioning the subject of the photo. The same can achieved for a montage without consuming too much space.
 * 4) Ultimately, an encyclopedia needs to give information in a well-balanced, neutral manner. And a montage is the perfect way to achieve this objective.

--Nosedown (talk) 00:35, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Comments
I think if we're going to use a montage, maybe we should combine both of them. For instance, I like nosedown's lotus temple picture more then nikkul, but I don't like any of the gate of India pictures. One is at an awkward angle. The other one does not look clear to me either. However, I like Nikkul's picture of the akshadhram (I think, what ever picture is at the bottom of Nikkul's) better then nosedown, mostly because it's bigger. Deavenger (talk) 20:58, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Modifications to montage
Keeping in mind the points raised by Franamax and Deavenger, I've created a new montage so as accommodate their suggestions. Please let me know your opinions on it and ways to improve the montage. Thanks --Nosedown (talk) 09:22, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
 * 1) Lesser number of images and larger canvas size. As a consequence, each image is larger and the monuments are featured prominently without making a "mockery" of all of them.
 * 2) Monuments from various eras of Delhi are featured.
 * 3) Most of the images are unique. There is no image in the article on Rashtrapati Bhavan and Lotus temple. The Qutub Minar image in the article's History section is unclear. This montage depicts all three of them clearly.


 * I think that the Gate of India should be added. However, in your original montage, I like how the picture of the gate is taken, however, I don't like the lighting in that picture. For Nikkul's, it's the exact opposite. I like the lighting, I don't like how the picture was taken. If anyone can fix this? Deavenger (talk) 20:11, 4 June 2009 (UTC)


 * How about this: File:Indiagatedelhi.JPG? --Nosedown (talk) 00:37, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Can someone make a montage with the following images from top counterclockwise: Nikkul (talk) 17:18, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Top: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:LotusDelhi.jpg
 * Left Side: Rashtrapathi Bhavan pic closeup
 * Left Side; http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Red_Fort,_Delhi_by_alexfurr.jpg
 * bottom: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:New_Delhi_Temple.jpg
 * Right Side: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:GateIndia.jpg (crop the bottom and sides)

I like the idea Nikkul just said. However, I think the india gate that Nosedown gave is better then the one Nikkul just gave, as the India on the gate is easier to read, as Nikkul's at night. And the top cannot be sean as easily compared to the lights on the bottom of the gate. Deavenger (talk) 18:40, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Superlatives in image descriptions
Why do so many images in the article have descriptions saying largest/ biggest/ busiest with dubious claims? For example, the Qutb Minar is only the world's tallest brick minaret, the CNG claim is from a very weak source (I see many organizations laying this claim), one of the busiest airports in South Asia says nothing, Jama Masjid's claim tries to make use of a clever definition of Asia-Pacific, rankings of AIIMS, IIT-Delhi, and the JN stadium are entirely unnecessary in the image descriptions. The largest Hindu Temple complex claim is the probably the only half-warranted thing. We should have something more neutral and do away with tall claims. The purpose is information, not glorification. Cribananda (talk) 20:49, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Delhi during the I war of Independence.
Why is it not mentioned that Delhi was the capital of the areas freed by the freedom fighters during the I war of Indipendence, 1857. Yogesh Khandke (talk) 09:37, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Feel free to add content yourself, just remember to cite your sources.  Aaroncrick (Tassie Boy talk) 23:10, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Residential colony
This article mentions a "residential colony," but Wikipedia does not have an article for this term. It appears in other Indian articles and should be either explained or given an article of its own. Wakablogger2 (talk) 20:58, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

names of delhi as people know locally
some north indian also use these slightly different names dilehi, dehali and dilli for delhi. I like to call delhi as it is called all over india. delhi is repersented not locally but globally. Bigsuperindia (talk) 16:50, 25 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Can you clarify what specific changes (additions or deletions) you are proposing to the article ? Note that, on wikipedia our aim is not to "present" a global or local view of a city; but rather follow what reliable sources say. Abecedare (talk) 16:51, 25 October 2009 (UTC)


 * ok so you plz. delete "Delhi, known locally as Dilli" from the article as you have no citation for it. Let it be DELHI alone. Bigsuperindia (talk) 16:55, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm making change that you will appreciate. infact no changes but a little change in language as you may call it. Bigsuperindia (talk) 16:58, 25 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Dilli is a literal tranliteration of the name of the city in Hindi (दिल्ली), Urdu, Punjabi etc, and that is the reason it is included as an alternative name in the article lede. It is easily sourceable and not controversial . See WP:LEDE for the related wikipedia guideline. Please don't repeat your deletion till you have read through the guidelines and obtained consensus here. Abecedare (talk) 17:01, 25 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Please check the changes i made i just rearranged it so it looks nice and your ego has been saved for another day. Bigsuperindia (talk) 17:09, 25 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Please read WP:NPA and WP:AGF, as has already been put on your talk page, your edit seems to go against concensus please discuss it prior to it's inclusion again. you have already surpassed WP:3RR any further edits on this subject without further discussion will be seen as disruptive edits and I will block, to prevent disruption to the encyclopedia. Regards Khu  kri  18:21, 25 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Regarding the message you left on my talk page. An editor has disagreed with your edit, I am here to stop the edit war not to comment on the edit itself, as I left on your talk page this is not a warzone, discuss your edit first and if you give the reliable or verifiable sources then this makes your position so much easier. But discuss then change as the next edit will be blocked for WP:3RR if concensus is not achieved. Khu  kri  18:39, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Official Languages of Delhi
Please read whole THE GOVERNMENT OF NATIONAL CAPITAL TERRITORY OF DELHI ACT, 1991. It clearly states that English and Hindi are only officially declared languages of Delhi. So please clearly mention it in the article. Rachitadelhi (talk) 18:41, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

THE GOVERNMENT OF NATIONAL CAPITAL TERRITORY OF DELHI ACT, 1991 http://delhiassembly.nic.in/nctact.htm Rachitadelhi (talk) 18:43, 25 October 2009 (UTC)


 * For those of us who do not know this subject, can you point to where in the document so I don't have to read through it all, and what does this have to do with the name, as I understand it Dilli is the Hindi name? Khu  kri  18:45, 25 October 2009 (UTC)


 * It is in section 34, 35 and 36. Please rectify the mistakes in the articles and for dilli i modified it and not deleted it. it is there checkout history  if you have some doubts. Rachitadelhi (talk) 18:52, 25 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Thank you for starting to discuss the matter. I will leave you to discuss this subject with editors who know about Hindi translations of the name, please be patient as fruitful dialogue isn't always immediate. Also please return to the Bigsuperindia account. Regards Khu  kri  18:54, 25 October 2009 (UTC)


 * The Delhi Official Language Bill, 2000 replaces what was official per the 1991 bill. - Spaceman  Spiff  19:55, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
 * can you plz. provide original bill declared by govt of Delhi. On govt of delhi's website and even on govt of india's website, there is no mention of such "Delhi Official Language Bill, 2000". Need authenticated sources. Bigsuperindia (talk) 20:40, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
 * This article: Languages with official status in India, has quite a few references that may cover this. Khu  kri  20:47, 25 October 2009 (UTC)


 * all sources are non governmental and hence not official. well and if you closely read each news which you portrayed here, it says that information will be provided in panjabi and urdu and not official work will be done in these languages. Govt of delhi still adheres to THE GOVERNMENT OF NATIONAL CAPITAL TERRITORY OF DELHI ACT, 1991 for all official work. and hence hindi and english are still primary official languages of govt of Delhi. so i still recommend to clearly reflect it in the  Delhi article. and if you are not happy with it or are not so resourceful then its not my problem. I'm moving to some better things. good luck to all you guys. and thanks for presenting some correct information about delhi. Bigsuperindia (talk) 21:06, 25 October 2009 (UTC)


 * (Outdent) If it helps, here are three official sources: (see entry 86);  (see page 8);  and . Regards, SBC-YPR (talk) 13:06, 26 October 2009 (UTC)


 * and non of the documents you proposed declare that panjabi and urdu are official languages for Govt of delhi. i read every doc. and found that they claim to promote 2 said languages so that people of delhi can understand these languages. and every sources on net claim that information will be provided in the said languages if asked. so this doesn't declare that from now these 2 languages are official languages. since we don't have a copy of "Delhi Official Language Bill, 2000" and even delhi govt doesn't have one on their website, it is obvious to adhere to "THE GOVERNMENT OF NATIONAL CAPITAL TERRITORY OF DELHI ACT, 1991".

since you guys really want to make, languages in question, official languages, i am giving up here and i myself declare that these languages are official languages. i still believe that english is the only language that unites india even today. i wish that every indian should only go for english as i want a united india. we stupid indian fight over languages. such a pity on us.Bigsuperindia (talk) 20:09, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

"If you want to blow the city up"???!
Totally uncalled for - please delete the very first line of this article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.192.231.242 (talk) 04:57, 28 October 2009 (UTC)


 * I'm very with this. plz delete very 1st line from the article. Bigsuperindia (talk) 18:29, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

BCE-CE Vs BC-AD
Since BC ("Before Christ") and AD ("Anno Domini", "In the year of the Lord") represent a Christian Point of View, i have replaced it with their secularized versions ie. BCE ("Before Common Era") and CE ("Common Era") in the entire length of this article keeping in tone with Wikipedia's NPOV policy. Before any reverts to this pls discuss in here. Thanks. Arjun (talk) 18:56, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
 * No that is wrong BC/AD is not a POV, it is a convention and changing from one era to another is basically now just your POV. WP policy is that it must remain as it was and should not be changed in order to keep the emphasis on the content--212.74.26.3 (talk) 12:57, 27 March 2010 (UTC)
 * In accordance with WP:ERA you should not change the era convention in an article. It should therefore be changed back--Sinazita (talk) 10:48, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

It should not have been changed--Sinazita (talk) 10:34, 6 April 2010 (UTC) Change it back then--86.26.235.97 (talk) 09:49, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Devanagari Script
Name in Hindi is actually writen in Devanagari Script. Please consider it to change it to Devanagari instead. It was disscussed on Sanskrit and Hind portal to mention Devanagari where every it is used. --Onef9day (talk) 14:25, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Known locally
Is it actually known as Dilli within the NCT in English (à la Calcutta/Kolkata, Chennai/Madras)? or just in the local languages, in which case it’d be Dilli whether you’re speaking Hindi or Urdu in Delhi, Islamabad, or London. Someone please clarify this —Wiki Wikardo 00:04, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Hi as far as I know the proper term is Delhi but people call it Dilli in slang language. Cr!mson K!ng (talk) 19:19, 11 March 2010 (UTC)


 * It is Delhi in English. Dehli (Deh-lee) is what the original inhabitants of the city and Hindi-Urdu speakers tend to call it. Dilli is what Haryanvis and the Punjabis who immigrated into the city post-partition tend to call it. Dilli has become the dominant name over the past 30 years or so, though lots of people still call it Dehli, especially in Old Delhi and the rural areas around the NCT. Most historical documents in Hindi or Urdu call it Dehli as well, which has spread into Persian and Arabic references to the city as well. As far as I can tell, Delhi people mostly have no strong feelings about the city's name one way or another, so all the names kind of coexist simultaneously. Not like Mumbai/Bombay or Calcutta/Kolkata. It could be that there was a loss of aspiration phenomenon at work in Dehli -> Deli -> Dilli. Punjabi does this pretty often, especially colloquially (vehem -> vaim / illusion, kahani -> kani / story, ehsaas -> esaas / feeling-realization, etc). However, this is pure speculation on my part, though it does make sense. --Hunnjazal (talk) 18:01, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

Proposal to merge New Delhi to Delhi article
I just posted in New Delhi Talk page page that article should be merged into Delhi or Vice versa. --Cr!mson K!ng (talk) 19:19, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Help with Delhi portal?
Hi, I am trying to improve the Portal:Delhi, if anyone can help me with few things please visit the Talk page. I hope this is the correct section as the portal is related to Delhi article.--Cr!mson K!ng (talk) 20:23, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Delhi Government Services
In the article it says Government and Politics citation needed for services provided by Delhi Govt, here are few: I hope this helps. --Cr!mson K!ng (talk) 15:02, 12 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Delhi Transport Corporation (DTC Buses)
 * Public Grievance Redressal System
 * Right To Information (RTI)
 * Senior Citizens
 * Tender Information System
 * Delhi Metro Rail Corporation (DMRC)
 * Public Works Department (PWD)
 * Delhi Jal Board (DJB)

Work needed
Hello everyone! This article currently appears near the top of Featured articles/Cleanup listing, with four cleanup tags. Cleanup work needs to be completed on this article, or a featured article review may be in order. Please contact me on my talk page if you have any questions. Thank you! Dana boomer (talk) 15:41, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Yep needs some ref--Onef9day (talk) 02:45, 11 April 2010 (UTC)
 * check this particular sentence "The linguistic groups from all over India are well represented in the city; among them are Punjabi, Haryanvi, UP, Bihari, Bengali, Sindhi, Tamil, Rajasthani, Garhwali ,Telugu, North-East, Kannada, Malayalam, Marathi and Gujarati roughly in same order." now we don't have any relevant statistical data/reference and how it popped in here is a mystery. Haryanvi, UP and Bihari are Hindi linguistic groups so simply mention Hindi.  roughly in same order: where is the data that claims it. Should we remove it? --Onef9day (talk) 15:17, 11 April 2010 (UTC)
 * removed " roughly in same order" for it has no relevance as long as factual data is not provided. --Onef9day (talk) 12:33, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

CWG Pic
Hey guys, I have added a pic of CWG Opening Ceremony at JN Stadium in the sports section. Hope that's okay. Nikkul (talk) 16:57, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

Largest city in India
According to the 2011 provisional population results, the population of Mumbai is 12,478,447, where as the population of Delhi is 12,565,901. this makes Delhi the largest city in India. Mumbai is the second largest in terms of population. What say?? -- Thalapathi  (Ping Back)  10:05, 25 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Please provide a source for this information. The Census 2011 provisional data does not seem to list city-wise population details. Regards, SBC-YPR (talk) 16:19, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

Dehali in Urdu or Sanskrit?
The article states that "Some other historians believe that the name is derived from Dilli, a corruption of dehleez or dehali—Urdu for 'threshold'—and symbolic of city as a gateway to the Gangetic Plain". It seems the word "dehalI" is a Sanskrit word which has the same meaning of threshold. I checked on the online Monier-Williams dictionary (http://www.sanskrit-lexicon.uni-koeln.de/monier/) typing in "dehalI". This gives: देहली (H2) देहली [p= 497,1] [L=96714] 	f. (rarely °लि) the threshold of a door or a raised terrace in front of it Gr2S. Ka1v. Pur.

I am not sure whether the Sanskrit or Urdu is the source of the word itself, and into which language it was assimilated, but it seemed a point worth mentioning.

Gopal.vasudev (talk) 01:35, 10 May 2011 (UTC)


 * Well, the word for threshold in Hindi-Urdu is either dehleez (देहलीज़, which is pronounced देह्लीज़ with the usual Hindi schwa syncope) or dehaali (देहाली). I wouldn't be surprised if the Sanskrit dehali and Persian dehleez are cognates. --Hunnjazal (talk) 06:43, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

Lt governor of Delhi
The Lieutenant governor of Delhi is not bhanu pratap singh as mentioned.. it is Tejendra Khanna as shown on  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tejendra_Khanna  and  http://lgdelhi.nic.in/index.html please correct I suppose it is vandalism (talk) 05:47, 30 July 2011 (UTC) Corrected--Amy (talk) 13:09, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

Municipal Corporation of Delhi
I've been trying to find this out for years, but within the NCT, exactly how many square kilometers do the administrative boundaries of the MCD cover? I'm not talking about how large the urbanized/built-up area is, but the extent of the MCD boundaries within the territory. I've seen everything listed from 431 sq km to 1,397.3 sq km. I imagine the former (which is listed on the "list of largest city propers in the world" page) is actually the built-up area, and the former is the actual administrative area extent, which would be the city-proper/local government area for Delhi. If someone could cite a source, that would be great so we can finally nail this down. --Criticalthinker (talk) 11:27, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I can see many sources stating the area covered by the municipal corporation of Delhi to be 431 sq.km (according to 2001 census). But the area would also have been expanded. -- Commander (Ping Me) 12:49, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I haven't seen any independent sources giving the area of the administrative boundary area as 431 sq km, which is why I'm pretty much convinced that that must be the measurement of the built up area within the boundaries of the Municipal Corporation of Delhi. As far as I can tell, the Municipal Corporation administration area covers everything within the territory minus New Delhi the Dehli Cantonment. --Criticalthinker (talk) 01:32, 28 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I think we've had this discussion before somewhere, but I don't remember where exactly. However, from what I remember, the result of the discussion was that we found out that the total area of the National Capital Territory is 1483 sq.km, of which New Delhi Municipal Council is 42.74 sq.km, Delhi Cantonment Board 42.97 sq.km, and Delhi Municipal Corporation (city proper together with the remaining census towns and villages in NCT) is 1,397.29 sq.km. The figures can be found in the NCT Statistical Hand Book 2010, page 3. The 431 sq.km is for the city proper of Delhi, a statistical definition basically used for population censuses. However, all the census towns and villages (outside the Delhi city proper, New Delhi MCl and Delhi CB) in NCT is administrated by Delhi MC.--Pjred (talk) 12:08, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Montage changes
I would suggest using Jama Masjid, Delhi instead of Humayuns tomb as an example of Muslim architecture. The mosque, the largest in India and probably the largest pre-modern mosque on the Indian subcontinent is also widely used by Delhi's Muslim population. The tomb is merely a tourist attraction. Also, I understand the importance of Connaught Place, New Delhi, but the current image doesn't show much of it. It only makes the montage look crowded. Perhaps it should be taken out to make room for other images.VR talk  05:24, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

hdi in infobox
What is the source for the hdi 0.875 in the infobox? I don't think its accurate. Besides the wikipedia List of Indian states and territories by Human Development Index states its 0.789 99.255.218.2 (talk) 22:54, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

Who said that English is official language in Delhi?
Who said that English is official language in Delhi? 14.99.209.60 (talk) 09:07, 10 January 2012 (UTC)


 * English is an official language of India. Varlaam (talk) 06:21, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

Delhi / Dehli
If Urdu has the spelling Dehli —as it does, د ه ل ی— is there a story about how the consonants came to be reversed in English? Varlaam (talk) 06:19, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

Delhi
The "Location of Delhi in India" doesn't show the location of Delhi, or is it just me? Nickzlapeor (talk) 11:24, 7 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Marker isn't showing up on the map. Will fix it. --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 10:59, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

Delhi Crime stats and titles
I am not sure why the crime related titles earned by Delhi and published by reliable sources (Times of India and Rediff.com) was removed. This doesnt violate NPOV as its been agreed by several news agencies and is not biased against Delhi. Its just a matter of fact that any new comer to Delhi should be aware of. Did you visit my reference links before removing my changes? I am unhappy that inspite of valid references by reliable sources my change has been removed. Happy to discuss this on any board here. Until then i wish to bring back the change and if required a Neutrality dispute symbol could be placed on the article until a final conclusion is made. )

The below is what Wikipedia NPOV guidelines on reliable sources says: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Identifying_reliable_sources#News_organizations

"News sources often contain both factual content and opinion content. "News reporting" from well-established news outlets is generally considered to be reliable for statements of fact."

I have given two reliable sources  (Times of India: (http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2011-10-28/delhi/30332107_1_crime-rate-violent-crimes-crime-incidents) and Rediff (http://www.rediff.com/news/slide-show/slide-show-1-must-read-delhi-on-worlds-most-hated-cities-list/20120905.htm), if you wish can give you dozen sources on the crime stats in Delhi which were recorded by the Government and published by the Press upon consent from Police. If you wish to dispute this please provide valid explanation and reason. Until then i wish my changes to be reverted and a neutrality dispute symbol could be placed until we reach a consensus. These are basic information any one should know about this city. Guru coolguy (talk) 11:54, 20 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Definitely not suitable for the lead. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 12:07, 20 December 2012 (UTC)


 * I agree that this is unsuitable for the lead. Although the sentence is sourced it is quite irrelevant on the lead (and also on the article) since the first paragraph (lead) is generally about the positive sides of the city. In my opinion, this should not be added in the lead and leave as it is now. Torreslfchero (talk) 13:03, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

Anna / Torreslfchero Your opinion is appreciated but may i remind you that if valid references from reliable sources are given then it could be published on wiki? These are titles earned by Delhi and it should be on the lead. Your points need to be justified with valid reasons,  merely saying "it doesnt look nice" is not acceptable as wiki is neutral and for any one to publish valid facts and truth . If you have concerns about references given you may let me know or else your points are not justifiable. If you wish to challenge the sentence, please provide valid references indicating less number of crime occurs in Delhi than any one city in India. Guru coolguy (talk) 14:17, 20 December 2012 (UTC)


 * The text in you added:

Delhi also holds the title Rape capital of Asia and India with highest number of rapes and crimes in the country. Travellers were often cheated and looted in Delhi by the locals making it one of the most hated cities on the world along with being unsafe for women.


 * I can never be in the lead because of the WP:UNDUE weight. As there are a few sources calling it the "rape capital", the fact could maybe, maybe go elsewhere, if reworded to avoid WP:UNDUE weight. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 16:05, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

Hi Anna - thanks for your response. The WP:UNDUE guidelines states that undue weightage should not be given to minority view points. But what i have mentioned is not a minority view point, it has been a popular and widely known and acknowledged view point. NDTV, Yahoo, Times of India, Rediff, The Hindu all agree with the view point and more than any thing else the people themselves are aware of these facts. I can give you several articles, news videos which will confirm its a widely accepted view point. Hence no undue weightage is given to a minority view but a due weightage should be given to a majority view point. An example of undue weightate is mentioning earth is flat on earth article which has no valid proof or source. But what i mention has got several valid proofs including stats, news articles by extremely powerful and valid sources. No one can agree that these sources give undue weightage but provide facts that are truth. If you wish i can rephrase as below: " Delhi also holds the title  crime capital of India  by topping on the list of crimes in a city published by leading news papers and Government statistics. It is also one of the  most hated cities on the world  as per surveys completed by several leading travel companies published on leading sources including Rediff." Guru coolguy (talk) 16:16, 20 December 2012 (UTC)


 * The intro should consist of facts, not opinions, even if those opinions are those of reputed newspapers. Emotional titles given by newspaper reports or the users of a social network like TravBuddy have no place in an NPOV article intro on Wikipedia.
 * Absolute numbers are meaningless: it's like saying "China has the highest number of crimes reported in the world" -- that won't be surprising because China has the highest number of people in the world. Delhi NCR is the largest urban agglomeration in India. If you consider per-capita rape cases, Durg-Bhilainagar is No. 1; Delhi is way behind, though it tops the other metro cities. As a state also, Delhi is ranked lower than most other states (not just UP-Bihar, but also Maharashtra, Andhra Pradesh, and Kerala), according to the NCRB statistics.
 * A number of articles (e.g. this one) have mentioned this point. Delhi simply gets a lot of attention because it's the national capital and the crimes in Delhi reflect incompetence of the federal government.
 * utcursch | talk 17:22, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

I strongly disagree with Utcursch. Firstly i dont understand how you would classify any title given by leading newspapers as "emotional"? Is there a valid proof that the title is emotional? Also the same ToI reference i have given above indicates Delhi tops the list in crimes among all states of India, followed by Maharashtra so it does tops the list of states with highest crimes. Saying Delhi is capital so it attracts attention is baseless and hypothetical - its a way to ask excuse for crimes in Delhi which is unacceptable. If so then even London is capital of UK does it mean crimes in London could be ignored? Both of your points have got no valid proof. Livemint is also not a valid news paper or recognized source like TOI or The Hindu which are leading news papers. If you wish rape capital is not decent, i can amend it to Crime Capital as mentioned above. The stats you gave from NCRB are for 2011 whereas TOI has given latest stats (2012). Hence your info is out dated compared to mine. The reason this should be on first paragraph is simple - its a title or other names given to this city and new comers should be made aware of these to protect their lives by taking caution or avoiding the city. This doesnt violate any of wiki's rules and is based on statistics and facts including news papers and Govt. Guru coolguy (talk) 17:57, 20 December 2012 (UTC)


 * I agree with Utcursch. It may be appropriate to add some crime stats if done in a neutral way, and in the right context, but the rape thing is a long shot. As for WP:UNDUE, I think you're cherry-picking. Read the first sentence to get the spirit of the thing. You should seriously consider dropping this whole thing. I don't think you're going to get consensus, and if you really persist with it, you will start to be considered as pushing a point of view, or even eventually trolling. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 17:43, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

Hi Anna - I dont understand why you think its UNDUE still whereas i have explained above that i am only using evidences by leading sources but not any minoriity view. I have also agreed to change te title to Crime capital which is as per the stats (as rape sounds indecent). I have come down a bit but you are stubborn. I am not pusing my view point, only trying to expose the real status of the city to wiki users with correct evidence and sources. I can only say you and Utcursch are trying to suppress me inspite of giving explanations and proofs. You are trying to make Wiki your own property and bend the rules only for your benefit whereas wiki is not just for you. I dont expect to reach to consensus so quick and i think you are worried about all proofs i have shown and hence threatening me to stop me. This is unacceptable and you are interfering in freedom / rights to express. I think you both should be warned by Wiki community i will bring this to the notice of wiki community soon. Guru coolguy (talk) 17:57, 20 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Please just drop it. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 18:27, 20 December 2012 (UTC)


 * "how you would classify any title given by leading newspapers as "emotional"?"
 * Here are some of the headlines from Times of India today: "Future of Indian bowling is bleak", "Ranbir Kapoor is hard to please", "Why Indian men rape". That doesn't mean we are going to include things like these in the intros of the articles on Indian cricket team, Ranbir Kapoor or Indian people. Facts, not opinions, should be included in the intros, plain and simple.
 * "Delhi tops the list in crimes among all states of India, followed by Maharashtra"
 * You haven't read the article you linked to. Quote from the article: "UP accounted for the highest 33.9% of the total crime reported in India last year followed by Andhra Pradesh (13.9%) and TN (11.4%)."
 * It does say that as a city, Delhi, followed by Mumbai, tops the crime list among the "mega cities". Like I said - such a statistic is meaningless unless you consider per capita. Please read my comment again.
 * You cannot say that "Tamil Nadu is more crime-oriented than Goa because TN is #3 on the list, far ahead of Goa." If the population of Goa is 10 times less than that of TN, it won't be surprising if 1000 cases were reported in TN as opposed to only 100 in Goa. Delhi and Mumbai are the most populous cities in India, so it's not surprising that the highest number of crimes are repored in these cities.
 * Another example: India's GDP is higher than that of Australia, Canada, Singapore and several other countries -- that doesn't mean that India is the among the richest countries in the world. The per capita figures are the true indicator.
 * "If so then even London is capital of UK does it mean crimes in London could be ignored?"
 * That's a straw man argument. Who said anything about crimes being ignored? The demographics section of the article on Delhi already mentions that "Delhi accounted for the highest percentage (16.2%) of the crimes reported in 35 Indian cities with populations of one million or more" and "Delhi accounts for 15.4% of crime against women in Indian cities." We are talking about inclusion of POV statements like "rape and crime capital" in the intro of the article. If you want to add a section to the article, go ahead. See New York City for an example.
 * "Livemint is also not a valid news paper or recognized source like TOI or The Hindu"
 * Mint is published by HT Media (of Hindustan Times fame), in collaboration with the The Wall Street Journal. Anyway, that's not what we are discussing here.
 * "TOI has given latest stats (2012). Hence your info is out dated compared to mine."
 * Nope. Like I said, you haven't read the article you are referring to. It's dated 2011. And I've already discussed the article contents above.
 * "new comers should be made aware of these to protect their lives by taking caution or avoiding the city"
 * See WP:AGENDA. If you want to launch an awareness drive about the crimes in cities like Delhi or Mumbai, or states like UP, Andhra and Tamil Nadu, please start a blog.
 * "u are worried about all proofs"
 * "threatening me to stop me
 * "interfering in freedom / rights to express"
 * Please stop the Drama. I am an Indian, but I wasn't born in Delhi, neither have I lived in Delhi. Torreslfchero and Anna Frodesiak aren't even Indians. So, there is no reason why should we be "worried".
 * "i will bring this to the notice of wiki community soon"
 * This should help you: Dispute resolution.
 * utcursch | talk 18:38, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
 * "new comers should be made aware of these to protect their lives by taking caution or avoiding the city"
 * See WP:AGENDA. If you want to launch an awareness drive about the crimes in cities like Delhi or Mumbai, or states like UP, Andhra and Tamil Nadu, please start a blog.
 * "u are worried about all proofs"
 * "threatening me to stop me
 * "interfering in freedom / rights to express"
 * Please stop the Drama. I am an Indian, but I wasn't born in Delhi, neither have I lived in Delhi. Torreslfchero and Anna Frodesiak aren't even Indians. So, there is no reason why should we be "worried".
 * "i will bring this to the notice of wiki community soon"
 * This should help you: Dispute resolution.
 * utcursch | talk 18:38, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Please stop the Drama. I am an Indian, but I wasn't born in Delhi, neither have I lived in Delhi. Torreslfchero and Anna Frodesiak aren't even Indians. So, there is no reason why should we be "worried".
 * "i will bring this to the notice of wiki community soon"
 * This should help you: Dispute resolution.
 * utcursch | talk 18:38, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
 * This should help you: Dispute resolution.
 * utcursch | talk 18:38, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

Hi Utcursch - You said - Here are some of the headlines from Times of India today: "Future of Indian bowling is bleak", "Ranbir Kapoor is hard to please", "Why Indian men rape". I say: The above examples are irrelevent to what we are discussing. You need to explain why the title is emotional. I have also given many other news papers saying the same thing, do you say all the news papers are emotional?/.. BBC: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-india-20765364  BBC says:  Sunday night's incident in India's rape capital was gut-wrenchingly brutal even for a city which has become numb to crimes against women. When BBC refers this city as rape capital, how can any one dispute this?  Many other news papaers: http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/delhi-police-test-on-gangrape-case/1/238598.html http://daily.bhaskar.com/article/DEL-rape-capital-delhi-suffers-more-than-other-metros-4118690-NOR.html http://gulfnews.com/news/world/india/new-delhi-is-still-the-rape-capital-1.793160 ''' So do you mean to say all the above news papers including BBC are emotional? common man.. ' You said: You cannot say that "Tamil Nadu is more crime-oriented than Goa because TN is #3 on the list, far ahead of Goa." If the population of Goa is 10 times less than that of TN, it won't be surprising if 1000 cases were reported in TN as opposed to only 100 in Goa.'' I say: I am not comparing Delhi with any city here like you have compared. Delhi is top most in crime and you cannot say a family of 10 people can commit more number of crimes compared to family of three people. Crime is a crime irrespective of population density and Delhi tops in this overall list. You said: ''If you want to launch an awareness drive about the crimes in cities like Delhi or Mumbai, or states like UP, Andhra and Tamil Nadu, please start a blog. '' I say: wiki is the first source of info for travellers across the world and it should have the real facts exposed instead of highlighting Delhi as a modern / developed city. Thanks for your suggestion to write blogs but i never asked you one! One point i agree with you is TOI stats are for 2011 i did make this small mistake. But this doesnt allow me to give up the truth. I am not interested about creating a section for crime at the end of the page which wont catch any ones attention. The title earned by Delhi should be one of the other names this city is called and it should be the very first line. Alternatively if you allow me to create a article titled "Criminal Capital" and redirect to Delhi i would be happy. Guru coolguy(talk) —Preceding undated comment added 20:48, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

Hello All - I would like to join this discussion. I was surprised by BBC link given by GuruCoolguy terming Delhi as rape capital. I think when BBC itself has acknowledged Delhi as rape capital then we should include it on lead. So i agree with Guru Coolguy to include this as other names of Delhi in first paragraph. ≈≈≈≈ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shiva120 (talk • contribs) 20:58, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi. New account huh? I think you might be Guru coolguy. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 21:01, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
 * And that lower case "i". Quite a coincidence. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 21:04, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

Hello Anna - I have given evidence from BBC calling it as rape capital. If you dont allow this, then you should look at the very wiki article on South Africa: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Rape_in_South_Africa Wiki itself refers South Africa as Rape capital. Why Delhi should not be referred as same for India? Who knows, soon Delhi would snatch the title from SA. Below line from Wiki:  The incidence of rape has led to the country being referred to as the "rape capital of the world". So what say now?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Guru coolguy (talk • contribs) 21:11, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi Guru coolguy. Are you also Shiva120? Anna Frodesiak (talk) 21:17, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Autoblock checker seems to say so Shiva120 and Guru coolguy.  Elockid  ( Talk ) 21:24, 20 December 2012 (UTC)


 * The article South Africa doesn't contain those epithets in the introduction. We are discussing your edits to the article's introduction here. You've been told enough about WP:UNDUE, WP:AGENDA and other guidelines. So, I'm not going to waste my time in repeating the same points again and again. If you still want to insist on making those edits, you might want to seek third-party dispute resolution. ~
 * Edit Conflict: Looks like the user has been temporarily blocked for sockpuppetry. utcursch | talk 21:40, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

The imagery of the article is incomplete
The article is not NPOV and not encyclopedic if some of the other aspects of the city are not displayed. There is the old city: ,, sacred cows  (not showing a Sacred cow in Dehli... for shame!) or this more common image of the Old Dehli skyline  the city can have pollution like this, and has a LOT of very poor residents without sanitation. A casual viewer of this article would think that Dehli is a completely revitalized city that has no pollution, no squalor or decay, no old city, no Sacred cattle and no monkeys. Please keep the article truthful and unbiased, not just in the wording but in the images shown, for this is an encyclopedia not a travel brochure site. Alatari (talk) 12:46, 4 February 2013 (UTC)