Talk:Thiruvananthapuram/Archive 3

Nicknames, Qualifiers Etc
Every place will have many nicknames. Some widely recognized, some not. To find a place in an encyclopedia, it must be widely known and used. "Gateway of Monsoon" is not one of them.

Yes, it was used in one book by an author with no special status. And there is no evidence of it being used anywhere else. Unless one can bring in evidence of wide recognition, the term can not be added. Do not put it back.

The editor mentioned "Evergreen City". that is already discussed on these pages. Do a google search and you can see widespread use. There is no comparison.

117.196.130.163 (talk) 01:36, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

I read the book "Chasing the Monsoon" By Alexander Frater, 1992 edition, and the name "Gateway of Monsoon DOES NOT appear in the book.

Being unreferenced, the caption will be deleted. If you want it reinstated, please add reference, including chapter/page number, so that it could be verified.

117.196.144.37 (talk) 15:46, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

The editor who is adamant to insert the title, seems to be totally unaware of how Wikipedia works. Please see CITE to learn how to cite sources.

The source quoted by him does not have the phrase. I have a copy of the said book. So, either a scan of the page, or transcript of the actual paragraph need to be provided for verification. Burden of proof lies with the editor here.

And the issue of whether the information RELEVANT here comes after that. As mentioned earlier, just ONE author calling the city something, on ONE book doesn't qualify it to be a title of the city!!

I am sorry to mention that the editor ignored all the principles, including using civil language.

The title WILL NOT be allowed to stay.

117.196.138.149 (talk) 00:58, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

Tie-up with Barcelona Abandoned

 * The Twinning or Tie-up with Barcelona has expired and has been abandoned. Hence removing the mention from the Twinned cities table. See here: http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics/nation/shashi-tharoor-denies-reports-on-mp-funds-spending/articleshow/9361163.cms - MountainWhiskey - talk 05:44, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

The twinning is still on.. It is said that since there is no support from the LDF, the twinning is likely to be banned. Please show more references, if you still want to remove. --Samaleks (talk) 16:11, 30 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Dear Samaleks: First of all, the twinning was never really "ON".


 * The newslink above clearly quotes Tharoor as saying "However, the project could not be implemented due to lack of interest shown by the LDF in the state, he said. The agreement only required approval by Thiruvananthapuram City Corporation. But as a result of petty politics by Left dominated muncipal authorities, the agreement was allowed to lapse', he added.


 * It is very clear from the above news article that the Twinning Agreement is not taking off. Lapse & Not Implemented means NOT happening in simple English.


 * FYI also, this article is worth reading.


 * I have posted a link which clearly says that it is not happening. Since you object to that, please provide a recent link which says that the Twinning Agreement has been renewed or that some action is happening on it. Cheers & I am not interested in an edit war. Fellow editors, please take note and contribute! - MountainWhiskey - talk 05:10, 2 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Aarem, what is your opinion on Barcelona and even Galveston tie ups? Never heard of Galveston in a long time - MountainWhiskey - talk 01:42, 1 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Samaleks, you objected to my removal of the Barcelona mention, but you have not provided any sources which say that the twinning agreement is still happening. Care to oblige, if not, it shall be removed - Cheers - MountainWhiskey - talk 01:43, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

Seeking Clarification: Inclusion of KL 21 / 22 in City Page
Hi Aarem OR any other sensible Editor(s),

Just checking if KL 21 (Nedumangad) and KL 22 (Kazhakuttom) come under TRV City (Corp) limits? I am pretty sure Nedumangad does not come under Corp, but maybe a bit of Kazhakuttom? Please clarify, thanks - MountainWhiskey - talk 01:41, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

Literacy Rate
I have updated the literacy date(as of 2001) from jnnurm report(page 2) based on census data. Cheers, -- Aarem (Talk) 03:59, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

Inconsistency in population/area figures
The population of Thiruvananthapuram city as per 2011 census is 835228(with an annual growth rate of 3.58 from 744983 as of 2001). This census figure is calculated based on the Muncipal corporation area of 141.74 km2. Now the area of the corporation is 214.86 km2, with a population of 957,710. Putting this figures in the infobox will affect the literacy rate and other population related parameters such as density. We should maintain consistency in the figures, and the information should be accurate. Cheers, -- Aarem (Talk) 04:27, 2 September 2011 (UTC)


 * I agree to that. One user here has dig his own grave. He has cited the corporation website, and wanted to update the literacy rate according to that(actually to show a reduced literacy rate). Let us use the corporation website, and update the population and area.
 * According to the site, the population is 9,57,730 and area is 241 :-)
 * Please update the article. The incidents reminded me of the Malayalam Proverb of Annaan(squirrel); the result was a stitch in the butt :D --Samaleks (talk) 15:10, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

You are welcome to do that. The question was about reference, and the corporation website is a valid reference. The screenshot was provided because editor Aarem's system could not render (because of configuration of the browser) the malayalam text. Anyone with a properly configured browser would be able to read the web site.

DileepKS(talk) 05:38, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

Verification needed tag added for the claim "Evergreen City"
After a lot of time spent on researching, I could not verify the claim of Mahatama Gandhi calling the city "Evergreen city of India". ALL the web pages obtained via Google search are circular references taken from this article. There is no mention of it in the other encyclopedia articles, or in any Govt of Kerala documents. Editor Aarem had informed me that there was an article in a newspaper some years ago, but no credible reference resulted from that.

We need a credible reference that is not circularly sourced. Till then, the tag shall stand.

DileepKS(talk) 09:20, 11 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Thank you for doing all the researching. But sorry to say that wikipedia is not a place for Original Research. There are several references for Evergreen city in the web. You may just google Evergreencity of India and you will find many many references to the phrase. Now I demand to stop this EDIT WARRING, and personal attacks. --Samaleks (talk) 04:04, 18 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Most of the Google results eventually end up pointing to this disputed bit. The reference given to substantiate the Evergreen claim also says "Referred to by Mahathma Gandhi, as the 'Evergreen City of India' Thiruvananthapuram, ...." This bit is right out of Wikipedia. It would be a good idea to get an alternative reference that does not point to Wiki and solve the issue here. - Amazer007 (talk) 16:58, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

"Most of the Google results" does not means "All Google results". Please check the reference cited in the article. It is also possible that Wikipidea has copied the sentence from some reference. Here are some references for you which is not a copy of wiki: Asianet, Destination360, and many more. It is easy to wake up some from sleep, but difficult to wake up some one pretending asleep. Thank you, --Samaleks (talk) 00:58, 23 September 2011 (UTC)


 * The Asianet and Destination360 absolutely cannot be relied upon and they are again pointing to information like those on Wikipedia. If the Asianet or 360 sites had mentioned their sources, maybe we could have used that! - Amazer007 (talk) 05:10, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

Can you please explain on what basis you are telling Asianet and Destination360 is not a valid source? How you know that those websites took information from wiki? Asianet is the largest news channel in Kerala. Please do not argue for the sake of arguing. I request you to be logical here. If you still have a problem please go for a 3O here. --Induzcreed (talk) 11:20, 23 September 2011 (UTC)


 * I don't intend to question the greatness of Asianet. But where is the source of the mention on Asianet's website? Please answer that first. = Amazer007 (talk) 18:27, 23 September 2011 (UTC)
 * I honestly did not understand what you meant by this question. Can you please let us know which "source" are you expecting? --Samaleks (talk) 05:31, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
 * I was asking whether Asianet termed or phrased Evergreen City of India or was it sourced from somewhere else? Are we saying that Asianet is the one that coined the phrase "Evergreen City"? If not, who? - Amazer007 (talk) 06:10, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
 * You may read wiki guidelines for citing references. Or please ask Asianet. :-) --Samaleks (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 06:31, 28 September 2011 (UTC).
 * I am afraid that does not answer the question. How do we authenticate what Asianet site has simply put as a header? The site referred here does not say why or how the city is the Evergreen City. This is just advertorial material and an obvious pick up from Wiki itself. Let us all be logical here, shall we? Asianet News maybe the largest TV news channel but the site in itself is not as reliable as the news channel. Even worse, the site is anything but professional. Just about anyone anywhere can put up a website, call something xy and z and then put it up on Wiki? I am afraid not. Let us choose reliable sources of information. - Amazer007 (talk) 10:15, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

Hi Amazer007, May I know what is your real query? Is it about the validity of using reference from Asianet? Please go through what counts as reliable source. The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth—whether readers can check that material in Wikipedia has already been published by a reliable source, not whether editors think it is true. (However, this part is still under hot discussion in wikipedia community) Asianet is a published reliable source which can be used to cite articles here. (Further, a simple google search is retrieving thousands of pages on the tag) If you are still skeptical, please read through all the links I provided above to get a clarity.. Hope, this discussion will not be dragged never-ending. Cheers, -- Aarem (Talk) 11:33, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the information Aarem. Let me go through and come back - Amazer007 (talk) 11:41, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

Tourist Statistics
New tourist statistics published by Government of Kerala shows Trivandrum no more the most visited place. So it should be removed from the article. But user:Salih continously revert it and restore the false information. See the reference - http://www.keralatourism.org/destination-wise-foreign-2010.pdf --Bijuts (talk) 14:42, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I suggested you to rewrite the information to indicate that Kovalam, not long ago, was the most visited tourist spot in Kerala. True, the article is not about the history of Trivanndrum, but this important information can go in the section "Tourism". If you take care of this I have no further objections. Let's all be stick to neutral editing. Salih  ( talk ) 15:06, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

If so, lots of articles to rewrite. Wiki is not the place for that. Wiki always allow to change the article whenever informations changes accordingly. So no need to mention the past history. If Kovalam again will come into most visited place in coming years, surely we can reinstate that information. --Bijuts (talk) 05:01, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
 * It seems you have not understood what Wikipedia is. It is not a place where you only get updated information. History is an integral part of any encyclopaedia. "If so, lots of articles to rewrite"..., Yes, lots of articles have to be rewritten, but that's not the point here. Salih  ( talk ) 10:51, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I agree with Salih. Also, the sentence in the current format says nothing like the place ranks first in tourist destination. Hence, do not remove the information blindly. --Samaleks (talk) 11:22, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

Correction needed: looks like city has 10 million people.
"With nearly 10,00,000(one million) inhabitants per the 2011 census, it is the Fifth largest, and most populous city in Kerala; the wider urban agglomeration has a population of more than 1 million." The comma needs to be adjusted but the article is locked. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Davensuze (talk • contribs) 18:57, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Done - MountainWhiskey - talk 06:53, 10 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Still this is misleading. According to 2011 census, the city's population is only 7,52,490. But the article says it is "nearly 10,00,000". How can 7,52,490 be eqal to "nearly 10,00,000"? It should be changed to "With more than 7,50,000 inhabitants..." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.230.130.125 (talk) 08:26, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

NH 47 is reassigned ,its NH 66 now passing through TVM
Government of India vide Notification No. S.O.542(E) dated 5th March 2010 has proposed to rename all National Highways. The revised Names are given in http://keralapwd.gov.in/getPage.php?page=NH%20in%20Kerala&pageId=301. Old data is given at the top table,revised list is given at the bottom. Could anyone please check and verify it and take appropriate action. KAS ( talk ) 18:25, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Requested move

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the proposal was no consensus. --BDD (talk) 19:18, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

Thiruvananthapuram → Trivandrum – Per WP:COMMONNAME. Thiruvananthapuram isn't listed in many English dictionaries or other sources that do not include native names, and when it is listed, no English pronunciation is provided. Ask yourself: How is Thiruvananthapuram to be pronounced in English? If you can't answer that with the references that an ordinary reader is likely to have access to, then the article does not belong under that name. How would an audio version of this article be created, for example? Trivandrum, on the other hand, is well established in English, and the English pronunciation is readily available.

Dict.com, for example, defines Thiruvananthapuram as "the local official name of Trivandrum", while it defines Trivandrum as "a city in and the capital of Kerala state, in S India: Vishnu pilgrimage center. 409,761." For Trivandrum it provides an English pronunciation ([trih-van-druhm], ); for Thiruvananthapuram it only provides the Malayalam (, no English pronunciation respelling). MW lists Trivandrum but not Thiruvananthapuram. Etc. Even local news publications in Kerala and Trivandrum use that name as the sole designation of the city. — kwami (talk) 04:28, 13 November 2012 (UTC)


 * For pronunciation, see IPA in lead. Which MW are you talking about?? Merriam-Webster's defintion of "Trivandrum" is "see Thiruvananthapuram". The assertion that many English dictionaries/encyclopaedias and Major/notable local news publications do not use "Thiruvananthapuram", is inaccurate (see below).-- Redtigerxyz  Talk 18:31, 16 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Thiruvananthapuram is not just the local official name of the city as defined in Dict.com but it is the official and original name of the city. Considering the meaning of the names, there is nothing in Trivandrum that can identify what kind of city it is. The name Thiruvananthapuram derives from the deity of the Sri Padmanabhaswamy temple at the center of the city. Thiru means Holy or pure, Anantha is the serpent Shesha on whom Padmanabhan or Lord Vishnu reclines and puram means city. This temple is an iconic landmark of the city as its monumental items and assets of the temple partially and recently revealed are close to INR100,000 crore (US$18.9 billion) and is what now our city is most famous for. But if you consider WP:COMMONNAME Trivandrum could be used because it is most suitable for normal English readers and I have no answer for the problem of pronunciation and its audio version of Thiruvananthapuram. KAS ( talk ) 15:20, 13 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Yes, the meaning of Thiruvananthapuram only works in Malayalam. In English it is just a meaningless name. — kwami (talk) 22:52, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
 * I haven't opposed it but just pointed out the importance of the name Thiruvananthapuram to us. Change is necessary as per WP:COMMONNAME. KAS ( talk ) 10:11, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

(looks like that's a support)
 * "Trivandrum" is also a meaningless name in English. Salih  ( talk ) 08:27, 17 November 2012 (UTC)
 * support as per WP:COMMONNAME  KAS ( talk  ) 13:44, 21 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Support per kwami's arguments, English, and commonname. Dicklyon (talk) 00:21, 14 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Oppose Britannica, Google Maps, The Penguin Encyclopedia of Places, Rough Guides, Lonely Planet, BBC, as well as wide usage in Indian media use "Thiruvananthapuram" -- Redtigerxyz Talk 19:21, 14 November 2012 (UTC)
 * In running text, the BBC uses "Trivandrum"; that's the only form used in 2012. (Cf. and .) The NY Times also uses "Trivandrum" (Weather; also 358 hits to 53 in articles.) Khaleej Times uses 'Trivandrum', as does New Delhi Television. Kerala IT News and Yentha.com use it as well, and they are published from Trivandrum! Etc etc. When even home-town papers calls it by that name... You can find plenty of hits for either, but one is more assimilated and has an established pronunciation. — kwami (talk) 19:48, 14 November 2012 (UTC)
 * If I google "Trivandrum", I will get more hits than "Thiruvananthapuram", but the new name is slowly catching up and encyclopedias (2012 editions) and news organizations are now using the official name. New Delhi Television (better known as NDTV) uses "Thiruvananthapuram" more . Khaleej Times also uses "Thiruvananthapuram" . Not sure about the notability of Kerala IT News and Yentha.com, but the major local (based in Thiruvananthapuram/Kerala) news groups like Malayala Manorama (26 in world-circulation) and  Mathrubhumi (42 in world-circulation) use "Thiruvananthapuram". The Columbia Encyclopedia (2012) also uses "Thiruvananthapuram". Reuters uses "Thiruvananthapuram" more 18 v/s 7. Washington Post, Merriam-Webster (2012), Oxford Dictionaries (2012).Trivandrum is described as "another name for Thiruvananthapuram."  Note that  ( Dictionary.com gives the definition based on a Collins English Dictionary (2009). -- Redtigerxyz  Talk 18:31, 16 November 2012 (UTC)
 * So you're saying that they all use both. Yes, both names are common. However, English speakers who are not familiar with Indian languages have no idea what to do with "Thiruvananthapuram". — kwami (talk) 20:19, 16 November 2012 (UTC)
 * I am saying that in 2012, we are using Thiruvananthapuram more (if not only Thiruvananthapuram, as in case of encyclopaedias). When major dictionaries (2012 editions)/encyclopaedias (2012 editions)/media organizations are moving towards the new name, why should we move backward? Reverting to old name, just because an non-Indian may/may not be able to pronounce the new name, does not make sense to me. More: UN (2002), Library of Congress (2004). -- Redtigerxyz Talk 04:22, 17 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Oppose. Beside whatever User:Redtigerxyz said, I also would like to point out that one of the most widely circulated English newspaper, The Hindu uses the name "Thiruvananthapuram" as can be seen here. See for example, here. Also, if you follow the argument of WP:COMMONNAME, then we will have to apply this to all cities in India, or at least in Kerala. Thus, Kochi should be renamed to "Cochin", Kozhikode to "Calicut", Trissur to "Trichur", etc. Do we really need to do that? Salih  ( talk ) 19:06, 16 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes, we do, at least for Calicut. COMMONNAME is WP policy, and so should be followed unless there is good reason not to. However, at least one of the sources I've seen which uses Trivandrum also uses Kochi, so they don't necessarily all need to be changed.
 * We should also point out that the Hindu is targeted to an audience familiar with Indian languages. WP has a broader target audience than that. — kwami (talk) 20:15, 16 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Over a period of time both "Thiruvananthapuram" and "Trivandrum" have become common names. People use both, sources use both, but the name Thiruvananthapuram has the official status too. So we should retain the title Thiruvananthapuram. But for the sake of English speakers, if you want to change the title to Trivandrum, it should be applicable to all cities in Kerala. That is for consistency. Just because you found one of the sources use Trivandrum alongside with Kochi, Kochi cannot be an exemption. Salih  ( talk ) 05:55, 17 November 2012 (UTC)
 * I wouldn't object to changing Kochi, I'm just not advocating it. In general, we follow common English names rather than official ones. — kwami (talk) 08:28, 17 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Here the fact is that, Thiruvananthapuram is also equally common in use. So why do we change? Salih  ( talk ) 08:34, 17 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Because Trivandrum is more familiar, and Thiruvananthapuram is inaccessible to those who are unfamiliar with Indian languages. — kwami (talk) 09:41, 17 November 2012 (UTC)
 * IMO, Britannica, Columbia encyclopaedias are intended for an non-Indian English-speaking audience. If they are using Thiruvananthapuram, then it may not be that inaccessible to those who are unfamiliar with Indian languages.-- Redtigerxyz Talk 10:29, 17 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Oppose . The name is not selected on the basis of what can be pronounced or its meaning - all names are ultimately meaningless and 'inaccessible' until you know what they refer to. The name should be the common one in official and formal use. If multiple current RS and the city government both use the current name, that should be enough justification. Imc (talk) 12:50, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Vehicle registration numbers
KL-16 (Attingal), KL-19 (Parassala), KL-20 (Neyyattinkara) and KL-21 (Nedumangad) are not situated within the city corporation. However, these are under the metropolitan area and is included in Thiruvananthapuram metropolitan area page.

Thank you :)  BIN O Y  Talk 08:09, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Technopark is not in Thiruvananthapuram City
This article is about Thiruvananthapuram City. Still it contains many images and descriptions of Technopark which is actually not inside Thiruvananthapuram city limits. Technopark is in Kazhakuttam which is a separate village panchayat as well as a block panchayat. Therefore the Technopark images are going to be soon removed from this article. - Karyasthan Raman Nair (talk) 18:28, 10 April 2012 (UTC) . — Preceding unsigned comment added by 14.99.158.108 (talk) 09:17, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Kazhakuttam is under Trivandrum Corporation. Cheers...  BIN O Y  Talk 17:01, 2 September 2012 (UTC) The comments in this matter are mosly raised by anti trivandrum lobby and should be discarded. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.249.2.114 (talk) 08:36, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Kazhakuttam is a ward under Thiruvananthapuram Corporation. The reference being the Thiruvananthapuram Corporation Official website and is referenced in the Kazhakuttam Page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Justpp (talk • contribs) 09:17, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

Correction Needed: French not a commonly spoken language of the City
The Metropolitan Area Template lists French under the list of Spoken Languages. Apart from the fact that the city has an Alliance Francaise centre and that French is taught in certain colleges, there is no reason to list French as a spoken language of the city. It would be misleading to international tourists desirous of visiting the city.

Justpp (talk) 09:39, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

French/Française
Monsieur, je comprends le français élémentaires. La langue française a beaucoup d'étudiants ici. Et, ce n'est pas une exagération. Pas grand-expertise, mais, connaissances de base est ici parmi les étudiants d'élite.

Just like Pondicherry, the well educated part of the native young population understands some basic French. Many schools/colleges offer French as a second language, apart from the Alliance française.

Among the Catholic clergy and laymen, many are French-educated. Some even in Université de Grenoble, France. Many people work in Europe, French-speaking parts of Africa, Canada, USA etc. and along with Italian and Latin, French is also taught and useful for higher studies.

Many healthcare professionals like specialised doctors study French since France is a leader in this field.

Fine arts students study French due to professional reasons. The fine arts college is in Trivandrum.

Film making enthusiasts and fraternity of technicians also study French since it's useful.

Fashion designers are here to study French. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sathyasaagar1 (talk • contribs) 11:43, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

The Alliance française here has a good library and French book readers as well.

And the TV5 Monde channel is also available in Trivandrum.

The interesting part of the issue is: most French speakers migrate to other parts of India or abroad. However, from a linguist's point of view, the nasal phonetical characterestics of French language make it easy for the natives here as the Malayalam spoken here is similar to French in this way.

Note: English is also taught through out India, but, less than 5 percent of Indian population can actually converse in English, that too, with a heavy Indian-accent. Still English is considered as a spoken language and even the autorikshaw drivers in India grasp some words!!!!

Here is the point. French is basically familiar, recognized and understood among the good students.(Russian is also studied, but a good library is yet to come and number of faculty is limited, German is a recent introduction but still in infancy. So, French achieved it through out the history.

And, former Travancore Kingdom's capital was in Trivandrum, and hence, as an international diplomatic language, French gained popularity even those days, it's understood!)

So, why not French???? Sure, many students in Trivandrum achieved it. Especially when pronouncing French correctly(The best in India). French is popular here and comes next to English, Hindi and Tamil due to the easy pronunciation-factor. But, outside Trivandrum district, for students who don't have a spoken-phonetic base for nasal words from a young age, French remains difficult to pronounce.

Exception in Kerala: Mahé near Kannur where a French-medium school still exists. French is basically familiar among Trivandrum residents of Malabar-origin also.

Kerala university's Malayalam classes in Trivandrum for international tourists
About the international tourists coming to India, they mostly expect English everywhere in India and travel to multiple destinations in India. Some of them even try to speak the local languages. If they choose to stay here for some months, learning Kathakali, Kalarippayattu etc, they learn basic Malayalam!!! The Kerala university's department of linguistics in Trivandrum even conducts a basic Malayalam course for foreign nationals and it's in Trivandrum, Karyavattom. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sathyasaagar1 (talk • contribs) 10:52, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

Healthcare Sector & Ayurveda & Sports
The city has a good number of quality healthcare providers of international standards. It's a major quality healthcare hub in India. South Kerala and Southern Tamil Nadu depend on the city's facilities. Even foreign nationals often choose Trivandrum for low cost healthcare related needed including cardiac surgeries. Sree Chithra, SUT, KIMS, NIMS, and many other hospitals are based here. Trivandrum is the place ,where, a good number of the best doctors of India and abroad of today, having their origin or student days spent. Then, about Ayurveda. Trivandrum is famous for reviving the traditional Ayurveda through it's govt. run Ayurveda College. An example rest of Kerala and India followed. Ayurveda's application in the sports medicine supported by the modern healthcare sector surely helped to shape the place Kerala have achieved in the field of sports in India. This helped the teams to maintain a good health without injuries. Trivandrum mixed what's traditional and modern in this sphere.Health and fitness is part of Trivandrum's culture. Eg: largest number of people in India go for a pollution free morning walk, jogging or bicycle-roam here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sathyasaagar1 (talk • contribs) 10:38, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

Kazhakkoottam is a seperate town
Kazhakkoottam and Sreekaryam area is not part of Thiruvananthapuram city. It was just in 2010 These areas where annexed to Thiruvananthapuram corporation (just for political mileage) and they are coming out of it within 5 years. Now they are all set to become a seperate municipality. This means Technopark, Kinfra, Karyavattom Campus, etc are outside city limits and cannot be included in this article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 106.66.153.133 (talk) 03:54, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

Merge Thiruvananthapuram metropolitan area to here.
Article Thiruvananthapuram metropolitan area should be merged to here. Trivandrum is not yet a metropolital area eventhough it is aspiring to be. Apqt (talk) 09:26, 30 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Thiruvananthapuram metropolitan area is the extended Urban Agglomeration of Trivandrum city. As per 2011 census, Trivandrum city have a UA with a population more than 1 million. see Since UA and City area are different and administered by different bodies, there is no need to merge/add these data to the city article. 117.248.12.214 (talk) 14:46, 5 April 2015 (UTC)
 * "Urban agglomeration" and "metropolitan area" are two different things. The article Thiruvananthapuram metropolitan area is all about the urban agglomeration, not about the metropolitan area. Trivandrum UA is only fifth largest in the state after Kochi, Kozhikode, Thrissur and Malappuram. But metropolitan status is something different. Government has not given any recognition for the metropolitan status of Trivandrum and it not likely to get any such recognition in near future, since Kazhakkoottam is becoming a separate municipality. See: Corporation not Happy About New Municipality. From the news:

“Possibilities of the city to attain metro status will diminish if Kazhakkoottam and nearby areas are taken away from the Corporation’s ambit, for it includes places such as the IT Hub Technopark. Thereby it will affect the Corporation from availing of Central Government grants for developmental activities,” said an expert.


 * This clearly proves that presently Trivandrum does not have any metropolitan status. It was just in 2010, areas such as Kazhakkoottam, Sreekaryam, Vattiyoorkavu, Kudappanakkunnu, Vizhinjam, etc where added to Trivandrum corporation to exaggerate the population and area. Vizhinjam has already snipped away as a separate Grama Panchayat and Kazhakkoottam is all set to become a separate municipality. It was a wrong decision of the authorities that sleepy small town of Trivandrum made capital of Kerala, ignoring larger cities like Kochi and Thrissur. Apqt (talk) 07:57, 6 April 2015 (UTC)
 * do not merge. As city will expand day by day and there will be need of separate article on its metropolitan area. -- Human 3015  Say Hey!! • 17:26, 26 May 2015 (UTC)


 * Don't merge : Metropolitan area and city area is different. It has nothing to do with corporation limits. According to the HRA classification, Indian cites are classified into 3 types. X, Y and Z. 6 Cities (Bangalore, Chennai, Delhi, Hyderabad, Kolkata and Mumbai) falls into the X category, 69 cities including Trivandrum, kochi and Kozhikode are in Y category and all the remaining Indian cities are in Z category. There is no such categorization as a Metropolitan city by Government of India. However, during the census, the government take the population of the corporation or municipality as the city population. If the city has adjoining urban areas, population of that areas are also calculated and listed separately as. That area is known as the metropolitan area or Urban Agglomeration. So can't merge these articles.  BIN O Y  Talk 09:54, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Don't merge : Both mean different context. The metropolitan classification seems to be recent, while the city has been in existence for long. Also metropolitan is an administrative classification.Ssriram mt (talk) 03:21, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

Authorities and People
There shall be some political factors and an hidden intention to attract the Trivandrumites and making it as an capital, can it be? Ankush 89 (talk) 08:45, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

Trivandrum UA has a population of only 1.6 and is not continuous with any other adjacent UA. Most of the areas even under corporation are rural in structure.Trissur,kochi,kozhikode are larger UA's.106.66.157.43 (talk) 19:04, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

Please upload a new main display picture for trivandrum Shafikochi123 (talk) 09:42, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

Changing the main display picture
Please somebody change the current display picture because its very bad and somebody intentionally did this to disrespect trivandrum which includes napier museum, infosys, jalakanyaka railway station and etc. Please add TECHNOPARK Phase 3 , Ust global campus trivandrum, Pattom skyline etc. Shafikochi123 (talk) 09:50, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

Change main profile picture
Remove museum, railwaystation, jalakanyaka and add TECHNOPARK p3, ust global, and pattom skyline Shafikochi123 (talk) 09:52, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Thiruvananthapuram. 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:
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.imdpune.gov.in/Temp_Extremes/histext2010.pdf

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

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 08:41, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 9 external links on Thiruvananthapuram. 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/20110721160020/http://www.spb.kerala.gov.in/~spbuser/old/html/Economic%20Review%202010/CHAPTER%20-%2021.pdf to http://www.spb.kerala.gov.in/~spbuser/old/html/Economic%20Review%202010/CHAPTER%20-%2021.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100918085703/http://www.corporationoftrivandrum.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=158&Itemid=11 to http://www.corporationoftrivandrum.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=158&Itemid=11
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.technopark.org/abttvm01.htm
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.isro.org/centers/cen_vssc.htm
 * Added archive http://www.webcitation.org/5tcfc0JvM?url=http://envis.tropmet.res.in/rainfall_stations.htm to http://envis.tropmet.res.in/rainfall_stations.htm
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.imdpune.gov.in/Temp_Extremes/histext2010.pdf
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://jnnurm.nic.in/nurmudweb/toolkit/Trivanthapuram/5PartCD.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110721160020/http://www.spb.kerala.gov.in/~spbuser/old/html/Economic%20Review%202010/CHAPTER%20-%2021.pdf to http://www.spb.kerala.gov.in/~spbuser/old/html/Economic%20Review%202010/CHAPTER%20-%2021.pdf
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.keralatourism.org/php/media/data/tourismstatistics/TOURISTSTATISTICS2005.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 17:24, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

There seems to be some kind of information overload in this article. should all wikipedia articles need be this exhaustive (42.109.164.54 (talk) 13:42, 25 January 2018 (UTC))

There are lot of verifications and citations. it is time to delete the tag (42.109.164.54 (talk) 13:43, 25 January 2018 (UTC))

Population stats
@ AG47 - The year given in the stats is 2011 & according to the Govt Census of 2011, the population of Trivandrum is 752,490. So if you're keeping the stats from Tvm Corporation website, then you need to change the year accordingly. You can't keep the year listed as 2011, since it contradicts the official figures from the Govt Census. Shady59 (talk) 17:33, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

@ AG47 Moreover, Census in India is done every 10 years. The last census was taken in 2011 & next census will be taken only in 2021. Rest all figures in the websites of private bodies are estimated mid census reports. So the website of Tvm corporation is not a better source than the Official Govt Census report. Shady59 (talk) 17:38, 1 February 2018 (UTC)


 * Thiruvanathapuram corporation website is the official website of the Corporation of Thiruvananthapuram. It is a better source than the census website. The census figure is calculated based on the old Municipal corporation area of 141.74 km2. The area of the city in 2011 was 214sq.KM. So 957,710 is the 2011 population. Putting the population data available in the census website in the infobox will affect the literacy rate and other population related parameters such as density. This was discussed and reached reached consensus in 2011, as you can see here. Cheers. AG 47   Talk 17:50, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
 * If the city was expanded to 214 sq.km after the 2011 census, then you need to mention that year instead of 2011. 2011 is the official census year and if you're mentioning that, then you can't put the stats from a later year which is misleading. Shady59 (talk) 18:05, 1 February 2018 (UTC)


 * Thiruvananthapuram was expanded before publishing the 2011 census data. The city was expanded to 100 wards in 2010, as you can see in this news article. Eventhough the Indian Census was in 2011, it was a huge process which started in April 2010. So they taken the corporation area as of 2009 for the census figures. So the newly added regions in 2010 was not considered as part of the corporation in 2011 census. So the 2011 census data is the misleading figure and it will create problems with parameters like density. In 2011, the city had 100 wards, had an area of 214.86 SqKm and a population of 9,57,730. The stats in the corporation website is from 2011 itself and not from any later year. You can see the discussion about this in the year 2011 itself. So here as the consensus in 2011 discussion, the population data in the census website is more reliable than the census website. Cheers AG 47   Talk 20:21, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
 * House listing for issuing UIDAI was started in April 2010. Population enumeration of the census was conducted between 9 and 28 February 2011. Which means, at the time of census(population) taken, Trivandrum corporation was already expanded. So unless you can show a credible source that says population enumeration done in February 2011 was done on the basis of corporation limits before 2010, it doesn't account for the 2011 year. The official govt census will supersede the corporation stats. Shady59 (talk) 08:15, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

I don't understand the problem here. First you said "the city was expanded to 214 sq.km after the 2011 census". Now you are saying "at the time of census(population) taken, Trivandrum corporation was already expanded". Lets analyse your problems one by one.

1. ✅ "at the time of census(population) taken, Trivandrum corporation was already expanded"
 * Yes. As I said before, Thiruvananthapuram was expanded before publishing the 2011 census data.

2. ❌ "So unless you can show a credible source that says population enumeration done in February 2011 was done on the basis of corporation limits before 2010, it doesn't account for the 2011 year. The official govt census will supersede the corporation stats."


 * Credible source? I am again repeating that Corporation of Thiruvanathapuram website is a credible source. So the govt census will not supersede the corporation stats. The Trivandrum corporation is not a private body as you said above. It is an official government website. Now, about the enumeration, note the points marked bold.


 * These news articles from October 2010 and November 2010 clearly says that the corporation had 100 wards in 2010. So it means that in 2011, the area of Trivandrum Corporation was 214sq.KM and had 100 wards.


 * The corporation website was updated in 2011. (Census data was published in 31 March 2011 and the Corporation website was updated to 957,710 also in 2011). You can see this in the web archive. In 2009, the population given in the corporation page was, from 2001 census and the area is given as 141.74sq.km. Then you can see here that it got updated to the population 9,57,730 and the area of 214.86sq.km in July 2011. Also, the discussion here in wikipedia about the same subject was done in September 2011. So this proves that the population data in question was not added after 2011.


 * In the 2011 Trivandrum district census data, you can clearly see that the population of only 81 wards and 6 out growths are included in the corporation for 2011 census. Area of the corporation in 2011 census report was 141.74sq.KM without the outgrowths and 179sq.KM including the outgrowths. This is same as the area of Thiruvanathapuram corporation + Outgrowths in 2009. Also, you can see that the newly added wards like Sreekaryam, Vattiyoorkavu, Kudappanakunnu etc are enumerated separately and are not included in the population of Thiruvananthapuram Corporation. This proves that the population of newly added wards in 2010 are not included in the 2011 Census data. So your second problem is also solved. Cheers AG 47   Talk 17:58, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

Area from Demographia.com
Text in Edit Summary: "It's common sense. The main city area of 214 sq.km with 957,730 population, has a pop density of only 4,500/sq.km. If metropolitan area of 311 sq.km has a population of 1.68 million, then that means the rest of the 97 sq.km outside the city has a pop of 729,676 with a density of 7,522. Which means, the main city has a density of only 4,500/sq.km, whereas area outside the city has a density of 7,500/sq.km. That's entirely implausible. So the metropolitan area is much greater than just 311 sq.km."


 * All encyclopedic content on Wikipedia must be written from a neutral point of view (NPOV), which means representing fairly, proportionately, and, as far as possible, without editorial bias, all of the significant views that have been published by reliable sources on a topic. WP:NPOV. Wikipedia articles also must not contain original research. What you did above is original research and it's not acceptable. That is, facts, allegations, and ideas—for which no reliable, published sources exist is not acceptable. WP:OR. I tried to find a source for the metropolitan area and the only reliable source I found is demographia.com. It's also used in many other city articles around the world. So the metro area given in the source can be used in the article. If you think the figures are wrong, please provide a better source which shows metropolitan area is much greater than just 311 sq.km. It would be really helpful.


 * Editors may not add their own views to articles simply because they believe them to be correct, and may not remove sources views from articles simply because they disagree with them. See WP:NOTTRUTH. - AG47  Talk 16:57, 14 July 2018 (UTC)


 * First of all, demographia is not an official body related to any city body. Just because it is used as a citation in many city related articles doesn't mean it's authentic. Secondly, the so called Trivandrum Metropolitan Area consists of Trivandrum corporation, 4 municipalities and 25 census towns. Trivandrum corporation area is 214 sq.km, Nedumangad municiaplity is 32.52 sq.km, Attingal is 14.18 sq.km, Varkala is 15.42 sq.km, Neyyatinkara is 16.21 sq.km, which itself totals to 292.33 sq.km. So you mean the total area of the rest of the 25 census towns combined is only 18 sq.km? Malayinkeezhu panchayat alone is 16.38 sq.km. It's not about citation, it's basic common sense and logic. Anyone who reads this can understand that. Shady59 (talk) 11:11, 15 July 2018 (UTC)


 * Which means, if Trivandrum metropolitan area is only 311 sq.km, then it constitutes only the corporation, the 4 Municipalities and one or 2 Panchayats, which itself would cover the 311 sq.km & more. So it wouldn't include all the other 25 census towns/panchayats. And if that's the case, then the population of the metropolitan area is certainly not 1.68 million, since the combined population of the 4 municipalities is around 2 lakhs and including any one or 2 panchayats, it would come to atmost 2.5 lakhs. So the total population including the 9.5 lakhs in the corporation area would come to only around 1.2 million. So it's evidently clear that both 311 sq.km area and 1.68 million population doesn't go together. If the Trivandrum metropolitan area population is 1.68 million, then the metropolitan area certainly is not 311 sq.km. It's much more than that. And if the Trivandrum metropolitan area is only 311 sq.km, then the metropolitan area population certainly is not 1.68 million, it's much less than that. Basic mathematics and common sense. Shady59 (talk) 12:32, 15 July 2018 (UTC)


 * By undoing the edit again without reaching consensus in the discussion, you just violated the 3RR. I think you didn't read the rules clearly. Let me explain it again. This time i will explain each points.


 * 1) All encyclopedic content on Wikipedia must be written from a neutral point of view (NPOV) see WP:POV. Here it's clear that you have some biased views towards the city. It's also noted that here in this edit, you also used the same source in another article.
 * 2) In Wikipedia, verifiability means that other people using the encyclopedia can check that the information comes from a reliable source. Wendell Cox's demographia.com is considered as a reliable source and currently, it's the only source available for the metro area. Of course if you can show some official government source, it will be more reliable than demographia.com. But you need to provide the reliable source.
 * 3) Here, you are only talking about your own personal views. Unsourceable personal knowledge is not acceptable in Wikipedia. You gave no sources for your views. Wikipedia is supposed to reflect what reliable sources say, regardless of whether individual editors think it is true or think they can personally verify it. Editors may not add their own views to articles simply because they believe them to be correct, and may not remove sources' views from articles simply because they disagree with them. See Truth, not verifiability and WP:VNT.


 * In a nutshell, here the "basic mathematics and common sense" is not what Wikipedia need. Wikipedia need reliable sources. If you want to remove that reference, you either need to say why demographia.com is an unreliable source and why it can't be used in Wikipedia, or you need to provide a better reliable source. If you can provide a source for your views, please provide it. It will be very helpful. Thank You - AG47  Talk 17:56, 15 July 2018 (UTC)


 * @User:AG47 - The "basic mathematics and common sense" itself is the answer to your question "why demographia.com is an unreliable source". The area depicted and the population simply doesn't go hand in hand. As simple as that and you clearly know that. Secondly, regarding me citing demographia in Kochi page: First of all, I've been editing Wikipedia since 2007, way before you and I clearly know what's WP:NPOV and what's not. The figures cited there is not at all contradicting and goes hand in hand. On top of that you can find the exact same area figure in other official reliable sources such as the website of Cochin Smart City Mission Limited headed by the district Collector, corporation mayor, GCDA chairman etc or the detailed case study prepared by ICLEI for EcoMobility Alliance. Kochi is a member of the former and one of the 2 participants from India for the latter. Can you cite any such reliable source showing Trivandrum metropilitan area figure?


 * Moreover, you haven't yet provided any reply regarding my contradicting figure reveal earlier. If you want any further clarifications, please go through this comprehensive mobility plan draft for Trivandrum prepared by Kerala Rapid Transit Corporation Ltd for the Smart Cities Mission by Central Govt. You can also download the same from the website of Smart City Trivandrum Ltd. Scroll down to page 3. It says the Trivandrum Study Area(TSA) for the project "consists of Thiruvananthapuram Municipal Corporation, Neyyattinkara Municipality and eight adjoining panchayats viz. Mangalapuram, Andoorkonam, Vilappil, Vilavoorkal, Pallichal, Kalliyoor, Venganoor, Balaramapuram. The population of the study area is estimated at 13.3 lakhs residing in 373.96 sq km of area as per 2011 census."
 * So please enlighten me how the corporation, 4 municipalities and 25 panchayats of Trivandrum metropolitan area totals to just 311 sq.km, when just the corporation, 1 municipality and just the 8 adjoining panchayats itself is 373.96 sq km? -- Shady59 (talk) 19:47, 19 July 2018 (UTC)


 * Ha Ha.. What does you joining Wikipedia in 2007 have to do with this discussion? Is this some kind of competition? It is not a competition man. It does't matter even if someone joined Wikipedia along with Jimbo Wales and I joined last month. Looks like you still don't understand what i said above. You are just repeating the same thing again and again. So let me repeat again.
 * Even though you started editing Wikipedia waaaaay before me, it seems like you didn't yet know about WP:OR and WP:VNT. As i said several times above, "Wikipedia is supposed to reflect what reliable sources say, regardless of whether individual editors think it is true or think they can personally verify it. Editors may not add their own views to articles simply because they believe them to be correct, and may not remove sources' views from articles simply because they disagree with them." It that hard to understand? It is very easy right? And I am not the one who said that. It is what WP:VNT says. That's means ONLY the "basic mathematics and common sense" is not acceptable to Wikipedia. In Wikipedia, you need to show a reliable reference which directly shows the "basic mathematics and common sense". Without a reliable reference, the "basic mathematics and common sense" is worthless. And a source which directly shows means that the source you given have to directly support the material being presented. It's also not said by me. It is what WP:OR. Also WP:SYN says "Do not combine material from multiple sources to reach or imply a conclusion not explicitly stated by any of the sources". Did you understand now?
 * Here you are doing calculations based on your own personal knowledge without a direct reliable source. That violates WP:OR and WP:VNT. Then you are now tying to combine another source with this source to reach or imply a conclusion which is not explicitly stated the source you given. It violates WP:SYN. So you are violating WP:OR, WP:VNT and WP:SYN. As an editor who started editing waay before me, I think you clearly know these policies of Wikipedia. WP:OR (which includes WP:SYN) is one of three core content policies in Wikipedia, yet you are just doing that.
 * I have no problem to change the area. If i find a more reliable source, i will definitely change it. I looked for metro areas and found demographia. It clearly satisfies WP:V and is widely used in many Wikipedia articles like List of urban areas by population and List of urban areas in the European Union etc. Changing the area figures to some unsourced data which also violates WP:OR, WP:VNT and WP:SYN is not good for the article. So as I said before, if i find a more reliable source, i will definitely change it. If you find one, that would be very helpful. Thank You AG47  Talk 16:20, 20 July 2018 (UTC)


 * @User:AG47 You think, quoting some shortcuts makes you an expert? The one thing you're forgetting is that the Demographia link given here doesn't actually satisy WP:V just because it's used in other articles. This is simply because other official sources which are actually related with the city, unlike Demographia, contradicts the stats depicted in Demographia. WP:SYN doesn't even apply here since we have an actual WP:RS which is related to the city and is doing city related works. That itself nullifies Demographia which has absolutely zero connection with the city. So let me ask you once again. It's clear from the comprehensive mobility plan draft for Trivandrum prepared by Kerala Rapid Transit Corporation Ltd for the Smart Cities Mission that the total area of Thiruvananthapuram Municipal Corporation, Neyyattinkara Municipality and eight adjoining panchayats viz. Mangalapuram, Andoorkonam, Vilappil, Vilavoorkal, Pallichal, Kalliyoor, Venganoor, Balaramapuram. The population of the study area is 373.96 sq km. So how come the so-called Trivandrum metropolitan area which includes 3 additional municipalities and 18 additional panchayats have a lesser area of 311 sq.km? And it's a WP:RS related to the city itself, unlike Demographia which has no relation with the city whatsoever.
 * And secondly, I don't have to give another official source that shows the size of Trivandrum metropolitan area. Because I already gave you an official source that proves that the size of the Trivandrum metropolitan area size depicted in the article is wrong. And why are you thinking of changing the area to an unsourced data? You know that showing metropolitan area isn't mandatory in Wikipedia, right? There are n number of city articles, even WP:GA that doesn't show the metropolitan area, because of lack of authentic sourcea. So you can simply remove that erroneous stat from there. That's the best option. In fact, this will be readily done if I put it up on WP:DRR simply because the stats from an actual official WP:RS contradict the article. -- Shady59 (talk) 00:26, 21 July 2018 (UTC)

Ha ha. Expert? No. no.. I am not an expert. You are the one who started editing waaaaaay before me so you are the expert here as you clearly know what's the polices in wiki and what's not. You said it yourself above! May be that's why you use wiki shortcuts on edit summaries of every edit you make. You think that will make someone an expert? ;)

Posting wiki shortcuts will not make anyone an expert. The three shortcuts I linked are the ones you are trying to violate. I only posted those on the last response. I don't know why such an experienced expert editor who started editing Wikipedia waaay before me find these simple policies hard to understand. Since you are repeating the same thing again, lets analyse your problems one by one.

1. Do the reference by demographia satisfies WP:V and WP:OR?
 * ✅ YES. Just because it's used in other articles doesn't mean that it satisfies WP:V. But I linked other articles only to show that not only it's a reliable source, the wiki community also widely use it as one. It is a widely used reference used in hundreds of articles in Wikipedia. If it's not a reliable source and the data in it can't be trusted, it can't be used in any Wikipedia pages as it's a bad source. Of course there might be more reliable sources than demographia. But you didn't provided anything yet.

2. Do you have a source that is more reliable than demographia.com?
 * ❌ NO. None of your source you provided say anything about the metropolitan area of Trivandrum. You are doing original research (WP:OR) based on your personal views here to make a point, which is not acceptable in Wikipedia. The comprehensive mobility plan link you provided talks about the study area for the comprehensive mobility plan. It says nothing about the metro area. How did you concluded that it satisfies WP:SYN?. Just because it is related to the city doesn't mean that it can be used here. That source talks about Mobility Plan for the city. It says nothing about the metro area. You are using the material in Mobility Plan source and comparing with the demographia link, along with your personal knowledge to reach the conclusion that Trivandrum metro area is bigger than 311 sq.km. That is definitely against WP:SYN and WP:OR.


 * All you need to do is provide a more reliable source than demographia.com which directly show that the Trivandrum metro area is bigger than 311 sq.km. And why should anyone remove a good source based on someone's personal research? That's why i linked WP:VNT. It says "Editors may not add their own views to articles simply because they believe them to be correct, and may not remove sources' views from articles simply because they disagree with them."


 * As what you are doing is just posting your personal knowledge and violating important wiki policies like WP:OR, i didn't need to do this explanation below. But since you are just repeating the same thing again and again without reading anything I written above or trying to understand the policies, now lets look at your personal views one by one.

1: "It's not about citation, it's basic common sense and logic."
 * ❌ NO. In Wikipedia, "common sense and logic" is not enough. You need to provide direct sources to prove your personal "common sense and logic".

2: "Trivandrum Metropolitan Area consists of Trivandrum corporation, 4 municipalities and 25 census towns."
 * ❌ WRONG. Trivandrum Metropolitan Area consists of Trivandrum corporation, 3 municipalities, 24 census towns and 2 Out growths. See, this is exactly why Wikipedia need reliable sources and Wikipedia don't accept original research. Because your personal "common sense an logic" can be wrong.

3: "It's clear from the comprehensive mobility plan draft for Trivandrum prepared by Kerala Rapid Transit Corporation Ltd for the Smart Cities Mission that the total area of Thiruvananthapuram Municipal Corporation, Neyyattinkara Municipality and eight adjoining panchayats viz. Mangalapuram, Andoorkonam, Vilappil, Vilavoorkal, Pallichal, Kalliyoor, Venganoor, Balaramapuram. The population of the study area is 373.96 sq km. So how come the so-called Trivandrum metropolitan area which includes 3 additional municipalities and 18 additional panchayats have a lesser area of 311 sq.km?"
 * ❌ WRONG. If you are trying to compare with the Metro area of 2011 census, you are again misinformed. Mangalapuram, Andoorkonam, and Balaramapuram are not part of Trivandrum Metro area. They are considered as rural in 2011 census. Also Varkala Municipality is also not part of Trivandrum Metro region. See how your "common sense an logic" turned out. As I said above, this is exactly why Wikipedia say no to Original research and personal views. Because it may not be correct.

There is no need to point out this as you are doing Original Research here. I said the mistakes in your points because you are just repeating this again and again. Have a nice day. AG47 Talk 15:12, 21 July 2018 (UTC)

-

@User:Shady59 Hello, since you were obsessed with the 2011 census figures, I just came across a good reference which shows the exact metro area according to the 2011 census. The District Census Handbook of Thiruvananthapuram district. You compared the census towns with the pachayath areas above. That's the first mistake. You think census towns are panchayaths. Census towns are not panchayaths. In the 24 census towns of Trivandrum district, you can see towns like Alamcode. There is no panchayath called Alamcode in Trivandrum district. It's a census town. So if you want to see the UA area, you need to find the area of these census towns. Not the panchayath area. And where do we find that? Of course from the census website!

The document above have all the 2011 census details of Trivandrum district including the area of census towns. So all you need to do is just add the census towns and urban areas like corporation area under Trivandrum UA together. Those census towns and municipalities which come under Trivandrum UA can be found [www.census2011.co.in/census/metropolitan/421-thiruvananthapuram.html here]. You can match the population of each census town with the handbook data for better precision. The outgrowth population is included in the corporation population in the handbook. I added it and the total area of Trivandrum UA is 542.57 sq.KM. There is also another easy way to find this. Doing this after adding all the data will also ensure that the data is correct. The Total area of Trivandrum district is 2,189 sq.KM. 577.46 sq.KM is the total urban area of the district. So subtracting the urban area which is not part of the Trivandrum UA from the total urban area of the district will give you the area of Trivandrum UA. Trivandrum district has 26 census towns and 4 municipalities. 24 census towns and 3 municipalities are under Trivandrum UA. So we need to find the 2 census tows and 1 municipality, which is not in the UA. They are Varkala Municipality and the census towns of Parassala and Parasuvaikkal. The Total area of these three are 34.89 sq.KM. So subtracting this from Total urban area is 542.57 sq.KM (577.46 - 34.89 = 542.57), which is exactly the same as the total added figure.

Since you talked about the reason why you added demographia as source in Kochi page and asked me to find sources, i also did the same with Kochi UA. The census town areas of Kochi UA can be found in the [www.censusindia.gov.in/2011census/dchb/3208_PART_B_ERNAKULAM.pdf District Census Handbook of Ernakulam district]. The census towns and municipalities which come under Kochi UA can be found [www.census2011.co.in/census/metropolitan/417-kochi.html here]. 45 census towns are in Kochi UA. And adding all these census towns, municipalities and the corporation areas together will get the total area of Kochi UA. And the area of Kochi UA is 843.84 sq.KM. Now we can also do the easy way, which also ensure the data is correct, we need to find the census towns in Ernakulam district which is not part of the Kochi UA. Ernakulam district has a total area of 3,063 sq.KM. 925.26 sq.KM is the urban area of the district. The remaining urban regions in Ernakulam district which are not part of Kochi UA is the Kothamangalam and Muvattupuzha municipalities and the census towns of Velloorkunnam and Eramalloor. All these are in the Kothamangalam UA. So Kochi UA area = Total urban area of Ernakulam district - Kothamangalam UA area. So, 925.26 - 81.42 = 843.84, which is exactly the same as the added figure.

So, that's the results. Area of Trivandrum UA is 542.57 sq.KM and the area of Kochi UA is 843.84 sq.KM. From the above discussion, i was very confused why are you trying to increase the area. Then i noticed that you were worried about the density figures. So lets calculate the density also. Trivandrum UA's population is 1,679,754 and Kochi UA's population is 2,119,724. So Trivandrum UA's density is 3,096 people per sq.KM and Kochi UA's density is 2,512 people per sq.KM. Now I understand why you were so much worried about the density figures.

So can I use these source as the reference? No i can't. Because the source is not a direct source. The source has the data. But you need to do all the calculations i did above to find the figure, which is original research. A source said one thing does't mean that the other source is completely wrong. Demographia uses another method to measure the area and it is given in the demographioa document. Also the metro density figures are not used in the infobox. Only the city density is used. Using the data from two very different sources that use different methods, to calculate density will be wrong. So it also doesn't matter.

Have a nice day AG47  Talk 17:17, 25 July 2018 (UTC)


 * @User:AG47 It seems that you haven't understood a single point which I've been saying. First of all, you don't have to take into account census towns at all. The comprehensive mobility plan draft for Trivandrum prepared by Kerala Rapid Transit Corporation Ltd for the Smart Cities Mission clearly says about the total area of Neyyattinkara Municipality and eight adjoining panchayats viz. Mangalapuram, Andoorkonam, Vilappil, Vilavoorkal, Pallichal, Kalliyoor, Venganoor, Balaramapuram as 373.96 sq km. They're not talking about any census towns here. And clearly this area os only a part of Trivandrum metropolitan area which you're stating as 311 sq.km which itself is a blunder. I'm saying when you yourself know that the Trivandrum metropolitan area is more than 311 sq.km, then there is no need to put a errnoneous stat in the page just because it says so in demographia.


 * Secondly, I thought by this time you would know that census2011.co.in is just some random website run for ads. It has zero credibility. So citing that to show the UA stats itself shows the sign of an amateur. You took that reference to find out that there are 45 census towns in Kochi UA which totals to 843.84 sq.km? Dude, the whole of Greater Kochi Area itself is only 731 sq.km which you can find in many official govt articles & reports and Kochi UA is only a part of the Greater Kochi Area. And you found out that a part of that 731 sq.km totals to 843.84 sq.km? All your calculations are absolutely contradictory and illogical. I guess there's no point in discussing further since you seem adamant on keeping an erroneous stats on the page. I'm taking this up for WP:DRR Shady59 (talk) 04:36, 26 July 2018 (UTC)

I just can't believe all this discussion about this just went over your head! How is that even possible? comprehensive mobility plan do not talks about metro area. It even contains panchayaths which are NOT part of Trivandrum metro. It's useless here. I said that several times above. All these discussions and we are back to square one! And i am an "amateur"? Can you just stop this name calling? I don't care about who you are and how you are an"experienced senior huge editor". We are here to discuss the issue. So all these name calling is immature. So let's stop that.

1. Your statement: You don't have to take into account census towns at all.
 * ❌ You are the one who bought up the 2011 census data figures in the first place. But it is now very clear that you don't understand how UA population is calculated on 2011 census. You are still calculating the panchayath area instead of census towns, which is hilarious. 2011 census is the one that says Trivandrum UA's population is 1,679,754. So if you want to calculate area for that figure, you need to use the 2011 census area figures. So, you have to take census towns into account, if you are calculating the area based on the population figures. And all those data is available on http://www.censusindia.gov.in/2011census/dchb/3214_PART_B_THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.pdf. Please don't bring the panchayath areas here again. We are talking about the UA here. It has nothing to do with the panchayath's area. I am again repeating, UA population is calculated using census towns. NOT by panchayath area. Hope you understood that this time.


 * And about the source (important), I posted census2011.co.in to only identify the census towns come under Trivandrum UA and Kochi UA. The data is available on http://www.censusindia.gov.in/2011census/dchb/3214_PART_B_THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.pdf, which is the official census website. You can verify all the data in census2011.co.in the census government document. If you still don't wan't to use that link, then here is the official government UA list of Kerala. https://kerala.gov.in/documents/10180/622777/urban. All the Census Towns and municipalities came under each UA is in that list. And the area for each census towns are given in this official document for Trivandrum and for the Kochi UA, the area of each census towns and municipalities are given in this official document.

'''2: Your statement: You took that reference to find out that there are 45 census towns in Kochi UA which totals to 843.84 sq.km? Dude, the whole of Greater Kochi Area itself is only 731 sq.km which you can find in many official govt articles & reports and Kochi UA is only a part of the Greater Kochi Area. And you found out that a part of that 731 sq.km totals to 843.84 sq.km? All your calculations are absolutely contradictory and illogical.'''
 * First, Greater Cochin and Kochi metropolitan area are completely different. Greater Cochin is the area defined for town planing by Greater Cochin development authority. That's why there are two separate articles for these.


 * Second, as I said above, there are there are 45 census towns in Kochi UA. It's sad that you didn't even knew that are 45 census towns in Kochi UA. If you don't like that source, I also given an official source which shows the same data (https://kerala.gov.in/documents/10180/622777/urban here). All you need to do is take the municipalities and census towns in the UA from this document and add the population figures and area figures for each of them from the official census document. That's it. And you will get the population of Kochi UA as 2,119,724 and the area as 843.84 sq.KM. Here is a the document which shows the area and population of each census towns. You can verify it with the official census document. It is very accurate because the population figure you get by adding those census tows is exactly the same as the smart city Kochi document here, which you asked me to look. Even if you try different methods to calculate as i said above, it is accurate to the decimal point. So there is no doubt that according to the 2011 census,Kochi UA has an area of 843.84 sq.KM. Now you are just ignoring the facts to suite your narrative.

3: Your statement: And clearly this area os only a part of Trivandrum metropolitan area which you're stating as 311 sq.km which itself is a blunder.
 * 311 sq.km is the exact figure on demographia.com. As I said many times above, a source said one thing does't mean that the other source is completely wrong. Demographia uses another method to measure the area and it is given in the demographioa document. If i can get a better source than demographia.com, i will definitely use it. So the 311 sq.km is only a "blunder" as much as the 440 sq.km being a "blunder", or any other demographia figure. AG47  Talk 13:47, 26 July 2018 (UTC)

Commons files used on this page have been nominated for speedy deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page have been nominated for speedy deletion: You can see the reasons for deletion at the file description pages linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 10:36, 31 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Kovalam beach 3.jpg
 * Varkala beach 2.jpg
 * Varkala beach kerala.jpg

Nomination of Portal:Thiruvananthapuram for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether Portal:Thiruvananthapuram is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The page will be discussed at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Thiruvananthapuram until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the page during the discussion, including to improve the page to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the deletion notice from the top of the page. North America1000 02:44, 30 May 2019 (UTC)

Definition of a Metro City
In India, the Census Commission defines the qualification for metropolitan city as, the cities having a population of more than 10 lakhs or one million and above and a Megacity as the cities having a population of more than 10 million and above. Yes, Trivandrum is the metro city of Kerala. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 116.68.75.160 (talk) 15:24, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 5 November 2020
change from City to Metropolis as it is an million plus urban agglomeration of india. 157.42.252.105 (talk) 08:27, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Semi-protection-unlocked.svg Not done: The page's protection level has changed since this request was placed. You should now be able to edit the page yourself. If you still seem to be unable to, please reopen the request with further details.  Seagull123  Φ  16:13, 13 November 2020 (UTC)