User talk:112.79.51.206

2405:204:5510:930F:E4C5:1722:2028:46D3 (talk) 19:11, 10 April 2020 (UTC)Thanks for the clarification. I have a few contentions with the revert to .984 from 1.016 after reading through sex ration article and looking at how the Indian census defines sex ratio, how articles about gender ratio in India and other city pages list sex ratio. Census 2011 India uses a number of females per 1000 males. This is how it is taught in schools as is the convention in news and information dispersion within the country. Even foreign reports often refer to this convention. With that in mind, this 0.984 clearly fools a layman reader who has been through Indian schooling systems to misinterpret this number as 984 females for 1000 males, which is what happened to me and I found it odd and checked the figure. -Article related to Indian sex ratio uses the same convention of females per 1000 males as the census an example of this is "-List of states and union territories of India by sex ratio" (India by sex ratio Further many city pages include this format either as a ratio or per 1000 Males basis in their demographics content and/or in infobox Examples: Chandigarh, Indore, Delhi, Kozhikode, Hyderabad, etc. Often to avoid confusion cities like Kota, RJ uses symbols for Females and Males. Thus being explicitly clear. Kochi, for example, uses 1.028 M/F in infobox but has 1028 Females per 1000 males in demographics. I hope you understand my pain for once. I was on a heated debate with a friend regarding sex ratio and Wikipedia almost robbed me by saying ratio is 0.984 without any specifications. There are cities like Ahmedabad which use m to f ratio but again it uses symbols for the gender. I think including this clarity will solve the problem, if you are hard bent on using "Wikipedia convention"( which I believe would still confuse Indian readers). Nonetheless, a city having a better Gender ratio should include that in their demographics column. But it is disappointing the numbers don't appear at all and the ratio itself is set in such way to confuse regular Indian reader to believe there are more males than females - Wikipedia article on sex ratio says "Scientific literature often uses the proportion of males. This article uses the ratio of males to females unless specified otherwise." This is not referenced and I am unsure if the article anywhere suggests this format needs to be adhered. However, International Organisations such as the World Bank prefer this convention.
 * Thanks for your suggestions. The points you have mentioned are indeed valid. I have made your suggested changes in the article.
 * Have a nice day,
 * Aviator423 (talk) 04:20, 17 April 2020 (UTC)