Talk:Delhi/Archive 7

Archive 1

←

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

Archive 8

Archive 9

Update GDP (Nominal & Per Capita)

Please update the GDP figures for 2020-21 in infobox (Nominal - 7.98 lakh crore) and Per Capita (354004). Source [1] (Government of Delhi). Thanks--115.98.54.28 (talk) 05:12, 8 February 2022 (UTC)

@115.98.54.28: Can you please explain the per capita thing? Are these values of the Indian Rupee (INR) itself? And as for relevance, is this information consistent with what's provided here and here? India sees GDP growth slowing to 8-8.5% in 2022/23 as risks rise —CrafterNova ^{[ TALK ]  [ CONT ]} 05:26, 11 February 2022 (UTC)

@CrafterNova: The data provided in economy of Delhi is actually a very old GDP data, moreover, that data is calculated on PPP basis. But the data which I provided with source is a current data and GDP is calculated on nominal basis. The official government of Delhi publishes that data annually. Therefore kindly update that info ASAP. Thanks--115.98.34.0 (talk) 08:25, 12 February 2022 (UTC)

@115.98.54.28: Is "Per Capita (354004)" in terms of Indian Rupee? —CrafterNova ^{[ TALK ]  [ CONT ]} 08:59, 12 February 2022 (UTC)

@115.98.54.28: Also, can you please mention the changes to be made clearly in a "change 'X' to 'Y'" format? I'm having difficulty in finding what has to be changed —CrafterNova ^{[ TALK ]  [ CONT ]} 09:35, 12 February 2022 (UTC)

@CrafterNova: Change GDP from ₹15.80 lakh crore (US$200 billion) TO ₹7.98 lakh crore (US$100 billion) AND Per Capita from ₹592,529 (US$7,400) TO ₹354,004 (US$4,400). Don't forget to remove old sources and add the new source which I provided. All figures are in Indian Rupees. Thanks--115.98.205.88 (talk) 12:07, 12 February 2022 (UTC)

@115.98.54.28 Are you happy with the results now? Itcouldbepossible^Talk 15:57, 12 February 2022 (UTC)

@115.98.54.28: But this currency converter (at xe.com) is showing that ₹7.98 lakh crore are equal to US$105.843 billion and that ₹354,004 are equal to US$4,695.9434 —CrafterNova ^{[ TALK ]  [ CONT ]} 13:26, 12 February 2022 (UTC)

@115.98.54.28: Also, could you please provide a better source? PDF files are very much vulnerable to link rot. This source is not loading in a secure webpage since the internet protocol being loaded is HTTP when it should be HTTPS. —CrafterNova ^{[ TALK ]  [ CONT ]} 14:13, 12 February 2022 (UTC)

I think you're new to wikipedia don't that much experience, anyway leave it. @Itcouldbepossible: Would please help update the GDP data.--115.98.205.88 (talk) 14:27, 12 February 2022 (UTC)

@115.98.54.28: Please try to have patience and please don't make personal assumptions like "you don't have that much experience". —CrafterNova ^{[ TALK ]  [ CONT ]} 14:49, 12 February 2022 (UTC)

Also you can use this Source. Check Page 30 and 32. And use the data. Thanks--115.98.205.88 (talk) 14:35, 12 February 2022 (UTC)

@115.98.54.28: Alright, I will try using this source —CrafterNova ^{[ TALK ]  [ CONT ]} 14:56, 12 February 2022 (UTC)

@115.98.54.28: Wait, what about the 2021-22 Economic Survey? Isn't that the latest one? —CrafterNova ^{[ TALK ]  [ CONT ]} 15:14, 12 February 2022 (UTC)

@115.98.54.28: I have added the citations you requested, but I think Nominal - ₹7.98 lakh crore and Per Capita - ₹354,004 are not the latest figures, so those are still pending —CrafterNova ^{[ TALK ]  [ CONT ]} 15:53, 12 February 2022 (UTC)

 Done Itcouldbepossible^Talk 15:57, 12 February 2022 (UTC)

Thanks a lot. Great Job guys.--115.98.205.88 (talk) 18:16, 12 February 2022 (UTC)

@115.98.205.88 Ok, no problem. But just to let you know, the one you called inexperienced, is in my opinion more experienced than me, for I count the amount of time people have stayed here, and not the amount of edits they have done. So, it can be the fact that CrafterNova is more experienced than me. But in the future if you want to update any GDP in articles, feel free to ping me.

@Itcouldbepossible: Thank you ;) —CrafterNova ^{[ TALK ]  [ CONT ]} 15:20, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

PS: I was wondering how you came to know me. Am I getting a little little famous? Itcouldbepossible^Talk 04:51, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

Sorry brother @CrafterNova: for calling you inexperience; I misjudged you. Hi @Itcouldbepossible: would you please update these articles of GDP too. Talk:Karnataka#Update_GDP_(Total_&_Per_Capita), Talk:Tamil_Nadu#Extended-confirmed-protected_edit_request_on_09_February_2022, Talk:Uttar Pradesh, Talk:List of Indian states and union territories by GDP and Talk:List of Indian states and union territories by GDP per capita. No need for hurry take your time and update. I have provided the current sources just remove old source and add the current source. Thanks--115.98.205.88 (talk) 05:52, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

@115.98.205.88 Sure, I will try my best. I love updating articles. And thanks to you too, for showing your interest in updating old data of articles. Itcouldbepossible^Talk 07:26, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

@115.98.205.88: No problem, we are all learning together ;) —CrafterNova ^{[ TALK ]  [ CONT ]} 15:20, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

@Itcouldbepossible: no problem brother take your time and complete. Thanks--115.98.51.4 (talk) 06:10, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

I have finished updating the GDP and per Capita in every article that you have made edit requests for. I will be updating the lists soon. Itcouldbepossible^Talk 06:16, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

The pronunciation

In addition to the English pronunciation of Delhi, the lead sentence carries those in the three languages of the Union Territory which have also been a part of the history of Delhi: Urdu, Hindi, and Punjabi. If you plan to remove any, you need to explain your reasons here and gain consensus for your edit. Please don't speak to me in edit summaries. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 23:44, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for restoring the sentence. All the pronunciations should stay in the article. These are all widely spoken languages in the city and in fact many of the street/road name boards have the names in all 3 (+ English), especially in old and central Delhi. -Ujwal.Xankill3r (talk) 03:53, 16 February 2022 (UTC)

Monuments

Have added more representative images of Delhi and its monuments. I have included India Gate, Lotus temple, Red fort, etc and removed the lesser known/relevant ones. If any images violate copyright then admins are free to delete it from commons. The images represent the most famous monuments of India's Capital. Thanks Vinrpm.p6054 Vinrpm.p6054 (talk) 16:03, 6 March 2022 (UTC)

Also a request to resize some of the images if possible. Thanks Vinrpm.p6054 (talk) 16:06, 6 March 2022 (UTC)

You need to garner a consensus here for your edits. The pictures in the infobox are representative of Delhi's history. All pictures are Wikipedia Quality pictures. Yours are not (at least the Jantar Mantar and Lotus Temple are not).

• Delhi is a Muslim city. It was built by Muslims (although there were some ancient Indian contributions), to which the British later added theirs. In keeping with that history, 500 years of Muslim rule (1300 CE to 1800 CE), with 250 years of the Sultanate, and 250 Mughal; 150 years of British (1800 CE to 1947 CE), and 75 years of Republic of India's (1947 CE to 2022 CE), the number of monuments in the infobox are divided in the ratio 1/2 Ancient Indian, 1 1/2 British, 2 Rep of India's and 4 Muslim.
• The sculpture of the woman from the Pratihara period is a nod to the dynasty that ruled northern India until just before the arrival of the Muslims. But as it is in the National Museum, New Delhi, space for which was assigned by Edwin Lutyens, the British architect of New Delhi, and the spot for which was chosen in the late-British period by Maurice Gwyer; it is also a nod to the British (comprising 1/2 contribution for them). The picture of the Government buildings on Raisina Hill is another nod to the British (a full 1) The airport and the metro are a nod to modern India. Finally, Humayun's tomb, a UNESCO World Heritage Site is a nod to the early Mughal period; the picture from the Qutb complex a nod to the early Sultanate, and another UNESCO World Heritage site (the minaret is already in the history section); the Jama Masjid with the city of Old Delhi (Shahjahanabad) behind is a nod to the mid-Mughal period. The Red Fort complex which was the palace fort of Shahajahanabad is Delhi's third and final UNESCO World Heritage Site (it too is already in the history section). Finally, Lodhi's tomb is a nod to the mid-Sultanate period.
• The lotus temple which was built in 1986 is similar to the Swaminarayan temple at Akshardham, mostly a modern tourist attraction. Neither has anything to do with Delhi's history. Could you tell me how many Baha'is there are in Delhi? How is either representative of Delhi? A lot of thought has gone into the choice of representative images for the infobox. The Jantar Mantar in New Delhi is of lesser architectural importance than the Jantar Mantar in Jaipur which is a UNESCO world heritage site. The India Gate, or War Memorial arch, visible also on the first-day issue in the Colonial history section, is a hackneyed image of Delhi. It appears twice in the infobox of the New Delhi page. Delhi has a 700-year-old history; New Delhi is only 100 years old. On the Delhi page, therefore, we cannot have 5 pictures of New Delhi and only one of old, as you are proposing to have. Best regards, Fowler&fowler«Talk» 17:41, 6 March 2022 (UTC)

Can you explain how Delhi is a 'Muslim city' when 75% of its inhabitants are Hindus? Sure the old city was built by the Muslim rulers, but that doesn't make Delhi a MUSLIM city in the 21st century. Could you explain why an architectural marvel like Lotus temple has no significance? And all your pictures are based on Delhi's past and doesn't have anything to do with the present. Famous monuments like the Red Fort have been omitted to make way for an ancient statue. Seriously? Thanks Vinrpm.p6054 (talk) 18:26, 13 March 2022 (UTC)

I have removed the New Delhi monuments like India Gate, Jantar Mantar, etc. and added Jama Masjid, Red Fort and Qutb minar which is more in line with Delhi's history. Thanks Vinrpm.p6054 (talk) 18:59, 13 March 2022 (UTC)

Not 75%, but 82% and 4% are Sikhs and 1% each are Jains and Christians, leaving about 13% Muslims. But please read the lead which says, "During the Partition of India in 1947, Delhi was transformed from a Mughal city to a Punjabi one, losing two-thirds of its Muslims residents, in part to the pressure brought to bear by arriving Hindu refugees from western " which is cited to Ian Talbot and Gurharpal Singh's Partition of India, Cambridge University Press, 2009. We are talking about the history section. Muslims built all the monuments that are recognized by UNESCO as world heritage sites. The Red Fort is already in the history section. It has been there for years, a part of the precedent. As for the statue, it is a nod to the empire that was in sway in Northern India at the time of Muslim arrival and also to the British who planned Lutyens Delhi which had assigned a place for the National Museum, New Delhi. The Metro and the Sun God at the airport are both works of modern Delhi. As for the Baha'i temple in New Delhi, there are dozens around the world that all take off take offs on the same basic form, unusual modern architecture no doubt, but more a feature of the Baha'i faith than the location in which they are built. How many Baha'is are there in Apia Samoa, or Chile? Fowler&fowler«Talk» 19:23, 13 March 2022 (UTC)

Someone save this page montage from Fowler&Fowler who is notorious for adding a particular section of India's history deliberately in every page. I hope admins look into the behaviour. Here again zero logic of replacing the diverse montage with 4/7 Islamic monuments and edit warring anyone who tried to revert it. Rohmanh (talk) 20:42, 27 March 2022 (UTC)

Talk page guidelines say that edits are should be specifically about improving the page, not making diatribes against fellow-editors. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 21:13, 27 March 2022 (UTC)

The old unfocused mostly New-Delhi images in the infobox

@Rohmanh: in this edit and edit summary, "Restored image montage which was more diverse as original instead of image full of crumbling buildings," has replaced the WP:QUALITY images such as File:Humayun's Tomb, Delhi, India 2019.jpg, File:Complejo de Qutb-Delhi-India043.JPG, File:20191203 Diwan-i-Khas, Red Fort, Delhi 0507 6368 DxO.jpg, File:Tomb of Mohammed Shah (Lodhi Garden).JPG, File:New Delhi government block 03-2016 img4.jpg, File:Delhi Magenta Line.jpg, and File:Lotus Temple in New Delhi 03-2016.jpg, with an extremely poor-quality montage 2007 File:Delhi Montage.jpg, which is titled Delhi, but really that of New Delhi, which has its own page. As I've explained before to another editor:

In keeping with that history, 500 years of Muslim rule (1300 CE to 1800 CE), with 250 years of the Sultanate, and 250 Mughal; 150 years of British (1800 CE to 1947 CE), and 75 years of Republic of India's (1947 CE to 2022 CE), the number of monuments in the infobox are divided in the ratio 1/2 Ancient Indian, 1 1/2 British, 2 Rep of India's and 4 Muslim.

In response to the previous editor's concerns, I did change the images, but we can't repeat the images already in the article, eand especially not why replacing them with a templated montage of unfocused images. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 21:04, 27 March 2022 (UTC) Fowler&fowler«Talk» 21:25, 27 March 2022 (UTC)

The montage isn’t impressive or representative, imo. The Qutb Minar picture could be way better showing the actual minar, same with the Diwan-e-Khas (maybe a different picture from the Red Fort complex? Or maybe the Jama Mosque instead?), and perhaps the South block picture could be replaced with one of the Rashtrapati Bhawan’s? I believe that such pictures should be used that are instantly recognisable to the reader as being Delhi. The Humayun tomb picture is excellent, more pictures like that if possible, please! I also believe that a picture of the India Gate would be great in the montage, and highly recommend including it, given that it is one of the most recognisable buildings in Delhi. We should also consider including a picture of Delhi’s skyline if a good picture exists on commons.

Also, while history should be taken into consideration, it can’t be the sole factor. There could be a million little monuments in Delhi built by the Slave Dynasty (for example) but it wouldn’t matter if none of those are recognisable enough for the readers to actually associate with Delhi. I could scavenge commons for some quality, better and more representative pictures (of monuments already in the montage) if required. UnpetitproleX (talk) 09:29, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

Another thing, it would be better to use images of such proportions that some symmetry is maintained in the montage. UnpetitproleX (talk) 09:33, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

I have set aside a Quality picture of Qutub and one of the Red Fort to swap with the Infobox pictures. Like Washington DC, Delhi does not have a skyline. In most regions building codes do not allow tall buildings. New Delhi is a separate page, and only a small part of Delhi. We cannot have only, or even mostly, pictures of New Delhi. I am generally against the idea that the infobox pictures should be recognizable pictures. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 12:15, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

Hello @UnpetitproleX: Unfortunately, a new editor PersianV (talk · contribs) has appeared out of the blue and made his 95th through 102nd Wikiedits in the infox, all the while preaching Wiki pieties to me. I suspect it is a setup, a trap. The Hindu nationalists are after me. So, I'm going to back off. I won't be able to expeditiously address your concerns as I had hoped to. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 14:08, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

Kindly don't revert my constructive edits on image addition to montage before proper talk page discussion. I see no reason at all to revert my edits. Kindly explain and also please remember rule of Wikipedia "Wikipedia is a wiki, meaning anyone can edit nearly any page and improve articles immediately. You do not need to register to do this, and anyone who has edited is known as a Wikipedian or editor. Small edits add up, and every editor can be proud to have made Wikipedia better for all." PersianV (talk) 13:38, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

This is the Delhi page, not a page of New Delhi, again *not* the New Delhi page. Delhi is Old Delhi, North Delhi, East Delhi, West Delhi, New Delhi, and South Delhi. What is it you don't understand? Fowler&fowler«Talk» 13:53, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

In light of an editor, PersianV (talk · contribs) refusing to acknowledge WP:BRD, may I request one of @El C, RegentsPark, Vanamonde93, Bishonen, and Abecedare: to please lock the page in the version of a couple of days ago and letting it remain in place until a new consensus emerges? Thanks very much. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 16:40, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

You've added a picture of the Birla Temple that is already there in the main body of the article. Do you even know anything about the city? What then is the point of preaching Wiki pieties to competent editors? Fowler&fowler«Talk» 13:55, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

I've addressed your genuine concern removed Birla temple image and added Akshardham image in body. I don't get your logic but Isn't New Delhi also part of Delhi? There is no rule that says every district of Delhi needs to have an image. New Delhi unarguably has most prominent images. Anyways only 3/7 images are of New Delhi area. The govt building, War memorial and India gate and Agrasen ki Baoli; all are diverse from different period. I don't see the logic for their removal. Please explain. Regards PersianV (talk)`

Also isn't India Gate & War memorial more accurate representation of huge megapolis of millions like Delhi instead of some crumbling wall art which is more representative of an archaeological site montage? Regards PersianV (talk) 14:10, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

On the principle WP:Don't feed the trolls I choose not to respond. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 14:14, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

I've been putting valid reasons for my constructive edits but you've been constantly abusing me calling me names. Kindly don't be so rude. We all are editors here trying to improve wikipedia and one can't have the thought here of "my way or highway". We all need to find a middle path here. RegardsPersianV (talk) 14:25, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

Montage

Here's my general proposal.

• Includes buildings from different areas and eras of Delhi.

-Two Mughal-built monuments both featured most prominently

-Two British-built monuments

-Two monuments built during Sultanate rule in Delhi, both having some connection to prior Hindu rule/buildings

-A metro station (not just a rail car) and the Lotus temple for the modern post-partition era

• Has perfect symmetry, something that the Mughals probably would have appreciated (lol).
• Are all good quality images
• Includes all UNESCO World Heritage Sites
• Uses more representative and recognizable images of the monuments

This also sums up what my inputs regarding Fowler&fowler's version were. UnpetitproleX (talk) 18:59, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

Thanks @UnpetitproleX: for your fine effort! Your infobox looks pretty good, but from whatever little I've managed to learn about infobox pictures over the years, here is a critical response:

• A "Quality Image" is a specific Wikipedia designation similar to a Featured Picture (WP:FP). It is decided after nomination, discussion, and consensus at the relevant WP forum. Only two of your images are Quality Images, File:Humayun's Tomb, Delhi, India 2019.jpg and the Lotus temple which were there in the old infobox. If you scroll down the image page, you'll see the green seal of the QP. All the old pictures were QPs.
• Why is symmetry necessary in an infobox? If you look at some Wikipedia Featured Articles (WP:FA's) on cities (they can be spotted by the bronze star up top right), there is no clear direction.

• Some such as Darjeeling, on which I am working at FAR, and whose infobox I have myself added have horizontal symmetry, but not vertical symmetry.
• Some such as Manchester have neither but still have a central vertical axis.
• But quite a few such as Ann Arbor, Michigan, Cleveland, Tiruchirappalli, or Boston don't have any symmetry.
• Washington DC doesn't have either as well. This city, which is similar in some sense to New Delhi not Delhi, does have a lot of official monuments, but had been weighing in at the FAC, I would have taken them to task for only including the White NW and leaving out the African-American SE portions of the city.
• What to choose is a perennial problem. Note for example, Washinton DC has a picture from one of the museums on the Mall. I had a picture earlier from the National Museum in New Delhi, but someone appeared and objected strongly. As Delhi is a page that does not see much traffic these days, pretty much anyone can choke the effort here by edit warring. Most are unaware of WP traditions.

• I joined some others in conducting a three-month long process on the FA India in 2012 for choosing some three dozen pictures in its rotating format. There are all sorts of criterion in additon for good pictures quality. Among them are geographical, relgious, and ethnic balance. Many people were dead set against showing only the "iconic" pictures. The India page is not about that, they said. boosterism remains a problem in many city and country pages. Gurgaon which has significant poverty had little mention of it until I broached it some ten years ago, but I haven't paid attention; it might well have disappeared.

• See some India-related Wikipedia Featured Pictures (WP:FP), Wikipedia's best, on my user talk page, User_talk:Fowler&fowler#India-related_FPs_I If you choose any for a place on the India page, there will be five people who will object.
• Anyway, I am happy to present some Delhi-related Featured and Quality pictures. Tell me which ones you like. Coming up soon. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 21:50, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for the very detailed response. I was actually in the middle of nominating the Anand Vihar station picture for Quality image status. Regardless of whether or not these images are included on this page, I believe many of them should be promoted to Quality images, so nominating some of them. Hopefully they will go through.

Anyway, back to the infobox, I admit that I’m biased in favour of infobox montage symmetry, and I believe we can achieve some symmetry using the currently available quality images too.

Plus my other issue was that the Qutb Minar picture, while a great shot, could be improved upon by using one that shows more of the minar. Same with the Diwan-e-Aam picture.

What I mean by this is that while the calligraphy is admirable, and the arch beautiful, a reader who comes across this page sees just that, calligraphy and an arch, as the very first images of Delhi. And worse, they see a rail car. The Qutb Minar, the Red fort Complex and the Delhi Metro are kinda missing. I’m not against including such pictures, but I believe they can achieve more in the body than the infobox. Example- looking at the calligraphy while you’re actually reading about the minar in the article’s body. Or seeing the car when reading about the metro. UnpetitproleX (talk) 22:32, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

I do like your metro picture. (I thought I already said that, but my memory is a sieve these days.). Agree about the more recognizable pics in the infobox and the more detailed (calligraphy on the minaret and the Diwan-e-Khas in the respective sections), but not the too conventional views. I had actually chosen two pictures even edited the infobox to load it and then something happened or someone interrupted a few weeks ago.  :) I'll dig them up very soon. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 22:40, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

Here is one possibility. It has four rows; all QPs except your metro; all three UNESCO WHS are there; India gate is there; two modern Delhi pictures relate to the life of people admittedly not the poorest; there is some geographic balance: the Jama Masjid and north Delhi "skyline," Qutub is in South Delhi; metro and high rise in East Delhi. I think it is very important there not be significant overlap between Delhi and New Delhi. There are image versions of WP:Content forks involved. We maintain that sort of balance by respecting that the ruins of Taxila or Mohenjo-daro are the province of Pakistan pages, not India's. Another way of putting it is: Delhi is like South Asia, New Delhi like India, the most important political unit. The images in South Asia can't be mostly of India; in fact, if you examine the page, the images are from all the South Asian countries. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 00:31, 12 April 2022 (UTC) And now I finally even have symmetry. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 04:33, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

• OK I've updated the pictures. If iconic images are what we want then this is the best-considered choice. There are two featured pictures here WP:FP the Humayun's Tomb and the lit-up fountain in Lutyen's Delhi. The remaining five are quality pictures. I decided pictures of metros (entirely the product of Japanese and Canadian technology) are hardly a feather in Delhi's cap. The B'hai temple should be in the religion section. However, the Birla temple is a major landmark in modern Indian nationalism, moving away from traditional Indian forms of worship. Nothing else is needed for Delhi. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 04:18, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

  I've readded B'hai. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 04:35, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

  I like it. The Jama masjid picture is a bit unflattering to me personally (not a comment on the picture, which is good, just personal preferences wrt to camera angle etc lol). Also sad to see the earlier Humayun tomb picture go (could be added to the article body?), but the current one is just as pretty. I don’t want to make any comments about the Birla temple’s significance or where in the article it belongs, but if we include it in the infobox then we’ll need to find a replacement for the religion section (perhaps Akshardham, Gauri Shankar or ISKON?). And the Red fort picture is a very nice one. All in all, I feel like this version does a way better job of being a representation of Delhi, than the current one. UnpetitproleX (talk) 05:46, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

  @UnpetitproleX: How about the current version? I don't know much about the temples in Delhi other than Bir. T. but we can put it back in religion. I had forgotten there is an old Hindu temple in Delhi, the Gauri Shanker temple adjacent to the Jain temple in Chandni Chowk. Also it is not such a busy riot of color as BirT. The picture of the red Jain and the white Hindu looks better to me. Both temples are a couple of centuries old, if not older. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 11:23, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

  Yeah I like this version. UnpetitproleX (talk) 11:56, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

This is my proposal. Akshardham is iconic building one of the largest temple, no one says only Old temple should be present. India Gate and National War Memorial should be present as they are iconic skyline of Delhi; not of New Delhi only and India Gate represents the colonial period. Agrasen ki Baoli is ancient structure representing ancient Delhi period. Indo Islamic period is aptly represented instead of Over represented as in above and current proposal where it nearly takes 75% of the montage. Humayun's tomb, Red fort are iconic buildings of Delhi and represent Indo Islamic period of Delhi aptly. Delhi metro and Lotus temple represent modern architecture and skyline of Delhi post independence. I belive this is a diverse proposal which gives all period, areas and sections of Delhi perfectly instead of biases as in above and current images.PersianV (talk) 11:36, 13 April 2022 (UTC)

• Strong Oppose this most obvious nod to Hindu nationalism in a Muslim-, and later, British-built city, especially oppose its most obscene erection, a disastrous misfit of color and style, arising smack in the midst Lutyens's artwork. A nonstarter. Please also respect WP:STATUSQUO. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 13:10, 13 April 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose The War Memorial is hardly as well-known as the Qutb Minar or the Jama Masjid. The Baoli is famous because of the contrast it presents due to its location in the midst of a very urban area of New Delhi, and it's not ancient because the current structure dates to the Sultanate period. I've already stated why including a railcar of the Delhi metro doesn't really achieve anything. The Akshardham temple could appear in the body, in a section where it might be relevant, but not in the infobox. For the infobox, we already have several far more iconic buildings to show (in fact, too many of them). Now, regardless of your motivations, one of your objections I do agree with: the colonial period should get a more prominent placing in F&f's version. @Fowler&fowler: Is it possible to swap positions of one of the colonial buildings with either the Qutb Minar or the Jama Masjid, without upsetting the aesthetic? And also, should we replace the current montage with your proposal version? UnpetitproleX (talk) 21:37, 13 April 2022 (UTC)

• Can't reall swap the Jama Masjid or the Qutb Minar, as they are tall pics, any Lutyens pic will spoil the symmetry, as the British did not build minarets. But I've never been a fan of the Baha'i Temple, which has little to do with Delhi's history, even the more recent one, it being one of dozens of architecturally avant-garde temples the Baha'is have chosen to dot this world's landscape with, even in such unlikely places as Tonga (whose population of practising Baha'is must surely be numerable on the fingers of one human hand) and Chile (which couldn't be much higher). I'm delighted to swap the BT with a spectacular picture, a very high-def one taken by a professional photographer travelling with the US Secretary of Defense last year. It is of another Lutyens-designed building, the Hyderabad House, which is a nod both to the geometric placement of buildings in the flank of Lutyens design (the India gate being at one end, and the FP of the fountain showing the Raisina Hill at the other). It is also a nod to princely India which constituted a large part of the British Raj whose architectural grandeur was displayed in Lutyens Delhi. It is also the only picture in which you can see both the distant view and the up close of Lutyen's style. A beautiful picture. The HH is where the leaders of the Republic of India meet visiting foreign leaders in any substantive discussions. The third row of the infobox now shows that symmetry: The Red Fort is now placed in the last row, opposite the two famous temples with which the Chandni Chowk, the major thoroughfare of Mughal India began. It is in the nature of the "sawal" (question) "jawab" (reply) style of Indo-Islamic architecture. Please allow me to present:

That's impressive! But the HH picture is dark, placing it next to the fountain kinda concentrates darker tones all in that part. Throws off the balance. How about only replacing the BT with the HH, like this? UnpetitproleX (talk) 00:31, 14 April 2022 (UTC)

That's better. On board, I am. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 01:32, 14 April 2022 (UTC)

PS There is also this picture, in which I have bumped up the image intensity a little. I normally wouldn't do this, but on account of it being an infobox picture, which a reader should be informed by, I feel it is legitimate. The fountain, they are able to see, but this building was a tad too dark before clicking. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 02:00, 14 April 2022 (UTC)

You decide @UnpetitproleX: and implement. You have the carte blanche as far as I'm concerned. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 02:14, 14 April 2022 (UTC)

@UnpetitproleX: The end of the day tomorrow (the 21st) will be a full week after you made your proposal scroll down to the bottom. The more I see it, the more I like the original (untouched dark Hyderabad house image) you have proposed. So, unless there is some overwhelming objection before then, could you please load that selection into the infobox tomorrow evening universal time? Thanks. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 03:14, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

@Fowler&fowler: Thank you for the reminder. Rest assured that I haven't forgotten about this! I've just been slightly preoccupied with commons, including among other things with getting the FP promotion for a beautiful image of Spiti. I've also come to realise that the Baha'i temple is on the UNESCO WHS tentative list, and though this doesn't mean the temple will make it to the actual list, it is the only site from Delhi currently tentative. Therefore I thought it best to delay the changes instead of just adding the picture. We might have to go back to your earlier proposal that included the Lotus temple (I do have a better image in mind, subject to how well it fits proportion-wise). UnpetitproleX (talk) 08:03, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

Unrelated Discussion

PS there are some other issues in the article particularly with the history section, completely unrelated to this discussion, but I'm just going to blurt them out here. The 1984 anti-Sikh riots are missing a mention, while the 2020 Delhi riots need a little bit of shaving down since the paragraph goes well over what is due (some suggestions: drop the "which was" and "began ... 2020 and", and club the last two sentences like "... two thirds were Muslisms, and the remaining mostly Hindus."). If possible make it even shorter and confined to one sentence. I can try my hand at that, if you allow. The 1984 one should be brief too, but definitely longer than the 2020 one. UnpetitproleX (talk) 08:03, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

Drive-by comment, the Rashtrapati Bhavan Fountain looks awfully out of place in the montage, I'm sure something better could be found, no? —SpacemanSpiff 10:46, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

Here are two possible replacements: 1, 2; but both are religious buildings and there’s already many religious buildings in the montage. I understand your point. I’m not against including the fountain picture, it is a featured image after all, but if it looks bad in the montage to many people, then I’m not against replacing it either. UnpetitproleX (talk) 11:09, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

@SpacemanSpiff: Hello Spiff. You might be right there. I put it there not so much for it being a featured picture, but that if you click on it, it shows an extended scene in great detail. But on the face of it, it is a fountain. We can get rid of it. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 11:19, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

• Here’s a possibility. I quite like it. There are two more pictures than the current montage, and one more than your alt proposal (new image being that of Baha’i temple). No new rows have been added. Also moved rows to see which arrangement looked most stable. I believe by including 9 instead of 7 pictures we increase the longevity of this montage, and reduce the likelihood of it being vandalised. Let me know what you think about it. I’ll go ahead and implement the change if there are no objections. UnpetitproleX (talk) 10:59, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

No. I don't even need to click on it. Very obviously much photoshopped.

The tentative list is just a list of what the host country nominates, the descriptions written by the host country. Several on India's, such as the Golden Temple have languished for years. It has no bearing on UNESCO's opinion. Lutyen's Delhi had been on that list, but the nomination was withdrawn after several years. I don't think that should play role. Also, there is no chronological cohesion in your new mix—random time periods are mixed. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 11:06, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

I don’t think we have to follow chronology of time periods, we’re already dedicating the prominence of inclusion according to history. UnpetitproleX (talk) 11:13, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

Nah. Its a nonstarter for me. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 11:14, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

Your earlier proposal didn’t follow the chronology strictly either. UnpetitproleX (talk) 11:18, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

I didn't say strictly, but there was a general coherence. This is incoherent. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 11:20, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

Which can be fixed by swapping the second and last rows, but you insist on making unilateral changes because “you have bent over backwards to accommodate everyone” (my proposal preserves 90% of yours with the only major change being the row arrangement, and consensus can gth, right?). UnpetitproleX (talk) 11:29, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

There are too many pictures. It is too clean. Delhi is a tired city in a poor country. I will now insist that it carry some street scene. I've bent over backwards to accommodate everyone. Sick and tired. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 11:16, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

Sure, make proposals. UnpetitproleX (talk) 11:17, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

Also, my support lies with my newest version and your first proposal. In that order. Regards. UnpetitproleX (talk) 11:20, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

Arbitrary break

Apologies @UnpetitproleX and SpacemanSpiff: The wrong side of the bed it must have been this morning. ... Moving forward, I don't remember my first proposal, but we could lose the fountain, We can add the Lotus temple back again, and we can add a church, but it obviously can't be a Catholic church in a Anglican city. I could propose that we go with the oldest, St James, but then we still can't add a Catholic church to the religion section of a British city (to the extent Delhi is; obviously the British weren't there as long as they were in Agra or Allahabad, let alone Bombay, Calcutta or Madras; you can tell by the houses in the latter, which are built with flourishes people make for themselves; Lutyens Delhi housing is utilitarian in contrast, anwyay, ... moving on ...). We'll have to add a row. Five rows, while not prohibited, should be added when the article is more developed, say, in the final state before an FAC submission. I'm also very concerned that this montage looks like boosterism in the images, though I have gone along with it. There is nothing on the most populous parts of the city. This is my third image discussion in as many months. (12 February 2022 14 March 2022, and now this one. So, you will understand if I might become impatient. I apologize again. This is what I have right now. I'm willing to have a fifth row if it is from East Delhi and it is a panoramic view, balancing the top. That probably still means the Baha'i temple will have to go, as far as I'm concerned. But I'll post again tomorrow with some fresh candidates and fresh eyes.

Fowler&fowler«Talk» 02:16, 21 April 2022 (UTC) PS Let's go with this, if it is agreeable to everyone. It has St James the oldest church in Delhi. It has the Baha'i temple. How does that look? If on board, please load in the infobox. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 03:52, 21 April 2022 (UTC)

It’s a bit long, but I do not hate it. Will load it soon. That the last two rows come so close to having a central axis but don’t is kinda irritating, will see if there’s a fix for that using these exact four pictures in this exact arrangement. If not, good enough. UnpetitproleX (talk) 22:33, 22 April 2022 (UTC)

Will be great if you could! Thanks. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 23:26, 22 April 2022 (UTC)

I strongly dispute this horrible montage. Are we still living in Mughal era? Fowler&fowler«Talk» seems to think so. My above montage candidate was very diverse. In words of Fowler&fowler«Talk» my montage with one single temple and three Islamic era monument image for a Hindu majority city is considered Hindu nationalism??!! Then with same logic his/her candidate of montage with Islamic era monuments covering nearly 70% and none Hindu monuments can be considered Islamic extremism in his/her own words. I don't want to argue with you but your choice of words are very poor and you seem to be very orthodox. Please remember this is public wiki anyone can do constructive edit but you seem to take this page as your personal album. 2 people saying yes is not a consensus. Get atleast 10 people to approve your candidate including admins then only put your personal favourite montage on the page. Till then the page should be without any controversial montage.PersianV (talk) 18:44, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

No montage in the info box is an excellent idea. It keeps drive bys with no knowledge from bickering about things that require no knowledge. Let’s make that permanent solution. I will add a much better map when I return to WP. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 19:28, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

Dear PersianV, Btw, there was a full-size and full-blown discussion here for a month 30 days in which you did not participate so on second thoughts I have to revert your impatient edit made during this extremely tardy appearance. Punctuality, not necessarily the fabled one that is the politeness of princes or sultans, but a reasonable one, is a must on Wikipedia. You were the hare but we were two tortoises, and the was also a giant tortoise, an admin, who ambled by and indirectly supported the current montage by questioning only the night fountain picture which was then replaced. So the vote was in fact 3 to 1 or > 75% allowing us quorum. Please read The Tortoise and the Hare.

You missed the boat. You my start a new discussion and endeavor to garner a consensus for a curative of your discontents, but you cannot revert a previous consensus unilaterally. Best regards, Fowler&fowler«Talk» 20:04, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

I haven't missed lot. All I see here is you making statement my montage is best rest is trash. You just seem to ignore valid points when presented in front of you. You did not even have a consensus for your controversial montage except one two people here. Get consensus then only use your biased montage. Till then the page shouldn't have any montage or restore the original montage that was here for years. PersianV (talk) 09:10, 15 May 2022 (UTC)

I am sorry but this is the consensus version. Before it there was a status quo of three months ago. If you persist I will ask for administrators to intervene. Also, you might be stalking me as you have also appeared on Varanasi another page I edit to which you have not contributed Fowler&fowler«Talk» 10:55, 15 May 2022 (UTC)

Oh please do invite admins to review this pages disfigurement. They will very well see how this page had a status quo montage for years before you came and started changing montage and declaring support of 1 people as "consensus". Furthermore you refuse to take any alternative opinions you attitude of "my way or highway" is very disturbing. When I put one temple in montage with four Islamic monuments you brazenly accuse me of Hindu nationalism! Please admins can openly review this page's edits and can very well go to the old montage that was here for years. As for Varanasi page I have interest in north Indian cities so can't I edit it? So by chance you did edits there so I can't edit there. Last time I checked Wikipedia was free for all for constructive edits. Stop behaving like you own wikipedia.PersianV (talk) 23:03, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

Climate

Please update Delhi's record high temperature in the table to 49.2 C° as of 15 May 2022. RayAdvait (talk) 09:26, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 6 July 2022

Change "For policing purposes Delhi is divided into eleven police districts which are further subdivided into 95 local police station zones. Delhi currently has 180 police stations." to "For policing purposes Delhi is divided into 15 police districts which are further subdivided into 95 local police station zones. Delhi currently has 180 police stations."

as Delhi has now 15 police districts instead of 11.
 Scitrs (talk) 12:33, 6 July 2022 (UTC)

 Done Terasail^[✉️] 13:55, 6 July 2022 (UTC)

References

The surfeit of lists and infobox tweaks

Please note that this is a high-level article. This means that it is a highly distilled summary written in prose. It uses links to refer to articles it summarizes but does not make lists of links or topics that have been summarized. It does not have short subsections of one- or two sentence length; this means it makes subsections only when the topic becomes large enough for a paragraph or two of reasonable length. Please also note that the pictures have to fit within the subsection; consequently, the page can take only so many pictures, and there are already more than enough. If you feel the need to add pictures, please consider proposing them here and let a discussion about their worth continue to consensus. The same applies to prose of any length beyond the merest.

Edit summaries that describe the edits adequately and transparently are a must. Generic edit summaries such as "added something" are of no value. All additions, furthermore, need to be cited to reliable sources. Best, Fowler&fowler«Talk» 05:02, 18 September 2022 (UTC)