Talk:Delhi

Which one is better?

Humayun's Tomb

Qutub Minar

Jama Masjid

Red Fort

India Gate

Digambar Jain Mandir

St. James' Church

Hyderabad House

Lotus Temple

From top, left to right: Humayun's Tomb; Qutub Minar; Jama Masjid; Red Fort's Lahori gate; India Gate; Digambar Jain Mandir with Gauri Shankar temple in the background; St. James' Church; Hyderabad House; Lotus Temple, a Baháʼí House of Worship

CactiStaccingCrane (talk) 13:42, 14 November 2022 (UTC)

I reverted an edit by user:CactiStaccingCrane which had attempted to move the image captions to immediately below the images. While their effort is commendable and arguably reduces confusion, it is not the convention on Wikipedia geography pages. (See, for example, WP:FA Geography.) The edit produces uneven image borders, the lowermost of which took a lot of work to arrange. In order to fit the captions below the images, they needed to be reduced in some instances, thereby reducing information. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 13:47, 14 November 2022 (UTC)

Their image needed to be blown up from total width 250 to 275 otherwise one caption spills into a second line. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 13:54, 14 November 2022 (UTC)

I do agree that you would lose a lot of contextual information doing it my way, but users can always click on the link to understand more about the topic. Also, it is a pain for mobile users to scroll up and down trying to match captions to the image. FAs are not a definitive guide to writing great articles – common sense is. CactiStaccingCrane (talk) 13:57, 14 November 2022 (UTC)

• Visually, the grouped caption looks better but I get the mobile issue. Perhaps there are just too many images in this montage and they can be reduced to 3 or 4? --RegentsPark (comment) 17:12, 14 November 2022 (UTC)

  We did have fewer pictures but people protested that they weren't enough, that they didn't give the visual nod to all of Delhi's landmarks. We had two RfCs, the first lasting several weeks, and the second over a month, and arrived at this. Also, I'm not sure what issues they are talking about in reference to mobile phones. I just examined the page on my mobile phone (iPhone). It has the lead paragraph, and then the infobox in the same format: The images; the grouped captions; the map; and the rest of the information. I don't see that anyone would need to scroll up and down, for the pictures and the grouped caption fit on one screen, and if they don't it is a short flick, nothing enervating. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 01:41, 15 November 2022 (UTC)

  >>>FAs are not a definitive guide to writing great articles – common sense is.

  Sadly, everyone doesn't have the same notion of what common sense is. Also, great articles are typically not written with infobox pictures. Kolkata, Chennai, Dhaka, Colombo none of which are FAs have quite a few pictures and have the grouped caption format. Mumbai does not, but only because you changed it recently. There can't be such a dearth of common sense in South Asia. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 01:55, 15 November 2022 (UTC)

  I had suggested once that we might consider removing the Red Fort and the Qutb Minar as they also appear in the individual sections in more or less the same view, but there was no sympathy for that argument either, such is the pressure to have the touristy pictures in the infobox. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 02:01, 15 November 2022 (UTC)

  Agree. Let's see how the discussion goes. CactiStaccingCrane (talk) 02:13, 15 November 2022 (UTC)

  What about adding wikilinks to the images themselves? Works well with the hover tool. See right. CMD (talk) 03:55, 15 November 2022 (UTC)

  That is highly discouraged, as the readers may want to get the high res pic. CactiStaccingCrane (talk) 04:15, 15 November 2022 (UTC)

  We have a guideline on image link discouragement? CMD (talk) 05:01, 15 November 2022 (UTC)

  I would like to suggest to place the image of Swaminarayan Akshardham Temple in Delhi in the picture section. The Swaminarayan Akshardham temple is a unique temple constructed in Delhi and a major destination for travellers to Delhi. Jay8014 (talk) 12:56, 28 February 2023 (UTC)

Lifeless infobox pictures

Hello! Sorry in advance for this odd critique but I happened to stumble on this article after a long while and I was a bit surprised to see the new selection of infobox pictures. They look somewhat lifeless, static, and overly-saturated to me. The pictures of India Gate, Digambar Jain Mandir, St. James' Church (random choice), and Hyderabad House (the picture is lopsided and poorly cropped) especially leave much to be desired. The previous selection of pictures was far better I think. I think having a picture of Lodhi Gardens and the Rashtrapati Bhavan/Secretariat buildings would also be a good idea, since both are strongly associated with Delhi (and not just New Delhi specifically). Just my two cents! 2620:6E:6000:3100:1D4C:C695:C947:31A2 (talk) 20:55, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

What can I say? It is what I had put in place, but people objected to this and that ... Fowler&fowler«Talk» 22:17, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

I wholeheartedly support going back to that. I would perhaps replace that picture of the corridor at Qutub Complex with a picture of the Minar itself and the Sun God at the Indira Gandhi International Airport with India Gate (or the Red Fort)? I think having a picture of the Metro is fantastic because the Delhi Metro has truly become emblematic of the city. Every person I've ever met from Delhi is very proud of it. --100.40.62.139 (talk) 00:45, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

There needs to be a replacement of Hyderabad House picture with Rashtrapati Bhavan and St. James' Church with Swaminarayan Akshardham temple or another Hindu temple. Rashtrapati Bhavan is much more important than Hyderabad House as it is the residence of the President of India. Also, having a Hindu temple would better reflect the demographics of Delhi instead of St. James' Church. Jay8014 (talk) 13:01, 28 February 2023 (UTC)

Images (and content) are less about demographics and more about history. This is especially true for cities with a long and varied history (like Delhi). A demographic rebalancing is not a good idea. --RegentsPark (comment) 01:37, 1 March 2023 (UTC)

Delhi has many famous monuments, but there are three Mughal era monuments (Humayun's Tomb, Jama Masjid, Red Fort) that are prominently shown on the page, which leaves out monuments from other eras, including the modern era. You can't be biased in favour of one era and not the other. Jay8014 (talk) 15:44, 8 March 2023 (UTC)

Agree with RP. The demographic rebalancing is post-partition, when, Delhi changed from a Mughal city to a Punjabi one; lately, the largest immigrant group has been from Bihar. Besides, there is another page, New Delhi which already has these less historic monuments. Delhi is much bigger, and older. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 16:20, 8 March 2023 (UTC)

GAR

Delhi

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

prateek

pourtigul

 a uou au ff.sdfhdfk

f fdsfghdfghdsfsdh

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch article reassessment page • Most recent review

Result: No response to issues; thus delisting on basis of silent consensus. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 11:27, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

A GA made in 2012. Now has multiple unsourced claims that need to be addressed for this article to remain a GA. Onegreatjoke (talk) 17:19, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

This article is a mess right now. I'm gonna try to remove blatantly bad sources and content out of the article. CactiStaccingCrane (talk) 12:26, 8 January 2023 (UTC)

CactiStaccingCrane, do you intend to continue? Also pinging potential contributors for their opinions: RegentsPark, Fowler&fowler, Vanamonde93, Kautilya3. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 12:12, 18 January 2023 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Picture of Swaminarayan Akshardham in Delhi

I would like to formally suggest to place the image of Swaminarayan Akshardham Temple in Delhi in the picture section. The Swaminarayan Akshardham temple is a unique temple constructed in Delhi and a major destination for travellers to Delhi. Jay8014 (talk) 12:54, 28 February 2023 (UTC)

I disagree. The oldest Hindu temple in the city, some 400 years old, already appears in the infobox together with the Jain temple. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 16:25, 8 March 2023 (UTC)

Infobox Replacement

The {{Infobox settlement}} used on this page is going to be replaced with {{Infobox Indian state or territory}} as per the Proposal and consensus of RFC. Any questions/suggestions? Discuss Here.

You can also contribute by replacing Infobox settlement with Infobox Indian state or territory on other pages , or by improving this one. Tojoroy20 (talk) 17:05, 25 March 2023 (UTC)

 Done Replaced — Tojoroy20 (talk) 20:25, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

Infobox Implementation

After careful consideration of the RFC consensus, the Infobox Indian state or territory was implemented on this page following standard and systematic procedures. However, a recent edit by an editor ( @Fowler&fowler ) resulted in the reversion to the previous version. The editor claims that Delhi is solely a city and not a union territory, but the fact remains that Delhi is both a union territory and a city. Therefore, it is reasonable to use an Infobox that accurately reflects the administrative type of the region without disregarding any parameters or information related to its "city" designation.

There are only parameters related to megacity and metro population, and perhaps a few (1-2) established history parameters that are not available in the new Infobox. Apart from this, everything remains the same, and nothing will be altered. In fact, the new Infobox is even better and capable of providing information more clearly and consistently.

Additionally, the editor asserts that the RFC was not properly announced, which is incorrect. In reality, the RFC was announced across various relevant wiki projects and numerous talk pages. Hence, it was not an "unannounced RFC."

Wikiprojects and talk pages which were informed about the RFC:

• Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Indian history
• Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Indian states
• Talk:Kerala/Archive 7
• Talk:Telangana/Archive 1
• Talk:Tamil Nadu
• Talk:Maharashtra
• Talk:West Bengal
• Wikipedia talk:WikiProject India/Requested articles
• Wikipedia talk:WikiProject India/Members
• Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Indian states/Archive 1
• Wikipedia talk:Noticeboard for India-related topics/Archive 76
• Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Andhra Pradesh/Archive 1
• Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Karnataka

... And many other pages.

Regarding the RFC itself, it was evident that a WP:SNOW decision was reached, as indicated on the closer request page. The overwhelming majority of comments (not just three) expressed agreement with the proposal.

The editor mentions that altering an infobox format that has been in place for an extended period is not a valid reason. However, it is important to note that pages can still be updated as necessary, and changes can occur over time, as outlined in WP:WIP. The editor states their status as the primary author of the page, but this does not imply ownership, as per WP:OWN. It is not feasible to inform every individual involved in the development or creation of an article. As mentioned earlier, the RFC was announced on all related talk pages. The editor's lack of awareness regarding the RFC does not invalidate the broader community consensus.

Therefore, I strongly advocate for the re-implementation of the Infobox version, emphasizing the importance of respecting the consensus reached through formal processes and the wider community. Prarambh20 (talk) 21:34, 27 May 2023 (UTC)