Talk:Kota Kinabalu/Archive 1

Archive 1

Population

Hello. Someone said that the metro. population of KK is 1.2m. I find this a bit too much. Is there any source to this claim? Maybe 0.9m is more acceptable. I dont know, just my opinion.

Another thing, does anyone know where we can find data on the demographics of KK? The closest thing i have found on this is a data on registered voters in the city, for the 2004 General Election. I find it quite interesting that according to that data more than 70% of the residents are Chinese. But probably this only represents the total of voters in KK (Api-Api) constituency only.

Sabah's population is estimated to be about 2.5mil, so 1.2million may be within bounds of believability. In any case, its hard to define what areas constitute metropolitan KK, since there is not a single definition in the first place Whodhellknew 20:17, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

i think the better number should be 700,000 for KK metro. if u see data from world-gazetteer the 2007 calculation for KK is 532,000. this should include KK, inanam, till telipok: KK city district boundary. then there is also Donggongon: 78,000. and Putatan: 85,000 (in penampang district)which are virtually connected to KK. so total 2007 calculation: almost 700,000. if we wanna be official, then we use latest census: banci 2000-- KK: 305,000 Donggongon: 56,000 and Putatan: 62,000. (or total for Penampang district: 137,000) total: 424,000 (or 442,000) metro. in 2000. kawaputra 18:04, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

okay, i just realised there is a difference between urban area and metropolitan area. so maybe we can say Papar and Tuaran is within KK's zone of influence, hence part of the metro area, although not "physically connected by continuous built-up development". kawaputra 10:32, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Etymology - more theories

from [1]. it says kina= quinine, balu=immune or loss of memory. however this the only source for this claim, and im hearing this only 1st time. so im just trying to substantiate this. not trying to propagate an original research. after further research i found out that quinine (bark) is also known as "kina" [2]. quinine normally come from cinchona trees. cinchona is also known as "kina" for certain ppl (eg: Indonesia: [3]). i also found this translation of Kinabalu National Park from japanese calling it Cinchona val natural park: [4] kawaputra 09:54, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Failed GA:Fixes needed

Unfortunately, after comparing this article to the criteria at WP:WIAGA, I have had to fail this article's nomination as a Good Article. The BIG issue is with Criteria 2 (accuracy and referencing). Among the problems:

• In the lead section, a superlative claim is made that does not appear to be referenced anywhere in the article, the statement that this is one of the fastest growing cities. This needs specific reference, even though it is in the lead.
• MANY sections (too many to list them all here) have inadequate referencing. Ideally, each new paragraph should introduce a new idea. Therefore, each new idea should be referenced to a specific outside source. Many of the sections have only one or often no references. It is impossible to find where much of the information in the article comes from.
• There appears to be a mix of referencing styles. While many references use the footnote style, there are about a dozen blind HTML links; these should be placed inside of ref tags and appropriately expanded to a full bibliographic entry, just like the others are.

Please make the above fixes. Once they are done, feel free to renominate the article at WP:GAC. If you object to this review, you may request remediation at WP:GA/R.--Jayron32|talk|contribs 20:53, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the comments. Will try fix problems accordingly. kawaputra^tok2me 04:43, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Request for reassessment at WikiProject Southeast Asia

This article has the length and content. However, this article requires more citation before it could be upgraded. At the same time, the culture and leisure section sounds like wikitravel article.__earth ^(Talk) 15:59, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Yeah. That section needs to be remade. It was a list before, then i converted it into prose. Maybe some stuff there needs deleted. kawaputra^torque 18:25, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Failed GA

• Generalities. Large parts of the article are unsourced
• The references that are there need to be fille dout with full author, accesdate, publisher information as applicable. Please see {{cite web}} and {{cite news}} for info. ( Done)

• I feel the history section needs a little more context. Were the Bajau the indigenous people of the island? Information about settlers coming from the Malaysian peninsular, Chinese settlers and others are not specified. Who ruled the land in the old days before the UK? Indigenous people? Did it have contact with Mollucan traders and so forth.
• In general the history section needs to be expanded to give a more understandable and flowing narrative. When was the new railway built? Do we know what the British motivation for settling this area was?
• There is a discontinuity before WW2 and then the context of the war is not discussed properly. Need dates for Japanese takeover
• Did anything interesting happen in the last 40 years; were there any general trends to report?
• Etymology section is well done. The second para needs a ref though
• City government. What authority does the city govt have? What are its responsibilities (as apart from the federal or state government?)
• Geography needs sources.
• Ditto climate
• People should probably be “democgraphics”. Comments on the ethnic groups need to be sourced. The origins of the migration should be discussed. Wthnic Malay and Chinese migration and its sources are not discussed. Despite the comment about ethnic harmony, does the Bumiputra policy apply in this city? Refs gerenally needed
• ”Asean Australian Engineering Congress” is that Asian or ASEAN? ( Done)
• A bit mote of a historical discussion would make things better
• Transport needs more sources. The air section: the other cities should be wikilinked.
• The history of the port should be discussed some more since the city was founded for its maritime facilities
• In the other utilities section, some of the one line sentences need to be integrated
• When was the uni created? Also, a brief description of the structure of the education system should be given: how mayn years in primary and secondary school, for instance( Done)
• The culural and historical section has a bit more awkward prose than the rest of the article and could do with a copyedit. Examples

• “Sabah State Museum, nearby Queen Elizabeth Hospital, is the main museum of Sabah” -> near ( Done)
• “the site where the declaration of Sabah forming the Federation of Malaysia was announced” ( Done)
• “serves as a reminder for those who died trying to oppose the Japanese forces” – it can’t remind people who ar already dead! ( Done)

• Well the placne crash you menion seems like a notable event that shoul dbe expanded in the history
• The cinema section reads like advertising
• Notbale personalities needs to put somewhere else, like a culture or music section

REgards, Blnguyen (bananabucket) 00:22, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for these very useful comments. I will try improve and implement the changes as far as i can. I need more source though to expand the history part. And more contributors. :) kawaputra^torque 04:59, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Bold text

British or American English and many, many names?

There seems to be a mixture of both in the article, which do people prefer? I don't mind myself, but I'd like to make it consistent. Also there are many different names or translation/pronunciation links in the article. We have the IPA link in the first sentence along with the former name (which is essential). Then in the second paragraph we have the Chinese name and the abbreviation KK. As if that wasn't enough there is an interesting etymology subheading further down, plus a subheading on original names. Then the infobox has three different native names squeezed in under the main city name. Some of this is important and needs to stay, but it seems like some could be cut down. I'm open to suggestions. Cheers, Paxse (talk) 17:30, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

I dont mind whichever as well. But since most Malaysian articles use British spelling, i wud suggest we use British English. I dont know about the subheadings etymology and original names. I created those, but if u and others feel we should do away with those sections, then go ahead. Those names in the infobox appears unnecessary. None of them are native names. So i removed them. Further they are already mentioned in the the lead or under the history subsections. ќמшמφטтгמ^torque 08:10, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

The etymology and original names sections are GREAT! We can't get rid of them. fascinating information for readers. I've been passing a printed version of the article around to friends and family and that is everybody's favourite section. I agree British spelling seems to make the most sense. Good job removing the extra names - I think it was a bit too much - now it looks much cleaner. I've still got to find some sources to expand the history section - it's really patchy at the moment. Cheers, Paxse (talk) 13:58, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Oh thats nice. Thanks :-) Ya, i will try get sources for the other sections as well. Also will remove gallery soon and incorporate the images into the article. I think those new images by User:Flanagan are really nice. ќמшמφטтгמ^torque 14:46, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

I've found a pile of sources for the history section - and some photographs. I'll try and rewrite over the next few days. More later. Cheers, Paxse (talk) 15:18, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

<outdent> I got a wonderful Christmas present - A History of Malaysia. I'll expand after a short holiday. Cheers, Paxse (talk) 16:10, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

File:1borneo.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:1borneo.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: All Wikipedia files with unknown copyright status What should I do? Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page. If the image is non-free then you may need to provide a fair use rationale If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale, then it cannot be uploaded or used. If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Deletion Review This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 18:50, 9 October 2011 (UTC)