Talk:Vadodara/Archive 1

This is an archive of past discussions about Vadodara. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Initial comment

Why does the first paragraph have "3rd largest" and later it says "2nd largest" city in Gujarat?? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.167.202.14 (talk) 20:37, 13 October 2004 (UTC)

Mission: To be Featured article on Wikipedia

Ummm... with Mumbai, Kalimpong, Gangtok, Chennai, Bangalore, Kolkata, Ahmedabad, Darjeeling, Kochi & Delhi featured cities, should Vadodara be left behind? nooooo Need someone to take the lead. =Bracknell «Kem cho!»= 17:42, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

WP:FLC is for lists, this needs to nominated at WP:FAC which is for articles. It should become a WP:GA first. -- Phoenix2 ^(holla) 18:41, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Worldgazetteer

Worldgazetteer puts Surat as 10th and Vadodra as 18th larges in India. So I guess Surat is 2nd and Vadodra is 3rd. Alren 22:45, 13 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Settled on 3rd largest for now until better information presents itself. Also make sure all edits conform to the Wikiproject: Indian cities (link above). DevanJedi 14:58, 1 September 2005 (UTC)

Riots

A user has added riots as a section; I put it as a sub-section of History. Should this be a section at all, or should it be a sentence at the end of History? DevanJedi 21:10, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

Added the following source [1] for the data; apparently the 18.93.2.251 user got the information from there. DevanJedi 21:10, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

Major Industries

The following line is mentioned : " Major industries include petrochemicals, engineering, pharmaceuticals, plastics and a small but growing software industry". Can the software industry part be verified? Doubts on software being a major industry in Baroda. Bruiselee 07:15, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

I think it should not be a problem as long as it says "small but growing". I know it is a bit of a stretch, but that phrase ("small but growing") may apply to the software industry all over the country! DevanJedi 14:14, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

Hmmm. I don't think you can apply the term "small but growing" to Bangalore or Hyderabad. I guess this would be limited to Vadodara.

True. I agree with you. And your point is? DevanJedi 05:35, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

Your statement where you said "("small but growing") may apply to the software industry all over the country!" It doesn't. It only applies to Vadodara.

--BruiseLee 05:48, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

Like I said, I agree with you. What I probably meant was that there are many cities in India, and even the world, where a line like "small but growing" could be applied to all kinds of industries. e.g. The city of Vadodara has a small but growing Avocado growing community. The city of Mumbai has a small but growing brain harvesting community. (I'm being facetious, but I hope you get my point). The phrase "small but growing" can get away with saying anything because it does not claim anything substantial. DevanJedi 05:59, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

Can we delete the phrase "small but growing software industry"? I doubt if it is even small, unless we are counting the myriad pirates with their high-speed CD writers. --BruiseLee 06:44, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

DONE! If we come back to "small but growing" in the future, remind me to put a similar sentence on Surat. We wouldn't want to forget the small but growing software companies like Brichi! DevanJedi 07:00, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

Yeah. Brijesh and Chintan (Bri-Chi) can even give Bill Gates the goosebumps.BruiseLee 11:02, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

Just an FYI, please check out www.rishabhsoft.com which is a 150 - people company based in Baroda and growing by 50% a year. I also suggest you check out other companies like Fortune Infotech (250-300 people BPO company recently acquired by Convergys) as well as PopNet Infotech (German company which was bought out by C-Sam established by Sam Pitroda). Small but growing is an appropriate phrase for the IT industry in Vadodara. It will never reach the heights of even Pune but will reach a significant size within the next 4-5 years.

As far as rishabhsoft is concerned, it cannot be verified if it IS growing at a 50% clip, because their balance sheet is not in the public domain. Regarding the other companies mentioned, assuming the information is true, it still is too insignificant to mention with the other major industries. As was earlier mentioned in this discussion, the "phrase 'small but growing" can get away with saying anything because it does not claim anything substantial". If the basis for having the mention of software is "small but growing", we must also include other industries like engineering (ABB + Bombardier), Beedi making, tyre retreading, etc, because all of these employ far more people, have a bigger base, and are growing at a substantial clip to warrant a place ahead of software. --BruiseLee 12:50, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

area density

The maths of area and density dose match the total population, 108.22 km² x 9,527/km² = 1,031,011.94 & not equal to 1,729,000 (too bad they do not teach Maths in 'Google school of trivial Knowledge'). I think either one of them (area or density) should be removed or somebody has to get more reliable information than just google, if people here can absorb the concept of 'more reliable than google search'.

I second this, there are discrepancies with the density. Let us assume the population and area to be corret, and work density from those two variables. Bruiselee 05:41 14 March 2006 (UTC)

Okay, I have redone the area and density bit. Assuming the population data is correct, and 40sq km was incorporated in late 2002 with Chhani, parts of Panigate road, to VMC, the new area is 148 sq. km. Also, the density has been arrived by dividing population by area. --BruiseLee 06:41, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

Demographics

In the opening paragraph, the literacy rate is mentioned as 82%, while in the demography box, the same is mentioned as 76.11%. Which one is true?--BruiseLee 05:21, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

Both may be incorrect! This article [2] says it is 87% in 1991, this site [3] says it was 63% in '91 and 71% in '01! Of course, all of this could be incorrect but it also may be that some of these figures refer to districts, some to the city and some may be completely incorrect. DevanJedi 14:28, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

Suburbs?

Do we need a list of suburbs? I think not... DevanJedi 02:40, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Major Hotels and Malls

We do not need a list of hotels and malls either!BruiseLee 10:58, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Why not if we have list and History of them. Most of the other Cities have it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.41.133.81 (talk) 05:51, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

Education

The list of school was getting too long and pointless, with each person adding their own school. I have removed all schools from that list, and added a single line. BruiseLee 05:33, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Sankheda merge

Not much on Sankheda now that couldn't be merged here. ∞Σɛ_Þ² ^(τ|c) 16:56, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Should not be merged! Barodian 02:40, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Uh, and why not? ∞Σɛ_Þ² ^(τ|c)

GA failed

I have reviewed this article according to the GA criteria and have failed this article at this time. The main reason for failing this article is the lack of citations. There are several sections that are missing inline citations. Go through the article and make sure to add inline citations to any statements that may be questioned about their verifiability. Also, the inline citations should go directly after the punctuation with no space in between; go through the article and fix all occurrences. The trivia section should be removed and any relevant information should be incorporated into somewhere else in the article. Once you have addressed these issues, please look over the rest of the criteria to see if the article is ready to be nominated again. If you disagree with this review, then you can seek an alternate opinion at Wikipedia:Good article review. If you have any questions about this review, let me know on my talk page and I'll get back to you as soon as I can. --Nehrams2020 08:19, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Sister Cities

Reference of sister cities, which is Sister Cities International. It does not have any twinning reference of Edison, New Jersey and vadodara. Should we keep Sister Cities section? Jadia Gaurang Pravinbhai (talk) 16:14, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Changed the reference to point to the correct page. akarkera (talk) 07:03, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Is this a joke? Edison isn't the sister city of Vadodara. Either specify what is meant by sister city or delete this section. In my opinion leaving it without an explanation leaves a bad spot on a very good article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.116.124.119 (talk) 21:00, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

Administrative Legends

Is this section really needed? akarkera (talk) 17:02, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Vadodara-Emblem.jpg

Image:Vadodara-Emblem.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 02:15, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

how old is Kashi vishwanath temple

can anyone just clarify how old is the kashi vishwanath temple in vadodara....an provide sum little information on it(if possible)Ultrasigma63 (talk) 02:26, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

Vadodara Marathon

Vadodara marathon is now AIMS approved. So i suggest a separate article on it and internal link to this article. Nizil (talk) 20:20, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

While that's a step towards notability, it's not enough by itself--you'll need multiple independent reliable sources talking about the subject. But if you have them, try going to Articles for Creation and using that process, as it's a good way to start your first article. Qwyrxian (talk) 23:16, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

Incorrect Climate Info

The information listed in the "Record High" and "Record Low" sections of the Weather Box are derived from the India Meteorological Department:

http://www.imdpune.gov.in/Temp_Extremes/histext2010.pdf

SillyBunnies (talk) 06:30, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Vadodara. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 16:45, 19 October 2015 (UTC)