Talk:Mangalore/Archive 3

This is an archive of past discussions about Mangalore. 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

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

→

Archive 7

New IT company to be added?

Recently the company GlowTouch was awarded with leading IT export award in M'lore region, considering it to be the second leading player after Infosys, dont you guys think this company is worth getting noted in this wiki? There are several references all around [1] but sadly few people in M'lore know about this company —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.92.241.103 21:26, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

It isn't necessary to add the names of every company that enters or exists in Mangalore. In fact the names of some companies already mentioned may be removed if it doesn't do justic to the article. If it is so important then create a new entry for that company, but do not mention it here.--PremKudva^Talk 10:15, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

I agree with Prem. Also, GlowTouch and Infosys are two different entities with different magnitudes of influence. Mentioning Infosys for a small city like Mangalore makes sense. GlowTouch is something that could be mentioned in personal presentations.

Culture

The pic of World Konkani center is more apt than the Jyothi talkies. Suggesting the removal of jyothi talkies pic. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.54.62.180 (talk) 06:59, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Do not agree!--PremKudva^Talk 04:19, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

Jyothi talkies is just another movie theatre. There other talkies which are as old and as prominent as Jyothi.

Your reasons please. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.54.62.180 (talk) 16:50, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

It doesn't matter so long at Jyothi is old and prominent. The other other theatres which are as old that you mention are just two in number and one has shut down. In any case it is pointless removing an image of a theatre which is visited by most of the population to replace it with the konkani centre [whose photo looks rather clumsy] which will be visited by just the konkani speaking population.--PremKudva^Talk 06:49, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Images in infobox

If you see the articles of Mumbai, Delhi, Chennai, etc, there is a group of images in the infobox. If anyone has good collection of Mangalore images, the same may be included in infobox of Mangalore as well, instead of having the only pohoto of town hall. I would suggest to have images of Town hall, Railway station(from outside), Airport(new), a temple(Kadri/Mangaladevi/Gokarnanatha), night view of any prominent road, etc Any volunteers? --Crazysoul (talk) 04:05, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

Weather chart

The weather chart as displayed on the article page, mentions precipitation in mm. But the data entered is wrong, since on the cited weatherbase page it is on cms. When the data is corrected by a factor of 10 the chart looks messy which is why the mms has been retained by previous editors. Is there a method of correcting the template to reflect that the data is cms and not mm? It should actually look like the weather chart for Chirapunji, so for now I have mentioned that the scale is 1:10.--PremKudva^Talk 10:15, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

Brahmins

Is it really necessary to list so many varieties of brahmins? It is already eight now. Each & every person starts adding their type of brahmin & say that they form considerable part of population even if they are just few hundreds in number. It would be better to retain just 2 or 3 names. What do u say? --Crazysoul (talk) 07:56, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

Agree: Mangalore has 4-5 different lingusitic groups each with its own set of Brahmin groups. No need to list them all. --Deepak D'Souza (talk) 19:10, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

Agree: Heh! You are right. I am sure there are plenty more, you know like Tamil Brahmin, Malyalee Brahmin and so on to add to the list.--PremKudva^Talk 04:27, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

I would suggest to retian Shivalli, Kota and GSB? Is it ok or any other combination must be put?--Crazysoul (talk) 05:33, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

Those are the three major. So yeah go ahead.--PremKudva^Talk 04:46, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

Piliyesa OR Hulivesha

Please discuss the matter here instead of reverting each other's revisions. Mspraveen (talk) 20:22, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

Piliyesa is a dance form or an art form endemic to the region of former South Canara Dist. Refered to as 'Piliyesa' in the local Tulu language of this region where it has its origin. The word 'Hulivesha' is just the translation of Piliyesa in Kannada. Hence Piliyesa should be mentioned. Earlier in this article it was mentioned as Piliyesa itself but someone has changed it sometime back if I am not wrong.--188.55.29.31 (talk) 16:35, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

Sorry for my haste, Googling piliyesha did not get me any results on the first page hence my revert, and also the wrong statement saying the word doesn't exist. My impression was it was pilivesha. Also it is known as vaga vesu in Konkani. But mostly it is known as hulivesha even locally. --PremKudva^Talk 07:00, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

Yes, it is Pilivesha. I was spelling it wrong all through. No doubt the word Hulivesha is also popular but is limited to only Kannada language. Whereas Pilivesha or Pilivesa or sometimes just Pili is the general usage. Also the word Hilivesha is just a translation of the word Pilivesha, hence using the original term will be apt.188.55.29.31 (talk) 16:42, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

Agree.--PremKudva^Talk 05:26, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

Removal of Kannada scripts in the lead

I suggest the removal of Kannada scripts in the lead. Except for the Kannada language, since Kannada script is the official script of the language; the Kannada script for the name in Tulu, Knn,and Bry should be removed. I know Kannada script is used for writing the languages, but still its not official, and considering this is the English Wiki, adding unnecessary scripts does no good and clutters the lead. Tulu: ಕುಡ್ಲ ,Kudla; Kannada: ಮಂಗಳೂರು, Mangalūru; Konkani:ಕೊಡಿಯಾಲ್, Kodial ; Beary: ಮೈಕಾಲ, Maikala should be changed to
Tulu: Kudla; Kannada: ಮಂಗಳೂರು, Mangalūru; Konkani: Kodial ; Beary: Maikala 115.242.202.84 (talk) 08:42, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

Konkani script?

In the article, the Konkani name is mentioned in a Kannada script. But according to the article here, Konkani is officially written in Devanagari script. Can anyone deny or confirm this, and make necessary changes to the article if needed? Thanks. MikeLynch (talk) 12:22, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

I have noticed that Konkani publications in Mangalore are always written in the Kannada script. Perhaps that is why they have used Kannada in the article.--PremKudva^Talk 05:03, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

In Goa, where Konkani is given official language status, it is written in the Devanagari script. However, in Karnataka, it is written in the Kannada script. The reason being that in the past, Konkani was only a spoken language, lacking a unique script of it's own. I might be wrong, but from what i know, there was no Konkani literature prior to the Portuguese rule of Goa. Joyson Noel ^{Holla at me} 10:54, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

The only reason it is written in Kannada is because the Kannadiga chauvanists who bossed over this article opposed any attempts to write it in the official script for Konkani because Managlaore is a part of Karnataka. You can refer to the talk page archives around 2007 for the discussion. --Deepak D'Souza (talk) 08:51, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Konkani was only granted "Official Language" status in Goa in 1987. There was no official script before this. An official script was only declared after Konkani was given official language status. Konkani literature in Karnataka is and has always been written in the Kannada script, both before and after 1987. The Devanagiri script is not used by the Canara Catholics. So, i don't think that it ought to be used here. Joyson Noel ^{Holla at me} 09:07, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Yeah that is right, Deepak there was nothing chauvinistic about it.--PremKudva^Talk 11:10, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

There is no official script for Konkani in Karnataka. Kannada script is used widely, but it is important here to remember that Devanagari script is also used among Kanara Konkanis. For example, the chitrapur saraswat community uses Devanagari script to write Konkani. Check out the Chitrapur Matha site and you'll find downloadable Matha literature written in Konkani using Devanagari script. Although the Chitrapur Matha is in Uttar Kannada, there are lots of Chitrapur Saraswats in Mangalore. It is unfair to ignore their existence by asserting that "devanagari script is not used by Canara Catholics", as pointed out by Joyson Noel. It is true that there was heavy lobbying for the Kannada script in favour of Devanagari; however Konkani is taught in the Mangalore area schools in EITHER DEVANAGARI OR KANNADA. There is a choice element attached to the script. Please read this. That link illustrates with pictures too that Devanagari script is used alongside Kannada script for Konkani. Wikipedia strives for Neutral stance on its pages, and the only neutral thing to do here would be include both scripts for Konkani. On a personal note, all these script wars need to stop. When are we going to unite under the umbrella of ONE language. Advocating the use of multiple scripts in different regions for ONE language will only widen the already existing rift between Goan Konkani and Kanara Konkani. --Zauercraut (talk) 22:12, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

If you read the section above, I have already proposed the removal of Kannada scripts for Tulu, Konkani, and Beary. In Mangalore, none of these languages have Kannada as the official script. Adding Kannada script is also making the lead very messy. I suggest only the name in Roman scripts be retained, for the three languages; except for the name in Kannada, since it has Kannada as the official script. I would also not suggest the name in Devanagari script here. Please remmeber there is no place for emotions or philosophy here (to the above user). 121.242.181.2 (talk) 05:50, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Neither Tulu or Beary have an official script, in the first place. But their literature and periodicals have always been written in the Kannada script. So, i fail to see why it shouldn't be used for these languages, especially given that the people themselves use it. As for Konkani, so what if the schools give an option regarding the scripts? The question still remains. Do the majority of the people use the official script? The Kannada script is used by the overwhelming majority of Konkani people in Mangalore and the Chitrapur Saraswats who use Devanagiri constitute a very tiny percentage of the Mangalorean Konkani speaking population, a very insignificant minority as far as numbers are concerned. To my knowledge, no Konkani periodicals or literature from Mangalore and South Canara in general, are written in Devanagiri. Using Devanagiri would give the false impression that it is used by a significant percentage of the Mangalorean Konkani speaking population, which is just not true. Joyson Noel ^{Holla at me} 09:02, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Baring a few , most languages have only one official script. The official script for Konkani is Devanagiri. In case you are not sure, pull out a note from your wallet and check. It does not affect the common use of Kannada script for Konkani in costal Karnataka or the use of Roman script in Goa or the use of Arabic script by Navayiths or the use of Malayalam script in Kerala. But that does not in any way make these scripts "offical" for that language in that particular state. Rather by writing the Konkani name in Kannada , we are giving the wrong impression that Kannada script is the official script. Unless the Karnataka government brings out a specific ordinance declaring Kannada script as the official script for Konkani in the state, the script used for Konkani as applicable to any central government communication remains. And in Wikipedia we only use the official script. --Deepak D'Souza (talk) 12:30, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Main page appearance

Hi due to the hard work put in by editors on the Mangalore article, it has been designated to appear on the Wikipedia main page tomorrow. Any changes if required should be made before then. I am reproducing below the message informing this that I received along with other editors.--PremKudva^Talk 06:25, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Hello! This is a note to let the main editors of this article know that it will be appearing as the main page featured article on January 5, 2011. You can view the TFA blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/January 5, 2011. If you think it is necessary to change the main date, you can request it with the featured article director, Raul654 (talk · contribs). If the previous blurb needs tweaking, you might change it—following the instructions of the suggested formatting. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page so Wikipedia doesn't look bad. :D Thanks! Tbhotch^™ and © 20:13, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Mangalore is the chief port city of the Indian state of Karnataka. It is located about 350 kilometres (217 mi) west of the state capital Bangalore. Bound by the Arabian Sea and the Western Ghat mountain ranges, Mangalore is the administrative headquarters of the Dakshina Kannada district in south western Karnataka. Mangalore developed as a port on the Arabian Sea – remaining, to this day, a major port of India. Lying on the backwaters of the Netravati and Gurupura rivers, Mangalore is often used as a staging point for sea traffic along the Malabar Coast. The city has a tropical climate and lies on the path of the Arabian Sea branch of the South-West monsoons. Mangalore was ruled by several major powers, including the Kadambas, Vijayanagar dynasty, Chalukyas, Rashtrakutas, Hoysalas, and the Portuguese. The city was a source of contention between the British and the Mysore rulers, Hyder Ali and Tippu Sultan. Eventually annexed by the British in 1799, Mangalore remained part of the Madras Presidency until India's independence in 1947. The city's landscape is characterized by rolling hills, coconut palms, freshwater streams, and hard red-clay tiled-roof buildings. (more...)

Image changes in the "Demographics" section

I would like to replace the image of St. Aloysius Chapel with that of the more famous and more visited Gokarnanatheshwara Temple, which i feel would be more appropriate here. Furthermore, i would like to add my family image already present in the Mangalorean Catholics article, in this section as well. The purpose behind this is to illustrate a Mangalorean family, which i feel will improve the article's quality. Any objections? Joyson Noel ^{Holla at me!} 16:33, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

I feel that should be OK, but do think if the image of the family is absolutely needed. Also, ensure that the images do not overlap sections. Waiting for other opinions. TheMike •^{Wassup doc?} 17:46, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

I feel that the family image would be appropriate in the "Demographics" section, to illustrate one among many groups that comprise the Mangalorean population. However, if there is a better picture in Commons (which i have so far failed to discover), then i'm absolutely fine with it not being kept. Joyson Noel ^{Holla at me!} 17:52, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

I've changed my mind, regarding the family image. I feel that i have found a more appropriate image. What do you think about this image? I could add it under the title, "Mangalorean Catholics celebrating Monti Fest near the Church of Our Lady of Miracles in Hampankatta." Joyson Noel ^{Holla at me!} 18:01, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Comment resulting from the RfC. I see no need for an RfC here at all. An RfC is part of the dispute resolution process but there seems to be no dispute here to resolve. Martin Hogbin (talk) 15:49, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

I guess that was a mistaken call from Joyson Noel. Nevertheless, I think that image is good, but I feel it would be better if the image were to be of a higher quality. In any case, I await comments from others. TheMike •^{Wassup doc?} 18:27, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

Oops, my bad! I was unaware that the tag should be added only in such a case. Joyson Noel ^{Holla at me!} 12:45, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

I don't think it's a good idea to replace the St. Aloysius Image with the Monti Fest Image. That Monti Fest image belongs specifically to the Culture section. Secondly, the image has a very low resolution. The St. Aloysius Image has a much better resolution and is quite attractive. Xavier449 (talk) 13:09, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

I meant replacing it with the temple image. Joyson Noel ^{Holla at me!} 13:10, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

It would depend on the quality of the temple Image, then. Xavier449 (talk) 13:22, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

Well, here it is. Decide for yourself! Joyson Noel ^{Holla at me!} 13:24, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

The temple pic suggested by Joyson is of good quality. A pic of Gokarnatha Temple deserves to be in the article, since it being a popular religious and tourist destination. I am for including the pic. 188.55.1.175 (talk) 18:57, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

I feel we should leave the current image set up as it it, the image balance right now is just right. Do not replace the chapel image since it has immense historical value. The temple image mentioned above can be added if it doesn't disturb the current formatting.--PremKudva^Talk 11:46, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

User:Premkudva makes a nice suggestion. As long as the formatting isn't disturbed, I think both images should be fine. TheMike •^{Wassup doc?} 13:06, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

OK, then. I will go ahead and add the temple image as well. I will leave the Monti Fest image aside. Joyson Noel ^{Holla at me!} 16:47, 18 January 2011 (UTC)