Talk:Mumbai/Archive 7

This is an archive of past discussions about Mumbai. 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 5

Population.

Just a heads up, this list lists Mumbai as the most populous city (13.66), with Shanghai being the eight most populous (10.03). You may want to check the sources. · AndonicO ^Engage. 23:19, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Seems that Mumbai is the populous city (proper), 5th populous in urban population and 4th populous urban agglomeration. According to me this page should reflect what's listed in the population pages of wikipedia. Editors who manage those pages do the research and we copy their findings here. Ninadhardikar (talk) 04:08, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

How does this sound, " Mumbai is the world's most populous city with a population of 13.66 million. Taking into account the neighbouring cities of Thane and Navi Mumbai, it is also the world's fifth most populous in terms of urban and metropolitan area and the fourth biggest urban agglomeration. " Ninadhardikar (talk) 02:09, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Nuclear reactor and oil refineries

I think its worth mentioning somewhere that,

1) Mumbai has a nuclear reactor within city limits.
2) A lot of oil refineries and petrochemical plants dot the eastern part of the city, and nearby Navi Mumbai owing to the port and the fact that Bombay High produces almost 70% of India's oil.

Ninadhardikar (talk) 15:03, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

I guess it is worth including in the Economy section. While all of them need refernces, the 70% oil claim definitely needs a convincing reliable source. Docku (talk) 15:06, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Contradiction?

Both the Shanghai and Mumbai articles cite their respective cities as the largest in the world. Which is true? Is Shanghai more of a municipality than a city, or is there a disparity? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.160.134.187 (talk) 21:56, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

Demographics, one of the hardest things to gather date on! Mumbai's population is ~13 million. The definition of Mumbai is finite in terms of area. Mumbai=Greater Mumbai. See the map on the article for the distinction. =Nichalp «Talk»= 06:26, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

The page for world's most populous city discusses this topic. We should be using what they say or change their opinion by posting on their discussion page. Giving different information on two different pages of the wikipedia is plain ridiculous. It undermines the integrity of Wikipedia. Currently it says Mumbai is the most populous city, so we should say that as well. I support using this " Mumbai is the world's most populous city with a population of 13.66 million. Taking into account the neighbouring cities of Thane and Navi Mumbai, it is also the world's fifth most populous in terms of urban and metropolitan area and the fourth biggest urban agglomeration. " Ninadhardikar (talk) 03:51, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

The current city population is just an estimate. To really know the exact population, we may have to wait till 2011. Docku^Hi 03:52, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

That's true, but we have to go by the estimates. Ninadhardikar (talk) 03:56, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Guess so. Reliable estimates will do. Docku^Hi

Vandalism

Hey all see What Chines people has written about Mumbai in chines wiki see this link http://zh.wiki.x.io/wiki/%E5%AD%9F%E4%B9%B0 Suyogaerospace^{talk to me!} 06:27, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, I can't read Chinese. =Nichalp «Talk»= 07:13, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Then take help of Google Translator --Suyogaerospace^{talk to me!} 07:52, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Quite good, I dont see any problem in http://64.233.179.104/translate_c?hl=en&sl=zh-CN&tl=en&u=http://zh.wiki.x.io/wiki/%25E5%25AD%259F%25E4%25B9%25B0&usg=ALkJrhgKNGOZc2qWdRGtzMjZUw5ec22-Cw Remember this is automated translation so not each word be correctly translated as can be done by human translator. --gppande «talk» 12:11, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Is Karachi Sister City of Mumbai?????--Suyogaerospace^{talk to me!} 13:29, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

I don't see any reason to get paranoid. I doubt Karachi is the sister city, but they have a reference for it. =Nichalp «Talk»= 13:41, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

My Goodness. It's such a wonderful article. How can people call the article shit. And regarding Karachi, they have got an excellent reference (http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/557779.cms) from the Times of India, an extremely reliable Newspaper. That will surely make people think Is indeed Karachi a sister city of Bombay. In Fact, I really thank the Chinese for providing such a great article on Bombay in the Chinese language. Thankyou very much. Kensplanet^Talk_E-mail^{Contributions} 14:05, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

As per an article in Mid-day, Mumbai (and the other metros) can have only have six metros. I had referenced that, and some nut has removed it. It's now lost in the archives, and someone would have to dig it out from the history. I doubt Karachi is an official sister city. The ToI article could be mentioning it in generic terms. =Nichalp «Talk»= 14:19, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Karachi is not a sister city of Mumbai. We didn't had any official understanding with Karachi municipality--Suyogaerospace^{talk to me!} 05:12, 29 July 2008 (UTC) _{China isvandal}

I wonder what makes a sister city official and where such informations can be found. Dock^Hi 15:36, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

sister cities

This website shows that Mumbai has only one sister city which is LA, USA as opposed to the reference included in the article. But Karachi is listed in neither case.Dock^Hi 15:42, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

This dead link mentioned six cities and the reason why. =Nichalp «Talk»= 15:57, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Wish I could find the reason why. Kind of curious. Dock^Hi 15:59, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

It mentioned some silly law that a metro can have only 6 and non metro 5. =Nichalp «Talk»= 16:25, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

http://www.sister-cities.org/icrc/directory/Asia/India/index website only mentions Mumbai's US sister cities. Non-US cities are not included. Kensplanet^Talk_E-mail^{Contributions} 16:03, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing that out. Dock^Hi 16:04, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Navigational Templates

The See Also section has 2 navigational templates. Actually, these templates should be set at the bottom of the article along with the other templates. The See Also section must have only Articles which are not wikilinked repeatedly. Kensplanet^Talk_E-mail^{Contributions} 11:12, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

The nuclear reactor and oil refineries wont need reference right? everyone knows its there. though i maybe wrong. the 70% one is easy to find reference...i will find one for you. Ninadhardikar (talk) 15:16, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

I agree with you. Nuclear reactor in Bombay is well known and so are the oil refineries. It also depends on how we phrase it. If we are going to write "lot of oil refineries", we would probably need a reference, I guess. Docku (talk) 15:21, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Good point. Ninadhardikar (talk) 15:28, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Good points to add to article. BUT, Articles of FA quality should not have major statements without citations. Read WP:FACR rule 1(c). Also not everyone will know of it. How can you expect a layman from Africa or South America to know it? --gppande «talk» 15:42, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

I agree. I am always in support of reliable sources. Docku (talk) 16:05, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

One, that's a tall claim of 70% if India's oil. I think 70% is in Assam, not Bombay High. And besides, Bombay High does not come under the geographical territory of Mumbai, so it need not be such an important listing. =Nichalp «Talk»= 18:30, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Right, definitely not 70%. This article says 60% of ONGC. Not sure how much % ONGC contributes for India? --gppande «talk» 20:11, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Yep, there is no harm in adding a reference, though I feel it doesn't need one. Sorry about the figure, its 40% of India's production (have reference for that). It used to be 70% a decade ago. We are only mentioning Bombay High as its one of the two main reasons we have many oil refineries and petrochemical plants in that area, the other reason being the port ofcourse. I don't have figures for Assam, but I sort of remember that it was nowhere near (5 to 10%) ...though i maybe wrong with the recent figures.

gppande: As far as i know, ONGC used to produce 30% of india's oil requirement until a few years ago.Ninadhardikar (talk) 00:25, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

I think we would have to err on the side of caution here. Is there a relation between the petroleum refineries at Wadala and Bombay High? If you look at the geography of the city, crude oil is unloaded at Butcher's Island and supplied by pipelines to these refineries. There are also additional refineries at Panvel. Another question that comes to mind is why would refineries for Bombay High be situated in Mumbai. In most places, refineries are situated far from populated regions. Since Bombay High is about 30 years old, it would not make economic and environmental sense to build refineries here. Some points to ponder. =Nichalp «Talk»= 06:57, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Nichalp, you point is very valid and it will be hard to find any proof that the refineries and petrochemical plants in that area are because of proximity to Bombay High. Location of refineries can be political but it might make sense to have them close to production. I dont buy the environmental factor though. Many refineries are close to cities (especially port cities), probably because proximity port and market. I think it must be more beneficial to have refineries closer to market than to production but I am no expert in that. For the time being, we can leave out mention of Bombay High. Ninadhardikar (talk) 07:32, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Environmentally, I don't see refineries set up too close to close densities of human population. If the refineries at Wadala, Uran and Panvel were built, it was because those areas were not very populated some three or four decades back. =Nichalp «Talk»= 14:12, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Well, I am big admirer of Indian economist Swami Narayan A Iyer who has been writing in Sunday editorial page of TOI for years. I remembered reading this article few months back and was fortunate to get it on net. If you read through the article, it is clear that economically it is always viable to have refineries near dense human population(consumers) and not near drilling place. That's why there are fewer refineries in Gulf than West European nations. But as politics plays its way in every walk of life in India - be is oil, job, quota or nuke deal, situations and positions change. Maybe, three four decades back politics was not so bad and the refineries were located at the right location(near Mumbai). --gppande «talk» 14:42, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Good idea - seems lot of speculations and old data. Lets leave out Bombay High - coz, even Nichalp also said it's not in city limits. Add the nuke reactor info (with some credible source only). --gppande «talk» 09:54, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Only city in world to have a National Scantury in its city limits

"Only city in world to have a National Scantury in its city limits" should we add this thing introduction of Mumbai. No other country in world has a national park in its city limits its a USP for mumbai. Singapore has a zoo but not national park Suyogaerospace^{talk to me!} 07:06, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

I had added that long back, somebody removed it. Don't know the reason why it was removed, would have to see the archives if a reason is specified (could be reference issue). However, I have never come across a statement which says it is the only national park within city limits. I have read in some National Geographic that it is the biggest national park within city limits. Ninadhardikar (talk) 07:11, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

It dont require a refrence! its a known fact. Mumbai is the only city with national park in its limit because not other city has a tiger reserve in its citi limits Mumbai has it so I think we must add My I add it to article ? I have never editid mumbai article can I dont please? By the way can you help me in expanding Mumbai Fire Brigade Article?Suyogaerospace^{talk to me!} 07:21, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Any claims such as largest, world's only, smallest does require a credible reference. Something from Bombay Times won't do, it would need to come from say a BHNS or Nature publication. =Nichalp «Talk»= 11:25, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

A circular Refrence will do (:p) ok jokes apart we must try our level best to find the refence a refrence from a book will do? Suyogaerospace^{talk to me!} 14:03, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

I guess Great Falls National Park is located within the Washington DC metroploitan area just outside the beltway. I am not sure if it is comparable though. Docku (talk) 15:35, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

I still doubt your first claim as i know of some national parks within city limits, though I don't know if you meant its the only tiger reserve ? I know for a fact that its the biggest national park within city limits...I have read that and I was the one who had added it to this article months back. It was removed and rightly so as I didnt find any reference for that. And though National Geographic might say it is the world's biggest in city limits ...they usually many a times dont consider that "city" is ambigious. The world's biggest city is 260,000 sq kms ..thats like a zillion times of Bombay. Even if we do find a reference, are we allowed to say city limits or something like urban area limits ...??? Btw the individual page of Sanjay Gandhi National Park does note the claim thats its the biggest of all in city limits. Ninadhardikar (talk) 16:23, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Well, even if there are cities which may have national parks near to their boundaries, Mumbai can still be considered unique if Sanjay Gandhi National Park can be proven to have any of the big cats. In that case, it certainly can be mentioned in the article unless someone else has reference to prove otherwise.Docku (talk) 19:25, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Surprise-surprise!!! Proof of big cats in the park. This doesn't mean I support the proposal though. --gppande «talk» 21:44, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Well, I have added the information in the Geography section. Hope it sounds ok.Docku (talk) 23:02, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Added relative area to city size. Ninadhardikar (talk) 00:47, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

I didnt realise that it is that huge!!! Second, I am not sure if it is included in the metropolitan area. While I am totally supportive for it to stay in the article, it would still be helpful to be sure whether it is within the city limitsDocku (talk) 01:19, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

The Official Site says its within city limits. I have seen the city size at 603 sq kms in many places, though the Municipal Corp of Greater Mumbai lists it as 437. No hafta from panthers, so no administering there I would say :-)Ninadhardikar (talk) 02:13, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Sounds good. :) Guess we will leave it there. Docku (talk) 03:37, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

First of all I will Like to clear the definition of City limit = Administrative limits or municipal limits and no other city has national park in there limits They have nature parks but not a forest reserve and tiger reserve so Mumbai is the only city with a national park —Preceding unsigned comment added by Suyogaerospace (talk • contribs) 09:50, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

I've never heard of the National Park as a tiger reserve. Infact pugmarks of a tigeress did evince interest half a decade back, but no tiger was found. [1]. In addition, the park does not lie in entirety in Mumbai, it extends across into Thane district, and across the Vasai Creek. If you travel to Yeoor Hills, that part comes under the SGNP, and is a part of Thane. =Nichalp «Talk»= 13:03, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Could it be that tigers were there half a decade ago and then all died out? My opinion on the location of the park is that while it needs to be clearly mentioned in the article where the park lies, it does not change the uniqueness (because it lies so close to the city) regardless of whether half is in Thane or otherwise.Docku (talk) 13:07, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

In fact, if you look at any map for example Google maps, the city wraps around the park both on the eastern and western side. I would have imagined the place where the park is today would have been part of Mumbai residential complexes if it were not assigned a National Park by some good people. Docku (talk) 13:24, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

While the park website may be claiming that it lies within the city limits, they may just as well mean it is located close to the city. I cant imagine that the park is under the control of city administration, rather I would think that it is with the Forest Department. Let us put it this way. National park close to the city- may be not that unique. National park having big cats close to the city- well, this is unique. If it can be proven that there are no more big cats living there, we may need to rewrite the edit. If it cant be proven, the evidence of occasional sightings of panthers and tigers are probably sufficient to keep things the way it is. Docku (talk) 13:47, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Hey Main Entrance of national park is in Borivali its a part of mumbai and in eastern side there is Powai and in south there is Arey coloney is Film city. I agree that it also lies in thana district but still majority part is in mumbai. officially is controll by dept of forest but technically it lies in Thana district and mumbai district (offically mumbai makes up two districts on maharashtra) So there are many lepords in national park and some tigers and lions in Lion safari National park is in mumbai Because Main entrance of national park is in Mumbai. (If any one wish we can have visit to National park and check for ourself that it lies in mumbai I stay in Andheri Borivali is near to me:))Suyogaerospace^{talk to me!} 14:37, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Hi! Could you please not indent replies by using spaces? It creates text "as is" without word wrapping. Thanks! =Nichalp «Talk»= 14:58, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

I have just migrated from IE to firefox I am not able to use preview option in firefox and I don't know why spaces are not working in firefox. (I have updated IE7 to IE8 β and useing β is a hell experience its too buggy and jurkey it hangs every 5 mins Suyogaerospace^{talk to me!} 15:40, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

No, National Park is partly inside city limits, but a majority extends outward. It's mentioned in the article itself. As what I read in the newspapers in 2003, the last wild tiger to be sighted in Mumbai was shot sometime in the 1920s. A tiger was also shot at Malabar Hill in South Mumbai in the 1880s. Leopards and panthers roaming wild, yes, but not tigers and other big cats. =Nichalp «Talk»= 14:58, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

one tigress was spotted with her cub in 2003 that was the story Tiger and lion rome in a fanced open space Suyogaerospace^{talk to me!} 15:40, 12 July 2008 (UTC

Killer cats in the national park , nationalgeographic.com article ~ Killer Cats. I agree with adding "close to the city" rather than in city limits for the time being. Our calculation of area of Mumbai at 603 does include most or all of the national park though. Mumbai isnt that big without that. Ninadhardikar (talk) 00:52, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

That is interesting. I also notice that the Whiting Ranch Wilderness Park near to Los Angeles have mountain lions. Docku (talk) 01:03, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

I tweaked the words to reflect the new reference. You are welcome to modify the words in a way you might feel fit.Docku (talk) 01:17, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Panthers are called leopards in Asia. Hope I am correct. We could also change the name I guess. Docku (talk) 01:28, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Jamnalal Bajaj Institute of Management Studies (JBIMS) and Sir J. J. School of Art Trivia

Mumbai is also home to Jamnalal Bajaj Institute of Management Studies (JBIMS), the esteemed business and management school in Asia. The Sir J. J. School of Art, is affiliated with the University of Mumbai, and offers degrees in fine art and sculpture. It won the Award of Distinction at the UNESCO Asia-Pacific Heritage Awards in 2006.
I think details about these institutes here are trivial. We are not supposed to mention it.
A better sentence would be,
Popular institutes in the city are Jamnalal Bajaj Institute of Management Studies (JBIMS) and Sir J. J. School of Art., Kensplanet (talk) 07:07, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

I think we should list the popular (top rated) schools in Bombay and brief whats so special about them. And ofcourse, the first introduction about how the education system works and which kinds is available. Ninadhardikar (talk) 08:49, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

History

1. Do you guys feel there is a need to add the Bombay Harbour Explosion as a one-liner to the history section.
2. We seem to have a section of history missing between 1964 to 1990s ..does anybody have anything to add in there ? Ninadhardikar (talk) 13:24, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Harbour explosion is a notable event in my opinion. Docku (talk) 13:59, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Yes, that and the Naval uprising, key events to India's independence. As for history the city from 1960-1990, yes, I acknowledge the lacunae here. I had a problem with writing the history for this period when nominated for FA. Nothing notable seemed to happen other than trade unions wars. =Nichalp «Talk»= 18:25, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

I know about history bweeten 1964 to 1990s my I help in that case? we can add about Mumbai mills strike etc etc Suyogaerospace^{talk to me!} 04:49, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Go ahead but you need to have it referenced by credible sources. See WP:RS. Avoid more than three lines since this is a summary article. =Nichalp «Talk»= 07:27, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

What about this "In three decade of 1960 to 1990 Mumbai saw tremendous changes After establishment of Sive Sena mumbai saw riots against south Indians in mid 1960s them in Early 1980s mumbai saw cotton mill strike, strike was lead by Dr Datta Samant this strike fail and all the mill in mumbai were closed down and the workers lost there job, this lead to increased organised crime in mumbai some young children of mill workers got attracted to underworld. And gangs like Ashvin niak, Arun Gavli, Dawood gang, Chota Rajan gang, started to flourish. In early 1990s mumbai saw Riots and serial bomb blast. In mid 1990s mumbai saw Down fall of criminal gangs there was many encounter during this period. Late 1990s Mumbai started to change its image as a result you are seeing today's Global mumbai""I know its too long just delete some part to make it short and sweet Suyogaerospace^{talk to me!} 10:39, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

The text has gravitated more toward the late 80s onward. Datta Samant is notable, but I don't really see why a list of criminals should take up real estate in the history section. History of Mumbai offers better space for such data. Besides, Dawood and co were recent additions. Before that were the Pathan gangs, Haji Mastan and others. Another thing: when mentioning causation and co-relation (this led to...), you need to cite sources =Nichalp «Talk»= 13:11, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

yes it has gravitated more towards 80s because I have read many books on Gang war! Haji mastan, Pathan gang, Vardha Bhai all were smugglers they were didt terrorise Builders. But Dawood and other did terrorise Builders for ransom. In 60 only two things happen Mumbai Become Part of Maharashtra and Shive sina thing that I have already mentioned. About cite sources, I can give that but only from newspapers and Marathi Book will is do? Suyogaerospace^{talk to me!} 13:46, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

The rise of the Shiv Sena is already mentioned in the article. Strikes, yes, but how often, and did it have any profound effect on the city? If so, then we could mention it. As far as Marathi sources are concerned, English sources are preferred here, but non-English sources are also welcome. However, the need for fact checking is importance, so if you need to reference a Marathi article, make sure you also mention all publication details such as ISBN number, page number, publisher etc. =Nichalp «Talk»= 14:00, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Of which strikes are you talking of? If Datta samant's Yes they ruined the lives of mill worker all mills went in Gujarat. If you are talking of political strikes we should mention important and successful strikes. Comming to marathi source I can give you ISBN No of very few books, because most of the book I have read were of late 80s and early 90s during that period ISBN No was not mandatory. I have deep knowledge of Crime in mumbai in which articles I can expand using this knowledge? Suyogaerospace^{talk to me!} 14:17, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Strikes or groups of strikes that had an impact. If you say the mills went to Gujarat, then you would need to source a reference for the cause. IMO, they closed because of several other reasons. I would strongly recommend that the books you source have an ISBN number, since the source must be one that can be easily referenced. =Nichalp «Talk»= 15:11, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

99% of the total sucessful strikes were organised by Shive sena and BJP. And about Mill any old mumbaikar will agree to it that Datta Samant was responsible for dislocation of mill. I will search for books with ISBN No(My mom is a librarian [;)]Suyogaerospace^{talk to me!} 15:26, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Knowledge is not enough. Subject of crime can be controversial thus needs reliable source. Docku (talk) 14:20, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Hi My comment on ""knowledge of Crime in mumbai"" is not related to History of Mumbai!! I am just asking advice from Nichalp Don't get confused Buddy!Suyogaerospace^{talk to me!} 14:25, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Sorry for butting in. I thought everyone can present their opinion on article talk pages. Docku (talk) 14:27, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

No need to say sorry I am famous for making my friends confuse its my mistake! every ones opinion are welcome for wikipedias as well as my development;)Suyogaerospace^{talk to me!} 14:35, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Mumbai Fire brigade & Mumbai Police

Hi all I have created Mumbai Fire brigade this article on Wikipedia its a stub If any one has more information please help me to expand it.

And any one interested in expanding Mumbai police?? Suyogaerospace^{talk to me!} 04:52, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Wrong Information/Intro

This is a wrong Information ""The name "Mumbai" is an eponym, etymologically derived from Mumba or Maha-Amba – the name of the Hindu goddess Mumbadevi"" Original story is that a Koli women maned Mumga and not Mumba Build this temple she was reciding in Versova she had a "नवस"(I dont know what its called in english) so to fulfill it she build a temple and from her name it got its name Munga-Devi its disambiguation become Mumba-devi So the name Mumbai its the true story Suyogaerospace^{talk to me!} 03:16, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

According to Lonely Planet's book Top 100 Big Cities there is a legend of a demon known as Mumbaraka, who terrorized the residents and the devi was known after him as Mumba-devi. That legend is disputed, but Lonely Planet is well known publication as well. Ninadhardikar (talk) 04:37, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Are we living in mumbai or lonley planet? I have proof of this Fact. Go to Mumbai-Devi trusties they will give you the proof and also Reputed news paper Maharashtra Times support my story (Actully I am supporting there story!)--Suyogaerospace^{talk to me!} 04:48, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Well, if the trustees have such proof, it would be transcribed and then be common knowledge. This Versorva thing is something new to me. See WP:CITE =Nichalp «Talk»= 08:23, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Mumbai

How about launching a Wikiproject Mumbai which is dedicated to the Mumbai Metropolitan Region? I think we should have sufficient number of editors.

SOME CITY WIKIPROJECTS

African cities: Lagos
Asian cities and city-states (non-Indian): Dubai, Hong Kong, Macau, Shenzhen, Singapore
Australian cities: Adelaide, Brisbane, Canberra, Melbourne, Perth, Sydney
Canadian cities: Montreal, Ottawa, St. John's*, Toronto, Vancouver
European cities and regions: Bedfordshire, Belfast, Belgrade, Brighton, Bristol, Cardiff, Cheshire, Cornwall, Devon, Edinburgh, Frankfurt, Greater Manchester, Hertfordshire, Kent, London, Munich, North East England, Porto, Rome, Sheffield, Somerset, Surrey, Sussex, Vienna, West Midlands, Zagreb

Indian cities: Balasore, Bangalore, Bhubaneswar, Chandigarh, Chennai, Cuttack, Delhi, Eluru, Hyderabad, Kolkata, Lucknow, Mangalore, Mumbai, Patna, Visakhapatnam

Mexican cities: Tijuana

New Zealand cities: Auckland

US cities and regions

Appalachia, Atlanta, Austin, Boston, Cape Cod and the Islands, Capital District (Albany, NY and vicinity), Charlotte, Chicago, Cincinnati, Cleveland, Columbia (MO), Dallas-Fort Worth, Durham, NC, Eastern Mountain Coal Fields, Eastern Washington, Erie, Hampshire County, West Virginia, Houston, Hudson Valley, Indianapolis, Jacksonville, Kansas City, KYOVA Region*, Las Vegas, Lehigh Valley (PA, NJ), Los Angeles, Louisville, Lowell, Miami, Myrtle Beach, New Hampshire Mountains, New Orleans, New York City, Omaha, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, St. Louis, San Antonio, San Diego, San Francisco Bay Area, Santa Barbara County (CA), Seattle, Shreveport, Southern California, Syracuse, Tampa Bay Area, Washington, D.C., Western New York State, Yellowstone, Youngstown

Mumbai being a major metropolitan city in the world should have a dedicated WikiProject. I think even Chennai has a Wikiproject Wikipedia:WikiProject Chennai. Please let me know what the editors of this Page think?-----------KennethJohn^Talk_E-mail^{Contributions}

I support it I was also thinking of it Thanks for Bring over here. Lets have a poll over hereSuyogaerospace^{talk to me!} 03:00, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

SUPPORT

I support it Suyogaerospace^{talk to me!} 03:00, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

I support it.Kensplanet ^Talk_E-mail^{Contributions}, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

=Nichalp «Talk»= Strong support. Long needed. I had preemptly tagged several articles as mumbai=yes in the WP India tag in anticipation. This should be a descendants of Wikipedia:WikiProject Indian cities. =Nichalp «Talk»= 06:05, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

OPPOSE

COMMENT

I don't think anyone is going to oppose this. Because there is no reason to oppose. So let's start the construction. Kensplanet (talk) 06:14, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

This poll is officially closed because the above mention project has been launched So start editing it --Suyogaerospace^{talk to me!} 12:30, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Good News

Hi all There is a a good news. In mumbai Government is restoration the Band Stands. Bandra Band was successful restored and got magnificent response from tourists so they are now going to restore cooperage band stand in oval maidan. And soon other will be restored isn't it cool? can we add this info in article?Suyogaerospace^{talk to me!} 11:15, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Pictures of New Projects

hi, how about a picture of one of the ongoing mumbai projects - Bandra-Worli Sea Link or Mumbai Metro?

--ti 14:40, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

I Support you I have many pic of Mumbai metro Its just going by my locality (J.P,Rd Nr apna bazar Andheri (w))Suyogaerospace^{talk to me!} 15:09, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Well, it could fit in economy or transport section. Both have nice pictures as of now. My point is why clutter these sections with unfinished projects when they already have good pictures. But, if you insist, I would recommend replacing the bus picture for a good picture of the Sea link or Metro. Docku (talk) 17:15, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Gaothans/ Kolivadas

Hi all there is no mention of Gaothans and Kolivadas in the article how can we miss them. They are integral part of Mumbai?-Suyogaerospace^{talk to me!} 15:40, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Yes they can be mentioned in culture. =Nichalp «Talk»= 16:13, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

ok soon I'll be doing it--Suyogaerospace^{talk to me!} 09:24, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Digging old Grave [:D]

I might sound stupid But I have been scanning through archives of talk page on archive3 or 4 there was a debt on Parel below sea level. Yes Parel is below sea level actually Parel is reclaimed from sea and it falls below sea level

I found a beautiful pic of Taj hotel cam we use it some where?

Cool pic

--Suyogaerospace^{talk to me!} 16:01, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Not sure if there is anywhere the image can be used, as the subject is a building. As for below sea level- that was removed as it needed a reliable source. =Nichalp «Talk»= 16:11, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

When we had 26th July Govt news (on DD saydheri on 7 pm news) said that there was flooding in Parel because it was below sea level and there was no chance for water to flow into sea--Suyogaerospace^{talk to me!} 16:13, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

That is open to interpretation whether the land is below sea level or the sewage system is below sea level. I think it is the latter. Since it open to dispute, the best sources would be from the government of Maharashtra. =Nichalp «Talk»= 16:15, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

If the land is below sea level its fact that its drainage will be below sea level. and about pic I have placed it over here Taj Mahal Palace & Tower--Suyogaerospace^{talk to me!} 16:30, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Not necessarily. The sewerage level is several metres below ground level. What is the ground level is just 1 metre above sea level? =Nichalp «Talk»= 16:42, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

picture change

User:Nikkul has changed the picture. The new picture is nice but it has a lower resolution and is kind of foggy. I tend to prefer the older one. Docku^Hi 15:18, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

We've had long run-ins with Nikkul over images, and had to block him several times. Trying to convince him is almost pointless. Try your luck though and see if there is consensus for either image. =Nichalp «Talk»= 16:46, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

I have tried engaging him in in the past his talk page and he hardly responds. Well, in this case, I agree with his rational for inserting the current picture and it would be great if he has a picture of the same location but with a better quality and resolution. Docku^Hi 17:39, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

As far as my past experience goes with Nikkul - he has agreed to go by consensus. Try building it here by a clean logical vote and then hope for Nikkul to abide by it. I think people do listen if you listen to them. Ask him his rationale too. --gppande «talk» 20:04, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

You must be the lucky few who have had good dealings with Nikkul. His talk page is littered with comments from all walks of wikipedia. Nikkul, in the past had resorted to employing sockpuppets to ballot stuff consensus. I do think he is doing a wonderful job for wikipedia by sourcing free images, but the appropriateness of the images in a section is questionable, since this is an encyclopedia, not a travel brochure. =Nichalp «Talk»= 08:55, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

First of all I dont think it's appropriate to talk about "past dealings" esp by an admin like Nichalp... And i dont think that's relevant anyway.

Secondly, I have added the original image of nariman point skyline, by which mumbai is symbolized. This is much more encyclopedic than an unidentified suburb. Nikkul (talk) 17:53, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

I don't see how the admin taunt is relevant here. =Nichalp «Talk»= 18:17, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

It is a good idea. But, do you have a better quality picture? Docku^Hi 18:01, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Nikkul says he changed the picture. Am i the only one here who doesnt see the the change? :) Docku^Hi 20:48, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

2008 Live Earth in Mumbai

Mumbai will be the only host to this year's Live Earth concert. This is probably worth mentioning somewhere in the article - although I will leave it up to editors who have worked on it to decide if and where the information should go. Here is the official link:

http://www.liveearth.org/?cat=44

and other sources at google news

http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&ie=UTF-8&tab=wn&ncl=1247761121 -Classicfilms (talk) 01:35, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Climate formatting issue

Does anyone know why some of the text in the Climate section is being rendered this way, when viewed through Firefox or Opera? I did not encounter the same issue with Internet Explorer. Initially, I thought this was because of either the {{convert}} template or because of an unintended non-breaking space somewhere in the text, but can't seem to find an issue with either of them in the section. Thanks AreJay (talk) 19:31, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Negative. It works fine on Firefox/Linux. No issues with Firefox+Opera/Windows either from my end. =Nichalp «Talk»= 19:37, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Hmm, interesting. I logged out of my account and accessed the article...didn't encounter any of the previous formatting issues I had. Maybe something in my monobook is creating the conflict. Thanks though..and btw, could you delete the screenshot when you have a second since its no longer needed? Thanks! AreJay (talk) 21:29, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Done =Nichalp «Talk»= 06:17, 20 September 2008 (UTC)