Jump to content

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Thiruvananthapuram/archive1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Aarem (talk | contribs) at 18:35, 5 October 2006 ([[Thiruvananthapuram]]). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

The article is prepared so as to match it as per the standards mentioned in WP:INCITIES.
So, I am nominating the article for the featured article status.

-- Rajith Mohan (Talk to me...) :-) 11:16, 30 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • How could you pronounce that? - Patricknoddy 8:08am September 30, 2006 (EDT)
Thiru - anantha - puram => Th as in Thin.
key => (tĭr'ūvənŭn'təpur'əm).
Also called Trivandrum (trə-văn'drəm) -- Rajith Mohan (Talk to me...) :-) 13:38, 30 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comments. It's good, definitely improved from when it was listed on peer review, but still needs work. Almost all of my comments from peer review could be repeated again. It is improved along those lines, just needs a lot more. There are still a lot of unsupported statements throughout, there's still colloquial language, demographics needs expanding, infrastructure, etc. "Foreign tourists are flocking to ..." is an example of a statement needing factual restatement and sourcing. Particularly the last section needs more support from reliable sources or just remove the statements that can't be supported. For some of the media outlets listed it's not clear if they are national resources that are available in the city or if they are based there. If not based there, I'm not sure they should be mentioned. - Taxman Talk 14:14, 30 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Object. Does not abide by featured article criteria 2 (compliance with the standards set out in the manual of style and relevant WikiProjects). Wikipedia:WikiProject Indian cities does not have any scope for section like City's Importance and Future prospects. Also the subsection Science and Technology need to be removed/ incorporated. The article still has "Citation nededed" template. Some parts of the article are choppy, for example, in History, last paragraph of Geography. In demographics, if possible, give some notable comparison with other cities of India/ Kerala (for example, the sex ratio). Many words/phrases need wikilinking. Regards.--Dwaipayan (talk) 17:41, 1 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    We know you support because you nominated the article, so I moved your comment to a response. While it is getting better, much of what is pointed out above is still a problem. There are still a lot of unsupported statements throughout, there's still colloquial language, the last section is still a problem. The culture section still doesn't cover the things culture sections in other geographic entity articles do, food for example. The demographics or culture should tell us about the ethnic groups, is there any conflict. The statement on languages spoken needs a reference. The unemployment problem could use more discussion, and should probably be moved to the economics section. 34.3% is extremely high, and the tone and focus of the economics section sounding like the economy is very rosy doesn't match up with the unemployment number. Several sections still need improvement for flow. They are choppy an some paragraphs are two short with one or two sentences. Also the reference cited for the statement that tourists are flocking to Thiruvananthapuram isn't really supported by that source, making me concerned about the others. Keep up the good work, there's more to go. - Taxman Talk 18:20, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comments. The unemployment rate and the growth in economy is not very much dependent on each other in Indian scenario. For eg; lets take the example of Kerala. Kerala's GDP growth is 9.2% in 2004–2005 and 7.4% in fiscal year 2003–2004, which indicates a steep increase in the economy. Kerala's per capita GDP — 11,819 INR — is significantly higher than the all-India average. Additionally, Kerala's Human Development Index and standard of living statistics are the nation's best. But Kerala's unemployment rate is variously estimated at 19.2% and 20.77%. The unemployment rate also was increasing during the period when the economical indexes shown steady growth !! You can obviously find a big controversy in these figures.
The same is applicable for all the Indian cities. The reasons are many. I am not getting further into it. Please see the article on Kerala to get the related sources of the figures I mentioned above. Infact, some statements are copy-pasted from that page. --Samaleks


  • Strong Support: This article is an excellent one, and , after having had two peer reviews, is one of the most professional articles I've read till date in Wikipedia. rohith 11:52, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support: The article is well-written. Improvements made on the article by addressing to the issues mentioned appreciated. The article is well organized, and is a real good stuff amongst Indian cities. I could not find any serious issues for not giving the Featured Star to this article. Full Support from my side. --Samaleks 15:29, 4 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comments: 1) The article seems to have a revert/edit war over the naming of the city. This should be resolved, and the article made stable. 2) The strategic importance section should be merged with other sections ... it is a nonstandard section for city articles, and projects an opinion rather than information. 3) Education section is a mess ... should be cleaned, a photo added, and the list removed. 4. Instead of making climate a lone subsection under geography, remove the subsecton header, and rename the section as "Geography and climate" . That's all for now ... --Ragib 07:33, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
* Just two reverts doesnt means that there is an edit war going on.. The section Strategic importance is not a mere opinion. It is very much informative, and is well tailored with relevent sources. Adding a photo in the education section can be done. But as of now, there are no photos(which is not copyrighted) available. We can fix this as soon as any editor is uploading relevent picture. The section Geography is changed as per your suggestion. Cheers, -- Rajith Mohan (Talk to me...) :-) 18:35, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]


  • Support: Beautiful article with well organized data. --Sathyalal 5 October 2006 (UTC)