Talk:Thiruvananthapuram

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Thiruvananthapuram article.
This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.
Article policies
To-do list for Thiruvananthapuram: edit  · history  · watch  · refresh

Should do :

  • Expand the sub-article History of Trivandrum
  • Transport Section should be trimmed and the excess details should be moved to the sub-article Transport in Thiruvananthapuram


Completed :
WikiProject_India This article is within the scope of WikiProject India.
A Quality: A-Class (add comments)
This article is maintained by the Indian cities workgroup.
This article is maintained by the Kerala workgroup.
More information about this article...
Former FA This article is a former featured article candidate. Please view its sub-page to see why the nomination failed. For older candidates, please check the archive.
Peer review Thiruvananthapuram has had a peer review by Wikipedia editors which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article.
Archive
List of archived discussions

Contents

[edit] Merging 'Science and Technology' in to 'Education'

The section 'Science and Technology' in the article can be merged with the section 'Education'. I would like to invite the responses from the editors regarding this.

Thanks, -- Rajith Mohan (Talk to me...) :-) 12:04, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

Obviously the list doesn't belong to the article. The S&T section should be converted into useful prose and merged to some section, preferably education. — Ambuj Saxena (talk) 13:09, 22 September 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Kowdiar Road Typical??

Hehe.. come on guys! You know that this is far from being true!! rohith 11:45, 2 October 2006 (UTC).

[edit] Ponmudi

The Ponmudi article says it is 61 km away from the city. As such, I dont think the image is apt in describing the geography of Trivandrum. Perhaps the Vizhijam picture (which looks out of place in the economy section) can be used here? -- thunderboltz(Deepu) 05:54, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

I disagree, Ponmudi is an important tourist destination to those who visit the city. And also to those who live in it.... But, yeah, I do agree that the presence of the Vizhinjam Port should be emphasized upon. Atleast then will visitors to this website know that the Central Govt. is trying to underplay such a strategically important site because of some peoples' personal intentions. rohith 06:58, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] People of Trivandrum - Trivandrumites (in English)

The people of Trivandrum are referred to as Trivandrumites in English. The user Bharatveer disagrees to this. As the article is now going on in WP:FA, it would be better if we stay back from unwanted edit wars. So I request other editors to discuss the matter here, and we can go ahead with the changing once a consensus is reached.

Agree - I agree to the usage. Personally I belongs to the area, and I am known to this usage. I have heard the usage in many speeches made in English. -- Rajith Mohan (Talk to me...) :-) 15:18, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Its not a question of anybody agreeing to this usage.Do you have valid references for the same?-Bharatveer 16:15, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Kerala Tourism, Chief Minister's Guest book, Opposition Leader's Guest book, commercial tourism site, News piece, commercial local site, etc. Moreover, by googling, i could find 211 results for the word. Most of sites retrieved were blog sites. This shows that the usage "Trivandrumites" exists and is used. It is not a non-existing word. -- Rajith Mohan (Talk to me...) :-) 16:52, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

  • In English language, the letters 'ite' is used to suffix the nouns for denoting persons associated with a place.

" -ite : a suffix of nouns denoting esp. persons associated with a place, tribe, leader, doctrine, system, etc. (Campbellite; Israelite; laborite); minerals and fossils (ammonite; anthracite); explosives (cordite; dynamite); chemical compounds, esp. salts of acids whose names end in -ous (phosphite; sulfite); pharmaceutical and commercial products (vulcanite); a member or component of a part of the body (somite). "

See these links

Hope this will clarify your doubt about the usage.

-- Rajith Mohan (Talk to me...) :-) 17:04, 9 October 2006 (UTC)


Agree : I too support the usage of the word. It is similar to Kochiites or Keralites. . We need not be so stubborn in this issue. The mentioning of the word is not any thing which is a false information. And, as Rajith Mohan pointed out, the usage is there in English language. --Samaleks 14:02, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

Agree: Having spent 25-odd years in the city, I feel that the usage is quite common, especially these days that there are a lot of people moving in from all parts of the country here and a sort of "lingua franca" is emerging, made of such terms. Ajaypp 14:32, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

See my point is that thiw word is not still a common usage.Not a single newspaper of repute uses this word yet. Therefore it is wrong to present it as a fact .-Bharatveer 04:22, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Suggestions for improving the article:

[edit] Suggestions by Taxman

1. It's got some awkward and possibly non-native speaker writing that needs a significant copyediting to improve, and turning colloquial phrasing into more encyclopedic wording.

  • May be beyond my capacity. If you can point out specific sentences, it would be more easy for me. --Rajith Mohan
  • Once the other issues are solved this part will be easy, but it doesn't make sense to work on this when #2 needs so much work. - Taxman Talk 13:23, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

2. It also still has a lot of statements of opinion that are not backed by sources
a) "of India’s most literate and socially developed state",
b) "however, much of this high potential growth would depend on the investment and trade union reforms of the government.", etc.
Neither are forgone conclusions and need to be worded more neutrally or replaced with referenced statements.

  • a)Sources are added.
b)Sentence removed. --Rajith Mohan
This one's the real problem. Those two specific ones were just examples that jumped out at me. I'll see if I can make a list for you sometime today or tomorrow. But basically you need to look for any statements that are not common knowledge to anyone that doesn't know anything about the city, or statements that make a claim like "Thiruvananthapuram is a major academic hub." What makes it that, what evidence? Would everyone agree to that? Make the article factually stated, not presenting a viewpoint. "The number of mobile phone connections have increased exponentially since the late 90s". Exponential growth doesn't mean much if the growth rate is .001%. The statement just sounds promotional without some data. - Taxman Talk 13:23, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

3. What about the infrastructure? Water, power, sewage treatment, etc. It tells about the transportation, but nothing else. The coverage of transport is relatively too much and should be shortened to make room for discussion of other facets of infrastructure.

  • Other facets of infrastructure such as power, water, etc is included. --Rajith Mohan
  • But we still need more here. What is the reliability of the power, does it run for 2 hours a day? Same for the water. Also sewage treatment sounds picky, but it's something taken for granted in most cities in developed countries. Finally the infrastructure hidden in the middle of the demographics is strange. It should be at the end of the transport section called something like transport and infrastructure, or just infrastructure. - Taxman Talk 13:23, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment: I dont think there is enough room in the transport section. The more apt place is Demographics section itself. The article should go by Wikipedia:WikiProject India/Cities.
  • Demographics is definitely not the right place for that. And hmm, it looks like that project's guidelines need some improvement. But they don't support the infrastructure being in the demographics section either. - Taxman Talk 15:59, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

4. The education section lists some schools but doesn't tell us about the overall quality compared to national and international standard, or even the literacy rate.

  • You've got literacy rate, but other than that I don't see anything about the overall quality. - Taxman Talk 13:23, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

5. Demographics could be expanded to discuss poverty and wealth distribution. I hope that's enough for starters to help you improve further, though this is well on it's way.

  • Not available now. I am searching for the official statistics. Getting detailed and authentic information will be possible only in my next visit to Thiruvananthapuram city. --Rajith Mohan
  • I can't see why some users are wary of edits meant to improve. The article has not yet been thoroughly checked for typos and it teems with hollow words. History section omits very important events. Phonetic transcript is absolute nonsense. Those who are eager to remove the clean-up tag may please address these defects first. Kundan After Sundown 10:43, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

I don't know much about the city of Thiruvananthapuram, but I do know about Malayalam and the IPA, so I updated the transcription of the city's name to match with the IPA's standards and with the Romanization scheme used in the Malayalam language article, as has been done for other major world cities with non-English names. --SameerKhan 10:56, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] False and selective history

It appears that the history section of Thiruvananthapuram as well as the patchy and worthless article History of Thiruvananthapuram suffers from extremely biased selection. There is absolutely no mention of Sir C. P. Ramaswami Aiyer's oppressive rule and many instances of state terror. An eventful period is simply glossed over with a statement "with the end of the British rule in 1947, Travancore chose to join the Indian union", which hides more than it tells. Kundan After Sundown 06:06, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Golf course

There are a few articles onlines which claim that Tvm course is second oldest in India. They claim that it was established in the 1850s, but every one (Official site, [1], [2], [3], etc) of those articles also say that it was founded by Maharaja Sreemoolam Thirunal Rama Varma. He was the King from 1885 to 1924. The King in the 1850s was Uthradam Thirunal Marthanda Varma. It is impossible that it was established in 1850s and by Sreemoolamthirunal. Tintin (talk) 06:56, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

Wait a minute. The article claims that it is the "oldest" in India. But Royal Calcutta Golf Club has been around since 1829. As mentioned above, even the claim that it is the second oldest is suspect. Tintin (talk) 07:06, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] FA?

I have had a quick look through the article. There are many points that need to be addressed. I feel that if we tackle one section a day, then it could reach FA quality in some time. I would be happy to help out. I could have done this myself, but being from an entirely different part of the country, I cannot help with adding information and references. I can only help with the prose, style and checking the references. If any editors are interested then please leave a message on my talk page. - Aksi_great (talk) 07:01, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Swati Tirunal, violin, Ravi Varma etc.

Who introduced violin in Carnatic Music? Certainly not this rajah. See[4]

Ravi Varma's global recognition sounds ridiculous. One award from abroad for one painting gives no global recognition. Kundan After Sundown 17:48, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Cleanup tag

To User:Kundan After Sundown,

The cleanup tag is used in wiki, in cases where the article needs cleanup in the following areas :

  1. You aren't sure whether something should be merged, deleted, or expanded.
  2. Needs formatting, proofreading, or rephrasing in comprehensible English.
  3. Multiple overlapping problems.
  4. The article is very short and might need removal or merging with a broader article

In this article, only No.2 is the needed activity.

Normally, the cleanup tags are included in the article, where there are no bounded editors attached to the project. But, for this article, there are a few editors, who are available upon any kind of request for improvement. So, a cleanup tag is not required in the article. It can be well discussed in the talk page itself. And I bet, you will get immediate attention from any of the attached editors.

And, thanks for the copy-edits in the article. Good effort :) -- Rajith Mohan (Talk to me...) :-) 16:25, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

I beg to differ. Sections need re-writing to remove bias or gain balance. Thorough proof-reading and copy editing is necessary. Typos and stylistic incosistencies remain aplenty. And what not, many of the sentences in history section are extemely poor re-work to get around copy-vio of the PRD website's poor and unreliable content. (Ex. Can you provide any reference for the existence of the city during Ay dynasty?). The editors available are not plainly upto their job! Tag is clearly in place. Kundan After Sundown 17:05, 15 October 2006 (UTC)
This is INDIA. We have to follow the official sources like PRD sites and GoK sites. Because, they are "considered" to be reliable. We dont have much information from reliable 3rd parties on internet.
And, it is better to reach a consensus from the editors attached to the project, before jumping in to conclusions. In wikipedia, the official sources (the contents from the Government sites) are considered more reliable than other private sites. -- Rajith Mohan (Talk to me...) :-) 18:00, 15 October 2006 (UTC)
Wikipedia is not an Indian project and serious history is not always something available on WWW. Misconstruing statements from third rate writing on PRD website can't improve your history (discussed elsewhere on this page). Some of the editors associated with this article seem to be too hasty to close all discussions and run away with their laurels. Repeated removal of clean-up tag while showing incapability of proofreading and copyediting and replacement of citation tag with false references clearly demonstate this.Kundan After Sundown 01:19, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] History: dispute

  • To date the tradition back to three millennia, some editors have relied on the suspect argument of a cheating website. (The website which claims that it is the original website of the Ministry of Tourism at least admits that it discontinued to be so, but some editors don't care!).
  • The PRD webpage which is invoked to state that the early rulers of the city were the Ays, doesn't say anything about city's existence during Ay dynasty or it being ruled by Ays.

Here is the relevant excerpt from the PRD webpage: "Thiruvananthapuram city and several other places in the district loom large in ancient tradition, folklore and literature. South Kerala, particularly the Thiruvananthapuram district, had in the early past a political and cultural history which was in some respect independent of that of the rest of Kerala. The Ays were the leading political power till the beginning of the 10th century AD The disappearance of the Ays as a major political power, synchronised with the emergence of the rulers of Venad." Unscholarly and vauge as the text is, to construe from that "the early rulers of the city were the Ays" is a misadventure.

Says who? -Bharatveer 04:01, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
User Kundan After Sundown (lOl) -- Rajith Mohan (Talk to me...) :-) 05:22, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
I don't need to answer stupid comments. However, since my last point in the original section sounds a bit ambiguous I would provide this explanation. It is not the existence of Ay dynasty that I dubbed disputed. It was one Shanku Aiyer, a historian, who diputed the theory of Ay domination upto 10th century. He called Ezhini Athan, considered as an Ay king until then, the first king of Venadu. He cited the reference to "Vanchiyoor Kulapathi Ezhini" that could not have been an Ay king. Shanku Aiyer argued that Ay dynasty's control was restricted to a few areas south of Vizhinjam by eighth century. This might sound like invention to those editors totally ignorant of the history of Thiruvithamkoor. They can refer the Thriuvithamkoor article in Vishwa Vinjana Kosham (the only comprehensive and scholarly encyclopedia in Malayalam, published three decades back and heavily obsolete about most of the subjects other than history). They can also look for Shaku Aiyer's Kerala Charitrathile Chila Anjatha Bhagangal Kundan After Sundown 06:22, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Mr. Kundan After Sundown, I am afraid that you are jumping in to conclusions with some biased ideas that you have. First of all, the History related to Ays, is listed in almost all government sites. You cannot just assume that the facts listed there is wrong. You have to prove that using valid sources. And the theory you pointed out is the perceptions of one historian. The Government sites usually reflects the most followed Perceptions.. You cannot just add tags to the article which is a Selected Article in the Indian Portal. It is advised that you discuss the matters in the talk page here. And you can go by the consensus. So, please stop the irrelevant edits.
Also, I feel that your user name is quite vulgar in Malayalam. I request you to change the user name. --Samaleks 06:34, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Here is my reply.
First of all, the History related to Ays, is listed in almost all government sites.
*Reply- Do "almost all government sites" deal in history?
You cannot just assume that the facts listed there is wrong.
* Reply- Even if the site has correct information, the page has it wrong.
You have to prove that using valid sources.
*Reply- Your criterion of validity?
And the theory you pointed out is the perceptions of one historian. The Government sites usually reflects the most followed Perceptions.
*Reply- may be "usually", but not always. The poorly written piece on the site in question shows how much the government cares for presenting history.
You cannot just add tags to the article which is a Selected Article in the Indian Portal.
*Reply- Which policy bans it?
It is advised that you discuss the matters in the talk page here.
*Reply_ I have discussed every point I wanted changed unlike those editors who indulge in revert wars.
And you can go by the consensus. So, please stop the irrelevant edits.
*Reply- You can't judge alone. Most of my edits have stayed in spite of the hostility of a few editors for well known reasons.

Also, I feel that your user name is quite vulgar in Malayalam. I request you to change the user name.
  • Reply:Tush tush tush! Was Kundan Lal Saigal a very vulgar fellow? What horrible things he did?

Kundan After Sundown 08:11, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Well nobody is wrong here. Depends on the Malayalam pronunciation. If the letter 'd' in this case is pronounced as in the word 'under', the resulting word may not sound good in Malayalam. If it is pronounced like 'th' as in the word 'that', which is the intended pronunciation, everything is fine. Esskay 19:15, 20 November 2006 (UTC)


Can someone check the Viswavijnanakosam anyway ? It is one of the "must reads" before attempting a major encyclopaedia article on any subject on Kerala. Tintin (talk) 08:43, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Ay Dynasty

Ay kingdom existed in south Kerala, and ruled with Vizhinjam as the capital. King Vikramaditya Varaguna is a notable name in this dynasty.

You can refer to a site named varnam.org, which is a discussion forum of historians and history aspirants. I am providing some urls for you. This will surely help you in knowing more about the Ay Kingdom and history of Kerala.

Indian History Timeline
History through coins
Vishnu temple of Ay Dynasty
Oldest fort in Kerala
Ay dynasty sometime between 7th to 11th century AD with Vizhinjam as the capital.The Ay dynasty ruled the land between Nagercoil and Thiruvalla

If you are not satisfied with the above site, you can go for the book Kerala State Gazetteer- vol. II, Part .I by Adoor K.K. Ramachandran Nair(First edition: 1986), which is a keral government publication.

The theory of Shaku Aiyer (which you narrated earlier) may be correct. Because history always go after assumptions and biased thoughts. But here, we should follow the most accepted theory.

Cheers, -- Rajith Mohan (Talk to me...) :-) 18:35, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] fraudulent website

The article cites as reference a fraudulent website allegedly of Tourims Ministry of India. The official website of Ministry of Tourism is this. Tourism Ministry of India That settles the dispute. Now we only need to see if the editors whot stick to this falsity is going to remove it.Kundan After Sundown 08:39, 17 October 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Excess of Unnecessary Details

There is too much unnecessary and irrelevant details in the article. It would be a good idea if those who contribute or edit, first take a look at articles on other cities of the world. Or look at the article on Kochi, which has been fairly well done.

Why do people writing here think the readers have to be drowned in all kinds of petty details? For example, are the readers really interested to know that the city is electrified? Do they really want to know KSEB has so many circles or divisions? Or about how many transformers it has?

Perhaps it would also be a good idea to have the readers in mind when contributing to or editing the article. Esskay 21:55, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Dear Esskay,
The details are not petty details. Those were added in a later stage, when the article was undergoing Featured Article Candidature. The excess details were as a result of the review comments associated with it. And the purpose of an encyclopedia is not just touching the details, but to provide a comprehensive information of the subject. Therefore, the details provided such as power, water, sewage, etc, definitely satisfies some set of readers, who looks for those details. All these comes in the infrastructure and facilities of a city. Moreover, there is no rule that the structure of one article should follow the structure of the other.
Cheers, -- Rajith Mohan (Talk to me...) :-) 13:32, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

No one has said there is any rule that the structure of one article should follow that of another. Pointing to better quality articles is not to say there are such rules, but to refer to them as good models that can be emulated. From where does the idea that the purpose of an encyclopedia is to fill an article with every minute detail about the subject come? Check out any professionally done encyclopedia and you will see how focused the articles are on the subject matter and they don't go into such minute details. (Now, if you are going to say there is no rule that the structure of one encyclopedia does not have to follow that of another, I can only say that you just fail to get the point.)

Details such as the number of transformers etc. are relevant in a report by KSEB about their infrastructure in the Trivandrum or in a book someone wants to write on the same subject, but not in an encyclopedia article about the city. I see this amatuerish eagerness to describe every sandpebble and every blade of grass a lot in Indian and Kerala topics. So you say these minute details satisfy some readers? So what? Describing every shop on the street would also satisfy some others! They are also part of the city, aren't they?

It does not matter whether or not the details are the result of "the review comments associated with it." That doesn't make them sacrosanct. There is a clear warning by Wikipedia before submission of articles that if you don't want your articles to be mercilessly edited, then not to submit it.

Please, let us use some common sense (and maturity?) and strive to have some quality in the article! Esskay 21:48, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

On second thoughts, I would like to add here that I don't see that happening here anytime soon as it appears that those behind this article want to keep it as their personal preserve. I tried. But I don't want to waste anymore time fighting youthful obstinacy. Esskay 22:39, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Esskay, You said, " It does not matter whether or not the details are the result of "the review comments associated with it. That doesn't make them sacrosanct. " I am sorry to disagree with this remark. Here, we go by the consensus. The article take its shape with the remarks from several users. The so-called excess details got added during the review time in WP:FA. Since the other editors too agreed to that, I was forced to add the details. Any ways, we are trying to create a sub-article on the Transport section, and then, the excess details will be moved there, thus trimming the section. The details in the demographics also will be moved to a seperate section. Thank you for taking much interest in the improvement of the article. We are not in to any unnecessary fights with other editors... Cheers, -- Rajith Mohan (Talk to me...) :-) 12:04, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Rajith Mohan, let me try again by outlining what I understand is the policy of Wikipedia: Wikipedia actually asks people to be bold and edit. It suggests consensus, but doesn't say it should be the rule. Reverting is allowed, but not repeated reverting. When disputes arises, the parties are encouraged to invite a larger number of editors to air their opinions and seek a consensus from them.

Consensus on general editing may be a good idea, except for the fact that it somewhat conflicts with the exhortation to be bold and edit. From what I see, you don't want anyone to edit here without a consensus for every change and it seems to be the consensus of the same three or four persons who seem to want to want to protect whatever is already there. If you really believe in consenus, why not let a newly edited version, though edited without consensus, stay for a while to see if it would be disputed, instead of arbitrarily resorting to wholesale reversion?

The way I understand it, consensus is not absolutely essential to contribute or make every change. If there are disputes, the way to resolve them is clearly described. Esskay 21:53, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Again, to Rajith Mohan: While I agree with you that the structure of one article does not have to follow that of another, I would again urge you and others behind this article to take a look at some good articles as examples. I was just looking at the article on India. If you wouldn't mind to take a look at it as well, you will notice not only that it is a generally well crafted and it is not crammed with minor details, excessive statistics and excessive description of topics. While you are at it, please also look at the talkpages to see where they discuss about the length of the article; you would find it interesting. Esskay 17:45, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Sub articles and improvement

  • I think that sub articles to Transport should be created, and thus should trim the transport section in the main article. Also, I would like to draw thoughts on the infrastructure details of the city. The infrastructure like power supply, water supply and drainage system got added in the article to satisfy certain comments raised during the FA candidature. I too believe that it is needed in the page, since it reflects the infra details.
  • An user, Taxman, suggested that the details of electricity, water, etc should be moved from the Demographics section to the transport section and the section heading should be renamed as "Transport and Infrastructure".
  • Note that the inclusion of more facets of infrastructure of a city other than transport is not supported in WP:INCITIES. Well, I believe that we should update the project guidlines too.

Any comments on these points? -- Rajith Mohan (Talk to me...) :-) 15:44, 17 November 2006 (UTC)


It is one thing to mention infrastructure details, but it is another to go ad nauseum about it. I repeat here what I said elsewhere about excessive details. Someone sitting somewhere other than Thiruvananthapuram and looking up the article on Thiruvananthapuram is not concerned about how many transformers are in place or how many electric poles there are in that city. Nor are they looking up the article to know exactly which airlines fly there or their flight numbers, not to mention how many traffic lights there are. They just want general information. The information need be comprehensive only in the sense that it covers important aspects, not in the sense that you have to describe every little thing. The venue to discuss the fine details should be elsewhere, not in the pages of an encyclopedia.

As I have suggested elsewhere on this page, it would be a good idea to look at good articles on other cities and learn from it. Esskay 18:31, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Vandalism

Hello, Someone is vandalizing this article. I removed the following paragraph from the future prospects section: Thiruvananthapuram is generally a backward city and there is a political tendency to blame [[[Cochin]] for this. Subscribers of this idea are found to be a minority, but they still try to promote activities like glorifying Thiruvananthapuram whenever possible and show Kochi in poor light. Wikipedia pages are also regularly subjected to such organised manipulations by these groups. Dr Mullet 15:44, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your deletion of the vandalised sections. Infact, this is done by by TrueVersion, who is a sock puppet of blocked user User:Alniko-Talk. -- Rajith Mohan (Talk to me...) :-) 05:36, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Free Software Foundation among Research Institutes in Tvpm

Free Software Foundation among Research Institutes in Tvpm? How come? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Thejasmanoj (talk • contribs) 12:38, 20 February 2007 (UTC).

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../t/h/i/Talk%7EThiruvananthapuram_7b74.html"