Image talk:IndiaMap2.PNG

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] India Map problem

There is no question of debating about the name of any particular city, as we can clearly see in the map, it is about the current political border of sub-continent and that's the reason why borders of states are not shown. This sound very childish and narrow-minded if we start messing up for the name of city. Think in an open panorama it's the map of India and there is no issue about any brainless ego problem. We all know Trivendrum is capital state of Kerala and it has got paramount importance of its own. You try to make a map and show all the important cities, I am sure then you will find yourself in a greater debate. Reason is simple; every one feels his or her city is important.Ashutosh.

Someone needs to uplaod a new India map . Trivandrum , the capital of Kerala state is not shown in the map , which is ridiculous --Altruist 07:37, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

And why is it ridiculous? =Nichalp «Talk»= 07:54, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
A political map is supposed to show all state capitals and not any city --Altruist 08:23, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
There's no hard and fast rule to show all state capitals. It will be very messy. =Nichalp «Talk»= 08:26, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
It should include all state capitals because its a political map and leaving out any capital saying thats gonna make the map messy is again ridiculous(More over a less important city is included unnecessarily)--Altruist 09:33, 25 April 2006 (UTC)


It is not a political map -- there are several cities on the current map that aren't state capitals, but placed there, because they're more prominent, either because of population, strategic importance, etc, e.g. Vishakapatnam in Orissa (Bhubaneshwar is the state capital), Ahmedabad in Gujarat (Gandhinagar is the capital). Also, there are several state capitals not on the list.
To make a comparison with other countries, New York City is usually depicted on maps of the United States, whereas Albany, New York, which is the capital of New York State, is much less likely to be depicted on smaller maps, except on maps of the United States listing all the state capitals. See the CIA World Factbook for an example USA.
Arun 09:39, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
Leave USA Talk about India. Can you tell me one reason why Cochin is more prominent than Trivandrum ? --Altruist 10:41, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
Talk:Kerala should answer your query. =Nichalp «Talk»= 10:47, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Kerala talk finalised Trivandrum as the largest city. Also if you go to any major official website Trivandrum is shown with prominence.I take example of Railways & Airport sites. Please have a look at the official government sites about the same see what railways say FACILITIES OF TOP CITIES http://www.southernrailway.org/city/facility.asp, they consider only Thiruvananthapuram from the state.CHENNAI ,MUMBAI ,PUNE ,NEW NELHI ,HYDERABAD ,KOLKATA ,BANGLORE ,TRIVANDRUM are included .

Also http://www.airportsindia.org.in/aai/airports-frame.htm

Vishakhapattanam is there, but not at the cost of hyderabad. Also do not says excuses like space. We will take this to administrator then --Sathyalal 16:04, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

We will take this to administrator then
Ahem ... in case you haven't noticed, check this. Also, I must agree with Nichalp on this; the map can't possibly show ALL state capitals. --Ragib 16:18, 25 April 2006 (UTC)


To both sides: Admins, bureaucrats, or Jimbo are not here to rule on the content, but to make sure that the discussions are carried out and consensus is reached according to policies and guidelines. Nichalp's input would be valuable, not because he is a bureaucrat, but because as a longstanding editor of the India page, he has a better idea of the reasoning that went into the decisions. So instead of finding a court to appeal to, please give reasons for your arguments. — Ravikiran 18:37, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

If all official sites can show this, what is the problem here? do not say the excuses like space etc. intentions are clear here. How can one use albany NY comparison here. They should use some Boston Washington DC(even though they are not in the same state) comparison--Sathyalal 16:56, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Some of us are working on alternate versions of the India map which may or may not address your concerns. However, please do not make changes to the existing map in the interim. AreJay 17:19, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
Hi Nichalp, I understand that you have admin rights. What I am expecting from you is the justice to put the prominent city there in the map. I have given you lot of examples. If you still need some more clarification, please let me know--Sathyalal 18:33, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
Also it looks funny that some people want to remove the prominent city from the map at any cost.

--Sathyalal 19:26, 25 April 2006 (UTC) yigkj We will take this to administrator then - well, I've blocked S for 8h for WP:3RR, so he has his wish :-) William M. Connolley 21:31, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Dear William, Please understand the problem. All the four southern states are represented with the capitals. Thiruvananthapuram has got more prominence in all the official maps in India and it is the largest city of the state. Some group of people maticulasely planned to remove this place from the maps at many sites in this Wikipedia. Kochi was placed there to create a wrong impression. At least they should have kept both the cities there,if they do not have any hidden intensions. Regarding the largest city.. A city with length from Palarivattom to Thoppumpady and a narrow breadth(because of this it is only 87 sq km) from Marine drive to Vytila

is smaller than

A city with length from Thiruvallom to Sreekjknkjkbkjaryam and breadth from Airport to Vattiyoorkavu.( I used only the approved city limits, not even Technopark, which is a big hub) Go to South railway station in Kochi, go to the police aid-post and ask for a pre-paid auto beyond parivattom. The police man(Not the Autowallah! Offcourse) will say, “Up to Palarivattom you have to pay 34 Rs and rest you have to pay 1 ½ of the charge since it is out of city limits”. Also some body can walk to the city corporation office and enquire the clerk, how many counsel members(which are based on population) they have. Also the world gazette ranks Thiruvananthapuram as 51 and Kochi as 64 in terms of population

Also this issue was settled by the admin in Kerala talk Talk:Kerala --Sathyalal 06:44, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

What about showing both the cities in the map? Cannot we try that option to remove the ambiguities--Sathyalal 11:34, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

The map problem was already discussed at Talk:Kochi, India, Talk:Thiruvananthapuram and Talk:Kerala. As I said before, wikipedia is not a soapbox to advertise Trivandrum (which is clear from the way you have gone about, highlighting all instances of the word "Thiruvananthapuram" in bold in many articles, and from the point of your origin, skyscrapercity.com ). Also, deleting maps in pages, because they do not contain your city is considered as vandalism, and will not be tolerated on wikipedia.
Citing reasons like TVM is the only city from Kerala that is linked in the railway website, and thus demanding it to be included in the map, is simply silly.
And regarding the map, where is Raipur or Bhubaneswar or Gangtok or Shimla or Aizawl or Agartala or the many other sate capitals? Because you see things with only one eye, it seems that only TVM was removed from the map. -- thunderboltz(TALK) 13:42, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

Who is promoting the city is very clear from your page & links. At least I am not promoting any thing in this site.It is none of your botheration if I do it or do not outside.You are just creating a smokescreen by pulling the name of smaller cities and also is driven by hatred.Just shutting the eyes so hard against the facts. I do not know, how do say that I have edited articles in bold. I have only edited some thing in talk pages to show my point.What I say is that official sites(gov,railways,airport etc) give more prominence to Trivandrum than Kochi, then how come this site alone can ignore it. Also I personally dont believe that because of this, any of the cities are going to die. I am not loosing as you are also not loosing. What is getting lost is the relevance of this site,if it cannot put the facts.I am the least worried--Sathyalal 16:29, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

Having the top ten cities (by population) on the map should be more than enough. We'd have to go by authentic Census of India figures not numbers quoted by the Indian Railways, Airports Authority of India and smaller sites. Statistics released by the 2001 census should put an end to the debate. Secondly, if we put just the state capitals, important cities such as Guwahati, Pune and Ahmedabad may not be marked. PS T'puram is marked on the state map. Regards, =Nichalp «Talk»= 19:21, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

Nichalp,Kochi city population is smaller than Trivandrum. Only Kochi urban cogglomate is having more population than Trivandrum city.We have settled this issue in Talk:Kerala. World gazette ranks Kochi as 64th and Trivandrum as 51st.You do not have to go to smaller sites.But can you please show me a single official india political map where Kochi is given with more prominance than Trivandrum. Even if you go by the top 10 cities(by population) logics, both the cities should not be there.Is'nt it? Also why do say that Indian railways and airport authority are wrong. Ofcourse they do not go by the numbers, but facilities. One more intersting observation. How come Srinagar is there? It is interesting guys.I enjoy seeing how people defend their points, not the facts. More experience..

--Sathyalal 01:05, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

The Census Commission of India takes the population count, *not* the Indian Railways or AII. =Nichalp «Talk»= 15:21, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

I have quoted them to show the prominance. Other wise are we following the population in the current one?If so some other cities should be there --Sathyalal 16:15, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Proposition

This is really a pointless debate that has raged on for what seems to be eternity. We have beaten this non-issue to death here. If everyone is in agreement, I will go ahead and make sure only the top 10 metropolitan cities are indicated in the map — it shouldn't take me too long. Please vote below, so we can reach concensus on this issue. Personally, I think this is utterly trivial and any concensus, if reached, in favor of the proposition will result in neither Kochi nor Trivandrum being represented in the map. I know that if I were from Kerala, I would have been happy with the map in its current state because it represented a city from my state, regardless of whether or not I was personally from that city. Please vote below. AreJay 01:33, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

  • Support I will vote for any thing to remove the ambiguity of prominant city in the region. Either put both of them.Or remove both--Sathyalal 01:39, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Support - Sathyalal, the World Gazetteer is used on some articles as a source but i don't think most editors realise that although the website has an academic recommendation from GE Source (a U.K. academic grouping), it is the work of one individual, especially the estimated populations. Do treat the estimates as exactly that - estimates. Green Giant 01:54, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
    • Comment:Green,Thanks for the info.But even the current population(not the estimated) shows Thiruvananthapuram is way ahead thatn Kochi. Going to ground realities.. I can list all the city ward names(these are based on population), their members and party which rules the counsil,if some body is still having doubts.And the number is 86 in TVM and 66 in Kochi--Sathyalal 04:53, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Support I will support any map which either shows either all the state capitals or shows only Top 5 cities. Do not want Wikipedia, a respected referral site to be used by anyone to promote one city or the other Harig 02:02, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Support - this is to having neither Trivandrum nor Kochi, right? —Khoikhoi 02:01, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
    • Comment: vote support to change the map to indicate India's top 10 cities (which would exclude Trivandrum and Kochi) or vote oppose to maintain status quo. AreJay 02:13, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Support Either have all state capitals , or just 10 important cities or include both Kochi and Trivandrum or exclude both .--Altruist 02:56, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Support Show both Thiruvananthapuram and Kochi. Rajeshdxb 04:04, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
    • Comment - that's not what the proposal is about, it's to exclude both. —Khoikhoi 04:14, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
      • Comment - Andhra Pradesh and Maharashtra have two cities each listed - why not have two in Kerala and finish this thing of ? Rajeshdxb 04:32, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
        • That's why AreJay is changing the map so it only shows India's top 10 cities (which would exclude Trivandrum & Kochi) —Khoikhoi 04:35, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
        • Comment: The vote here is to restrict the map to show the ten largest cities in the country, not to add more cities to the map. You cannot "finish this thing off" by adding two from Kerala. That will just open up a hornet's nest — everybody and his brother will want two cities from his state shown in the map. AreJay 04:38, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
          • It is a difficult choice, I'd want Thiruvananthapuram to be listed as well, because it is a state capital as well as an important city; removing the only place in Kerala which is currently shown is not desired too. Is there anybody opposing the addition of Thiruvananthapuram ? As a last ditch effort, I suggest we include both places, failing which we go ahead with the top ten cities plan. Rajeshdxb 04:48, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
      • Comment - Rajeshdxb has a valid point. The current map has smaller cities like Panaji and Srinagar, Chandigurh,it is amazing the see the resistance to add one of the prominent cities and first international airport declared after the four metros of Mumbai, Delhi, Kolkatta and Chennai--Sathyalal 05:18, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Support - If the decision is to show only the top 10 cities, I support it to remove any ambiguity, but I would prefer a solution in which all State Capitals are shown,after all that's what a Political Map is supposed to show. In any map used for international reference, the capital city is always present. Ajaypp
  • Support - If this will put an end to this silly rhubarb, I've raised both my hands in support.. -- thunderboltz(TALK) 05:08, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
      • Comment -Hi Deepu, Take some map with capitals like Panaji, Chandigurh, Thiruvananthapuram, SriNagar. Then remove Thiruvananthapuram and put Kochi. Even go to Thiruvananthapuram site and put the same map and put a label for Thiruvananthapuram as wrapped (so that no body can recognize). This is maligning, and not fixing this is maligning. I personally said, I am open for both Kochi and Thiruvananthapuram together in the map, see the first support column--Sathyalal 05:26, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment — This is ridiculous. Everyone has voted support, but they actually meant to support different things? — Ravikiran 05:36, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Support -Hi Deepu, Its really disappointing to see your comments. Please do understand that nobody wants Kochi out, but its intriguing to see the kind of reaction to the proposal to include Thiruvananthapuram in the map. Why you people are getting paranoic about it?. Putting Thiruvananthapuram is not gonna affect anyone or does it?-Rajkrish 05:43, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Support to remove the controversy of which cities are included and to stop this pointless debate over something that isn't much of an issue. Nobleeagle (Talk) 06:56, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

I do support to include only the State Capitals in the political map of India. If so only TVM can be there in the Political map. Also, someone had referrred about the HQ of NY. This is not like that. WE are not asking anyone to mark separatelt, the cantonment area in Trivandrum, which is the seat of the important Govt. Offices. I think some persons have certain sort of inferiority complex about their city. They are jealous about Trivandrum. Infact, that City is sure to get submerged into the Arabian Sea after 285 years, as a consequence of the global warming. It is only the real estate lobby that tries to sell the city before that by masking the real facts. That city has the most unfertile soil in the state. The drinking water is of the poorest quality. Due to poor garbage removal and drainage facilities, the water bodies and the streets are highly polluted , resulting in "mosquito enriched" nights. Trivandrum is the City in Kerala with the best ecological conditions. It is also the "Ever Green Ciity" of India. With the development of the VZM Port, it is gonna be the Gate Way of the whole of Asia. Also, this city is strategically located ont he inetrnational air and sea routes. Hence I do support to have TVM only in the politicla map of India.

        • Comment: I am from the Northern part of Kerala. In most times, the political map should show the capital city. I dont want Kochi to be removed either. This cannot be compared with the Gandhinagar - Ahmedabad comparison; where Ahmedabad is far more bigger than Gandhinagar. But Trivandrum is not just a political capital. Over 80% of the State's IT export is from Trivandrum. The International Airport operates flights to many foreign destinations. Around 25 R&D institutions are there in the capital city. Establishments such as Regional Cancer Centre, (RCC), Vikram Sarabhai Space Centre (VSSC), Tumba Equitorial Rocket Launching Station (TERLS), ER$DCI, C-DAC, etc are also operating in the capital of Kerala. So the comparison with the omission of other state capitals cannot be seen par with the ommission of Trivandrum. Kochi also should not be omitted. Because Kochi is the main hub of export-import trading. The Stock Market business is more concentrated here. I couldnt understand why people from Kochi are insisting that their state capital should not be included in the map. I cannot support for the exclusion of both the cities to include only the first 10 cities of India. Reason : The importance of a city cannot be measured only in terms of population or area only. Other things such as facilities (educational, health care, etc) life style, cosmopolitan nature, strategic importance, international airports, global connectivity etc are the key factors which should sum up towards determining the importance of a city. In this case, cities such as Surat or Kanpur (falling in the top 10) is not more important to be marked than Trivandrum or Kochi. So we shall not go for the omission of these cities. Better include both. Or atleast include our State Capital.-Dikkoos 05:55, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

What else can we do if people are adamant to remove the state capital at any cost?

Finally cities with major establishment like

"Southern Air Command, Indian space research organizations like VSSC,ISRO, C-DAC, First Technology park, the proposed and only one Aero space Command and Air India Hungar"(Thiruvananthapuram) And "Southern Naval Command, Only one Green Field Airport in India, Seaport"(Kochi)will not be there.

--Sathyalal 06:36, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

  • Delete everything and be done with it. What a waste of time. Tintin (talk) 07:36, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment Actually who is having an objection to Thiruvananthapuram having a place on the map ? The argument that everyone will start demanding a place in the map , and therefore it is not possible for Thiruvananthapuram to be given a place is not very convincing. I do not think that any of the people from T. or those who support havinǐg T. on the map is asking for Cochin to be removed. If there are other cities who deserve to be on the map, then they should be put too. This reminds me of the nuclear debate; having an agreement with India is not possible because other nations too will demand it. Kind of ignoring the reality ? Rajeshdxb 10:32, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
No way. Someone mentioned above that Kochi is the 64th largest city in India. I demand that all the other 63 be listed. I also want all cities which are longer than the distance between Thiruvallom and Sreekaryam to be added. And in what way are Imphal, Kohima, Shillong and Gangtok inferior to Trivandrum ? Tintin (talk) 10:42, 27 April 2006 (UTC)


Tintin - I am not going into the argument of the largest city or distance between two points. This issue needs to be resolved. As long as no one is insisting that Cochin be removed, what is the whole issue about ? If the people of T. feel that they should be represented, why not give a weight to their consideration ? This is the point that I am puzzled about. It is not about incorrect facts, or false data, but just an additional city being included in the map cud to its prominence. If you feel other cities which meet your criterion should be included, please post it under a new thread, and maybe it would be considered on its merits. Rajeshdxb 10:52, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

Tintin, consider the current map, cities like Panaji, Chandigurh, Srinagar, Kochi, Patna etc are there? Are they superior to the cities you mentioned?--Sathyalal 12:33, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

My comments were intended as a joke, so don't take it too seriously. What you said is true in this particular case but we may have set a precedence which can come back to trouble us again. Tintin (talk) 12:36, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
Yes, of course. Wait till some Punekars notice that Pune is not listed even though it is in the top 10 cities in India. Blood will flow on the Mumbai-Pune expressway. — Ravikiran 12:45, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
True, so the the criteria for selection of places to be put on the map should be unambiguous. For example, the state capitals. These not not going to change in any forseeable period of time, and the capital cities are what is represented on all political maps of the world. In the case of biggest cities, further questions may arise such as - is it biggest in the sense of population, area, urban agglomeration etc. Is not blood likely to flow then ? Rajeshdxb 13:21, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment There is no need of such a map, that shows all the capitals or prominent cities with the sub section politics. India's political map is given beneath, which shows all the States and Union territories. That is a better one too. It is suggested to include the picture of Indian Parliament or something relevant to Indian politics with the subsection. (Off topic- There are more than 500 stubs related to Kerala in this wiki which are almost ignored. I wonder why those who take part in this discussion (and many are only interested in the discussion on Thiruvananthapuram and Kochi!) cannot utilize their time to complete those articles.) Manjithkaini (talk)13:41, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

This is a useless debate and certainly a waste of everybody's time. Sathyalal, if you can can draw a professional map... (mind you it should be svg filetype, and as good as this one) I would be glad to support just the top 10 cities as per the 2001 census figures. Regards, =Nichalp «Talk»= 15:19, 27 April 2006 (UTC) This is a useless debate and certainly a waste of everybody's time. Sathyalal, if you can can draw a professional map... (mind you it should be svg filetype, and as good as this one) I would be glad to support just the top 10 cities as per the 2001 census figures. Regards, =Nichalp «Talk»= 15:19, 27 April 2006 (UTC) Nichap,AreJay has already mentioned (see the start of this proposition)that he can easily put that change.If required I am ready to help. --Sathyalal 16:33, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

  • Support A political map should show all state capitals, so Trivandrum should be included.Chandrurajan 19:53, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
For the love of God, what is happening here? The vote is to either include the top 10 cities or to maintain status quo, period. I've said that three times already! People seem to be voting support for their own imaginative consensus threads. AreJay 20:03, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
What you are seeing is, I think, the desire of the majority of the people here, and that is to include Thiruvananthapuram on the map. There should have been a third choice, I believe. Rajeshdxb 20:38, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
When the majority of people voting here appear to have a combined total of less than 30 contributions (or in that neighborhood) to Wikipedia with most of the said contributions relating in some way to the Trivandrum-Kochi issue, it raises a lot of questions on whether or not there is an active lobbying attempt on the part of this so-called majority. We are trying to close out this issue, not drag on with it. There seems to be no logical reason why Trivandrum should be included in the map apart from the fact that many people voting here apparently want it that way. Certainly from a population standpoint there are atleast 50 Indian cities that would rank over Trivandrum. My offer therefore was to erase cities from the map that would not rank in the top 10 most populous cities. At this point I do not have the time to add every Indian city that ranks 1 through 50. Keep in mind also that the outcome of this dicussion might at best result in the creation of a makeshift map, which will get replaced once the SVG map comes out. AreJay 21:12, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
OK, I rest my case. I take it that the final decision is to have a map of India with the top 10 cities. Rajeshdxb 21:30, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
I also, Please go with top 10 cities to remove ambiguities AreJay, Now we all agree that there are ambiguities in the current map. Are they capitals? No. Are they top cities based on population? No. Are they most prominent ones as in the official sites? No. Are they capitals or top 10? No. So lot of ambiguities. So how can you call the demand for removing the ambiguities as lobbying? At least introduce a common standard--Sathyalal 01:30, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

Comment Why not mention all state names marking national capital only???Sreeramiyer 07:19, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

What on Earth is this, this isn't even that controversial and we're making a complete mess out of it. This is not what South Asian editors are known for, now let's get organized. Nobleeagle (Talk) 08:13, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Oppose - Simply adding top 10 cities will leave blanks in many parts of the map like eastern India. That is just plain silly and hardly representative of India. I am sorry but why are we even wasting our time over this? This is unacceptable. Might as well not have a map then. This is a rather crude solution to the current issues!! I will fight this tooth and nail. --Blacksun 06:57, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

"Political map should indicate the state capitals as well as the National Capital. There should be no argument regarding that." —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Karunakaranashok (talk • contribs).

Ummmm...well there is. He just said "will leave blanks in many parts of the map like eastern India". That's a pretty valid argument. —Khoikhoi 07:18, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Oppose - Agree with Blacksun here. Top 10 cities is not the solution. State capitals is not the solution too since that will clutter the map. - Ganeshk (talk) 07:44, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
Related FYI, "Organized campain to remove Thiruvananthapuram from India related sites" on Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents page. Not sure if Ravikiran or SwiftRakesh know about this. - Ganeshk (talk) 07:50, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment: The whole vote is becoming a farce as we have a sudden influx of one-hit "editors", or some editors with surprising short edit histories (Chandrurajan (talk · contribs), Dikkoos (talk · contribs), Sreeramiyer (talk · contribs), Karunakaranashok (talk · contribs)), which suggests attempts of stacking "votes". Besides, the issue is amazingly worthless to continue the "vote" and discussion on it. The status quo seems fine. --Ragib 07:59, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
I think support is the consensus regardless of whether those editors should be counted or not. So how about we close this vote. Nobleeagle (Talk) 08:37, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

Comment: Ragib can you please explain how you can term “attempts of stacking "votes" “, when the comment was an intent to provide equal and fair representation of the whole country. There was no vote for or against but suggesion to have names of all the states marking National Capital.Sreeramiyer 09:14, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

  • Support per User:Nobleeagle - Aksi_great (talk) 12:11, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

Comment: Hi All, It is a good idea to remove the current ambiguities by adding top 10 cities based on population.But I had one interesting observation.If we do the same thing with US map, then Washington DC wont be there! People adamant to remove state capitals, please note this point--Sathyalal 03:43, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] SVG map

Image:India-svg-test-2.svg

Draft 1 ready: Please comment here: Image talk:India-svg-test-2.svg. =Nichalp «Talk»= 16:34, 29 April 2006 (UTC) Hi Nichalp, it looks good--Sathyalal 14:58, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

Hi Nichalp, Cannot we update map to the site?--Sathyalal 05:50, 21 May 2006 (UTC)