Talk:Bangalore

Regarding the Neutrality tag in Bangalore article

There are many places in the Bangalore article's lead, infobox and a few other sections such as Demographics, etc. where the statements are biased and aren't adhering to WP:NPOV. The statements seem to have a promotional marketing tone and are biased rather than neutral/Encyclopedic. Also, please note that any article's Lead section should be an unreferenced summary of referenced statements. Some of the Neutrality issues are

1. Lead section

• a. "Its multi-ethnic multi-religious and cosmopolitan character" - This is promotional and editorially biased.
• b. " reflected by its more than 1000 Hindu temples, 400 mosques, 100 churches, 40 Jain Basadis, three Sikh gurdwaras, two Buddhist viharas and one Parsi fire temple located in an area of 741 km² of the metropolis" - No citation is found for this statement. The content also isn't found in the body.
• c. "A demographically diverse city" - The demographics section explains this. Should the same thing get promoted again after 1.a?
• d. "Bengaluru has one of the most highly educated workforces in the world" - Is this statement even necessary? It's advertising and highly biased, and adding more citations won't make the statement neutral.
• e. "Bangalore has the highest elevation among India's major cities" - This is a vague statement. What is the meaning of 'major city'? There are state capitals (major cities) such as Shimla, Gangtok, Kohima, etc. that have a much higher elevation than Bangalore. The mentioned citation is not related to this statement. Is this comparative statement needed in the lead?

2. Infobox

• a. "Garden city" - This seems rather outdated, although old citations exist.
• b. Does Karnataka have an official flag? What is the reason for its inclusion in this article? Please note that this trend could lead to the addition of the state flag in other Karnataka-related articles too. As far as I know, no state in India is supposed to have its own official flag.

3. Demographics

• a. "Telugu Speaking Morasu Vokkaligas are the native people of Bangalore" - The mentioned book citation is not at all related to this statement. In fact, this statement or claim isn't found anywhere in the Web or mentioned anywhere else!

This is just a sample, and I haven't gone through the article in detail. But the article does not adhere to Neutral point of view, just by looking at some statements itself.

Cheers,
Aviator423 (talk) 11:34, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

Does Karnataka have an official flag? What is the reason for its inclusion in this article? Please note that this trend could lead to the addition of the state flag in other Karnataka-related articles too. As far as I know, no state in India is supposed to have its own official flag

Dear Aviator

Yes, Karnataka does have a State Flag. It had been part of independence struggle, much before British allotted dominion status to India, hunger common wealth.

It is the yellow & red horizontal bars in a flag.

Every state in India, is allowed to have a flag.

Because, other states didn't have one, doesn't mean what exists is wrong.

I'll be happy to provide more info. Mallikarjunasj (talk) 11:44, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

Remove Unofficial Stats

Please remove the unofficial "Metro GDP/PPP" numbers from the Infobox and from the main article both in lead/economy section. Three different sources given are unofficial; none of them from Govt of India or State Govts source. So please remove those figures.--103.218.236.58 (talk) 04:42, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: all of the sources given are reliable sources. Don Spencer^{talk-to-me⛅} 19:54, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

Bangalore must be redirection page Bengaluru must be main page

Bangalore must be redirection page Bengaluru must be main page.

Mumbai Kolkata Gurugram are all working in the same manner.

Can English Wiki Adkins kindly take notice of this request & set this right?

Appreciating the help in this regard.

Mallikarjunasj (talk) 11:40, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

Mallikarjunasj please see the ten requested move discussions in the box at the top of this page - all refused - Arjayay (talk) 11:43, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

Where to see move discussion sir

Mallikarjunasj (talk) 12:01, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

Mallikarjunasj - as I clearly said, they are listed "in the box at the top of this page" - Arjayay (talk) 12:05, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 24 August 2020

124.123.81.61 (talk) 15:26, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: as you have not requested a change.
Please request your change in the form "Please replace XXX with YYY" or "Please add ZZZ between PPP and QQQ".
Please do not suggest that the article is renamed to Bengaluru, as this has been discussed at length 11 times before - see the list at the top of the page. - Arjayay (talk) 15:41, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

Requested move 24 August 2020

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: No consensus. Not enough evidence to support move according to WP:COMMONNAME (non-admin closure) Vpab15 (talk) 11:46, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

---

Bangalore → Bengaluru – It was almost three years since the last RM was happen and now as time changes, more source using Bengaluru instead Bangalore which is former name of the city. Because this RM seems as continuation of moving from Bangalore riots to Bangalore violence which some users suggest move it to Bengaluru, IMO, Bangaluru should be the title of the article per WP:COMMONNAME which at the time many users oppose it because some reasons. 110.137.186.235 (talk) 23:27, 24 August 2020 (UTC)—Relisting. power~enwiki (π, ν) 23:26, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

• Oppose per WP:COMMONNAME based on Google Ngrams.[1] English language usage is shifting, but Bangalore is still the more common name in English sources based on the Google Ngrams. Rreagan007 (talk) 00:24, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
• Support per nom.--Ortizesp (talk) 03:38, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose per WP:COMMONNAME as shown by User:Rreagan007's link - Arjayay (talk) 07:24, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose per nom. BilCat (talk) 07:31, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
  • @BilCat:, the nom is in support of the move, so "oppose per nom" doesn't mean anything. Did you make a typo? TryKid ^{[dubious – discuss]} 07:45, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
    • No, I didn't make a typo. Thanks for checking. BilCat (talk) 07:51, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
• Very strong support: Per WP:COMMONNAME of course. As shown by recent usage, the city is commonly known as Bengaluru in all sources. Ngram tracks historical usage of a term, and isn't very useful for the application for WP:COMMONNAME. Consider the Ngram of Kolkata vs Calcutta. If we go by Rreagan007 argument, Calcutta should be the common name of this city in Bengal, but of course it isn't: the common name is Kolkata, saying otherwise would be ridiculous. Therefore, the Ngram based argument is ridiculous and shouldn't be taken into account when closing this. Pinging Arjayay who also supported on misleading Ngram argument. Regards, TryKid ^{[dubious – discuss]} 07:45, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
• Strong support it is now known as Bengaluru in all sources in India regarding the coverage of August 12 riots. The arguments that they oppose based on Google Ngram viewers is very poor and false. If you take Mumbai vs Bombay, i believe the title will known as Bombay, same as Kolkata-Calcutta. 182.1.25.238 (talk) 09:28, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
• Support Among many other news sources, there seems to have been a shift in the major indian news sources: The Hindu, TOI, IE, etc. Bengaluru is now the common term/name. NGRAM can throw up odd results on occasion and it's a bit of an unrefined catch-all, so i'm not relying on that. It's evident by the lack of people saying 'it's the official name' that we've reached a stage, 14 years on, that the term stands for itself as the WP:COMMONNAME. Usage in The Hindu,example, Times of India, example,Indian Express, Hindustan Times and so on. There's still some vestigial usage in URL names, and the odd website markup, but the editorial policy for major indian papers is that Bengaluru is correct. I agree with the WP:TITLEVAR points below, we should be looking at Indian sources, and from those it's clear that Bengaluru is common name. Zindor (talk) 14:51, 30 August 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose - Even limiting to 2020, my searches of news sources find more results for the current title. If the new name isn't common in this kind of generous check, then it clearly isn't common when you consider "slower" sources like books or papers. -- Netoholic @ 21:28, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
  • @Netoholic: have you taken into account the names of organisations in your search? For example, the highest court of Maharashtra is still known as the Bombay High Court despite the common name of the city being Mumbai. Similarly, there's a newspaper called the "Bangalore Mirror", and even that newspaper uses "Bengaluru" to refer to the city. The Hindu has a Bengaluru edition, it's official name has the word "Bangalore" in it and yet it too uses "Bengaluru" only to refer to the city. Go ahead, do a search for "Bangalore site:thehindu.com" and see how many times you spot "Bangalore" outside organisation names. There will surely be some instances, but here too Bengaluru is certainly the more common name. Repeat this with any other website, taking into account the names of organisations formed before the renaming of the city and you'll find that Bengaluru is indeed the common name. Regards, TryKid ^{[dubious – discuss]} 21:49, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
    • That's pretty hard to do, but I also think that if organizations are slow to adopt this new name, that is evidence against this move as well. -- Netoholic @ 22:09, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
      • Organisations aren't "slow to adopt". They just don't usually change their names once they settle on one. There's Calcutta Cup, Calcutta University, Calcutta High Court, Calcutta National Medical College, Calcutta Tramways Company and many more. They haven't changed their name since the last 19 years of the new Kolkata name, and likely never will. But all this doesn't have any effect on the fact that Kolkata is the common name. Regards, TryKid ^{[dubious – discuss]} 22:42, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
        • Even Bombay High Court, Madras High Court and Calcutta High Court still use the cities colonial name despite their changes name to Mumbai, Kolkata, and Chennai many years ago. IMO, naming changes for the city doesn't necessary mean a rename for all institutions that use former city name that use in British colonial rule. India's most prestigious and largest stock exchange, Bombay Stock Exchange still use former city name, and doesn't change their name to Mumbai Stock Exchange until now even after their city was renamed 25 years ago. 180.245.102.250 (talk) 23:18, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

180.245.102.250 you are another new editor from Palembang, what is your opinion on all the new Indonesia IP editors on this and the Ford RM? In ictu oculi (talk) 08:12, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

• Oppose. Nothing has changed. Still the common name. -- Necrothesp (talk) 11:58, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
• Strong oppose. The common name hasn't yet changed, and we can't project future use. (Unlike the Kiev/Kyiv situation, I don't think we need a moratorium, as Kiev's moratorium was only re-instituted because of abuse of the RM process.) O.N.R. ^(talk) 02:56, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

Comment for all opposers, all of those arguments are false, notably Old Naval Rooftops which places very weak personal argument which will be discouraged. In the past years, Bengaluru become increasly more common in many news organization, mainly from India itself. Please see The New Indian Express, TOI, Deccan Herald sources which increases use "Bengaluru" in their news articles. If anyone sticks oppose argument with "Common name" reason, Kolkata should be renamed to Calcutta, Mumbai become Bombay or Chennai become Madras and so on. 110.137.166.230 (talk) 06:42, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

Don't WP:BLUDGEON the process, and WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. BilCat (talk) 07:36, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

It's not a OTHERSTUFF argument, it's a precedent argument. The IP has shown proof that Bengaluru is the common name, while the opposers have only shown a faulty Ngram and "because I say so". And while I WP:AGF, I would note that some Britishers who love their queen seem to still be stuck in colonial era when Britain dictated what the names of Indian cities were. India has 1 billion people while Britain has 60 million? Karnataka alone has roughly equivalent population to Britain. All Kannada English newspapers and TV channels use the "Bengaluru" term. Bengaluru is much more common, both source wise and population wise. Regards, TryKid ^{[dubious – discuss]} 08:35, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

Totally irrelevant to Wikipedia's naming policies. BilCat (talk) 09:04, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

• Oppose No evidence has been presented that the usage of Bengaluru has outdone the usage of Bangalore in the English-language sources. Hence Bangalore is still stands as common name. -- Ab207 (talk) 14:13, 27 August 2020 (UTC)
• Comment WP:ENGVAR and WP:TITLEVAR would point to what is the common name in Indian English and what sources in the country use as key just as if a place in, say, Canada was renamed we would look to Canadian sources. A glance at the list at Talk:2020 Bangalore riots#Requested move 12 August 2020 (to take a snapshot of current usage) shows most Indian news sources calling the city Bengaluru and use of Bangalore primarily in foreign sources. Annoyingly Google Ngrams does not offer an option for Indian English. Timrollpickering (talk) 16:49, 27 August 2020 (UTC)
• Comment Seems to me that the "move" supporters are doing a very poor job of presenting their case. Ideally, we need to see actual evidence rather than emotional arguments. Such evidence, if it exists, should not be hard to find. A quick check, for example, at The New York Times, shows a distinct shift to Bengaluru from Bangalore over the last few years (cf. [2], [3], [4], [5])). Perhaps a proper examination of sources from English speaking countries (other than India) would show whether you have a strong case or not? --RegentsPark (comment) 00:35, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

I've added links to my poor job above. Titlevar would limit the relevance of a shift in U.S paper usage, as much as i respect the NYT as a publication Zindor (talk) 14:51, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

@Zindor:. I think you've misunderstood my point. The New York Times is using Benagluru. A quick look at The Guardian and the Washington Post also shows that they use Bengaluru rather than Bangalore in recent articles. While I don't know what Indian sources use, I expect that they largely, if not uniformly, use Bengaluru. If you broaden your evidence internationally, you would have a stronger case. Note also that the application of WP:TITLEVAR to India is unclear since India is not an English speaking country and a case can be made that WP:CN trumps WP:TITLEVAR. You will need lots of evidence because the oppose !votes outnumber the support ones and, your !vote excepted, the support ones do not present much in terms of evidence. Keep in mind that the status quo is usually the preferred option. --RegentsPark (comment) 15:25, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

I understood your point and appreciate the research. India has 22 scheduled languages, and it would be unreasonable to expect this en-wiki discussion to delve into the minutae of the usage in those. India has a wealth of significant English-language news sources, which are regularly cited on India-related articles, and Indian English is a recognised variant both on-wiki and off. We have alternative wikis for Hindi and Gujariti etc, so i do think there is a very strong case for focusing on WP:TITLEVAR here. As a straw poll, yes oppose is ahead, otherwise the !votes don't hold much water. There is a focus mainly on Google statistics, which i've seen to be erroneous in the past (will try and find a link), and editors have demonstrated in this discussion the unreliability of the trend data. Zindor (talk) 16:10, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

As I said just below, all I'm seeing presented here is anecdotal evidence of Bengaluru's prominence over Bangalore. Yes, it's obviously trending that way, but as far as I can tell, it isn't there yet. BilCat (talk) 21:28, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

• Support per the TITLEVAR policy—it seems clear that Indian English primarily uses "Bengaluru" these days. (Ngrams is not an appropriate source for assessing primary spelling in Indian English.) Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 02:06, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Honestly, all I've seen presented is anecdotal evidence of some Indian English language sources using Bengaluru, but nothing to show that it's a majority there yet. (And as I understand TITLEVAR, it has to be in all of India, not just Kannada.) BilCat (talk) 06:06, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose - Not even close in terms of WP:COMMONNAME. Impru20^talk 13:00, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
  • From that policy: "For cases where usage differs among English-speaking countries, see also National varieties of English, below." That's WP:TITLEVAR, which contradicts this argument. Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 01:34, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
    • If India were really "English-speaking country", would they have even wanted to change the name to a Kannada word? The problem is that India wants to be an English-speaking country without using English words. :) BilCat (talk) 01:57, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
      • Your take is so bad that I can barely come up with a response to it. Does pointing to Lists of English words by country or language of origin suffice? Let's avoid racist statements, please. Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 04:40, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
        • How is that a racist comment??? It's irony, sheesh! BilCat (talk) 04:51, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
          • Ah, apologies, I read the statement seriously. Sarcasm and such doesn't always come off in text. :-) I've struck my comment. Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 05:51, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
            • Thanks, and I appreciate the strike out. I'll try to be more careful in the future, as some humor just doesn't work on Wikipedia. BilCat (talk) 05:59, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
    • Can't see how TITLEVAR applies when even in India, "Bangalore" gets 94% of Google search results compared to 6% for "Bengaluru". This is unlike Mumbai/Bombay, which is the most comparable case, in which the trend is exactly the opposite. COMMONNAME establishes that Wikipedia generally prefers the name that is most commonly used (as determined by its prevalence in a significant majority of independent, reliable English-language sources). In this case, "Bangalore" is by far the most commonly used term in English-language sources, even within India, thus TITLEVAR doesn't apply unless anyone is attempting to hint that it overrides COMMONNAME, which it doesn't. Impru20^talk 15:44, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

Clearly the results are either erroneous or not taking important variables into account. Bangalore usage is about 80% lower than 2004, yet Bengaluru has apparently been almost flatlining for 16 years? Come on. Zindor (talk) 16:10, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

They would be erroneous if, for some reason, the number of searches for one term had to be inversely proportional to the searches for the other. But they don't. The overall decrease means that the popularity of the place is not as high in 2020 as it was in 2004, that's all. The exact same is true for Ngram as well. Impru20^talk 23:28, 30 August 2020 (UTC

Yes a drop in popularity would push the trend that way, it could also be influenced by other factors. A lack of data on a proportional increase, inverse or not, in Bengaluru could involve people getting their information about Bengaluru from native apps instead of Googling it, and even a shift to other search engines such as Bing and Duckduckgo. The book NGRAM could be detailing a downward trend in book authorship, because of an upward trend in the internet publishing medium, which would make the increase in book-use of Bengaluru even more significant than it looks on the graph. The NGRAM also doesn't distinguish between Bangalore as part of a multi-word proper name (such as Bangalore Mirror), or Bangalore as the name for the city. It encompasses all English uses, not just Indian-published books. The source is raw data, it hasn't been 'textured' by statisticians who could explain the data and give us the full-picture. NGRAM interpretation involves original research, and as such is unreliable. Zindor (talk) 17:55, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

Actually, India is one of the top countries in the world when it comes to use of Google over other engines, so the argument doesn't sustain itself ([6] [7] [8]). Impru20^talk 21:29, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

• All TITLEVAR does is limit the scope of COMMONNAME to the home country involved, in this case India. It still has to be the common name within India as a whole, and I've yet to see conclusive evidence that it is now. BilCat (talk) 18:57, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

*Support per ENGVAR and TITLEVAR policy. It seems that nearly all news organization in India and South Asia in general, even there a one media named "Bangalore Mirror" uses "Bengaluru" in modern days, for example Geo TV (Pakistan), Daily Express (Sri Lanka), etc. Non-South Asian media like New York Times and Reuters use modern day name Bengaluru at least since 2010s. The problem is majority of international media are reluctant to use modern name and they still called it in former colonial names instead because it was easy to spell and many users tend to use non-South Asian sources which majority of them still called it as Bangalore until now to write new information about the city with new citations. Arguments about Bangalore is common name isn't very clear, as they tend to use non-Indian sources for referencing. 36.77.93.87 (talk) 13:20, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

• • Side question: why are Indonesian IPs so interested in this? Is Bengaluru suddenly famous in Indonesia? Are you and the previous IP who supported the same person? Both geolocate to different cities in Indonesia and on different networks but it's still possible that both are same. Regards, TryKid ^{[dubious – discuss]} 13:27, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
    • One option is WP:CANVASSING. Not an accusation, but merely a option for when IPs show up. Of course, they may just be interested encyclopedians who happen to live in Indonesia, which has a very large population btw. That's the AGF answer. BilCat (talk) 21:13, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

above Palembang, Indonesia IP was blocked for socking In ictu oculi (talk) 14:19, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

• Agree per nom. Manasbose (talk) 11:00, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
• Very Strong Support the new name is officially used in all the Government of Karnataka and Government of India documents. Most of the recent sources refer it as 'Bengaluru' and in future the use will definitely the same. Manthara^talk 14:38, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

  @Manthara: Kindly dont use templates for normal comments. —usernamekiran (talk) 22:59, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

• Support when institutions are considered Bangalore is more common, but in references to the city itself it seems that Bengaluru has caught up to Bangalore. Sources that use Bangalore (like the BBC) tend to be non-Indian. power~enwiki (π, ν) 05:49, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose - "Bangalore" is the common name in English. --IWI (talk) 01:36, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

But situation is more complex in India where 1.3 billion people tell their common name of the city is "Bengaluru" in Indian English which is the official English language variant of the country. 114.125.231.114 (talk) 21:03, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

• Oppose. No evidence that the name has changed in English sources. The appeals above to the official name have as much validity as this one and no more. Andrewa (talk) 10:30, 1 September 2020 (UTC)
• Note: I show up as the relister for fixing the relisting template, which was added by Usernamekiran (talk · contribs). This is procedural, and isn't a conflict with my vote here. power~enwiki (π, ν) 23:28, 1 September 2020 (UTC)
• Weak Support because it seems that there are many disagreements regarding what sources being used to refer the city whether it is Bangalore or Bengaluru. In India, the city now refers officially as Bengaluru, this spelling was officially adopted by the government in 2006 and all news media organization in India and South Asia refers to the current name although there are minority that still use the former spelling that was invented by British Empire that rule India which known as British Raj. On the other hand, majority of non-Indian sources, for example BBC, which is owned by the British government who rules India at the time, still use Bangalore as the common name even it now becomes archaic in its former colony. This stance particularly used by other foreign media until now (with exception of NYT, The Guardian and Reuters that use Bengaluru despite still be slow for adapted), this is like a debate whether the Ukrainian capital is Kiev or Kyiv which is the correct title in Wikipedia (see Talk:Kiev). 180.242.45.27 (talk) 13:14, 2 September 2020 (UTC)
• Neutral per BBC https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-india-53747331 but Guardian https://www.theguardian.com/business-to-business/2018/jul/03/bengaluru-whats-next-for-indias-tech-capital In ictu oculi (talk) 13:56, 2 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Although we need to remember that the Guardian is painfully politically correct and would probably use any name preferred by a non-Western European government in preference to its common name in the UK. I'm not sure it's a good source for determining a common name. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:12, 2 September 2020 (UTC)
• Agree most foreign media sources are being slow for adopting new spelling of the city despite Indian government changes name of the city from Bangalore to Bengaluru in 2006. For most foreign visitors that visit India at once a lifetime, They think this city as "Bangalore", not "Bengaluru" as they refer it as Common name, same as foreign media sources that use former spelling at the time. In India, their citizens now calling their third or fourth largest city as "Bengaluru" even for English-language media and countries where consulate general is located in the city. For me, the situation in India is more complex regarding what they city being call for whether they follow their country source, which all of them use Bengaluru, or foreign news media which mostly of them used "Bangalore". 114.125.231.234 (talk) 20:56, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

first edit from another Indonesia IP, this one South Sumatra, Palembang again, same Internet cafe as the others? In ictu oculi (talk) 08:09, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

---

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Rationale

@Vpab15: Given the depth of the !vote rationales in this RM, would you be able to expand your rationale regarding this close? I note that you've assessed the evidence in the !votes "according to WP:COMMONAME"; did that take into account WP:TITLEVAR that would limit the common-name evidence to only Indian sources or was that discounted? Thanks Zindor (talk) 02:22, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

WP:COMMONNAME says we should use the most common name in English sources globally, not only in one country. I don't think WP:TITLEVAR applies in a case when most English sources use a name that contradicts the local name, as happens with Bangalore. Vpab15 (talk) 10:51, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for clarifying this. Zindor (talk) 12:28, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 26 August 2020

Population of Bangalore needs to be updated from 11 million to above 12.34 million. Rupaiya One founder (talk) 10:18, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: Please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Interstellarity (talk) 10:47, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 22 September 2020

change the photo caption "The Bangalore torpedo was invented in Bangalore in 1922." to "The Bangalore torpedo was invented in Bangalore in 1912." to match the main article text and the date given here: https://www.iwm.org.uk/collections/item/object/30023786 Tomdavies (talk) 07:18, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

 Done → Timbaaa _talk 07:33, 22 September 2020 (UTC)