Is it really necessary to split Bombay in 30+ districts? We don't need to follow adminstrative boundaries here: to my clueless eye it'd appear that a single article for the Central and Western Suburbs each would be plenty for now. Jpatokal 10:34, 6 Oct 2005 (EDT)
37 districts! I did go overboard. Give me a week and I will organize it better. --Ravikiran 05:08, 8 Oct 2005 (EDT)
I've never had to take the shuttle between the international and domestic airports. I'd appreciate if someone elaborates on the free (in theory) part. Do folks have to bribe someone to get on to the shuttle? --Ravikiran 01:36, 2 Nov 2005 (EST)
I used it on 3 Feb 2011 to go from Domestic to International. No bribes, just queue for security, baggage xray (again) and get on the air conditioned modern coach. It is VERY SLOW. Goes round the inside of the airport then leaves it to drop you at the international departures entrance with everyone else. Only needed to tip the guy taking the bags off. - Waring 3. 10:15, 5 Feb 2011 (UTC)
I feel that it is definately time to change the names of the Indian cities to their official titles. So, unless there is any strong dissent, I propose changing Calcutta to Kolkata, Madras to Chennai, and Bombay to Mumbai with, of course, redirects from the old and now pretty much obsolete names. Personally, I think that the names used on Wikitravel should always be those used by the city itself. Unlike written guides where people may look for a familiar title, and miss a new unfamiliar one, Wikitravel has the advantage of redirect. So, in this way, the 'traveler first' policy is still protected, while at the same time its saves the almost impossible task of having to continuously assess which name is in most common useage - but that is a matter for a different debate. At the moment, I just want to propose changing the names of the cities mentioned above. Thanks WindHorse 10:07, 16 October 2006 (EDT)
I notice that the title of the Madras article has already been changed to ChennaiWindHorse 21:09, 16 October 2006 (EDT)
I don't mind, but phoreners should weigh in. The traveller comes first. Also, in Talk:Chennai, there is a Google news test that was carried out. If we use that precedent, Mumbai emerges as the clear winner. But someone can repeat the test and post the results here, if he/she has the time. I do not till later in the day. — Ravikiran 05:57, 17 October 2006 (EDT)
It's official. Mumbai is the most common name for that city on the Ulhas River. Google figures show that Bombay has 28,300,000 sites compared to Mumbai's 47,300,000. WindHorse 10:02, 18 October 2006 (EDT)
I've rolled back the change you made. First, this has been one of the most contentious naming issues on Wikitravel, and it really needs more buy-in before making a change. Second, it's much better to rename an article with a long history than to cut-and-paste. When you cut-and-paste, you lose the article history, and thus all the credits for the people who've worked on it.
I'll try to dig up the stats on Mumbai/Bombay. Google search figures are good, but they're skewed towards official names as most statistical documents, etc., will use the official name. --Evan 10:21, 18 October 2006 (EDT)
FWIW, I'll throw in my vote with changing the name to Mumbai. And based on a cursory inspection of recent guidebooks to India on Monday, so do all of Footprints, Rough Guide and LP. Jpatokal 10:27, 18 October 2006 (EDT)
Those are good data points. Here's an analysis of recent news stories on Google News that contain the string "Bombay" or "Mumbai", broken down by country, and with a total (including non-English news sources, by the way). This kind of search tends to favor traditional names, since words like "Bombay" filter into the language in other uses, like "Bombay Sapphire gin" or "Salaam Bombay". Non-English searches tend to favor official names. In any event, here's the data I got:
Google news stats
My rough analysis is that "Bombay" is still in widespread use in North America, where its ratio of use w/r/t Mumbai is about 1:2 or 1:3. (That'd jibe with my personal experience, too.) Elsewhere, the name is much less common, being used about 1:5 or even 1:10 times. Either way, Mumbai is clearly much more commonly used in current media.
I think all the data points are pointing towards Mumbai. Other guidebooks use it, and it seems that it's used more in the media, too. It's the official name. Probably the only counter-indicator I see is the Getty Thesaurus, which gives "Mumbai" as the preferred name and "Bombay" as the "English preferred" name. But I think this is just going to be a case where we go against the TGN.
Let's give this 24 hours to percolate, then move it if there's no major objection. --Evan 11:02, 18 October 2006 (EDT)
OK, let's see what the consensus is tomorrow, and I'll be happy to do the necessary. Thanks, Evan, for reminding about the 'move' option. I had forgotten about that. By the way, what's the feeling about changing Calcutta to Kolkata - a debate has been initiated on that Talk page. Thanks. WindHorse 11:26, 18 October 2006 (EDT)
FWIW, I concur on changing it (with rename, and a redirect from the original name, and perhaps "formerly known as" in the intro), though I would point out that as this is the English version of WT, the "english preferred" names should tend to be used, as I would expect in the Spanish or German (etc.) editions the name for some of our cities might change ("Nueva York"?). Additionally there are political implications of some name changes (Burma vs Myanmar, for example). Is this discussed somewhere on a meta page? Should we move this discussion there? And why is "Istanbul (Not Constantinople)" now stuck in my head?--justfred 12:26, 18 October 2006 (EDT)
Since no major objections have been noted since October 18 and consensus and Evan's figures seem to lean toward renaming the article as Mumbai I've moved the article to the namespace. -- Andrew (Sapphire) 05:07, 22 October 2006 (EDT)
One thing that's still needed is to change every "Bombay" to "Mumbai" within the article and district articles. -- Andrew (Sapphire) 05:10, 22 October 2006 (EDT)
Keep in mind that some attractions still have the name "Bombay" (ie the "Bombay Stock Exchange" is still the "Bombay Stock Exchange"). Maj 23:31, 22 October 2006 (EDT)
Isn't Mumbai the THIRD largest metropolis in the world, not the sixth? My understanding is that it comes after Mexico City (1st) and Tokyo (2nd)... Cacahuate 10:28, 14 November 2006 (EST)
That's probably from Wikipedia , and given the endless edit wars caused by the ordering of the list there, I'd prefer to just say something along the lines of "one of the world's biggest cities"... Jpatokal 10:37, 14 November 2006 (EST)
I haven't quite figured out why Thane and Navi Mumbai have separate articles.
Officially, the City of Greater Mumbai (BrihanMumbai Nagar) has 5 boroughs
Town (Mumbai City Dist)
Western Suburbs (Mumbai Suburban Dist)
Central Suburbgs (Mumbai Suburban District)
Thane (Thane Dist)
Navi Mumbai (Raigad Dist)
This article seem to be about the first 3 boroughs
We should have a general article about all the 5 boroughs and and also have a separatedetailed article on each with listings of restaurants, hotels, bars, malls etc..
I mean, the NYC article is general and the articles on Manhattan. Bronx, Brooklyn etc are detailed.
upamanyuwikitravel, 4 52 pm IST, 29 Nov 2006
No, Brihanmumbai does not contain Thane and Navi Mumbai. The latter two have municipal corporations of their own. You will notice that I have already divided Mumbai into seven districts and the task of moving all detail into them is Work in progress (for a long time.. sigh.)
Thane and Navi Mumbai come under the Mumbai metropolitan region which sprawls as far as Alibag. May be it is a good idea to have that as a region article, but I don't know what we'd write there. — Ravikiran 22:34, 29 November 2006 (EST)
I have moved the "Pending tasks" to the bottom of the page. In keeping with my drive for tighter article quality control, I have downgraded the article's status from guide to usable primarily because for it to be a guide, all district articles need to be "usable" or better and they are not. In addition, the following things need to be done. — Ravikiran 09:14, 19 February 2007 (EST)
Add new requests to the bottom and scratch them once they are done.
Fill out the buy section.
Expand the Eat section - add generic stuff about restaurant types (Udupi restaurants, Irani restaurants) types of food ("Gujarati Thali"), restaurant etiquettes, areas that are famous for specific types of eatables.
Once above is done, move the restaurant listings to district pages.
Sleep listings - do the same. Mention general options here, but move the specific ones to district pages. — a lot more sleep options need to be filled in.
More "Do" listings. For a city of Bombay's size, they are pitiful.
All districts to be "usable" or better. — barely done.
Please read Wikitravel:External links... we only add websites to primary sources (a hotel's official website, etc)... we don't want to be a link-farm, so we avoid linking to things like this. – cacahuatetalk 13:08, 8 September 2007 (EDT)
It's the official site for a newspaper, and therefore a primary link, since we often list major newspapers for major cities. kyakare isn't a primary website, it's a collection of events and things to do. Event websites and listings have been a thorn in Wikitravel's side for quite a while, and has been heavily discussed... the solution that was found was that one of our long-time contributors started Wikevent, so if that interests you maybe you can help him out with that there :) – cacahuatetalk 20:27, 8 September 2007 (EDT)
I have created details on Khadi Clothing in the "What To Shop" section and added details regarding Chor Bazar, Crawford Market in the "Where To Shop" section. I have deleted the details of the Crosswords Mall from the the Where to Shop section since the mall is no longer functional. Also I think we should need do a major re-hashing of the "What to Shop" since the details really don't appear coherent.
Happy editing :)
Mumbai Terror Attack warning box not displaying
The page looks edited with the warning box included in the page, but it's not displaying. Anyone know why? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by R3lai (talk • contribs)
It works for me. Perhaps it will show if you refresh your browser window? --PeterTalk 22:17, 26 November 2008 (EST)
Does anyone know how much time should be allowed to make connections between the various terminals at the Mumbai airport? That would be a useful piece of information to include in the article. 22.214.171.124 02:13, 25 March 2009 (EDT)
I have been unable to find online a sufficiently detailed Mumbai street/road map-- to locate St. John Baptist Rd, (in Bandra W) for example. Would be nice to have the URL for one, if it exists. 126.96.36.199 15:12, 8 June 2010 (EDT)
In recent edits, information on traveling has been added or moved to the "Get out" section. Per Wikitravel:Article templates/Sections#Get out, that is not what the section is for; it should be restricted to information on nearby destinations. LtPowers 10:19, 7 September 2010 (EDT)