And it would help if you added the alt attribute, as has been done in the existing montage. The way to add the alt attribute is | image1 = Charminar sumeet photography 3.JPG {{!}} The Charminar during the Ramzan night bazaar-- Toddy1(talk)10:05, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The population crossed 10 million in bangalore and hyderabad but there is no official census after 2011. statista un reliable source even for bangalore. Ustadeditor2011 (talk) 10:13, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If you want sensible replies that link to previous talk discussions and explain policies, you are going to have to accept that it takes time to construct the replies.
But for Bangalore there is no montage, why seperate policies for Hyderabad article. Even census data is wrong in Bangalore there is no official sources of census data in India. Ustadeditor2011 (talk) 10:19, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I am saying satista if not reliable should not be considered for Bangalore. There is no official data after 2011 census in Indian citites, so only 3 cities qualify as Mega cities Delhi, Mumbai & Kolkata. Ustadeditor2011 (talk) 10:20, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hyderabad Montage
I have added Hyderabad montage in talk page, next tell me what to do. Give me the tool link which makes a montage of images. There is no montage in Bangalore infobox pls remove it and add montage. Ustadeditor2011 (talk) 11:33, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Stop rubbing ur personal views on south Indian articles like Amaravati and Hyderabad. The name of Amaravati is from the original Amaravathi site founded by Vasiraju stop rubbing your european tactics on articles related to AP and Telangana, we dont need ur manipulations here Ustadeditor2011 (talk) 07:44, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Everytime somebody builds something in a city doesnt become founder of cities. There is no modern city founder, ultra modern city founder for any place. Pls respond to my discussion in Amaravati talk page. Ustadeditor2011 (talk) 07:00, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia works on the basis of verifiability not truth. If you correct a statement in Wikipedia, please could you put a citation that supports your correction next to the corrected statement. If the existing source does not support the correction, then you need to think about what to do with the existing source. What I have done in the article in question is to move the BBC citation to a statement it still supports, and add a WHO citation that supports a corrected version. Given that the BBC source says that carbon tetrachloride is carcinogenic, it is desirable for the new version to explain the currently understood situation (otherwise a well-meaning person with restore the statement that it is carcinogenic).
When people are checking sources, and citing them in the edit summary it is likely that they are not making random reverts.-- Toddy1(talk)14:50, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I am not going to report him/her for edit warring. What I have done is to copy the very good discussion that you initiated at User talk:Yasarhossain07toTalk:Rohit Sharma; it is more useful there. Content discussions are best held on article talk pages - that way it is easier for other people to join in, and there is a record of the discussion in an accessible place that may help other editors in a few years time. -- Toddy1(talk)08:04, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
