Talk:Karnataka

Proposal to add a new section on Notable residents

One person who could be listed in this section would be:

• G. Muthuraj, footballer in the 1950s

His page in Wikipedia cites one reference:

• Footballer Muthuraj no more; Times News Network; The Times of India; pg 22; Monday, May 22, 2006.

My context in this proposal is my part in the 'Adding link to orphaned article, Wikiproject Orphanage: You can help!' activty. TheAMmollusc (talk) 15:59, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

Disagree. There are way too many notable residents. 71.90.21.128 (talk) 23:17, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

Turn off Semi-protection

I tried reading the talk archives to see why it was being semi-protected, but didn't see a reason. Does this article still need semi-protection? 125.215.150.94 (talk) 10:58, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from MeenalKulk, 19 May 2011

Today Belgaum has become a controversial issue as Maharashtra too, rightly claims to be its part owing to 80% Marathi speaking population.

MeenalKulk (talk) 17:58, 19 May 2011 (UTC)  Not done - Please specify exactly what you want to change in the article. Your statement should read like: Please change X to Y. Yes Michael? •^Talk 19:14, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from 122.167.17.153, 30 May 2011

Karnataka being a multilingual state, various linguistic groups have been demanding for separate states based on language in the regions where those languages are spoken by the majority. Tuluvas and Kodavas are major ethnic groups which aspire to form separate states.

Can you please delete the above mentioned statement this is not true, Majority of Kodava people want to be with karnataka and few Kodavas now have asked for regional autonomous district with in karnataka and Tulu people have never asked for separation from karnataka, in fact Tulu people are fore front in promoting Karnataka.

122.167.17.153 (talk) 14:12, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. elektrikSHOOS 18:46, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

KANNADA is the only official language of KARNTAKA. You have wrongly included in English and Hindi. You may verify this information with Andhra Pradesh only Telugu, Kerala only Malayalam and Tamil Nadu only Tamil is mentioned. Immediately remove English and Hindi as this information totally incorrect. If it is not done you are treating Karnataka separately compared to other states which violates Constitution and rouse passions. ರಾ ಸು ಮೇಟಿಕುರ್ಕೆ

First of all, cool down; "samvidhaanada bagge ashtu high-level maatu kathe beda". I agree Hindi is not treated as an official language. According to the Karnataka Official Language act 1963, Kannada is the official language of the state. English is also recognized as a language valid for all official purposes. I will remove Hindi from the list. Lynch7 13:56, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

English is not an official language of KARNATAKA

Thanks partially obliging HINDI from the official language list of KARNATAKA

Please note I do not require any ones advice to be calm. I am always calm and composed. As a citizen of Karnataka it is my duty to present facts to the world who may be interested in knowing about my state and language. Kindly show me where is it mentioned that English is the official language of KARNATAKA. KANNADA is one and only official language of KARNATAKA.

PLEASE be patient and check the information of our neighboring states ANDHRA, TAMIL NADU and KERALA in Wikipedia itself. (ರಾ ಸು ಮೇಟಿಕುರ್ಕೆ (talk) 10:17, 3 August 2011 (UTC)) ರಾ ಸು ಮೇಟಿಕುರ್ಕೆ

Thank you, "artha madkondiddikke dhanyavadagalu; Wikipedia aadharavannagi tagolabaradu" because other articles are rarely seen as a standard. Please read the Karnataka Official Languages Act 1963, where it is mentioned that though Kannada is the "official language" (so called), English is also to be used for official purposes. Lynch7 13:42, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

KANNADA is one and only official language of KARNATAKA

I would like to re-iterate Kannada is the one and only official language of KARNATAKA. English has no place under this heading. I am not sure what you are trying to convey here. I have read THE KARNATAKA OFFICIAL LANGUAGE ACT, 1963 and also THE KARNATAKA LOCAL AUTHORITIES (OFFICIAL LANGUAGE) ACT, 1981 which is an amendment to 1963 ACT. Hence Please remove ENGLISH from the heading Official Language of Karnataka.

I would also like you to know that I have been an active contributor to Kannada Wiktionary and have contribution of nearly 70,000 edits for the last 2+ years.

It is also our duty to keep uniformity amongst the states of Indian Union and unnecessarily mentioning ENGLISH in the official languages of Karnataka sends wrong signals whereas no such things are mentioned with other states. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ರಾ ಸು ಮೇಟಿಕುರ್ಕೆ (talk • contribs) 15:14, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for your contributions to our Kannada Wikimedia projects. They are much appreciated. Again, I must draw attention to these: "The Karnataka Official Language Act, 1963" (PDF). Government of Karnataka. and Bopanna. "Sahyadri Education Trust vs State Of Karnataka on 4 July, 1988". Karnataka High Court.. It is quite clearly mentioned that Kannada is the official language, with English also valid for official purposes.

Also as a note: It is not necessarily our aim to maintain consistency with other states. Other states may have other language acts; as far as Karnataka is concerned, the Karnataka Official Language Act, 1963 and subsequent amendments are valid. Thank you. Also, kindly continue the discussions in the previous section itself, hence avoiding new sections for each time. Regards, Lynch7 14:18, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

"Official Language" and "valid for official use" are totally two different things. As far as Official language of Karnataka is concerned it is only KANNADA and nothing else. The 1963 Act and subsequent amendments all tell the same thing. Sahyadri case judgement is concerned more with Medium of instruction rather than official language issue and it is irrelevant in this case.

I do not see any logic in equating ENGLISH with KANNADA as the official language and I am also not sure what you are trying to convey to the world. ರಾ ಸು ಮೇಟಿಕುರ್ಕೆ (talk) 05:53, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

This is not my personal analysis; I am merely reporting what is there in the Act. Read the Sahyadri Case properly, it does not exclusively refer to medium of instruction. Kannada is the official language, English is valid for official use; and that is precisely what the article says. Lynch7 06:54, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

I have read Sahyadri Case properly, I suggest you also try to understand that case which has no relevance to the topic we are discussing. Common sense tells me there is a vast difference between "Official Language" and language valid for official use. English has no place under the heading "Official Language". FYI some of the neighboring state languages are also valid for official use in certain parts of the state and that does not confer them the Official Language status. I am still not clear what is that you are trying to convey to the world. ರಾ ಸು ಮೇಟಿಕುರ್ಕೆ (talk) 08:34, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

I am merely trying to convey to the world, whatever the Act says. The act says that Kannada is the official language, with English also valid for official use. I suppose the "certain parts of state" you mention are disputed areas, such as Belgaum and Kasargod. Anyway, the Act merely says that Kannada is the official language, English is valid for all purposes, and Hindi is valid for use in legislature. I will be inactive for a few days, so I trust you will do what is right. Regards, Lynch7 10:56, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

The Heading here is "Official Language" and the answer to that as per the act is "KANNADA". Just because some other language can also be used for official purposes is some cases, it can not be accorded the status of "Official Language". I am not at all referring to the areas you have mentioned. In general if more than 15% people speak a particular language they can use their language for official purposes. Again that will not give their language the status of official language of the state. Mentioning English under the heading of "Official Language" is totally unwarranted, unacceptable and incorrect by any means. I suggest that you read "THE KARNATAKA LOCAL AUTHORITIES (OFFICIAL LANGUAGE) ACT, 1981" - http://dpal.kar.nic.in/.%5C30%20of%201981%20(E).pdf as well to understand things better. Hope to see what is correct and right is presented to the world about our state. ರಾ ಸು ಮೇಟಿಕುರ್ಕೆ (talk) 13:11, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Well, The Karnataka Local Authorities (official Language) Act, 1981 seems to be pretty clear-cut about this one. Must concur with ರಾ ಸು ಮೇಟಿಕುರ್ಕೆ here - "..just because some other language can also be used for official purposes in some cases, it can not be accorded the status of "Official Language".." - Niri M / ನಿರಿ 20:08, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Today's news article on the Indian Express: Namaskara, Swalpa Swalpa Kannada Gottu (see the first line). I'm making the change shortly, thanks. - Niri M / ನಿರಿ ^(Talk) 12:48, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from Sspatil.nie, 17 September 2011

Update the Poluation of the State as per the 2011 Census.

State: Karnataka Population : 61130704 Male  : 31057742 Female  : 30072962

Source : http://updateox.com/india/state-wise-population-of-india-as-per-2011-census/

Sspatil.nie (talk) 08:25, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

 Already done Jay _{Σεβαστός}^discuss 09:39, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

Is Karnataka the land of only Kannadigas?

The lead in this article states that "Karnataka is the land of Kannadigas". Is it not being unfair to other native ethnic groups of the state? Tuluvas, Kodavas, Konkanis etc are also natives of this state. Requesting the questionable statement to be removed.117.226.240.122 (talk) 14:04, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

I quite agree with that. Anyone has a suggestion for an alternative sentence? Lynch7 17:02, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

• Agree Even I agree on that. One possible way would be:

  Karnataka is a state in South West India. It was created on 1 November 1956, with the passing of the States Reorganisation Act and this day is annually celebrated as Karnataka Rajyotsava (Formation Day) and is the land of Kannadigas, Tuluvas, Konkanis and Kodavas.

  or

  Karnataka, the land of Kannadigas, Tuluvas, Konkanis and Kodavas is a state in South West India.

  Any other suggestions? — Abhishek  ^Talk 12:43, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

I would prefer something on the lines of the first option. If we go on with the 2nd option, then we'll be bombarded with edit requests, asking each group to be named. Coming to the first option, if we can somehow refine "...is a state in South West India", and replace it with a larger sentence, because just the short sentence will look tacky. Lynch7 14:35, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

IMHO, the current one is good enough - WP:KISS! (i.e. "Karnataka is the land of Kannadigas") - Niri M / ನಿರಿ 16:37, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

@MikeLynch Fair enough. These were just samples. They need to be corrected for grammar though. Do you have anything in mind?

@Niri What about the coastal belt which is home to the Konkanis and Tuluvas and Kodagu which is home to the Kodavas? There are a significant number of these communities though Kannadigas being the largest. — Abhishek  ^Talk 17:00, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Niri, its true we should keep it simple, but it would be a misrepresentation of sorts (but again, it depends on how we define Kannadiga–if we define it as the speakers of Kannada, then we'd have an issue, but if we define it as the residents of the Karunadu region, then it would be fine). I think its better we steer clear of any misconceptions and possible misunderstandings. Lynch7 18:08, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

The Kannadiga article clearly states that people who are native speakers of Kannada are Kannadigas. By that logic the statement "Karnataka is the land of Kannadigas" need to be deleted 117.226.132.104 (talk) 01:55, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

I think its better if we do not list out any groups in the lead at all (trust me, we'll have a horrid time later on when we handle edit requests). Lets have a look at the FA Minnesota, where the lead is clean. We can do something like that. Lynch7 02:54, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

Consider this lead for this article "Karnataka, a state in South West India, was created on 1 November 1956, with the passing of the States Reorganisation Act. Originally known as the State of Mysore, it was renamed Karnataka in 1973" 117.226.184.217 (talk) 12:57, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

The IP speaks well (you should create an account really). What say guys? I'm in favor of this. Lynch7 13:10, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

I am not really in favor of removing the "...land of Kannadigas.." part. Giving a broader meaning to include Tuluvas, Konkani, Kodavas would be ok, but that should not lead to other ethno-linguistic demanding their inclusion! They have a state of their own (atleast in old times)..KevinBraun 21:34, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

Agree with KevinBraun. Perhaps adding about Tuluvas, Konkanis and Kodavas would make it complete. - Niri M / ನಿರಿ ^(Talk) 13:40, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

It should be fine, but there is all the possibility of some other community demanding their representation. I think we'll update this for now, unless there is some more opposition. Lynch7 14:42, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

 Done. Lynch7 14:15, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

One out of the context issue. Kannadiga wikipedians keep an eye on some of the Karnataka related wiki pages, especially those which got featured star because of the hard work put up by some early wikipedians such as Dinesh Kannambadi. There is vandalism going on every now and then. E.g. Chalukyas page. Thanks. - KevinBraun — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.83.92.168 (talk) 21:50, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

I agree. I wish I had the pleasure of knowing Dinesh. We need people like him! Lynch7 14:15, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

Do we even need that sentence there? What about the rest of the people who speak other languages than listed there? Those who are born in Karnataka but speak a different language can't claim Karnataka to be their land. That sentence is jingoistic at best. All languages and people groups (if there are any) are discussed in the Demography section. I'll be removing that sentence from the lead. Gnanapiti (talk) 01:42, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Edit request from , 21 October 2011

Jnanpith Award received by kannadigs is eight. recently Chandrashekhara Kambara awarded. Pkbheemaraju (talk) 02:59, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

 Not done: Article already has Writers in the Kannada language have received the most number of Jnanpith awards in India. Mentioning the names is WP:UNDUE here. Will be appropriate in Kannada. — Abhishek  ^Talk 03:09, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

Autosizing images as upright=0.90 plus ALT

I am planning to change all the images to use auto-sizing parameters, based on each viewer's Special:Preferences for the default image size, to fit either PC or handheld viewing. For example, adding the image parameter "|upright=0.90" will autosize the image as 90% of the user's default size. A typical large portrait is set simply as "|upright" (with no number), which defaults to about 76%, and avoids the "over-powering huge pictures" of people in close-up portraits. Also, I will add the "alt=" parameter to give a short physical description of the image (at mouse-over) for sight-impaired readers who rely on written, or machine-spoken, text about the image contents. -Wikid77 (talk) 16:54, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

• DONE. I have set the "upright=" scale number to autosize images, and set the "alt=xx" parameter in 25 images, per WP:ACCESS, to give a short physical description of each image for sight-impaired users who prefer written text about each image's contents. Wikid77 19:37, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Thank you, I can't believe there was no ALT text all this time (or was there?) Lynch7 14:37, 29 October 2011 (UTC)