Talk:Mumbai

Name Bombay restored to it's original name Mumbai in 1995

Should add details about name Bombay. Bombay name was given by Britishers as they were unable to pronounce the original name Mumbai,given by native peoples. In the name of Mumba Devi, which is temple of goddes Mumba. That's why it doesn't make sense to say that name changed from Bombay to Mumbai. It should say restored to it's original name to Mumbai in 1995. Source:https://www.britannica.com/place/Mumbai

NitrosenseAK (talk) 11:53, 15 January 2025 (UTC)

 Not done: It's Portuguese: Bom Baim. Mumbai wasn't the native name. The Govt. named it Mumbai. The city was made by the Britishers. check the source properly Xiphoid Vigour ⚔ 08:10, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

You outsiders think you know everything,you own everything but your just outsider. Your know one who will teach us what our city names. Before Portuguese came it was Mumbai, Mumbai name comes from Devi's name Mumba Devi, that's where mumbai came from. NitrosenseAK (talk) 04:24, 23 March 2025 (UTC)

Infobox images

@Chronus This is regarding the infobox image on this page, my argument is that the back bay image has been in the infobox for a long time around 2 years if im not wrong nobody has tried to change it mainly because its a good quality image and does justice to a city like Mumbai and it covers the entire region from Tardeo to Ephistone. The image you are adding is outdated its from 2020 at a time when the entire city was under construction and it has been taken from such a distance that the buildings are barely visible and most of them have construction cranes on them becuase its from 2020 its a very bad representation of the skyline. I had told you this in 2023 when you were adding this very same image, and now you are doing this in 2025. Please Sir its a request please let the back bay image be in the infobox. Joy goel (talk) 08:53, 1 April 2025 (UTC)

I completely  Disagree! An image being in an article for a long time just because an editor behaves, improperly, like the WP:OWNER of the article, is NOT an 'argument' to prevent changes in the infobox collage, just like this absurd comparison with the New York article. Furthermore, as I said in the edit summary, the image I am proposing covers a much larger area than the image of half a dozen buildings in the bay, and is therefore MUCH more representative of the city, as well as showing the Rajabai Clock Tower, one of the main symbols of Mumbai. Chronus (talk) 13:45, 1 April 2025 (UTC)

@Chronus Please try to understand that image you are adding has been taken from a very large distance, hence the buildings are in the distance and not visible properly and as the picture has been taken in 2020 there is a large number of buildings with construction cranes on them which is not visually pleasing, please Sir its a humble request let the back bay image be in the infobox. thanks. Joy goel (talk) 13:55, 1 April 2025 (UTC)

@Joy goel Your arguments are subjective and nothing more than empty personal opinions. I'm waiting for concrete arguments! Chronus (talk) 14:14, 1 April 2025 (UTC)

@Chronus Sir with all due respect, what im saying is not personal opinion but the facts. That image you want in the infobox has been taken from a large distance and the buildings are far away it looks better as a wide image but that is not possible to do in an infobox and its also a fact that almost all buildings have construction cranes on them, again its a request please let the back bay image be the way it was. Joy goel (talk) 14:22, 1 April 2025 (UTC)

So far you haven't come up with any logical argument to stop the photo collage from changing. I, on the other hand, have presented several arguments that you simply prefer to ignore. Your request has been denied. Chronus (talk) 16:06, 1 April 2025 (UTC)

I haven't ignored you arguments, your only logical argument is that it covers a wider area, but the image i want also covers sufficient area, please do not change the back bay image. Your image is not a good representation of the skyline its better as a wide image because it has been taken from a large distance and to be frank it is outdated do not add outdated image in the infobox. i don't know why you don't find my arguments logical it makes perfect sense to me. Again its a request do not change the back bay image. Joy goel (talk) 16:22, 1 April 2025 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 30 May 2025

115.129.73.128 (talk) 04:33, 30 May 2025 (UTC)

Put an official language of Mumbai is Marathi and Hindi

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Cannolis (talk) 07:44, 30 May 2025 (UTC)

Inclusion of an image of Dharavi in the Economy section

@Joy goel, I added an image of Dharavi in the Poverty, inequality, and the cost of living subsection of the Economy section. You have removed it, stating that it is not needed but have given no adequate reason as to why. I believe the image is very relevant to the section and also very useful for readers EarthDude (talk) 17:59, 30 June 2025 (UTC)

@EarthDude sorry but i dont think that the image is needed as it looks very shabby on a otherwise very well constructed page please do not add that image or any other image of slums on this page thanks. Joy goel (talk) 18:03, 30 June 2025 (UTC)

But you give no reason as to why it is shabby. It gives a much more accurate and holistic view of the city. Mumbai is not just about skyscrapers and money. The image is also relevant to the subsection which speaks of poverty and inequality EarthDude (talk) 18:07, 30 June 2025 (UTC)

@EarthDude the reason is simple it tarnishes the image of a great city, i have been editing this page for more than 4 years now and there has never been an image of slum on this page please do NOT add slum images to this page thanks Joy goel (talk) 18:14, 30 June 2025 (UTC)

Thats a ridiculous reason. You cannot reject facts and reality just to save face and reputation, a violation of WP:NOTPROMO. You are also violating WP:NPOV, which is perhaps Wikipedia's most fundamental policy. I am re-adding the image. If you want to remove it, please do not edit war. I would suggest you gain consensus to do so, or open an RfC for removal. Cheers EarthDude (talk) 18:24, 30 June 2025 (UTC)

@EarthDude I am not going to let you impose your will here this page will not have a slum image thanks Joy goel (talk) 18:27, 30 June 2025 (UTC)

Brush up on Wikipedia policies and guidelines. This platform is not to be used for promotional content as you are suggesting. We are an encyclopedia, and a holistic one at that. I am not imposing anything. I am simply stating the facts. Your actions violate WP:NPOV and WP:NOTPROMO. I suggest you do not edit war and open an RfC on the issue EarthDude (talk) 18:29, 30 June 2025 (UTC)

@EarthDude my actions do not violate any policy its just an image that is not necessary and you are acting like a WP:bully i will have none of that. Joy goel (talk) 18:33, 30 June 2025 (UTC)

Your arguments and actions are directly in violation of WP:NPOV and WP:NOTPROMO. WP:NPOV is a wikipedia policy regarding a neutral point of view. WP:NOTPROMO is another such policy against making promotional content for articles. Your repeated removal of the image for the sole sake of not "tarnishing image", directly contradicting well known facts, is clearly promotional and biased in tone. EarthDude (talk) 18:38, 30 June 2025 (UTC)

@EarthDude well im going through the policies you cited i am violating none of them by just removing an image, im not removing reliable sources or anything. Joy goel (talk) 18:42, 30 June 2025 (UTC)

this policy WP:NPOV - states that information should be reliably sourced and no original research im not violating that.

WP:NOTPROMO - states that wikipedia is NOT a repository of images ;inls and media files im not violating that either.

you are the one imposing your will and forcefully adding an image which this page has never had in 20 years. Joy goel (talk) 18:49, 30 June 2025 (UTC)

You are violating WP:NPOV by repeatedly removing an image, an extremely important image of one of the world's largest slums which exists in the city, for the sole reason of not tarnishing the city's image, even though the image would be very relevant in the subsection, thus violating a neutral point of view. Your insistence on maintaining a good image also violated WP:NOTPROMO because what you are saying is fundamentally promotional in nature.

I have added this discussion to Wikipedia:Third Opinion, so we can seek the view of someone uninvolved, which should hopefully help in this issue between us. Cheers EarthDude (talk) 18:55, 30 June 2025 (UTC)

@EarthDude I am not violating any of those polices, its a request please dont be so adamant in adding such as degrading image.

please read this https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/industry/services/property-/-cstruction/dharavi-redevelopment-project-plans-to-house-indias-next-prime-business-district/articleshow/122146256.cms?from=mdr dharavi is under redevelopment and work is started many months ago this slum wont even exist in a few months then why add an image of something that will not exist. Joy goel (talk) 19:08, 30 June 2025 (UTC)

https://www.hindustantimes.com/real-estate/dharavi-redevelopment-master-plan-for-indias-largest-slum-nears-completion-6-key-highlights-101744373561893.html dharavis redevelopment started in january 2025 we dont include images of things that will not exist Joy goel (talk) 19:11, 30 June 2025 (UTC)

i agree with EarthDude that this photo should be included. the photo depicts an important part of Mumbai. some people may find it unpleasant, but wikipedia is WP:NOTCENSORED

according to the HT source, only half of the slum will be redeveloped, and the government says it will take 17 years. so i don't agree with your argument that "this slum wont even exist in a few months" Rainsage (talk) 06:15, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

Response to third opinion request:

Support for the inclusion of a representative photo of the Dharavi slum. A relevant image enhances the article’s encyclopedic value by providing visual context for readers unfamiliar with the area. The objections to the photo appear to be based more on reputational concerns or discomfort rather than on Wikipedia policy. Slums are an established and notable aspect of Dharavi's identity and coverage. Wikipedia’s role is to document facts neutrally, not to sanitize them. Unless there are specific policy-based concerns, exclusion of such an image risks reflecting a conflict of interest or promotional intent, rather than adherence to core content principles. Nemov (talk) 19:25, 30 June 2025 (UTC)

@Nemov but Dharavi is under redevelopment a project that started in January this year and it has made significant progress i think we should wait for a while until the project is completed and then take action.Its very unfair to included an image of something that is a work in progress. This slum will not even exist in a year or so. Joy goel (talk) 19:38, 30 June 2025 (UTC)

For the time being, I am readding the image to the article. If you wish to remove it, open an RfC. An RfC is a discussion among several editors over the inclusion/exclusion of content from the article. It is used to gain consensus and compromise, and to avoide edit warring EarthDude (talk) 19:45, 30 June 2025 (UTC)

I would recommend reviewing WP:CRYSTALBALL. Please don't ping me if you don't have a policy argument. Thanks! Nemov (talk) 19:47, 30 June 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for your response. I appreciate it EarthDude (talk) 19:43, 30 June 2025 (UTC)