Talk:New Delhi

When did building begin?

Resolved

 – Requested info added to article

This article is a bit confusing:

...built from 1912 to become the new capital of British India, eventually replacing Calcutta on February 10, 1911.

When did the building begin? Did the British establish the city after already making it the capital of British India? I think there must be a typo here -- maybe 1912 should be 1902? -- Tlotoxl 11:32, 21 Aug 2003 (UTC)

Fixed. - Patrick 12:11, 21 Aug 2003 (UTC)

Disambiguation

As I said on Talk:Delhi, could someone sort out the precise differences between Delhi (the city, not the union territory) and New Delhi and make them clear in the entries? -- till we *) 12:18, Aug 21, 2003 (UTC)

• I think New Delhi does deserve an article. with more importance on the natinal administrative functions and the delhi page can be with a perspective on the city by and large. 203.94.241.97 10:21, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Agreed. There should be a relatively brief article on New Delhi that talks about its construction by the British and perhaps about the administrative Division between New Delhi Municipal Corporation (NDMC) and the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD). All historical details should be put in the main [[Delhi] article. Anurag Garg 10:53, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Statehood

"Now there are plans afoot to give New Delhi complete statehood."

eh? Does this refer to Delhi NCR?, and if so it should be moved to the Delhi article. Imc 17:34, 14 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Yeah, it refers to the Delhi NCT. I've removed it from here. -- Paddu 08:39, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 27 February 2026

change Rajpath to Kartavyapath ~2026-10200-66 (talk) 13:53, 27 February 2026 (UTC)

 Not done, no reason for change given. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 15:03, 27 February 2026 (UTC)

New Delhi is a capital and city

@Largoplazo: New Delhi is a city within a large city, and it is a country's capital at the same time it functions as a city it is similar to say the City of Westminster. It is considered a city, but it is part of London though it is considered to be distinct for some reason and hence seen as a city. If the City of Westminster is basically a city, then why can't New Delhi be seen as a city and capital, and you can't argue by saying the population of New Delhi is not large by looking at the population census of 2011 instead of a recent census? Wikipedian reader 1234567 (talk) 13:43, 13 August 2026 (UTC)

@Wikipedian reader 1234567 A person can have, among other things, an ethnicity, a religion, a citizenship, and an occupation. For example, someone can be a Black Jewish American lawyer. That person's ethnicity is, however, not Black Jewish American lawyer, nor is their religion, citizenship, or occupation. These are separate qualities of the person.

For purposes of this parameter, a settlement has a type—city, town, village, borough, tehsil, unincorporated areas, counties, neighborhoods, etc. Being the capital of some larger place is a role that that city, town, village, etc., plays with respect to the larger place, but it isn't the type of settlement it is. Largoplazo (talk) 15:11, 13 August 2026 (UTC)

@Largoplazo: But it's just like saying the City of Westminster should not be considered a city or seen as distinct from London and that the City of Westminster is not politically important compared to New Delhi, which is very important. London is the Capital, and the City of Westminster is part of it, and it is not seen as distinct as New Delhi is, and New Delhi is not just the area of Lutyens' Delhi it includes parts of large parts of the New Delhi district as well. It is a big area and not just one area. Wikipedian reader 1234567 (talk) 15:59, 13 August 2026 (UTC)

It isn't like any of that. You seem to be mixing together a bunch of unrelated things but, honestly, I can't really say for certain what you're trying to say about London and Westminster. It's like you're trying to make it complicated. It isn't. If New Delhi is a city, then its "settlement-type" is "city". All those other things you say about it may be true, but those aren't the "settlement-type", they're other things.

As for the part I'd said was redundant, yes, "city" and "capital city" are redundant. If you've already said something is the capital city, then you've already said it's a city. You don't have to say it again. If it wasn't a city, then it wouldn't be the "capital city" either. For a capital to be a capital city, it has to be a city. Largoplazo (talk) 19:10, 13 August 2026 (UTC)

1) You seem to not comprehend what I am saying. If it was not for the British monarch to consider the city of Westminster a city for some reason, then it would be just another area within London and not a city and if New Delhi was still a part of the British empire wouldn't it enjoy the same Status as the City of Westminster and being a Capital unlike the City of Westminster.

2) There are settlements in India that are considered cities

List of cities in India by population

If Mathura, which is not a capital of any city or country, has a ruffly around similar population as New Delhi, it can be considered a city in India and not some distinct kind of settlement. Then why can't New Delhi be seen as a city and a capital city? New Delhi just doesn't have government offices or government meeting places. Wikipedian reader 1234567 (talk) 04:19, 14 August 2026 (UTC)

Because "capital city" is not a type. "City" is a type, serving as the capital is a role that the city plays.

As for Westminster, I "seem" not to comprehend what you're saying? I literally said that I didn't. And I still don't, your point about it on its own or in relation to India remains unclear to me. Largoplazo (talk) 05:28, 14 August 2026 (UTC)

A capital city is a city where there are just government offices or government buildings; it's the seat of the government where the government runs the country or state.

A city is just a settlement in which it doesn't always have to be a large settlement.

I was comparing it with Westminster since it is considered a city, not just a normal area in London. Wikipedian reader 1234567 (talk) 06:15, 14 August 2026 (UTC)

The settlement type of a city that's the capital is "city", in the same way that the religion of a Black Jewish American lawyer is "Jewish", not "Black Jewish American lawyer". Largoplazo (talk) 11:22, 14 August 2026 (UTC)

You have not answered why the City of Westminster should be a city, so you are now arguing that a planned capital should just be a capital city and not a city as well.

Shouldn't the City of Westminster, going by how you explained the religion of a Black Jewish American to be Jewish in that way, shouldn't the City of Westminster not be a city but just be an area of London? Why is it a city?

The problem is India doesn't grant city status this happens in the UK.

New Delhi is not just a capital but also a city, and in India, Mathura is also a city. Novopolotsk a planned city in Belarus is also considered a city in Belarus despite having a smaller population than New Delhi or Mathura. Wikipedian reader 1234567 (talk) 18:03, 14 August 2026 (UTC)