Misplaced Pages

Talk:Brahma Chellaney: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 19:40, 12 November 2021 editTrangaBellam (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Page movers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers22,563 editsm Advertisement: edTag: 2017 wikitext editor← Previous edit Revision as of 19:42, 12 November 2021 edit undoTrangaBellam (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Page movers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers22,563 edits Advertisement: +Tag: 2017 wikitext editorNext edit →
Line 38: Line 38:
:please explain this edit of yours. . Please be aware that much of the criticism of Chellaney’s opinion on the Sri Lanka debt trap was information that was added by a sockpuppet ] (]) 19:06, 12 November 2021 (UTC) :please explain this edit of yours. . Please be aware that much of the criticism of Chellaney’s opinion on the Sri Lanka debt trap was information that was added by a sockpuppet ] (]) 19:06, 12 November 2021 (UTC)
::The two of you, collectively, have got less than five hundred edits. That the information was added by a sock, is irrelevant. ::The two of you, collectively, have got less than five hundred edits. That the information was added by a sock, is irrelevant.
::] {{tq|is considered to have a reliability between no consensus and generally unreliable. It tends to have a bias in favor of the Indian government.}} Anyways, such blurbs are not suited for inclusion in Misplaced Pages unless someone has used those words in writing a substantial profile of Chellaney. ] (]) 19:39, 12 November 2021 (UTC) ::] {{tq|is considered to have a reliability between no consensus and generally unreliable. It tends to have a bias in favor of the Indian government.}} I do not know much about ] but he seems to be one of the many high-profile journalists in India with little subject-expertise. Why does his opinion matter?
::Anyways, such blurbs are not suited for inclusion in Misplaced Pages unless someone has used those words in writing a substantial profile of Chellaney. ] (]) 19:39, 12 November 2021 (UTC)

Revision as of 19:42, 12 November 2021

WikiProject iconBiography Start‑class
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Misplaced Pages's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography
StartThis article has been rated as Start-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
Articles for deletionThis article was nominated for deletion on 19 December 2019. The result of the discussion was speedy delete.
Archiving icon
Archives
Archive 1

Commands respect and speaking truth to power?

What kind of delusional promotional peacock sentence is that for the intro? Not only is it inappropriate and non neutral. It is an insult to reality considering he has been heavily debunked as wrong.

Ie. Brahmamy Chellaney had made claims of Debt trap in Sri lanka by claiming that Sri Lanka had defaulted on Chinese loans and was forced to give away their port. None of that is even close to speaking Truth to power.

Because as Chatham House points out, Chinese loans made up a small proportion of Sri Lanka debt distress. Sri Lanka never defaulted and it was Sri Lanka who solicited China to lease its port. https://www.chathamhouse.org/2020/08/debunking-myth-debt-trap-diplomacy multiple credible scholars like Deborah Brautigum, Chatham house, Maria Adele Carrai shows that he is a terrible scholar at best and a deliberate liar at worst. This article is a complete joke. What is dreadfully ironic is thar Deborah criticises him and argues that it because of people like him, scholars need to speak Truth to power to counter his bs claims. And at University, we all learn he is an idiot promoted narrowly by a misleading media

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/23792949.2019.1689828

https://gjia.georgetown.edu/2021/06/05/questioning-the-debt-trap-diplomacy-rhetoric-surrounding-hambantota-port/

https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2021/02/china-debt-trap-diplomacy/617953/ Nvtuil (talk) 03:14, 31 October 2021 (UTC)

Let's be objective and avoid attacking the author

The concept of "debt-trap diplomacy" is well established: It is part of the United States National Security Strategy Report. Several studies have endorsed it. For example, the use of debt as an instrument of Chinese foreign policy has been detailed in two separate reports released in 2021 by researchers at AidData at William & Mary, the Center for Global Development, the Kiel Institute for the World Economy, and the Peterson Institute for International Economics:

1. https://www.aiddata.org/how-china-lends

2. https://www.aiddata.org/china-development-finance

So, it is important to be objective. Attacking Professor Chellaney as a "terrible scholar," "idiot," etc. is unfortunate. -- Alpinespace (talk) 13:30, 31 October 2021 (UTC)

I revised the "truth to power" sentence because it was cliche'd and not substantive. But I agree that we do not need editors' WP:OR attacks on scholars here . -- Kautilya3 (talk) 15:30, 31 October 2021 (UTC)
The more interesting question is, whether claims can be debunked as factually true. TrangaBellam (talk) 21:03, 31 October 2021 (UTC)

Advertisement

A paragraph like, while The Wall Street Journal has labelled him a "prominent strategic affairs expert" and The Guardian has called him "a respected international affairs analyst and author." The Times of India, for its part, called him "India's top foreign-policy expert". He has also been described as a "famous strategic pundit and TV talking head". isn't encyclopedic content.

This page need not be a hagiography (or hit-job). TrangaBellam (talk) 18:44, 12 November 2021 (UTC)

I have restored this paragraph. The sources are reliable and multiple and in my opinion appropriately recapitulated. Please note that another editor has also seen it fit to restore this paragraph and i have also reverted you in line with wp:brd previously for removing this paragraph. .Pinging User:Alpinespace for the reason explained aboveEstnot (talk) 19:06, 12 November 2021 (UTC)
please explain this edit of yours. . Please be aware that much of the criticism of Chellaney’s opinion on the Sri Lanka debt trap was information that was added by a sockpuppet Estnot (talk) 19:06, 12 November 2021 (UTC)
The two of you, collectively, have got less than five hundred edits. That the information was added by a sock, is irrelevant.
The Times of India is considered to have a reliability between no consensus and generally unreliable. It tends to have a bias in favor of the Indian government. I do not know much about Shekhar Gupta but he seems to be one of the many high-profile journalists in India with little subject-expertise. Why does his opinion matter?
Anyways, such blurbs are not suited for inclusion in Misplaced Pages unless someone has used those words in writing a substantial profile of Chellaney. TrangaBellam (talk) 19:39, 12 November 2021 (UTC)
Categories: