Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 19:23, 11 July 2015

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Jawaharlal Nehru article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5Auto-archiving period: 2 months

This article is written in Indian English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, analysed, defence) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

This page is not a forum for general discussion about Jawaharlal Nehru. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about Jawaharlal Nehru at the Reference desk.

Template:Vital article

This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. India: History / Politics Top‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Misplaced Pages's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by the Indian history workgroup (assessed as High-importance). This article is supported by the Indian politics workgroup (assessed as Top-importance). This article was last assessed in April 2012. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Biography: Politics and Government This 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 This article is supported by the politics and government work group (assessed as Top-importance). Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Philosophy: Philosophers / Social and political / Eastern / Contemporary High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Misplaced Pages.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Associated task forces: /  Philosophers Social and political philosophy Eastern philosophy Contemporary philosophy

Template:0.7 set nominee

Jawaharlal Nehru received a peer review by Misplaced Pages editors, which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article.

This article has been mentioned by multiple media organizations: Mugdha Variyar (2 July 2015). "'Jawaharlal Nehru was Muslim', Says Misplaced Pages Page Edit Tracked to Govt IP Address". International Business Times. Indo-Asian News Service (2 July 2015). "Jawaharlal Nehru's Misplaced Pages page altered from govt IP address, alleges Congress". ABP News.

should this be added to the main article?

Wiki entries on Nehru family edited from NIC IP? If this continues to happen, and continues to receive media coverage, then we can consider adding this information on the wikipedia page--that Nehru's biography is being targeted by vandals using computers having a Government of India IP address. Soham321 (talk) 06:03, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

http://zeenews.india.com/news/india/wikipedia-pages-on-nehru-family-edited-from-nic-office_1622948.html Extract:

New Delhi: The woes of the Bharatiya Janata Party-led National Democratic Alliance government are far from being over with the Congress now alleging that Misplaced Pages pages on former prime minister Jawaharlal Nehru and his father Motilal Nehru have been altered.The Congress claims that the editing was done from an IP (Internet Protocol) address belonging to the government-owned National Informatics Centre (NIC). Addressing a press conference, Congress spokesperson Randeep Singh Surjewala sought Prime Minister Narendra Modi's reply in this regard. "There was an attempt to alter the Misplaced Pages pages of Jawaharlal Nehru and Motilal Nehru. What is worse is that the changes were done from a government IP address, specifically from the NIC, the software provider of the government. There was a sinister attempt to show that Jawaharlal Nehru was a Muslim. It doesn't matter whether he was a Muslim or a Hindu, he was an Indian. The government should conduct a full enquiry into the same," Surjewala said.

Soham321 (talk) 06:11, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

Currently, no, but if continues or if someone big is involved then yes. It is presently a cat and mouse fight. RRD13 দেবজ্যোতি (talk) 08:53, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

Interesting. If, hypothetically speaking, this edit was made by a notable person who ends up having to resign from their current position, then the fact can be noted on that person's wikipedia page. If, as is most likely, this is just routine vandalism made by a non-notable entity that catches the media's attention for a moment, then this would not be worth mentioning anywhere on wikipedia per WP:NOTNEWS etc. In either cases, the content is irrelevant to this this and other (deceased) Nehru family member articles. Abecedare (talk) 14:37, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

Controversy/ disputes related to Nehru not even mentioned

Why is that this article seems to be an advertisement of Nehru and nothing else. There is no mention of this guy declining permanent seat in UNSC and instead advocated to give it to China , . How due to his stupid policy on Kashmir, India is still suffering from the Kashmir problem and insurgency, how India lost a wide territory under him due to his foolish policies and actions., ,. Hope these historically important facts get added to this article rather than being a eulogizing one.210.212.144.133 (talk) 10:08, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Reliable sources for historical matters are scholarly articles or books written by historians. Please see WP:HISTRS. Newspapers are only reliable for day-to-day news. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 11:49, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Buddy please go through link which is a scholarly article written by a PhD held person. Further newspaper reports form the basis of any article. Many articles on Misplaced Pages have information solely based on newspapers. And Nehru is not just a historical figure. He was a major political figure too.So attempt to dislodge factual things in the garb of historical matter is not prudent. All aspects should be covered.210.212.144.133 (talk) 06:31, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

References

1. http://www.ibnlive.com/news/india/world-view-55-467791.html
2. http://defenceforumindia.com/forum/threads/how-nehru-turned-down-permanant-unsc-seat.15854/
3. http://www.niticentral.com/2013/06/26/nehru-was-willing-to-let-go-of-jammu-kashmir-95714.html
4. http://www.rediff.com/news/2004/jun/16spec3.htm
5. http://www.susmitkumar.net/index.php/history-of-kashmir-conflict
6. http://www.susmitkumar.net/index.php/history-of-kashmir-conflict

Nehru's religion

I just reverted the edit of someone who made the claim that Nehru's religion was Agnosticism. This is based on claims that Nehru was an agnostic, which he was. The point is that there are many schools of Hindu philosophy and some of these are atheistic schools like the Sankhya philosophy for example. The Sankhya is an atheistic philosophy. What this means is that it is possible to be a Hindu while continuing to be an atheist or an agnostic. Additionally, one should take note of the fact that Nehru was cremated in accordance with Hindu rites as per Nehru's wikipedia page (which gives the relevant references for this). So i think it is appropriate to claim that Nehru was a Hindu; or one can say that Nehru was a Hindu agnostic. But one cannot say that Nehru's religion was Agnosticism. Agnosticism is actually not a religion. Soham321 (talk) 03:01, 3 July 2015 (UTC)Can someone please do something about the links below my edit? I did not give these links but it is appearing as if i did. Soham321 (talk) 03:06, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Regarding just that field in the infobox, this edit made by Guy Macon is relevant. The infobox should be left blank. I thought of moving that recent edit to the relevant section since someone's beliefs can rarely be put in one word, especially if there is doubt that they identify themselves with any religion. -Ugog Nizdast (talk) 06:45, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Done your latter request. -Ugog Nizdast (talk) 06:47, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Thank you Ugog Nizdast.Soham321 (talk) 06:51, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

If (and this is a big if) Nehru was an atheist or agnostic, putting that information in in the body of the article and omitting the religion parameter from the infobox was decided by the clear consensus at Template talk:Infobox person#RfC: Religion infobox entries for individuals that have no religion. If, on the other hand, Nehru was a Hindu (even an atheistic branch of hinduism), it's OK to say that in the infobox. This came up in the case of Nontheist Quakers a while back. I will leave it for the folks who are working on this page to decide whether Nehru was agnostic or a Hindu, All I care about is that the religion parameter of the infobox contains an actual religion. --Guy Macon (talk) 07:21, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Best to omit the religion parameter for now in my opinion. Soham321 (talk) 21:42, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Nehru and Patel

I am afraid the new section on Nehru and Patel is a textbook example of WP:COATRACK. I accept that there is a case for a section on the subject, but I don't think we have the proper sources for it yet, and the current treatment is more about Patel and less about Nehru. Starting the section with BJP views is entirely ridiculous. This is a level-4 vital article, and we can't allow it to degenerate like this. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 11:53, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

I disagree. The material is relevant because it is discussing Nehru and Patel concomitantly, and the source being cited is considered an expert on this subject (see for instance: http://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/experts-reject-advani-s-claim-of-nehru-patel-spat/article1-1147924.aspx ). Furthermore, the material is relevant to contemporary times as both the references given (the Frontline article of A.G. Noorani and also the Economic Times article) prove. You are welcome to add other views on Nehru and Patel. Soham321 (talk) 18:50, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

I find it strange that the Hindustan Times article at the link i gave which had pronounced Noorani to be an 'expert', 'a veteran journalist and chronicler', referred to one of his upcoming books, and which had given his views on BJP leader Advani's statement of a rift between Nehru and Patel is no longer available for viewing (at least not on my computer). I had only viewed it a few hours ago. This business of Indian newspapers yanking their online articles from the internet has been noted in a New York Times editorial: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/28/opinion/Indias-Press-Under-Siege.html?_r=1 Soham321 (talk) 00:45, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

And now the article is back online. Thank you, Hindustan Times. Soham321 (talk) 01:45, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

The entire article is turning into a mess due to recent edits. In particular, there are far too many quotes and close paraphrases. - Sitush (talk) 13:13, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

Sitush, have you read the books being cited to make the charge of close paraphrasing or is this mere speculation on your part? If you feel any kind of copyright violation is taking place, then best to report it in the appropriate forum instead of writing about it here or making copyright violation accusations against me on my talk page. Soham321 (talk) 15:40, 11 July 2015 (UTC) And regarding the quotes, that is a matter of style and taste. Giving direct quotes also ensures that no distortion is taking place of the sourced content. I agree that excessive quoting should be avoided. But if a quote contains critical information, which is liable to be misinterpreted, it should be retained as it is. For instance, the quote from A.G. Noorani in the section 'Communism, Fascism, and Hindu right-wing communalism' should be retained as it is because it contains critical information and paraphrasing it could result in misinterpretation and distortion, and notice that some paraphrasing has in fact been done just before this quote was given. Soham321 (talk) 15:57, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

That is actually a very good example of an unnecessarily long quotation. It could be reduced to a single sentence and would lose nothing in meaning. - Sitush (talk) 16:45, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

I disagree. You will not be able to compress the critical information in this quote in one sentence. Incidentally, here is a short review of the book Nehru: A Contemporary's Estimate by the eminent historian Ramachandra Guha: An Uncommon Diplomacy. In the book review, Guha finds it necessary to give the following quote from the book he is reviewing in one shot:

His first concern was to see that India did not fall apart. To this end he encouraged a nationalism that would make Indians feel that they were Indians instead of feeling that they were Tamils or Punjabis or Dogras or Assamese or Brahmans or Kshatriyas or this or that caste, as they are apt. He gave special consideration to the Muslims as to induce them to feel Indian. For the same reason Christians and other minorities could always be sure of Nehru's unflinching protection. The "Secular State", that is to say a non-Hindu and all-Indian State, was fundamental to this concern.The great bulk of the people of India sensed, and they never lost the sense, that Nehru only wanted to help them and wanted nothing for himself; and that he was a ruler who had pity and kindness.

Nehru had conflicts with other leaders, such as Rajagopalachari, Rajendra Prasad and Patel, over Socialism; with Subas Chandra Bose over the Fascist approach; and with Jinnah over the status of the Muslims. Nehru's contests were always over ideas, never over any personal interests of his own, although he waged them without quarter and provoked a good deal of personal enmity.

Nehru might have been ignorant or misguided about some matters, and about some persons, but he was always disinterested, always concerned with what he thought would help Indians or mankind. We can be certain that there will be no revelations to make about him of the kind which are often made about celebrities; not even revelations like those of Churchill's disagreeableness. Nehru's private face differed scarcely at all from his public face.

Soham321 (talk) 16:56, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi Soham, whether a particular quote is important enough to be included verbatim is a judgement call. You need to seek consensus rather than stick to your own judgement. Note also that we are writing an encyclopedia, not a book review. An encyclopedia is supposed to provide a quick summary, not detailed analysis. Cheers, Kautilya3 (talk) 17:22, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

I have simplified it. I have no idea whether the section actually reflects things in a neutral manner but I do think that my simplification causes no loss of information. Revert it if you gain consensus to do so. - Sitush (talk) 17:18, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

Controversy/ disputes related to Nehru

Editors of Misplaced Pages. Please help in improving this article. I had put references for the controversies related to Nehru in an earlier talk section. But seemingly pro Congress/ pro Left editors are not willing to put disturbing facts about Nehru in this advertisement article. request all to please consider the references/ links and make necessary amendments to include truths and facts about the person Nehru.210.212.144.133 (talk) 04:06, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

Better you come with an account and discuss your issues. Your most of given sources are more like blogs, though you may have point regarding "UNSC seat" and "Kashmir issue" and you may find reliable criticism for it but you should get consensus for it. You should open an account and discuss your issues here in descent way. If you call people "pro-congress" or "pro-BJP" then everyone will ignore you. This is not facebook. And you should read article carefully, mention about his stand on Kashmir issue is already there. --Human3015 knock knock • 05:00, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

Donald Eugene Smith and his book 'India as a Secular State'

Sitush, writing about Donald Eugene Smith, wrote the following message on my talk page (diff1) (i have deleted some irrelevant comments given by Sitush but i am giving the diff of the comment made by Sitush on my talk page) :

There is no article telling us who he is What we have is a poor stub full of mini-quotes in Yogesh Khandke style. That tells us how important this now-outdated book was in its time. What we need to know in the context of Jawaharlal Nehru is what qualifies Smith to form such an opinion. That would be, for example, that he is/was a political scientist or a historian. Given that it is 50 years since, it might also be necessary to say that this is an old opinion, ie: something like "In 1965, the political scientist Donald Eugene Smith said that yada yada"

I prefer to respond to content disputes on the main article of the Nehru page, so i am giving my response here: This is the book of Donald Eugene Smith: India as a Secular State. This book has been described as a 'classic' in a 2010 article by A.G. Noorani, as a pioneering effort in a 2005 The Hindu article, and as a "seminal work" on Hindu nationalism by the historian Ainslie Embree in an invited contribution published in a book. References for these endorsements of the book are given in the wikipedia page of the book. So the wikipedia page of this book does tell you who Donald Eugene Smith is--he is the author of this significant book. Sitush's suggestion that we should write that this is "old opinion" constitutes original research as far as i am concerned. Soham321 (talk)

Stop being obtuse and turning everything into a battle! I said "might also be necessary". I'm on the cusp of blowing up here, Soham: you seem to be simply incapable of accepting improvements without long-drawn sagas that, inevitably, you "lose". - Sitush (talk) 18:13, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

I have this book on my bookshelf, and I have read parts of it. It is indeed a classic but, as Sitush points out, it is also out of date. For talking about Nehru's times, it is fine though. Sitush's point was that we should say a word or two about who Donald E. Smith is. I have already taken care of it. Cheers, Kautilya3 (talk) 18:57, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

I would still maintain that you are doing Original Research when you claim the book is 'out of date', considering A.G. Noorani called it a "classic" in 2010, and Ainslee Embree described it as a "seminal work" on Hindu nationalism in 2003. Soham321 (talk) 19:04, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

Try reading a dictionary. For example, a "classic car" is not usually one that we associate with the modern conveniences of speed, fuel economy, reliability, air conditioning etc but rather a significant development somewhere in the arc of car design. Similarly, a "seminal" work is not necessarily an up-to-date work. Yet again, you are arguing seemingly just for the sake of it. Please let it drop because it isn't even relevant now that Kautilya3 has fixed the issue. - Sitush (talk) 19:13, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

Please explain how Kautilya3 has "fixed the issue", because i am continuing to see Donald Eugene Smith's quote in the main article in the exact shape and form it was existing when i first inserted it in the main article. And there is no disclaimer that Smith's quote is 'out of date'. Soham321 (talk) 19:20, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

Oh, for fuck's sake - historian, remove link from article, add link to citation. I'm out of here until you are blocked, which is going to happen sooner or later. - Sitush (talk) 19:23, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

• Misplaced Pages articles that use Indian English
• All unassessed articles
• B-Class India articles
• Top-importance India articles
• B-Class India articles of Top-importance
• B-Class Indian history articles
• High-importance Indian history articles
• B-Class Indian history articles of High-importance
• WikiProject Indian history articles
• B-Class Indian politics articles
• Top-importance Indian politics articles
• B-Class Indian politics articles of Top-importance
• WikiProject Indian politics articles
• WikiProject India articles
• B-Class biography articles
• B-Class biography (politics and government) articles
• Top-importance biography (politics and government) articles
• Politics and government work group articles
• WikiProject Biography articles
• B-Class Philosophy articles
• High-importance Philosophy articles
• B-Class philosopher articles
• High-importance philosopher articles
• Philosophers task force articles
• B-Class social and political philosophy articles
• High-importance social and political philosophy articles
• Social and political philosophy task force articles
• B-Class Eastern philosophy articles
• High-importance Eastern philosophy articles
• Eastern philosophy task force articles
• B-Class Contemporary philosophy articles
• High-importance Contemporary philosophy articles
• Contemporary philosophy task force articles
• Old requests for peer review
• Misplaced Pages pages referenced by the press