Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 03:36, 14 October 2006

Anti-Hindu

This article is based on a fictitious term Anti Hindu and its authors have tried to invent a term creating a parallel to Anti-Semitism - pls. note the (ism) ,Holocaust and possibly Islamophobia which are the terms with a lot of academic debate.An article by this name should be suitable for wiktionary being an adjective and not a noun.The issues discussed in this article could possibly be transferred to another article Persecution of Hindus, if they have not already been discussed there.An article like this is merely repetitive and maliciously put in to highlight a particular point of view Hindutva - the right wing Hindu religio- Xenophobe movement in India and increasingly abroad and should not be allowed a second to sit on the academic space of Misplaced Pages. TerryJ-Ho 00:23, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

• Strong and Speedy Keep:Bad faith move by TerryJ-Ho for a well-sourced article.Hkelkar 00:38, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
• Expanding above position:Not a single statement in the article is unsourced. Per precedent in anti-semitism,anti-Christian and anti-Muslim the article chronicles historical and modern anti-Hindu views and attitudes.This is a bad faith attempt by the user TerryJ-Ho to promulgate a bias that is rapidly becoming very burdensome for many wikipedia users.He has lost out to a mediation involving anti-Hindu attitudes held by another historical figure Tipu Sultan and I believe that he is merely venting frustration at this article here. Administrators please investigate this matter.Links to the mediation dispute is here:

User:Martinp23/Desk Misplaced Pages:AMA Requests for Assistance/Requests/September 2006/Hkelkar .Hkelkar 00:53, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

• Delete - Agreed with TerryJ-Ho. This information would all be appropriate in Persecution of Hindus. BhaiSaab 00:52, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
• Comment:BhaiSaab was also part of the mediation which emerged in my favor and I question his motives here as well.Hkelkar 00:53, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

Hkelkar is a likely sockpuppet and I question his motives here as well. BhaiSaab 00:55, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

The argument for moving anti-Hindu to Persecution of Hindus has been refuted in the talk page as the two articles discuss different topics (attitude vs action). Plus, below is a representatiom of reliable sources used in the article:

http://magazine.uchicago.edu/0412/features/index-print.shtml http://www.sullivan-county.com/news/pat_quotes/hindus.htm http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/irf/2006/71443.htm http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/engASA130062001!Open http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/2310359.stm

All of them are notable and describe anti-Hindu views and attitudes.Hkelkar 01:02, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

• Strong Keep - Upgrading to Speedy Keep - The article is well written and well sourced. If this is deleted, we may as well AFD Anti-Semitism, Anti-Christian, and Anti-Muslim for the same "reasons". Torinir _{( Ding my phone My support calls E-Support Options )} 01:10, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

Apart from Anti-Semitism, the other two terms are not commonly used apart as an adjective and could possibly be removed. anti Muslim points to Islamophobia rather and is a commonly discussed term at the time.I have never come across a term Anti-Hindu used as a phenomenon TerryJ-Ho 01:15, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

Look at the sources in the article that frequently mention the term.Islamophobia is a neologism.Hkelkar 01:16, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

If we are discussing Anti-Hindu , why not discuss Pro-Hindu as a phenomenon and all the Pros and Anti's possible.Say for example Pro-Communism, Anti-Communism. These are not ideologies but point of views and any person in the world will always have one or the other attitude or none at all TerryJ-Ho 01:19, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

Immaterial to the issue at hand. We are talking about anti-Hindu views and prejudices here.Hkelkar 01:22, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

Most of the sources that use "anti-Hindu" are referring to specific incidents, not a phenomenon. BhaiSaab 01:20, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

Bigotry against Hindus are definitely a systemic phenomenon in many countries per the US congress report itself.Hkelkar 01:21, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

Another point of note: Anti-religious activities are not reserved for one religion or another, even though it's more visible in the Jewish community. Systematic discrimination of others over their religious views will happen regardless of who is discriminating against whom. This is a significant part of religious fanaticism and it's been happening for centuries, and it still continues today to a lesser degree. Torinir _{( Ding my phone My support calls E-Support Options )} 01:25, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

Comment:Frankly I do not know how to react to this AfD. Personally I am so utterly disgusted I could retch. TerryJ-HO is deliberately conflating the issue of Hindu Nationalism with the hate and bigotry against millions of Hindus who have nothing to do with any goddamn nationalist movement.Many anti-semites also conflate the issue of anti-semitism with the issue of minority Jewish Fundamentalism, does that mean antisemitism should also be put up for AfD?This is utterly disgusting!Hkelkar 01:40, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

Well you've already reacted by soliciting six votes. BhaiSaab 01:43, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

No different than what TerryJ-Ho has been doing.Plus, informing users is no crime.I do not know user:Torinir and have never met him before.Hkelkar 01:45, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

One can expect you not to call the Hindu Nationalists as goddam on your after these edits but anyhow let us remain within the realm of discussion rather than out of it.TerryJ-Ho

Yes, the pettiness of this AfD is becoming eminently clear after the views of User:Martinp23 in the Tipu Sultan debate here addressed to my side of that debate.Hkelkar 02:19, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

If you are bent on discussing issues that have no relevance here note that Martinp23 wrote these comments as your advocate and not as a judge.I would appreciate if you continued to comment on the article at hand and not the editors.TerryJ-Ho 02:33, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

To use your own words:"They all are relevent as they put into perspective TerryJ-Ho's position" from here as anon ip 82.44.188.125.Hkelkar 02:40, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

• Speedy Keep I sense bad faith here. The topic is quite well documented in the article. It is a fact that some people/organizations treat Hindus with contempt due to their views on Hinduism. That is documented in this article. Nobleeagle 02:37, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

• Keep I see nothing wrong in this well-cited, balanced article. --Incman|वार्ता 02:54, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

• Speedy Keep - The reasons cited by User:Terry Jo are not good enough to delete a well-referenced article like this one.-Bharatveer 03:32, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

• Keep It is actually a valid term. See Anti-Hindu at Google Book Search. That said use or misuse of the term by Hindutvaseems to be significant going by Google Scholar so there should be more mention of that.--T. Anthony 03:36, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

• AfD debates (Not yet sorted)
• AfD debates