Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 22:20, 26 June 2013

The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information.

Please discuss removing content which is cited/backed up by a reliable source here first before removing it. If you wish to counter a claim made by a reliable source, find another reliable source and add it to the article, summarising what it says, thus providing readers with both sides of points of view. Further edit warring over cited content without discussion may lead to page protection and blocks.

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 High‑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 High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. 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. Hinduism High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Hinduism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Hinduism on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.HinduismWikipedia:WikiProject HinduismTemplate:WikiProject HinduismHinduism High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Archives

Index Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 Archive 4 Archive 5 Archive 6 Archive 7

This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III.

Edit request from Wouterhagens, 3 September 2010

1. REDIRECT Template:Edit protected/preload

Please add the link

Recent Edits to this Talk Page

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

reservation

माननीय श्री,

अध्यक्ष महोदय भारतीय जनता पार्टी

महोदय , भारत में इस समय चरों और सिर्फ और सिर्फ दमन और स्वार्थ की ही राजनीति चाल रही है उसी क्रम में देश में आरक्षण भी अभिशाप की तरह देश की अखंडता और एकता को घुन की तरह खाने का काम कर रहा है जब भी कभी कोंई एसे हटाने की मांग करता है तो एक आवाज आती है इहें सताया गया है इसलिए अब इन्हें आरक्षण देकर आगे लायेंगे क्या वास्तव में ये उचित है ? क्या सिर्फ दलित ही सताया गया है क्या समस्त ब्रह्मण क्षत्रिय धनवान थे या हैं ? अगर आप इसका उत्तर जानने की कोशिश करेंगे तो आप को नहीं में ही उत्तर मिलेगा और अगर ऐसा नहीं है तो जाती आधार पर आरक्षण क्यों? और वास्तव में ये आरक्षण ही है जो हिन्दू समाज को विघटित कर रही है और जब तक हिन्दू समाज एकार्तित नहीं होगा तब तक बीजेपी कभी भी पूर्ण सत्ता नहीं पा सकती.

ख़ैर छोडिये ये सत्ता की बातें हमसे अच्छा आप समझ सकते हैं हम सिर्फ ये कहना चाहते है की जिस परिद्रिस्य में हमने होश संभाला सायद आप ने नहीं देखा होगा मै भी ब्रह्मण हूँ और जिस गरीबी में पला सायद उसे आप कभी नहीं समझ सकते . फिर भी मै ये लेख लिख कर अपनी बात आप तक पहुँचाना चाहता हूँ. अगर सवर्णों के प्रति आप अपनी तोड़ी भी नैतिक जिम्मेदारी समझते हैं तो कास्ट बेस आरक्षण को समाप्त करें और नहीं सिर्फ बदले की भावना रखते हुए हमें दलित बनाने पर तुले हैं और चाहते हैं की भारत में सवर्णों का अस्तित्व समाप्त हो जाये और फिर हिन्दू समाज विलुप्त हो जाये तो आप और सत्ता में बैठे लोग सर्व समर्थ हैं समस्त सवर्णों को देश निकला का आदेश देदो या फिर उन्हें फंसी लटका कर समाप्त कर दो.

हमने कभी भी ऐसे स्वतंत्र भारत की कमाना नहीं की थी हम आज भूखे राह कर मजदूरी कर के पेट भरने मात्र को परेशां हैं और ऊपर से गली मिलाती है की हमने औरों का हक छिना और हमारे महान नेता कहते हैं की हम आरक्षण का विरोध करने वाले का विरोध करेंगे

हम बीजेपी में आस्था रखते हैं इसलिए यह लेख आप को संबोधित है और अगर आप हमारी बतों से सहमत नहीं हैं तो ये हमारा और समस्त सवर्ण समाज का दुर्भाग्य है साथ ही हिदुत्व का भी दुर्भाग्य ही है

जै हिंद जै भारत

                                           ANAND KUMAR MISHRA

Edit request on 13 April 2013, to change the word from "Extremist" to "revolutionary"

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Please change the word "Extremist" to "revolutionary"

Reference: Please kindly refer the history of it's origin, And in Indian history from time to time almost all the Prime Ministers of India has condemned the word Extremist in Indian Parliament.

Aravindhkilaru (talk) 17:43, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

The sources say extremist. First, you'll need sources that describe it as "revolutionary"; if those are reliable and of due weight, then we can add both descriptions. Qwyrxian (talk) 03:45, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

References to Hitler

Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh does not derive inspiration from Hitler. This is a derogatory reference and should be removed. There is no cited source for this remark. The quoted statement from M S Golwalkar's book has no mention of Hitler and this comment has nothing to back it. RSS organization is non violent and wants to teach good values based n Hinduism like in a yoga center. It is also non political and has no philosophy to obtain power. IF nothing can be quoted from RSS literature or speeches, then it can not be ascribed to RSS, for this topic. Referring to Hitler on this page amounts to following Hitler's hatred inciting methods. Let us follow path of love and understanding and not of hatred and maligning.

There is also a reference criticism as extremist and paramilitary organization. This is again 'opinion' based on desire to portray a peaceful organization in negative light. Provide objective information and let the readers conclude the 'extreme' or 'cuddly, lovable' nature of organization.

The following paragraph is also incorrect and derogatory. HRA resorted to path of 'violent freedom struggle'. RSS is completely non violent and has mission of 'character building'. RSS was not even chartered with removing British from India. And then mention of 'implemented forcibly in RSS' is untruthful and meaningless. He founded this organization on very different principles and goals and there is no question of 'forcible implementation'. One does not have to be 'Hindu' to attend RSS shakha and membership is informal and there is no formal membership list. All are welcome in RSS to participate.

"Since Hedgewar was primarily associated with the Hindustan Republican Association, he adopted the full constitution of erstwhile HRA and implemented it forcibly in his newly established organisation RSS later"

My children and I have developed trust in Misplaced Pages. Let us keep it objective and not a tool for political vendettas and continue to be trustworthy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vsagdeo (talk • contribs) 21:47, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

Uh...yeah, I was with you at the very beginning, but as you went further, you lost credibility for me. There is no doubt that major, influential people whose opinions matter classify RSS as an extremist group, so that is certainly not going out. Saying that they respect Hitler is just another way of saying that they respected the Nazi movement, which, in fact the quotation says exactly. So if you think it's better to change that to "Nazism" or "Nazi Germany" or "the Nazi German position of ethnic cleansing", then we coudl do that. The rest of what you say are unsourced claims that do not match the numerous, respectable sources we do have that classify RSS as somewhere between extremist and terorrist. Of course, if you can provide sources independent of the group that state that they are non-violent, then we could consider adding those as a counterpoint, but we can't remove the sourced info already here. Qwyrxian (talk) 07:37, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

I suggest making a separate article for Criticism of Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh‎ where references both independent of the group and the corresponding viewpoint of RSS can be added. It is wrong as you say that "no doubt that major, influential people whose opinions matter classify RSS as an extremist group" but "most influential people" like major buisness leaders are associated with Indian National Congress and most newspapers are either Pro-minority or Pro-Congress and they generally tend to potray RSS as an extremist group due to some unknown reason. Solomon7968 (talk) 11:46, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

You would need to show that there is a major body of high quality work which would count as criticism. You would, in fact, probably need to show that there was an academic topic devoted to criticism. Otherwise, you'd fall directly under WP:POVFORK. Your points about other groups are just opinions, unsubstantiated by facts. Again, the best approach would be to find sources that establish the opposing opinion. Should enough of those be found, we could look towards a major rewrite. Qwyrxian (talk) 12:06, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

It is not necessary to be an academic discipline. Take for example Criticism of Human Rights Watch. It gives list of criticisms on Pro-Israel, Arab-Israeli conflict etc etc. To create Criticism of Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh‎ it is necessary first then to create a full fledged Media bias in India adding chunks of info to Media bias in South Asia and its biases of say topics like Minority Appeasement, Pornography, Reservation in India, Westernization to name a few. Then proceeding we can give sources about the prominent Media barons who are associated with Indian National Congress or Communist Party of India like M. J. Akbar, Seema Mustafa, Shobhana Bhartia and others who tend to brand RSS as an extremist group. It needs work since coverage of Indian politics is low. We don't have articles on the biographies of a number of Imam's who are Member of Parliament. I generally try to avoid my own political views on wikipedia but if RSS is an extremist group then why not Akbaruddin Owaisi and others are extremists. Solomon7968 (talk) 12:38, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

HRW in the Lead

Driven to the talk page after a revert warrior bent on lawyering forced my hand. I have indeed if you check the archives written multiple posts on Undue Weight given to ideas/events that are tangential to the RSS' notability in the lead. The onus is on those adding material to demonstrate its legitimacy. First, HRW is a controversial advocacy organization, and Secondly the RSS was not even banned for its (alleged) role in the riots, and thirdly, the RSS is not central to the media coverage of the 2002 riots and conversely 2002 is tangential to the notability of the RSS. Pectore 04:03, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Seriously? Fine I'll take the matter to RSN. HRW is, of course, not reliable on issues of politics, history, etc. But on human rights abuses? They're practically the authority. Maybe I live in some sort of weird spin bubble. I'll leave the info out for now. Also, I could see a justification for moving the info out of the lead into the body of the article, but I suppose we should first get to RS issues. Qwyrxian (talk) 04:42, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Actually, as I was about to post, the issue isn't RS; there's an archived thread in at Misplaced Pages:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 15#Human Rights Watch clearly establishing them as RS. The question is, as you point out, one of due vs. undue. If we agree to move the point out of the lead will that be sufficient to satisfy your UNDUE concerns, Pectore? This material must be in the article; as the general consensus at RSN said (and matching my own opinion of them), HRW is not only considered a good source for Human Rights Abuses info, they're one of the top 3 (with AI and parts of the UN being the others). If it is to be moved, where shall we move it? Qwyrxian (talk) 04:46, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Rashtriya_Swayamsevak_Sangh#Claims_that_the_RSS_has_been_party_to_Violence_and_to_RiotsPectore 04:55, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

So it is. Okay, then, sounds fine by me. I hadn't realized it wasn't covered elsewhere. I'm inclined to accept that even though HRW has a very high profile, it is just one organization's opinion, and without later substantiation, and thus more appropriate out of the lead. Qwyrxian (talk) 07:37, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Source misrepresentation?

The source does not appear to support "by K. B. Hedgewar, a revolutionary and doctor from Nagpur, as a socio-cultural group in British India" this at all, and Hedgewar is not even mentioned in the book. I have removed that and replaced it with content that is in the source. Whoever reverts my changes may do well to actually read the source before misrepresenting it. Darkness Shines (talk) 22:20, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

• Misplaced Pages controversial topics
• All unassessed articles
• Start-Class India articles
• High-importance India articles
• Start-Class India articles of High-importance
• WikiProject India articles
• Start-Class Hinduism articles
• High-importance Hinduism articles