Revision as of 09:13, 25 August 2006 editBADMINton (talk | contribs)235 edits →Where was Ms Maino born?← Previous edit | Revision as of 05:58, 29 August 2006 edit undoHornplease (talk | contribs)9,260 edits →Removal: deleting per WP:BLPNext edit → | ||
Line 107: | Line 107: | ||
Have removed removed the following as it is factually in correct. | Have removed removed the following as it is factually in correct. | ||
(The vulgate version of the events mentioned above run contrary to the actual events that took place behind the screens. The are restrictions placed on Sonia Gandhi because she is a naturalised citizen of India. She was not supposed to have been eligible to run for office in India because the same restriction applies to natrualised citizens of Italy who relinquished their previously held Indian citizenship. This is covered under Section 10 of the Indian Citizenship Act of 1955. An example, often cited by her critics is of actress Sonali Bose who married the Italian Director, Roberto Rosselini and naturalised as an Italian Citizen. She was barred from running for municipal office. Hence, if restrictions are applied on naturalised citizens of Italy from India, the same are to be applied to naturalised citizens of India from Italy.Related Essay | |||
In light of the above restriction, President Kalam, denied the office of Prime Minister to Sonia Gandhi.It is also a well known fact that Sonia Gandhi lied about her educational qualifications in her election affidavit. She did this by falsely linking Lennox Cook School which is situated in the borough of Cambridgeshire to the University of Cambridge.Related Essay--BangaloreSri 18:23, 29 March 2006 (UTC) | |||
Regardless of her motives, her actions have consolidated her hold on party with virtually every Congress leader rallying for her.) | |||
Plaese read the link i have added as the Supreme Court of India has dismissed two PILs filed in this regard. I believe the Supreme Court of India is the competent authority on the constitution of India. | Plaese read the link i have added as the Supreme Court of India has dismissed two PILs filed in this regard. I believe the Supreme Court of India is the competent authority on the constitution of India. |
Revision as of 05:58, 29 August 2006
Biography Unassessed | |||||||
|
Devnagari
Maybe it's the way it renders on Mozilla that's the problem. However, I get, roughly transliterated, s-o-n-yi-a, which, needless to say, is not correct. Should be s-o-ni-y-a, with the ि on the न, correct? Graft 19:02, 2 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Fixed this, as you suggested. User:Venkatr_n
- First thing first, its Devanagari not Devnagari (I make this mistake too.) Now about Soniya Gandhi. I use Yudit for writing Devanagari and in the transliteration scheme I use this is what is written:
soniyaa gaa.Ndhii (or soniyA gA.NdhI)
- It render's as this:सोनिया गाँधी and looks absolutely fine. The result is what is expected. Now I don't know how this: सोिनया गान्धी can be generated in my transliteration scheme but it creates the problem of separating the ि and the न. Now about what you see I suggest you go to BBC Hindi and if you see the same rendering with the ि after the न then I think it has nothing to do with your browser but its your Operating System. If you are using Linux get the latest version, if you are using Windows 2000/XP install support for Indic fonts from your Windows CD and if you are using something else - I don't know what can be done. Hope that helps. -Ankur 04:21, 26 Dec 2004 (UTC)
- Hmm... the BBC also renders wrong for me. I'm using Firefox on Linux with current revisions, so I guess there's some error here (or at least an inconsistency between Firefox and IE). I'm inclined to believe that Firefox conforms to standards, but I guess time will resolve this on its own. (also, incidentally, Devnagari is fine as a transliteration) Graft 04:58, 26 Dec 2004 (UTC)
- I am sure it is not a browser problem. I think it is the responsibility of your Desktop environment to render fonts properly. Its more likely that you did not install support for Indic languages. KDE supported Hindi last year in version 3.2, here is a screenshot from trolltech website . Gnome supports it too. --Ankur 15:24, 26 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Wrong year of birth for Priyanka?
This article says that Priyanka was born in 1972. The article about Priyanka herself says 1971.
Removal
Articles on this site should be from neutral point of view, not BJP Propaganda, Entire article is written with negative slur. Even the comment above (the first one) reflects that... As of now I am deleting this line "But Sonia remains at the post of the Leader of the Majority, which she has kept to herself for controlling the Prime minister(?????), and the Chairperson of the Congress Parliamentary Party (all Congress MPs)." Would like it if someone would flag this as non neutral and completely rewrite this article
John
Yohajohn 04:54, 19 October 2005 (UTC)
- I agree completely. The old article was ludicrous and quite shockingly anti-Sonia. The new one is much better.
=> Yohajohn, Please be aware that statements may be anti-Sonia; that does not make them false or incorrect. (Statements about Adolf Hitler nowadays are generally 'Anti-Hitler' - that does not make false. Or are you questioning the gas-chamber atrocities??).
POV
John Yohajohn 05:15, 19 October 2005 (UTC) I am a fool and Sonia is a traitor.
Volker report Removal
The para on the volker report is factually incorrect. I original allegation in the volker report is Natwar Singh/Congress. Which is interpreted as Natwr Singh of the congress. There is no allegation on Soni Gandhi or Congress, even by the BJP. This para doesnot belong. Its should at best be added on page of Natwar Sing or Indian National Congress (INC)
I will be removing this para after waiting for time period for comments
- You are a cheat and seem to be a paid servant of Sonia Maino. There are reports that she wrote a letter to Saddam Hussein and it names her party as the beneficiary at a time when she was the President.
- Please try to discuss instead of flaring up. The 'reports' on Volker report only mentions Natwar Singh and Congress. Therefore it should be placed rightly on Natwar Sing or Congress page. If u look at the article on Indian National Congress. U will see that the article is already there. On ur point that she was president of Congress...Does that mean theat we have to put Tehlka scam and all other scam that tool place when A.B. Vajpayee was in government on the Vajpayee page. Definitely no. I believe only the ones on which the person has been directly been accused of should be put up. In fact bofors allegation is a more appropriate article to be put under title 'Political Accusation'.
- I think it was a great idea, that the Volcker Report para was removed altogether. I saw it mentioning Sonia Gandhi, and immediately edited it, removing her name. I am glad the para is not mentioned at all now. And please ignore this person who seems to be from the RSS. Even POV is ok,but factually unproved stuff such as "Natwar Singh is the foot soldier for the Congress" should not be included in a Misplaced Pages entry. The post below has noted this, and I too had noted the use of term "freedom fighters", among those who opposed her prime-ministership. Who were these so called "freedom fighters"? I am glad that is gone too. The new article is much more balanced and fair.
- Some idiot said "And please ignore this person who seems to be from the RSS.". I would like to tell that the Misplaced Pages is as much of the RSS as much it is yours. Why do you mean by "ignoring"? Is this Yahoo! chat? UPA-led government may not allow free speech but Jimmy Wales-led Wikimedia project DOES. Should I make some comments on your race, complexion and religion? Should I prophecy that you are a black Christian from the southern India? Please refrain from making such gross statements. RSS is a patriotic organisation for a majority of Indians. No fact would be concealed. Lastly, learn to sign talk pages after defacing them (just like I do...LOL). ;) ♔BADMIN♛ (आओ✍) 09:07, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
- I think it was a great idea, that the Volcker Report para was removed altogether. I saw it mentioning Sonia Gandhi, and immediately edited it, removing her name. I am glad the para is not mentioned at all now. And please ignore this person who seems to be from the RSS. Even POV is ok,but factually unproved stuff such as "Natwar Singh is the foot soldier for the Congress" should not be included in a Misplaced Pages entry. The post below has noted this, and I too had noted the use of term "freedom fighters", among those who opposed her prime-ministership. Who were these so called "freedom fighters"? I am glad that is gone too. The new article is much more balanced and fair.
Removed line on supporter of Benito Mussolini
I looked over some references on her father being mussolini supporter. It may be true, it may not be true. Rigjt now I don't have any authentic references for that point. So it will remaim deleted till it can be removed
- Here is an authentic reference: /*Quote*/ I ask him about Eugenio Maino's alleged Fascist sympathies. "That shouldn't surprise you. He came from Asiago not far from Vicenza in the Veneto region where nationalism was strong. He fought in the Russian campaign alongside the Germans and remained true to Fascist Nationalist ideology all his life. I have even heard it said that he belonged to the Salo Republic that Mussolini set up in 1943 after he was ousted by his son-in-law. That is what people say but I have no confirmation of it. He even gave his three daughters Russian names in honour of the campaign in which he fought. He venerated the Duce. Many still do," says Giovanni, referring to Italy's war-time Fascist dictator Benito Mussolini. /*Unquote*/ from
http://www.frontlineonnet.com/fl1509/15090140.htm Authentic enough?
Biased writing/editing
I have made the three changes to this article on Mrs. Sonia Gandhi which I think are very essential in order to maintain the character and value of Misplaced Pages as a forum with impartial and correct (or atleast close to it) information. People should desist from colouring the infomration here with their own affinities and prejudices.
The opposition to Sonia Gandhi's candidature as Prime Minister was on account of her foreign origins and on account of the fact that she retained her Italian citizenship for 15 years and took Indian citizenship only in 1982. This opposition was not only from the right wing BJP, but also from a section of the common populace. Besides, there was opposition within the coalition and within the congress party itself, on account of which three senior leaders split the congree to form the "Nationalist Congress Party".
Moreover, this issues was there right from the point she stepped in the political arena and being well of this she contested the parliamentary elections from two constituencies, just in case she looses from one. Both these consituencies were Congress strongholds and elected only Congress candidates for decades i.e. Amethi and Bellary constituencies and was elected from both. She subsequently gave up the Bellary seat as required by law.
Besides, Mrs. Sonia Gandhi studied at some language school in Cambridge, not in Cambridge University as is sought to be portrayed.
Please desist from vandalising the material here to suit your own interests and image.
- Yes but u dont need to character assasinate the person just because u fon't like. here is point by point rebuttal
a) On the point of mentioning her citizenship...the original post contained that she took citizenship onlt after 1983 after rajiv gandhi became prime minister (because it was felt to be only a formality). You don't have to additinally mention 15 years its irrevelant (anyone can see that from fates)
b) Only language school in cambridge...The article did not say she did a language school in canbridge university It just said she studied in cambridge, if u misread it as cambridge university thats ur own fault...and i don't think u need to emphasis its cambridge ...when i say i studied in kanpur it doesnot mean i studied in IIT kanpur noe do i have to add to my biodata that i didn't study in kanpur IIIT I hope u see the difference.
c) On ur point there is not much refernce to her 'candidature as Prime Minister was on account of her foreign origins' in fact the entire article only talks about that in fact the article should be renamed as "Reasons why sonia should not be Prime Minister" rather than a profile of Sonia Gandhi. The main opposition was from right wing bjp and to a degree sharad pawar and company both were mentioned.
d) On ur contention is contested from two seats safe seats ...I don't see how that is revelant. In India almost all important leaders sometimes contest from two seats even Advani does so...i don't see what point u r trying to make from this. Infact she won with record margin from both the seats
Photo
Please post an real not-doctored photo of sonia. current photo with a doctored back-ground of indian tri-color (colors of indian national flag) is disturbing! for example look at the pages of USA presidents and their photos!
POV again
Much of the BJP propaganda has been filtered, but now the article seems haphazard, perhaps biased the othe way around.
First, the Congress party did not win any surprise victory. The BJP, even after losing the strength to form Government, still has only a few members less than the Congress. The UPA coalition is a Post-poll alliance stiched together with support from the Communist-bloc of parties. So it is essentially a bipolar government with the centrist Congress and the Left. This arrangement is one of the reasons that there are fire-fights in the UPA. Credit to Ms Gandhi should instead be given for revitalizing a party that many had written off.
As for being a political novice, well, even four years as a Cabinet minister are not at all sufficient for a Prime-Ministerial chair. So, for all intents and purposes, she was a novice when compared with some of the other senior leaders in her own party. It should instead be credited to her political acumen that she not only outmanoeuvered the NDA, but also reliquished the Prime Minister's chair for the reasons mentioned.
Finally, the defeat of the NDA was due to a large number of other factors, independent of the Congress party. They were widely criticised for corruption (although none of the charges have been proven), and were generally seen as inept administrators who failed to deliver on their election promises. So, the Aam Aadmi bit shopuld be put into perspective.
- 'First, the Congress party did not win any surprise victory'. It was a susprise victory even the bjp accepts that. From all accounts it looked like BJP led NDA alliance would comfortably win absolute majority
'Finally, the defeat of the NDA was due to a large number of other factors.' Agreed that is so in all elections, there is no single factor which constitutes victory and analysis of reason why NDA failed in election is not purpose of this article. What is revelant here is that being leader of opossition party she and the slogan it was symbolic of bjps defeat (something like saying that Winston churchil withstood the germans in second world was though he never fought the battle himself and there were man other factors involved, He was symbolic of the sucess of britian)
Removal
Have removed removed the following as it is factually in correct.
Plaese read the link i have added as the Supreme Court of India has dismissed two PILs filed in this regard. I believe the Supreme Court of India is the competent authority on the constitution of India.
Citations Needed
There are a ton of statements in the main article on controversial subjects that havent yet been cited. I'm leaving them in for the moment, but I would like to see some references soon. Hornplease 23:31, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
Cite properly please
The allegations that are conitunally put in the article as "persistent" are not some that have been aired in the press as often as the article makes it sound. The reference provided is from a single article, and that too written by a BJP MP. If you can find a report or citation that indicates that this is a "commonly-held" belief, please cite it and only then reinstate the reference. I certainly have not heard it, unlike the often-expressed concern that she took 15-16 years to gain Indian citizenship. Hornplease 21:16, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
Where was Ms Maino born?
The Wiki article and the official website of Ms Maino contradict each other. Is it Lusiana or Luciana. Compare the results: http://www.google.co.in/search?hs=7yr&hl=en&client=firefox&rls=org.mozilla%3Aen-US%3Aunofficial&q=lusiana+italy&btnG=Search&meta= http://www.google.co.in/search?hs=1yr&hl=en&client=firefox&rls=org.mozilla%3Aen-US%3Aunofficial&q=luciana+italy&btnG=Search&meta= ♔BADMIN♛ (आओ✍) 09:13, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
Categories: