Talk:Mahatma Gandhi

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Former featured article Mahatma Gandhi is a former featured article. Please see the links under Article milestones below for its original nomination page (for older articles, check the nomination archive) and why it was removed.
Good article Mahatma Gandhi has been listed as one of the History good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Main Page trophy This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on February 1, 2005.
News This article has been mentioned by a media organisation:

Edit request[edit]

In the Celibacy section, the sentence, "But Gandhi said that if he wouldn't let Manu sleep with her, it would be a sign of weakness.[189]" the word "her" should be replace with "him". Reference to the article justifies this, which also makes the sentence comprehensible in context.

Yes check.svg Done Thank you for pointing that out. --NeilN talk to me 03:21, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

Imari and Kai were princes, amd they were the most important people in the world. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.56.9.118 (talk) 01:08, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 18 March 2014[edit]

Gute morge kann ich ebes ändre?

84.159.33.209 (talk) 07:23, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. ... You could also post in de:Mahatma Gandhi. Sam Sailor Sing 08:32, 18 March 2014 (UTC)
(edit conflict) Not done: As this is the English Wikipedia, your request should be in English, however, you cannot change the page, because it is semi-protected. If you wish to request that a page is unprotected you must apply at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection, not ask here - Arjayay (talk) 08:34, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

Naked Ambition[edit]

Hi all, After reading a book named "Naked Ambitions" by Jad Adams (a historian), we come to know about mind-blowing facts about The Father of the Nation's sexual life. Do you think, these informations should be added to the article? Remember Jad Adams is a qualified historian (not a biographer or journalist that we can call the informations fake). At the same time I am coming to know all these details for the first time and in no other book I have read so. I am totally confused. Further comments are welcomed. RRD13 (talk) 15:53, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

Jad Adams is a TV producer and director who is also the author of popular books on several topics. Among his books are: AIDS: The HIV Myth, Rudyard Kipling, 'A History of Kings & Princes Garth and Forest Hill, A Brief History of Women and the Vote, Double Indemnity: Murder for Insurance, Tony Benn: A Biography, The History of Shirley Oaks Children's Home, Pankhurst, Madder Music, Stronger Wine: The Life of Ernest Dowson, Poet and Decadent, Hideous Absinthe: A History of the Devil in a Bottle, in addition to his book on Gandhi. While I have no doubt that his books are well-written, he is not a professional historian of South Asia. Wikipedia, in general, gives greater weight to scholarly, peer-reviewed sources; see, for example: WP:Reliable sources#Some types of sources.
This article has used scholarly biographies of Gandhi such as those by historians Judith M. Brown or Stanley Wolpert or political scientists Lloyd and Susanne Rudolph, or work on Indian nationalism and decolonization such as that of Anthony Low or Ravinder Kumar. Best regards, Fowler&fowler«Talk» 20:29, 24 March 2014 (UTC)
I'm not sure what facts you are referring to, but if you mean Gandhi's experiments with celibacy or "Brahmacharya" in 1946 during his stay in Bengal, then please consider that they been public knowledge since 1946 itself, Gandhi himself widely discussing it with his followers during his Bengal sojourn, and many authors writing about it thereafter, including Gandhi's secretary, Nirmal Kumar Bose. They are also discussed in Celibacy and experiments ... section of the Gandhi article. Best regards, Fowler&fowler«Talk» 23:18, 24 March 2014 (U
Can you be more specific what you want to add or specify ? Shrikanthv (talk) 08:18, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────The book Gandhi: Naked Ambition is available for preview on Google Books here. As for the author, " He is a Fellow of the Royal Historical Society and is currently a Visiting Research Fellow of the School of Advanced Study, University of London." This makes Adams a noted academic and the book is published by a reputable publisher. That means it passes the test of a reliable source and is therefore suitable as a reference for the article where relevant. ► Philg88 ◄ Star.pngtalk 09:09, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

Yes, I'm aware of that, but neither the Fellowship of the Royal Historical Society, awarded routinely to popular historians, nor Visiting Research Fellowship, a temporary appointment, makes his work scholarly, reliable, by Wikipedia's definition, though it may be. Scholarly work is usually peer-reviewed, published by scholarly publishers, and reviewed in scholarly journals. To date, the book has not been reviewed in any journals. Among reliable sources, Wikipedia gives more weight to scholarly sources. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 09:37, 25 March 2014 (UTC)
My problem is the line "we come to know about mind-blowing facts about The Father of the Nation's sexual life.... I am coming to know all these details for the first time." Welcome to Wikipedia wehere the facts are already in the article. Best look at the large scholarly literature on the topic--much of which is already summarized here. Rjensen (talk) 09:49, 25 March 2014 (UTC)
@Rjensen, Shrikanthv: A summary of the book can be accessedhere. RRD13 (talk) 10:12, 25 March 2014 (UTC)
@Fowler&fowler: That's why I put the "where relevant" in italics for emphasis, e.g. a sweeping generalisation unsupported by other sources would not be valid. Best, ► Philg88 ◄ Star.pngtalk 10:40, 25 March 2014 (UTC)
British enemies of Gandhi (Churchillians usually--like Roberts) have this strange interest in Gandhi's naked-non-sex. Seems to get them very excited. Maybe it blows their minds. But Adams has not added anything new. Rjensen (talk) 10:45, 25 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Rjensen +1. I also agree with FowlerAndFowler, Adams should not be included in this article. --TitoDutta 04:43, 27 March 2014 (UTC)
Really distastefull opinonated personnal attach thats what i could see , I would not really support such proclaimed truths Shrikanthv (talk) 11:14, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

Gandhi as anti-apartheid?[edit]

Gandhi is in Category:International_opponents_of_apartheid_in_South_Africa. Considering that Gandhi was murdered months before the 1948 elections after which apartheid legislation begun, I find this dubious. In particular, considering his racist views on SA blacks (at least earlier in his life, I do not know about later) and the fact that he apparently expressed pro-segregation sentiments, I find it hard to believe that he was particularly opposed to the legislation, apart from how it may have affected SA Indians (hagiographies notwithstanding). Is there a cite where he specifically criticises any prospects, plans or actions that could reasonably be termed "apartheid"?LCNielsen (talk) 00:02, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 13 April 2014[edit]

Please insert link or explanation who is "Guha". It can be read at some points of the text that "Guha argued..." or "Guha noted..." without any previous mentioning of Ramachandra Guha, or explanation of who he is, or what connection he has to Mahatma Gandhi. JhnyBp

Yes check.svg Done I've linked the first occurrence. If you think more information should be given, please state exactly what should be added and reopen the request. Jackmcbarn (talk) 14:34, 13 April 2014 (UTC)