Talk:Bal Gangadhar Tilak: Difference between revisions
Line 69: | Line 69: | ||
So what has stopped you from editing this article ? [[User:Jonathansammy|Jonathansammy]] ([[User talk:Jonathansammy|talk]]) 20:20, 11 January 2013 (UTC) |
So what has stopped you from editing this article ? [[User:Jonathansammy|Jonathansammy]] ([[User talk:Jonathansammy|talk]]) 20:20, 11 January 2013 (UTC) |
||
I am blocked for writing such things on Wikipedia India Pages |
|||
--[[Special:Contributions/117.204.93.21|117.204.93.21]] ([[User talk:117.204.93.21|talk]]) 12:58, 12 January 2013 (UTC) |
Revision as of 12:58, 12 January 2013
India: Maharashtra / Politics B‑class High‑importance | |||||||||||||||||||
|
Biography: Politics and Government B‑class | ||||||||||
|
Religion: New religious movements B‑class Top‑importance | |||||||||||||
|
New Edits
I don't have time to police and I certainly don't give a damn about people reverting these new edits, but they should NOT be reverted because (1) they are better organized and lucid, (2) they are not repetitive stuff.
Don't freak about an Anon adding these changes. As long as Wikipedia allows it, there is no problem with Anon work.
the dalit view on tilak section should ber emoved as it is biased and very offensive
NO.
Actually the Dalit section enhances the quality of the article as it puts Tilak in the proper perspective. It is the Brahmin class of India (I am also a Brahmin) to which Tilak belonged wants to project a false image of Tilak as a great progressive and a leader of all classes. In reality he was a Brahmin reactionary and a Hindu fundamentalist!
Let people know the entire personality of Tilak.
Enyone who say tilak a fandamentalist is a fool persone.who do not know what is hindu and who are fundamentalist.
POV?
"The British colonial authorities infamously and derogatorily called the great leader as "Father of the Indian unrest" "... isn't this biased? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 163.1.221.95 (talk) 15:11, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
- I agree, several points of this article are rather biased. I'll take a more thorough look later but this will probably end up flagged. Celestial Oblivion (talk) 06:00, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
The main reason of rivalry between Gopal Ganesh Agarkar & Tilak was tilak was against social justice..... This is tru.. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 1.23.199.75 (talk) 15:47, 7 April 2012 (UTC)
Problem with quote
There seems to be some problem with this text here, and it doesn't make sense: "However, English, which (Anant) Chaturdashi (in Aug/Sept span), which contributed for people to get together and celebrate the festival and provided a good platform for leaders to inspire masses. His call for boycott of foreign goods also served to inspire patriotism among Indian masses."--fredericknoronha 07:43, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
Ganesh Chaturthi: 1893 or 1894?
The following references seem to contradict the year.
- Hindu-Muslim Relations in British India, G. R. Thursby, p89,1
- A Concise History of Modern India Barbara Daly Metcalf, Thomas R. Metcalf, p 150-151, 2. Docku:“what up?” 05:27, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
social contribution
I have expanded the section. I am not sure if the song is suitable to this page or Ganesh Chaturthi. I went ahead and added anyway. comments welcome. thanks. Docku:“what up?” 14:56, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
- Was the song written by Tilak himself? Becasue that is the impression I got when I read it. However the statment does not specifically say so. If it is not written by Tilak , I dont think it should be on this page. --Deepak D'Souza 12:11, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
Bal G.Tilak
Very strong Personality. Freedom Fighter of India. He was having self breath. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.18.61.229 (talk) 09:03, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
Biased article
The quality of this article is just like a political party literature. The tone is similar to that in a Indian school history textbook.
There is a very major point that is missed. That Tilak had turned pro-British in his later years. He gave full support to British war efforts. Who can say for sure that he was not disillusioned by local leaders who naturally would be competing with him for leadership.
Moreover, when speaking of his earlier year endevours to activate Ganesh pooja, it was to incite Muslim antagonism in Maharashtra. This negative element still haunts the local areas.
Beyond all this, to define a local leader in one state as a national leader who was venerated all over British-India is also the product of baseless imagination. It is doubtful if he was seen as their leader by the majority people in Tamil nad, Kerala, Eastern states, Kashmir etc. or in independent kingdoms like Travancore. Most of them would not even have heard of him.
Wikipedia articles on India should not be written by persons who are write like parrots. If that is the quality required, all one need to do is to copy paste NCERT textbooks --117.204.91.220 (talk) 08:19, 11 January 2013 (UTC)
So what has stopped you from editing this article ? Jonathansammy (talk) 20:20, 11 January 2013 (UTC)
I am blocked for writing such things on Wikipedia India Pages
--117.204.93.21 (talk) 12:58, 12 January 2013 (UTC)
- B-Class India articles
- High-importance India articles
- B-Class India articles of High-importance
- B-Class Maharashtra articles
- Top-importance Maharashtra articles
- B-Class Maharashtra articles of Top-importance
- WikiProject Maharashtra 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
- Mid-importance biography (politics and government) articles
- Politics and government work group articles
- WikiProject Biography articles
- B-Class Religion articles
- Top-importance Religion articles
- B-Class New religious movements articles
- Top-importance New religious movements articles
- New religious movements articles
- WikiProject Religion articles