Talk:Jana Gana Mana

Transliteration citation

There is a note in the article saying that a citation is needed for the National Library of Kolkata transliteration. Do Wikipedia policies require transliterations to be cited? What sort of sources are acceptable on Wikipedia as sources to cite a transliteration? If someone can give me some guidance, I'll look for a source. -- Lexmercatoria 12:37, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

"FACT" included in Trivia is INCORRECT.

Please note, the fact included in the trivia section of this page is incorrect. It states, "Rabindranath Tagore is the only person whose poems have been adopted as the national anthem of more than one country." Enoch Sontonga is a South African, who wrote a poem that was chosen as the national anthem of both Zambia South Africa and Tanzania. I've altered the trivia fact to reflect this. (5amuel 11:13, 11 July 2007 (UTC)).

Thanks for the correction! The point can perhaps be made that Tagore's two different poems have been adapted as national anthems of two countries, but the previous statement was incorrect as it stood. I wonder if we can even be certain that Tagore and Sontonga are the only persons with this distinction ?! Abecedare 11:34, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Jana gana mana, explain reversion and source

I was recently reverted by Ruebens, who quotes a source from The Tribune for the changes, which does not anywhere mention "Thou art the ruler" as the translation into English from Sanskrit. In my opinion, it is the word "adhinayak" which means "ruler" in Sanskrit, and although it is not a part of "Jana Gana Mana" (which legitimately means "The Minds of the People" in Sanskrit), there are some sources which say otherwise Indianchild.com, National-anthems.net. This one, in particular, from Hamiltoninstitute.com, gives a very accurate translation and includes "adhinayaka" as a part of the first phrase of the anthem. So can we have a general agreement to keep it is - "Thou art the ruler of the minds of All People". One more source: Sankalpindia.com. Thank you. -- Zamkudi ^{Dhokla queen!} 09:01, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Allright, I was taking a literal translation. But what you're reverts were doing is that it is also reverting the inclusion that the music is derived from a composition for the song by Ram Singh Thakur, which was my main emphasis and what I referenced. I think the current version is fine.Rueben lys 10:54, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

The role of Ram Singh Thakur is not clear

I'm confused. The article states:

"The music for the current version is derived from a composition for the song by Ram Singh Thakur."

Does this mean that Ram Singh Thakur composed an arrangement (i.e. added accompanying parts for other voices or musical instruments) for Rabindranath Tagore's original melody? Or does it mean that Ram Singh Thakur wrote a completely new melody for Tagore's poem and that this new melody is the one that is sung and played today? Please can someone clarify this point. It's quite important. Thank you. 62.64.207.76 23:13, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

This refers to role of Ram Singh. He was a bandmaster in the Azad Hind Fauj (or so-called Indian National Army). When the Andaman Islands were captured by the Japanese, the highest ranking officer of British Army of that abandoned fortress was Major Bijeta Chaudhuri (who later became Lieut. General, O.B.E and Surgeon General of the modern Indian Armed forces) who elected to stay behind to look after his men - spurning an offer to leave with the British on the last boats out. At Changi prison camp (Singapore) he was repeatedly approached by Subhash Chandra Bose to join the Japanese side - which he spurned. Chaudhuri was from an ancient Brahmo Samaj lineage and was himself married into the Tagore clan (actually his wife - RNT's grand-niece was given away in marriage by RNT himself at Jorasanko in 1932) and knew the Jana Gana Mana well - and Bijeta Chaudhuri used this Bengali Brahmosangeet song to keep up the morale of his men. The song became so famous in Changi for Indian determination that it was stolen (adopted) by the INA also when it was clear that the Japanese were going to lose, and this song became a rallying point for all Indians (Greater Indians) in the final days of WW-II. Ram Singh Thakur had nothing to do with this song or it's music. Sroy1947 (talk) 15:36, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

The original music was done by Rabindranath Tagore himself. I do not see why it would be someone named Ram Singh just because he played the song's rendition in his band? Well, when you play any Rabindra sangeet in band, it will sound different and that must not imply that the band has created a totally new music composition. I find the name of the music composer should be Rabindranath Tagore, not Ram Singh Thakur.

Request for comments: Is the Bengali song a Hindi song?

Please go through the above discussion for detailed arguments. The song was and IS Bengali. Original and *exact* transcripts of the constituent assembly resolutions *DO NOT* mention any adoption of a "hindi version". Also, what exactly is a "Hindi version"?

My cards are on the table:

• Please provide the exact line where the constituent assembly members mention that they are adopting a "hindi version" of a Bengali song.

• Please explain to me what is exactly "Hindi version" of a Bengali song? Was any word changed? Was it translated to Hindi? Was the grammar changed? What is the difference between the written version of the song as written by Tagore, and the official written version of the song? (In case anyone claims pronunciation as a "translation", then would you support my claim that the English Wikipedia is written in "Bengali version" because I and some other Bengali speakers read the articles loud with a Bengali accent?)

Unless you can satisfactorily provide answers to the above questions, please do not keep pasting a "Hindi version". That Hindi is the national language or something like that of India is irrelevant: this is not the Hindi encyclopedia, so any other script than the song's original script is quite irrelevant. --Ragib 08:25, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

You are a perfect example of a chauvinist. Nobody argues that the original song Jan-Man-Gan was in Bengali, which has 5 stanzas, which is not our natinal anthem. If you are so ingorant read this from government of india website http://india.gov.in/knowindia/national_anthem.php For your information, "The song Jana-gana-mana, composed originally in Bengali by Rabindranath Tagore, was adopted in its Hindi version by the Constituent Assembly as the National Anthem of India on 24 January 1950." You should also know that only first stanza is the National Anthem of India. So get your fact straight and stop acting childish. Rabindranath Tagore was a great Indian, don't make him look small with your narrow minded stubborn behavior. My mother tongue is not Hindi and I don't consider hindi as our national language. But accept that Hindi one of the official language of the Governement of India. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 132.198.138.110 (talk) 03:12, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

Wow, somebody sure forgot to see wonderful wikipedia policies such as WP:NPA. :). For the other comments, see above and inside archives. --Ragib (talk) 04:01, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

Wow, now you feel you are personally attacked ;-). May be you should go to the moderators to ban me because I am arguing your POV. Why don't you see the archives for any thing you want? I just replied to show how wrong your comments are. --Sandipani1 (talk) 16:00, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

Well, you should really see the archives, where the "Arguments" in your comment were debunked. --Ragib (talk) 16:19, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

Well, I did not that you are the owner of the wikipedia, who can debunk all arguments against your POV.--Sandipani1 (talk) 16:22, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

No, but many editors before you raised the same red herring argument to claim the same thing, but failed awfully to produce a single transcript from the parliamentary commission to support their position. So, you need to see the discussion. I don't want to repeat that. --Ragib (talk) 16:24, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

And you went to the parliament and supreme court to get approved your version of the national anthem. And since you are the authorized from the government of India, you don't have to prove anything. Don't be an ignorant. Show me any government of India official document which which proves your POV. Here is the official references to prove my POV. http://www.whitehouse.gov/national-anthem/newdelhi-full.html http://india.gov.in/knowindia/national_anthem.php

--Sandipani1 (talk) 16:33, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

The incorrectness of those links have been demonstrated here. Note that, the Indian Govt's own Constitutional assembly's detailed transcripts have more weight in this issue, and not the website. :) --Ragib (talk) 16:35, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

Now you want to me read your original research :-). I guess someone forgot to read wikipedia's policy of "no original research". Why don't you show me the Govt's own constitutional assembly's detailed transcript? --Sandipani1 (talk) 16:43, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

You are not making any sense here. The whole thing has been thoroughly discussed in the past, and I'm merely suggesting that you read that discussion first. Thank you. --Ragib (talk) 16:45, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

Oh.. I did not know the government of India had formed a committe under your chairmanship to find a solution on this issue. With the help from your great colleaugues you have successfully found a panacea on the issue. The issue has been permanently ressolved and sealed in an ultra secure place. And now a punk like me comes from no where and raises doubt about your panacea. What a shame! And now I am not making any sense at all.

But I don't understant why it has become so difficult for an expert like you to give me a single official document which proves your POV. I don't think you are a new wikipedia member. Majority of people including me don't understand Bengali, and perhaps don't want to know either. It does not matter if the anthem sounds like Bengali or Hindi. Many Indian languages uses same words. For example "jal or jol" for water is not only a Bengali word. National anthem is not your poem and your don't have to so emotional. I gave your the references from govt of india's official website and also US govt website. Just give me some solid proof to prove me wrong. --Sandipani1 (talk) 17:31, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

Once again, you are not making any sense here. The link to the archive I provided discusses the Constituent Assembly of India's transcript, i.e. the exact words of the resolution that adopted the song as the national anthem. A webmaster's unsupported claim does not supersede the actual resolution/govt decision. See the archive for details (solid, as requested). Finally, your claim about "Jal" / জল not being one of the Bengali words is entirely, completely, 100% incorrect. Thank you. --Ragib (talk) 17:36, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

Perhaps anyone who contridicts your POV make no sense to you. In the archives I saw again and again your same rhetoric. It looks like you are on bench and promoting Bengali on wikipedia is your 24 hour job. The Constituent Assembly link is like question and asnwer session without any elaboration. If we go bye your arguments then the national anthem should have five stanzas and not one. Because the trascript does not say anything about the number of stanzas and the original song has five stanzas. And who authorize you to say the issue is ressolved. Someone of your thinking proposes something and then you accept the proposal. So with the agreement of 2-3 persons, the issue is solved permanently. And again by your argument, all the information on all government websites is webmasters personal claims and the government of India has no responsibility whatsover.

By writing "Jal" in Bengali does not make it a Bengali word. Probably you would claim Sanskrit is derived from Bengali and the word "jal" has come to Sanskrit and other languages from Bengali !! --Sandipani1 (talk) 20:26, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

And if you not satisfied with my previous discussion, here is another reference which support my POV. http://judis.nic.in/supremecourt/qrydisp.asp?tfnm=27027. Note that this is the judgement of supreme court on some matter (not language) related to national anthem. For your easy reference here is some part of the judgement.

The following is the transliteration i.e. the text of the National Anthem in Hindi:

"Jana-gana-mana-adhinayaka, jaya he Bharata-bhagya-vidhata. Punjab-Sindh-Gujarat-Maratha Dravida-Utkala-Banga Vindhya-Himachala-Yamuna-Ganga Uchchala-Jaladhi-taranga. Tava shubha name jage, Tava shubha asisa mange, Gahe tava jaya gatha, Jana-gana-mangala-dayaka jaya he Bharata-bhagya-vidhata. Jaya he, jaya he, jaya he Jaya jaya jaya, jaya he!" (Source __ India 2004, A Reference Annual, published by Publications Division, Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, Government of India, p.22)

Now don't tell me the supreme court is making unsupported claims. I observed, you have just playing around with your theories like if A is B and B is C. I suggest you to stop being childish and show at least one official document which says the Indian National Anthem is in Bengali. --Sandipani1 (talk) 21:02, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

Well, you have not really shown the original text of the transcript, so let me quote this below:

The composition consisting of the words and music known as Jana Gana Mana is the National Anthem of India, subject to such alterations in the

words as the Government may authorise as occasion arises; and the song Vande Mataram, which has played a historic part in the struggle for Indian freedom, shall be honoured equally with Jana Gana Mana and shall have equal status with it. I hope this will satisfy the Members." ___Constituent Assembly Debates, XII. (24th January, 1950)

After the Constitution had been signed by all the members of the Assembly, the President, on the request of Shri M. Ananthasayanam Ayyangar permitted all members of the House to sing Jana Gana Mana in chorus. Then led by Shrimati Purnima Banerji all of them sang it in chorus for the first time after its formal adoption as our National Anthem.

This is from the exact link you provided.

• Now, where do we see the text "adopted in hindi version"?
• Where, except for the website, do we find mention of a hindi version being adopted? The original transcript of the assembly, as shown above, mentions adoption, but no reference to the "hindi version"
• What exactly is the "Hindi version" of a "Bengali song"? Any words have been changed? And how what Hindi grammar would consider "Tava shubha name jage, Tava shubha asisa mange, Gahe tava jaya gatha," as a grammatically valid Hindi sentence? The sentence as written by Tagore is a valid Bengali sentence, but NOT at all grammatically correct Hindi sentence. That some words are common to Hindi does not make it a Hindi song.

So, please provide me the reference to the official decision that says, Mr. So and So/Committee so and so/parliament so and so decided to adopt the Bengali song in its Hindi version (unless you claim the webmaster of the Indian govt website adopted it :D) ... the case will be closed finally. Your own reference does not mention anything. Also, please explain what "Hindi version" of a "Bengali song" means :).

(You've broken 3RR (counting your anonymous edits from Univ of Vermont's IP). --Ragib (talk) 02:40, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

National anthem is not an essay, you don't have to talk a lot about its grammer. I am surprised to see that you are not aware of "no original research" in wikipedia. For me the sentence you mentioned look like Gujarathi. The national anthem is full of Saskrit words which fits well with almost any Indian language. I really don't care, but I even doubt if the original song was in Bengali.

Now your judgement is that I broke 3RR. May be you should ban me now. You should spend more time on tracking IP addresses of the machines from which you propaganda is argued.

To be frank, I am not so emotional about hindi. The thing which bothering me is that you are turning the national anthem into a Bengali peom with your "Jon Mon Gon" stuff. If you are honest, try to understand this proposal. English is one of the official languages of the Government of India (Bengali is not). The article is on english wikipedi (not Bengali wikepedia). So there is no necessity of including the text in any other scripts if we get the government of India text of national anthem in roman script. Lets just include the roman text approved by the government of India. I will try to provide "the text" approved by the government of India.--Sandipani1 (talk) 17:05, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

The anon IP address 132.198.138.110 is public information, and just cliking on the whois link on the contribution page shows that it is from U of Vermont. So, there is no "tracking down" here.

The question about what the national language of India is is quite irrelevant here. The question is what the language of the song is, and it is, and has always been Bengali. Spreading misinformation is not ok.

My comment about the grammar is also quite relevant, under what justification do you claim "Hindi version" here? Looking at Tagore's writeups, I don't see any structural or grammatical changes to his original Bengali poem/song here. No translation has occurred, apparently. "I even doubt if the original song was in Bengali." ha ha ha, so was Tagore writing in "Martian language" all along :)? Do you also doubt that Tagore was a Bengali poet ...? :)

As for the usage of Bengali script, it has been the convention in English wikipedia to provide the original native script for non-English poems. Check out Saare Jahan Se Acchha. You have broken 3RR, and I'll report you shortly. --Ragib (talk) 17:28, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

I did not say you are a member of CIA and your are tracking me :-). The IP address is visible but not the location, you need to track the IP address (which is ofcourse possible to everyone). Your problem is you are a narrow minded person and you are not able to associate national anthem to a country. Why don't you write an article with title "Jona Gona Mona" and write whatever shit you want? You know, no body will care about that title, because that is not India's national anthem.

I am already familiar with your knowledge about languages when you wrote the word "jal" in bengali screamed like hell when I was trying to say it is a sanskrit word and almost all indian languages use that word. And you should read wikipedia policiy of no original research. We have enough information from government of india about national anthem.

Being Tagore a bengali does not give you authority to associate everything regarding him to bengali. I am surprised that you don't believe the government of india scrip of national anthem is not correct. I am really afraid, what the content of wikipedia will look like if narrow minded people like keep making edits 24 hours a day to wikipedia.

And by the way, no government body has any official script of Sare janhashe achha. It has nothing to do with a national anthem. You don't understand the difference between a national anthem and any ordinary song.

--Sandipani1 (talk) 17:04, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Sigh, I hoped you will refrain from launching personal attacks once your block is over and you return!! Perhaps focusing on articles rather than other users is a better option for you than calling names :(

Sure, many languages in South ASia that are derived partially from Sanskrit share many words. What matters here is the grammar and sentence construction. Just because you find common words used in a sentence doesn't make the sentence belong to your language of choice ... the grammar matters, and under no Hindi grammar can you make JGM a valid poem/sentence.

Tagore's writeup is in BEngali (And some in English translation of his own work). Please show which work was authored by Tagore in Hindi/Urdu/Martian language etc. As for your claim of Govt sources, please see below. That it is your national anthem may be of supreme importance to you, but wikipedia is not an Indian website, it is an encyclopedia.

Finally, please read the comment written about Saare ...Acchha. Original scripts are commonly provided for non-English work of literature. --Ragib (talk) 18:08, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

As for your IP address/location, please check out the contribution page of your IP. It provides links to show the geolocation, and one does not need to do much other than click on the whois link there. This is routinely done for disruptive anon users. --Ragib (talk) 18:10, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Arbitrary section break

Once again, I repeat the following points:

• The decision to adopt anything as the national anthem of India was taken by a legislative body ... from the records, it seems that that body is the constituent assembly of India [1]. Please provide the exact line where the constituent assembly members mention that they are adopting a "hindi version" of a Bengali song. From the official transcripts, I cannot see any mention of "Hindi version" there ... quoting from the text: The composition consisting of the words and music known as Jana Gana Mana is the National Anthem of India, subject to such alterations in the words as the Government may authorise as occasion arises; and the song Vande Mataram, which has played a historic part in the struggle for Indian freedom, shall be honoured equally with Jana Gana Mana and shall have equal status with it. (Applause). I hope this will satisfy the Members.. The song was and is written in Bengali language (words, grammar etc., so unless it is specifically mentioned by the legislative body, speculating about any "hindi version" is incorrect. If the constituent assembly didn't mention the hindi version, but some other parliamentary body did, please provide that. Otherwise, just because "you think so","everyone thinks so", the webmaster of a site "thinks so", has no legal value.

• Please explain to me what is exactly "Hindi version" of a Bengali song? Was any word changed? Was it translated to Hindi? Was the grammar changed? What is the difference between the written version of the song as written by Tagore, and the official written version of the song? The song was originally written in Bengali (no doubt about that per multiple sources), so what grammatical changes/translation has occured since then? (In case anyone claims pronunciation as a "translation", then would you support my claim that the English Wikipedia is written in "Bengali version" because I and some other Bengali speakers read the articles loud with a Bengali accent?)

--Ragib (talk) 18:08, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

The INA version

Would it be worthwhile adding a mention of the fact that Subhas Chandra Bose prepared a Hindi / Hindustani translation of this song in connection with the proclamation of Azad Hind? Not many people know about now, so it probably wouldn't qualify an article of its own, but it seems to me that the translation and its use by the INA was a notable event in the history of Jana Gana Mana, and probably merits a sentence or two in this article. -- Arvind 13:29, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

I agree. -- Yoshiroshin 04:37, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I know about this... I was fighting a poor battle in my heydays at WP about the Hindi version (which obviously was non-sensical as Ragib has pointed out!). But recently I read an article about the INA version (Hindustani version) in a local mag and I realized that it was probably this version... blah blah...blah (sorry, forgot what I was trying to prove...SAS)

Punjab and Sindh

While Punjab and Sindh were parts of India when Tagore wrote the poem, but to Indians they would refer to the states of Punjab and parts of Gujarat and Rajasthan. Linking the name of a region in the Indian national anthem to a Pakistani province just seems wrong. I am invariant under co-ordinate transformations (talk) 17:52, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

I disagree. I can see how "Punjab" can refer to both the region (including both the Pakistani and Indian states) and the Indian state itself, but I really don't see how people would reinterpret Tagore's mention of "Sindh" to be a reference to slivers of land in Gujarat and Rajasthan. The song was written well before the current boundaries, so we can't pretend that all the regions referred to are found solely within the modern state of India. The song wasn't written for modern-day India, but for the greater India (which existed then). If West Bengal decided to declare independence, that doesn't mean that we have to reinterpret Tagore's "Banga" as being "Bihar" or "Assam". The song is what it is, and there's no reason for us to change the meaning just because of what has happened in history since the song was written. --SameerKhan (talk) 20:13, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

I don't think there is a need for linking any word from the song, and create more confusion. Tagore was referring to pre-partition British Indian regions, which may not be part of India anymore. It will be incorrect to "re-interpret" his words and link to wrong areas. --Ragib (talk) 20:17, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

I guess this works. The national anthem has to have meaning. Is it then to be left to individual Indians to interpret these words ? One thing is clear, Sindh in this song should not link to the Pakistani province. This isnt any personal agenda, just that linking to a region that isnt even in India defies geography. I am invariant under co-ordinate transformations (talk) 01:09, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Second part of anthem

It looks like anthem of India has second part:

[2]

Day and night thy call spreads over the land

And we hear thy voice of salvation,

Hindus, Buddhists, Sikhs, Jains,

Parsees, Muslims and Christians

Come from East and West to the foot thy throne,

Singing their song of devotion to thee.

Oh glory to thee, who unites our hearts and gives us good fortune!

Hail, hail, hail to thee for ever!

Q) Why it isn't showed in the article? A) Because this is not part of the national anthem :) Regards, Iliassh (talk) 04:33, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

NLK edit by 89.203.64.123

The history page doesn't give any kind of reason as to why this was changed. While I don't speak any of the languages, I can tell just by listening that they lyrics as transliterated don't match what's actually in the song. 141.202.248.52 (talk) 18:17, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Jana Gana Mana or Indian National Anthem

This article seems to be confusing the two chief entities, the poem Jana Gana Mana by Tagore and the Indian National anthem, which is only the first stanza of the said poem. While they are related, they are not the same. As it appears this is a mess and doesn't adequately do justice to either.

Ideally, there would be two articles, one for the poem itself (which has its own historical significance), it's genesis, history, complete lyrics (all 5 stanzas), any controversies etc. The second article would be specific about the National anthem, including adoption of a portion of Jana Gana Mana as the National anthem, any other songs/compositions so considered and controversies/issues thereof, official lyrics (including regional variants, if any), official playing time etc, available recordings etc.

My two cents. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bmurthy (talk • contribs) 21:24, 14 December 2009 (UTC) Bmurthy (talk) 21:27, 14 December 2009 (UTC)Balaji

I agree that there are differences, but the fact the poem is notable mainly for being the national anthem, two articles would be rather redundant. Bʌsʌwʌʟʌ ^{Speak up!} 21:14, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

The fact that Jana-Gana-Mana is the national anthem is not irrevelant, however, it has its history before being adopted as the national anthem. That history includes the fact of it being a full poem with 5 stanzas and its own other newsworthy issues. As it is, the issue is completely muddled in this article and there is place for the original complete poem to have its own full article. The national anthem aspect is deserving its own article too. Bmurthy (talk) 01:23, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

I agree that the article has muddled the distinction between Jana-Gana-Mana the national anthem and Jana-Gana-Mana the poem. The primary focus of the article should be on the Indian National Anthem (its history, selection, rule/formality of playing, etc). I don't think the poem Jana Gana Mana merits its own article as opposed to any of Thagore's other works (Its primary distinction compared to his other works is as the National Anthem). All in all, this article needs a through revision especially reducing that gigantic discussion on controversies. I have a limited schedule; but if anyone is willing to help me with fact checking, I would be glad to work on it. JNG71886 (talk) 19:34, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

Revising the Page

There are many years worth of edits and changes in this article. The many discussions drown out the main focus of the article, while the multiple edits make the page appear disjuncted. Over the next week I am going to work on revising the article to make the primary focus on the National Anthem and to make the writing more clear, consistent and concise. JNG71886 (talk) 20:04, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

I was thinking of organizing it as such: 1)Intro, 2)Lyrics (of national anthem provided by the Gov't of India), 3) Rules and Decorum for Playing, 4)History/Selection as national anthem, 6)lyrics of Original (all 5 stanzas), 7)Controversies.

I would greatly appreciate help with this. JNG71886 (talk) 20:10, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

I hadn't taken a look at this page in sometime, and it has really gone to seeds in the meantime. I have reverted some recent edits that added a lot of unsourced and undue information and made the controversy section unduly argumentative, and non-compliant with both encyclopedic tone and wikipedia namual of style. It is possible though that my revert removed some pieces of information that can be properly sourced and may be worth retaining. So for convenience, here is the diff of my revert, which can be reviewed to see if anything should be re-added to the article.

I like your proposed organization of the page, except:

• I don't think the lyrics of the complete poem are needed at all. Firstly because, as you rightly note, this article is on India's national anthem and not the poem per se, and secondly, because we are writing an encyclopedic entry about the anthem, and not an anthological source containing the anthem. Frankly, the article need not even quote the complete anthem itself; however, given that the article is pretty short, we can be flexible and leave it in. The complete poem can be added to wikisource and linked from the external links section.
• Ideally, we wouldn't have a Controversies section at all, and would instead integrate its content into the main body of the article. However, I realize that this may require greater thought and effort than we may be able to devote at present, so fixing this should not stand in the way of improving the overall article.

I too am a bit short of on-wikipedia time at the moment, but if you take the lead I'll try to chip in (and/or, chime in) around the edges. Cheers. Abecedare (talk) 02:15, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

Sorry I haven't produced an article yet. I am currently studying for board exams. I'll get back to working on the article after I take the exams, some time in late June. JNG71886 (talk) 21:03, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

Controversies & remaining 4 stanzas

@JNG71886 SASSOTO (talk) 10:08, 11 May 2010 (UTC)SASSOTO Hi! This is in reference to your appreciation of my additions on the Jana Gana Mana article. Thanks for it. The points raised by you were: 1> The article has become too long because of my additions

2> More than half of it is dedicated to controversies

3> Citations required for the remaining 4 stanzas

My answers: First of all, I see that u have reverted all the changes I have made. Well, you could have done it 'after' coming up with your own refined version or accepting my concise version.

1> There are longer articles in Wikipedia and leaving apart the controversy, the translations of the remaining 4 stanzas could have very well been included even in this article. Length restriction may be your personal opinion. On the other hand, I can assure that this information is very much searched for in the Internet and this is the best platform to impart this knowledge under this section itself so that people can understand the complete flow of the poem and its relevance as the Indian National Anthem. Wikipedia and this article is the first place they land and they should feel that their knowledge has been enhanced or brushed up. So please keep those stanzas there itself.

2> The version of controversies that was present in your version of the article was incomplete in some aspects. for e.g., you have quoted the British Indian press but not the nationalist Indian press which clearly differentiated between Tagore's poem not being sung for King George V. This has misguided many patriotic Indians who have recently learnt to disrespect Jana Gana Mana because of this controversy. Wikipedia's NPOV policy encouraged me to put the facts (with citations) of the other side too. If they outweighed the original controversy making it seem irrelevant, then it should not be said that this article is not 'neutral' because I did not tamper with the original contents and sources in favor of the controversy. You are right in saying that this section can have a page of its own. I would have come with a concise version of the controversy but sadly, anything I shorten will tilt the scales on one side or the other.

3> Translation for the first stanza was provided by Tagore himself and for the remaining 4 stanzas, every word is a Bengali to English translation and not an 'interpretation' by an individual. Still I have mentioned the person who first translated it.

"I see that u have reverted all the changes I have made." --- Before accusing me of deleting you contributions, I would recommend that you calm down and check the history feed. I did not revert anything that you wrote. Many people edit Wikipedia articles, and someone else made the revisions. I wrote to you with my concerns, because I felt that it would be rude to just delete your work. Let us not fight.

As for the message I sent you, many people (me included) contribute their two cents to an article without looking at the whole article. This builds up over time and articles loose focus. I just wanted to clean up the article, and I was looking for people to help me do that. That is why I wrote you. I would appreciate your help; and if you want to, see the immediately preceding discussions. —Preceding unsigned comment added by JNG71886 (talk • contribs) 00:58, 12 May 2010 (UTC)