Talk:Muhammad Ali Jinnah: Difference between revisions
replacing with a neutral tag |
rv. project of neautral tag doesn't exist and wp indian history had important assessments |
||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{WP Pakistan}} |
{{WP Pakistan}} |
||
{{WP India|class=FA|importance=High|history=yes}} |
|||
{{WP SouthAsia}} |
|||
{{featured}} |
{{featured}} |
||
{{WP:MLP}} |
{{WP:MLP}} |
Revision as of 04:33, 30 November 2006
Pakistan Unassessed | ||||||||||
|
India: History FA‑class High‑importance | |||||||||||||
|
Template:Featured article is only for Wikipedia:Featured articles.
This is a WikiProject, an area for focused collaboration among Wikipedians. New participants are welcome; please feel free to participate!
|
Welcome to WikiProject My Little Pony! Every editor on this project is dedicated to improving the quality of My Little Pony articles in general, i.e., the entire My Little Pony franchise. We can't stress enough that the Project is NOT a discussion board or fan club for the franchise, and your attention should be directed to MLP discussion sites and fan clubs outside of Wikipedia instead.
ScopeWikiProject My Little Pony covers articles about:
Guidelines
Make sure you are familiar with the following pages:
ParticipantsWe welcome everyone who wishes to improve My Little Pony articles. You don't need to formally join our project in order to contribute, but feel free to indicate your participation by adding your name to the list of members. You may also add our template {{User MLP}} on your userpage to show everyone you're a member of this WikiProject. Active membersSign your name on the list below using #~~~~.
InactiveThis is an alphabetical list of former members of the project. If you're no longer active within the project, please remove your name from the active list and add it below. If you have not edited Wikipedia for over a year or are retired, your name will be placed here.
Currently To-doHere is a list of things that the Project needs to do at the moment. If there's something we've missed, feel free to add it under the appropriate section. Recognized contentTalk:Muhammad Ali Jinnah/Recognized content Articles
Place articles in the 'WikiProject My Little Pony' category by adding {{WikiProject My Little Pony}} to the talk page of the article. See here for more details on the use of that template. Here is a list of our articles: Article alertsTemplate:Mainpage date Template:Indian selected
Jinnah the "Great" Leader of "Indian" muslims..?Jinnah represented the muslim population of Pre-partitioned British India who were willing to join the nation of pakistan.He isnt any "Great leader" for muslims who wished to stay back in India.Moreover presently he doesnt just represent the muslims but he represents the citizens of pakistan who could also be non-muslims. Hence changed the sentence to-- 'Jinnah the Great Leader of Pakistan'. Scourgeofgod 15:00, 28 June 2006 (IST) 87% of the Muslim electorate of India voted for Jinnah in the 1946 election. His main support came from areas that now form the Indian republic. He represented mainly a Muslim constituency in the central legislature of India for 30+ years from Bombay as well. Jinnah a pork eater??is it true that jinnah, while nominally a muslim, ate pork (which is strictly off limits to muslims)? i found this info on the article offensive terms per nationality, in the section for pakistanis. can someone please clarify? this is really interesting.
SpellingSomeone is continously changing the way Jinnah wrote his name. Jinnah spelt his first name as "Mahomed". Live with it. It is there in every primary source. I don't even understand why this was diverted to "Muhammad" when Jinnah never wrote his name "Muhammad" but was Mahomed Ali Jinnah.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.38.49.122 (talk • contribs)
http://www.ya-hussain.com/int_col1/others/1942imgs/majin.htm
Related to such disagreement on names, the history of edits/development of this article is unfortunately incomplete, going back only to 14:41, 11 March 2006, when there was a name change, i.e. a version that had been developed under another title was copied in. Is it possible to see, somewhere, the prior history? Congratulations to all who worked on this featured article, recognized or not in the current history.... :) Don 16:11, 7 June 2006 (UTC) Quotes and Contemporary viewsDoes anyone see any value in either of these two sections. I for one don't think quotes are encyclopedic on their own. And the contemporary views section could probably be eliminated while still remaining some of the content if it can fit in other sections. Pepsidrinka 17:17, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
Sir Sikandar HayatSir Sikandar Hayat is stated as a "critic" of the Lahore Resolution. Infact it was Sikandar Hayat who officially moved the Lahore Resolution on 24th March 1940 at the League convention. Under an unofficial pact... Unionist Party was operating in Punjab under the League banner.
2- As for Lord Wavell... he was accused of being Pro-League later in 1947. It was after direct action day that wavell shifted to being pro-League... before that he hated Jinnah and the Muslim League intensely. In his diary he had referred to Jinnah in most derogatory terms.. till after DAD when he realised that the game was bigger... Wavell's comment was not POV. He was commenting that there was no evidence in front of the Government to suggest that League - and remember it was Suhrawardy they were blaming- was responsible. A detailed discussion on DAD can be found on page 166 of H V Hodson's "Great Divide".
Dear Rama's Arrow, The Unionist Party was founded in the late 1920s by Sir Fazli-Hussain - who was formerly of the Muslim League. It was not the Unionist Muslim League since Unionist Party had many great Hindu landlords like Sir Chotu Ram etc. My great grandfather, Pir Rang Ali Shah, was a member of this party till 1939- till he switched over to the Muslim League. Sikandar Hayat and Jinnah agreed that on the all India level Muslim League would represent the Unionist Party and that Unionist Party would call its government in Punjab a League ministry. Sikandar Hayat and Jinnah had a difficult relationship... but it was Sikandar Hayat - who at Jinnah's orders- left Viceroy's war council. Unionist Party under Sikandar Hayat was a part of the grand coalition that called itself the Muslim League. I suggest you read Ayesha Jalal's book very carefuly. It was Lord Linlithgow who had put the Congress leaders in jail btw. Also if Lord Wavell's comment is POV (even though it is a statement of fact that there was NO evidence of Muslim League's involvement) ... then why should we treat Gandhi's grandson's evidence as anything more than a POV? H V Hodson's book page 166 shows that Jinnah's plan for direct action day was of civil disobedience movement of the kind Gandhi had launched in 1942... nothing more. All over India ... things did remain peaceful - except Calcutta... and in Calcutta all figures point to the fact that 3 times as many Muslims were killed... that shows that the violence that broke out was not planned as such - as many Indians like to claim- but was an unfortunate occurence where mobs on BOTH sides went crazy. If anything, Sumir Sarkar, an Indian historian, has quoted a letter in his book from Sardar Patel in which he gloats over three times the numbers of Muslims getting killed... and we know that Patel was not your usual machivellian but a man of some integrity. So what does that tell you?
===Answer=== Jinnah did not make the statement "Muslims are no believers in non-violence" - Sir Feroz Khan Noon did. Jinnah's statement of 14 August 1946 (2 days before direct action day) very clearly outlined the fact that Direct Action Day was to be peaceful day of civil disobedience which it was except in Calcutta. Jinnah dismissed Suhrawardy by the way for negligence. As for your claim about Jinnah not believing in non-violence- Jinnah's commitment to non-violence was constitutional.
(3) Patel's comment was that it was a "good lesson for the League" that Muslims suffered more casualties than Hindus, owing to the League's own ideas of how Hindus and Muslims could not co-exist. Patel hoped Jinnah would think twice about provoking communal passions again. And the only reason that so many people were killed was because British Raj governors refused to allow the provincial and central governments to sufficiently attack the unruly mobs and protect innocent civilians. There is plenty of evidence citing Nehru's and Patel's frustration with Wavell and other officials, given that as home minister it was all his primary responsibility to stop the mobs. ===Answer=== It is amazing how Nehru and Patel were not all frustrated when the first governor general of Independent India , Lord Mountbatten, refused to deploy the boundary force which he had promised ... and when V P Menon went to the UN and declared that "it was mere communal disturbance" when Pakistan's foreign minister Sir Zafrullah Khan called for an international investigation into communal holocaust in Punjab.
Answer1-There was no uncontrollable violence unless you think thousands of Muslim women marching peacefuly is uncontrollable violence. 2- As for Sikandar Hayat... between 1939 (when Jinnah-sikandar pact was supposed to have come into existence and Sikandar Hayat became a Muslim Leaguer however nominal) till his death in 1942 Sikandar Hayat did not establish coalitions with Congress or the Akali. 3- I am afraid you've gotten your dates of League's entry confused. Congress did not concede anything. The talk of Muslim League being in the government was there before the DAD. Congress joined the government in August/September after DAD ... It was not until the December summit in London that Muslim League came into the interim government... by then the DAD situation had already abided. Congress agreed to the League's entry only because it was the second largest party in the country and also - as Gandhi conceded in an agreement with Jinnah- that League alone represented the Muslims. I can produce the agreement at some later time if you continue this discussion.
It is very sad... I think we should continue this argument for the sake of dialogue. Also I continue to be grateful for doing such an excellent job with this page...
Note to anonIt is very tempting to thwart all your replies with facts, but I must adhere to my pledge of restraint. I must also ask you to restrain yourself, becoz a revert war will definitely jeopardize this article's elevation to FA status and main page display. It is not POV to state what happened as a result of DAD - violence broke out across India. The sentence is very clear in stating that Jinnah called for strikes and protests, not attacks on Hindus. And again I strongly encourage you to obtain a registered account - I, and a lot of other people will feel more comfortable with you as a regular colleague. Rama's Arrow 14:13, 25 April 2006 (UTC) -- Dear Rama... I don't want to get into any war and I am very sorry to hear that this is the impression that has been brought about. The violence that broke out was in Bengal and later in Bihar - not all over India- as H V Hodson's narration of facts on page 166 (Great Divide) as well ... but I leave it to you to consider how you would want to incorporate different perceptions of the same fact. I am sure the sense of fairness you've displayed will compel you to change that sentence ... As for a registered account I do have one but I'll have to dig it out from my email - so give me some time. --
Answer: Thank you ... The word "degenerated" is fairer and I agree with its usage - the fundamental point of disagreement being the specific scope of DAD violence.
2nd note to anonHi - signing up for a new account will take 30 seconds! When I talked of revert war, it was becoz of my concern that edit wars here will delay this article's rise to FA status. Its not an observation about this debate or you. It will be easier for people to communicate if you get a registered account. Cheers, Rama's Arrow 04:54, 27 April 2006 (UTC) Early lifeMany sentences like about him dressing in European clothes does not belong in his early life section. Also the source about Jinnah consuming alcohol and pork needs a better quote than the one given. A columnist paper from a news source is not a correct source especially if this is to be featured. --a.n.o.n.y.m t 20:50, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
LanguageRama- According to M C Chagla, who wrote "Roses in December" which I read a long time ago, Jinnah, who could speak English better than many native English speakers, nonetheless was maserly in Gujurati and Cutchie. Please research this issue. Again great work man. Thanks.
I do not desire to offer any comment about the contents of this article. My attention was drawn to this page, and I am just giving links to my responses:
As of now, I am not interested in this FA - I know that if certains editors continue to destroy the contents, the FA status may be lost, and that shall be a great loss to wikipedia, and wastage of time and resources of the wikipedians. Regards. --Bhadani 14:31, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
Jinnah remained a citizen of India even after the creation of Pakistan. I again request users to please register, and edit to avoid confusion. Thanks. --Bhadani 09:34, 14 May 2006 (UTC) Congratulations!!Congrats all contributors for this featured articles!!! :) --Pratheepps 04:58, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
CAN SOMEONE EXPLAIN WHETHER INFORMATION ABOUT JINNAH'S RESLIGIOUS AFFILIATION AS AN AGHA KHANI IS THAT SHOULD BE ON HIS SITE, FURTHERMORE THAT THE MUSLIM LEAGUE HE LED WAS FORMED BY AGHA KHAN, WHOSE FATHER WAS UNDER A DEATH SENTENCE BY THE KING OF PERSIA FOR HIS RELIGION CLAIMING TO BE GOD ON EARTH. INCIDENTLY THE SAME KING TOOK THE TITLE AWAY FROM AGHA KHAN WHICH HE HAD GIVEN TO HIM. fINALLY, AGHA KHAN HELPED THE BRITISH QUELL HTE REBELLION IN SIND PROVINCE BY MUSLIM THEREFORE GETTING THE TITLE PRINCE OF THE BRITISH EMPIRE. SEEMS TO ME THAT THIS INFORMATION IS RELEVANT. TRUEBLOOD786trueblood 03:35, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
TRUEBLOOD786 ContradictionThe article says:
How can he have been the eldest of five when his parents had seven children?
Minor phrasing issueTwo sentences in the introduction begin with "Disillusioned by the failure...", with only a single sentence in-between them as a buffer. There is nothing technically wrong with this, but it is repetitive and indicates a lack of linguistic creativity in writing. One of them can probably be tweaked to use different verbiage. -- 63.167.255.231 12:01, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
Dina WadiaHi, The article states that Jinnah's daughter Ms. Dina refused to stay in Pakistan. Thats sounds as if she did so to make a political statement. Did she really refuse to stay in Pakistan because of some ideological or personal differences with her father or because her family, her husband et al were settled in bombay? There is a difference between the two. If the later then I would like the sentenced to be changed unless someone can show that Dina refused to live in Pakistan because of her certain personal/political beleifs. Omerlives continuedI had the same thought when I read the article and changed it to say that Dina STAYED in present-day India because her family was there. The article makes it seem like the way the person above says so. This is just one of many slight slandering remarks against Jinnah throughout this article. Bengali view of JinnahHi everyone, I've included a Bengali view of Jinnah paragraph. Very important as Bangladesh was a part of Pakistan upto 1971 and it was Jinnah's decisions in creating a country where one ethnic group (Punjabis) who ruled over everyone else which ended the Pakistan concept in 1971. Please do not start an edit wars over this. Habz — Preceding unsigned comment added by Habz (talk • contribs) Ive removed your comments as they were highly insulting, Jinnah was the founding father of Pakistan not Bangladesh, He was a statesman that achieved Pakistan through completely democratic, peaceful means, he was never imprisioned unlike Gandhi or Sheik Mujeeb. "Very important as Bangladesh was a part of Pakistan upto 1971" East Pakistan was part of pakistan federation until 1971 not Bangladesh. "it was Jinnah's decisions in creating a country where one ethnic group (Punjabis) who ruled over everyone else which ended the Pakistan concept in 1971" It was S Mujeebs decision to create a country where one ethnic group (Banglas) who ruled over everyone one else (ie Biharis). Read the rules of wiki86.131.108.49 05:30, 19 September 2006 (UTC)Ad
GujaratiAs a Pakistani citizen he had no link to Gujarat whatsoever and neither he officially accepted Gujarati as his language. He endorsed Urdu that is why Gujarati is irrelevent. Some historians claim that his family was basically from Sahiwal which is now in Pakistan. Szhaider 07:06, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
Actually I guess I agree now that it shouldn't be there. It was just his mother tongue, he never lived in Gujarat, identified too strongly as a Gujarati, and probably never wrote anything in the Gujarati language (unlike Gandhi for example), or (most importantly) in the Gujarati script. Tuncrypt 15:09, 21 September 2006 (UTC) /But btw, why do you bold the Urdu? It looks so lame, lol
Content SelectionI realize this may not be totally relevent but I need some help in selecting what information to use for a research paper. The topic is: 'Quaid-e-Azam - An Architect of Pakistan'. Can anyone please guide me as to what sort of content I should use in the paper? I'll be very grateful!! Beeny 16:16, 3 October 2006 (UTC)Beeny
Spelling of "Quaid-e-Azam"The insertion of "u" after "q" is a convention of English orthography. The traditional spelling is "Qaid". Sarayuparin 21:27, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
|
- Unassessed Pakistan articles
- Unknown-importance Pakistan articles
- WikiProject Pakistan articles
- FA-Class India articles
- High-importance India articles
- FA-Class India articles of High-importance
- FA-Class Indian history articles
- Unknown-importance Indian history articles
- FA-Class Indian history articles of Unknown-importance
- WikiProject Indian history articles
- WikiProject India articles
- Wikipedia pages with to-do lists
- WikiProject My Little Pony
- Old requests for peer review