Talk:Criminal Tribes Act

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

[untitled section][edit]

The article doesn't seem very neutral and seems heavier on philosophy than on concrete facts about these "criminal" tribes. Are there other opinions out there? Were the British as high handed and crazy as the article makes it sound here, or maybe there are dissident/revisionist views on the actual relevance of these measures? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.24.104.52 (talk) 02:07, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Serious rewriting needed[edit]

POV issues, poor grammar, and some questionable assertions. Wilson44691 (talk) 16:18, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

Questionable assertions indeed. I flagged a particularly blatant paragraph in the History section. The other text surrounding it is only marginally better, uses highly emotive language more appropriate on a placard than in a Wikipedia article, and is flagrantly POV. Alas, I am not familiar enough with Indian history to attempt fixing the article myself, but it cries out for attention. Freederick (talk) 02:39, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
It will get that attention over the next few weeks. - Sitush (talk) 14:00, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Punishable to be a Gypsy in England under Henry VIII and others[edit]

This article would be richer with an addition of a section to provide the backdrop of discriminatory legislation already in place in England itself , prior to the act being implemented in India .
It became an offence to simply be Gypsy in England under Henry VIII , and being caught could lead to flogging , whipping and banishment .Being caught a second time could be punishable by death .[1]

An interesting book on the subject is English Gypsies And State Policies By David Mayall. The book has a A summary of key legislation relating to gypsies , vagrants , rogues and vagabonds ,England and Wales , 1530-1914 Intothefire (talk) 09:32, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

  1. ^ Crimes of Hate: Selected Readings edited by Phyllis B. Gerstenfeld, Diana R. Grant. California: Sage Publications. 2004. p. 355. ISBN 0761929428.  line feed character in |title= at position 34 (help)
That would be a form of synthesis unless reliable sources discuss a connection between two sets of legislation passed 300 years apart. Without that, I doubt it is even worth a See Also link. Was the gypsy legislation even in force in the 1800s in Britain? And if it was, was it enforced? - Sitush (talk) 13:49, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
Another relevant book is Roma And Gypsy - Travellers In Europe: Modernity, Race, Space And Exclusion By Angus Bancroft which explores the racial discrimination and disastrous consequences of driving gypsies to homelessness due to the various and uninterrupted Acts of legislation as late as 1960s , which made it impossible to live as a gypsy without breaking the law .Intothefire (talk) 17:51, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
And I ask again ... where is this source "relevant"? It may be relevant to an article concerning gypsies or something similar but nowhere does it seem to mention the subject of this article and, indeed, it only mentions India in passing on p. 7 when referring to a possible-but-contested theory of origin. - Sitush (talk) 18:16, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
I've slightly misrepresented things there, sorry. The source also refers to Indian on pp. 9, 13-14 and 44. The most relevant is p. 44, where an analogy between Indian untouchable castes and Gypsies is made ... and rejected. - Sitush (talk) 18:19, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
Also see Practicing Anthropology in Development Processes edited by Floriana Ciccodicola Page 220-221-Intothefire (talk) 18:29, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
A brief look suggests that there is nothing wrong with that as a source. It could be cited as {{cite book |chapter=Born to be Damned: The Colonial Construction of Criminal Tribes in India |first=Subir |last=Rana |page=221 |title=Practicing Anthropology in Development Processes |editor-first=Floriana |editor-last=Ciccodicola |publisher=Edizioni Nuova Cultura |year=2012 |isbn=978-88-6134-791-5 |url=http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=Gq9QSx4CQLAC&pg=PA221}}. I've not read the entire chapter but it would certainly justify a sentence in this article - a good find. - Sitush (talk) 18:57, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
And yet another relevant book citing the commonality of ill-treatment pf Gypsies under law by the English in England and Colonial India -Challenging The Rules(s) of Law: Colonialism, Criminology and Human Rights in India edited by Kalpana Kannabiran, Ranbir Singh.Intothefire (talk) 11:20, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Orphaned references in Criminal Tribes Act[edit]

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Criminal Tribes Act's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "ReferenceA":

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT 18:26, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

Factual error?[edit]

We say Ramnarayan Rawat, a professor of History and specialising in social exclusion in Indian subcontinent, states that the criminal-by-birth castes under this Act included initially Gujjars but its enforcement expanded by late 19th century to include most Shudras and untouchables such as Chamars, as well as Sanyassis and hill tribes. Try as I might, I cannot see where the cited pages of Rawat's book say the stuff about which groups fell under the Act initially and the bit about Sanyassis and hill tribes definitely is not said by him (a re-phrase would probably fix that because there is a source given for it but the sentence attributes it incorrectly). Can someone please provide a quote here or at least tell me what paragraph of what page I should be looking at. I have a hard copy of the book, btw. - Sitush (talk) 18:20, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

It appears to have been added in this edit by Paulmuniz. Some bits have since gone missing (Ahirs etc), probably because of people trying to sanitise on behalf of their castes. The pages in Rawat certainly refer to these communities but not, as far as I can see, in the way that has been paraphrased. - Sitush (talk) 18:28, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Criminal Tribes Act. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:18, 14 August 2017 (UTC)