From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Biography / Arts and Entertainment / Politics and Government (Rated C-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the arts and entertainment work group (marked as High-importance).
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the politics and government work group (marked as High-importance).
WikiProject India / Tamil Nadu / Politics (Rated C-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Tamil Nadu (marked as Top-importance).
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the Indian politics workgroup (marked as High-importance).
edit·history·watch·refresh Stock post message.svg To-do list for Jayalalithaa:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:
  • Article requests : Add section on her film career
  • Expand : Add additional points about foster Son wedding in criticism
  • Infobox : Add additional points in line with other prominent political leaders of India
  • Merge : Trivia section contents into other sections.Personal life section contents into other section
  • NPOV : Shorten criticism section to avoid disproportionate space, Mention her political achievements.Remove criticisms which violates WP:BLP or Wikipedia:Avoiding harm
  • Other : Add Photo

Elections 2001[edit]

The election results in 2001 where not unprecedented. In fact, the AIADMK could win only four seats in the previous elections, 2 of its members later split.

-- Sundar 05:21, Jul 20, 2004 (UTC)


Is there any reason why this shouldn't be moved to "Jayalalithaa Jayaram". That seems to be the proper title in keeping with wiki style. Feco 22:53, 31 May 2005 (UTC)

We can move it but for the fact that she's not well known by that name and she herself doesn't use the full form anywhere. Also, in this part of India, surnames are only either a necessity due to passport and other federal documents or due to some political figure wanting to show his/her political lineage. -- Sundar (talk · contribs) 05:28, Jun 1, 2005 (UTC)

In South India,its customary or a tradition to have either Father's Name or Village Name first and then the person's name.The concept of middle name is only a minority following.Therefore its J.Jayalalithaa.In North India,Father's name or Surname is after a person's name,therefore it would be Jayalalithaa Jayaram.Sureshbalaraman (talk) 20:35, 11 March 2009 (UTC)sureshbalaraman.


I suppose the neutrality of the article is disputed due to the following.

Her successes Relaxation camp for elephants that served in temples ==> well disputed Attracting many IT companies to Chennai - including INFOSYS ==> not to be trumpeted Successfully implementing rain water harvesting measures on schedule. ==> Let Chennai's water problem be solved first.

On deeper consideration, we don't even need to include her successes! Apart from these, all the other stuff mentioned seem to be facts. The non-NPOV tag can then be removed.

I strongly feel there should be a commendation for her bold efforts (revoking free power, etc). We could also include the unpopular midnight harrasment of Karunanidhi which led to widespread riots.

Dont Defame Her - She is Really a Revolutionary Leader[edit]

I Really Ready to Aruge with those who are defaming her in a Informal bad manner...

She has Made many Good things to Tamil Nadu and India.. Her Recent Achivements are enomrous and that has made a Tamilnadu a Most favoured destination for Direct Foriegn Investments..

Some of her achievments are untold or mislead by medias So that media is disgracing her. but her dedicated efforts and her affection on people and particulary on tamil people and women is untold and unseen by these scanvengers....

Her Good Steps which has been Welcomed and applaized by Genaral Public..

1 . Implementing A strong Measure on RAINWATER HARVESTING . this has significantly improved the water levels in all parts of tamilnadu.

2. Her Efforts on TSUNAMI Relif...

As soon she heard something has happended badly in the costal areas he immedatly ordered the officals to do the needful and went to the affected areas for direct relif efforts..

If she waited for few more mintues she would be also affected by second tsunami waves... she is bold lady and iron lady of india. she continoued her efforts in the relif in a proper and well planned manner.,,,

This has brought her to the global arena.. now world bank has sanctioned a huge sum to the affected people relif and with her visionary and modern taught a massive rebuilding of tamilnadu coastal work is going on...


She understood the strugles of women, she was very active in providing all sort of support to goverment schools and offer a quality education.. in some parts of tamilnadu they wont let their female child out when it grown up, she ordered a strong measure with the sceme name "KATAYA KALVI" - "EDUCATION MUST" and ordered her officals to door knock all houses in rural areas and spread the message and enroll students in schools..

this is great succesive scheme where large number of female students have joined in the schools now, he also recruited and filled the vaccanicies in goverment schools and to improve quality of education..

she has also offered free bi-cycle to all female students from rural and urban goverment schools. so that now many students from these areas are the toppers in the results..

does her efforts stopped... never....

Recently she has impletemented a new scheme ,those who are studing in goverment schools from 1 st standard to 12 th will recive free books and notes .

even last week she has abolized old admission process and has lighted the dreams of rural low income students to get in proffesional courses..

she also introduced self help groups among women and thus it created a massive job oppursunites and a high level of income to women, once they were called as home makers now they are the business women of rurals...

as this schems was big sucess she has impleted once such to employed youth...

She is strong law keeper and when ever she finds a law breaker sure they will be punished. is this wrong ?

for it is not a karunanidthi or kamakodi all are one, if they breaks law . defently she will take law to do its due course and safe guard law and order.

Now People of Tamilnadu Under stood her... thats why they had given her a massive victory in two bi-polls..

her rivalary was 7 party co-liasion and she a single lady , people was on her side , they made her a landslide victory and by swiping 7 party to a trash can.

in coming months tamilnadu is going for state polls , i assure this time she is going to win all the seats and it is a guiness record, there will no opposite party will win in the elections..

People is on her side and i personally dont feel for your bloody defame...

soon i am going to lauch a dedicated website for our amma who has giving our tamil people a new life and new power.

we support amma [JAYA MAM ] till our souls REST IN PEACE....


# Please sign your name whenever you post anything on the talk page.
# Media in South India is fair. We have neutral papers like The Hindu, Deccan Chronicle, Indian Express, etc. And neutral channels like Doordarshan (Free to all). You do not need to blame the entire media for a small group of people.
# You cant generalise and say that her steps are successful. We do not have any concrete indicators. For example, give information supporting RWH - some stat which says RWH increased the max during her period due to her efforts or not. Only then can you make a statement that she was successful
# Successes will be listed only if a person has been conferred an award or title.

Some POV points eliminated[edit]

some of the pov and biased points have been weeded and added some trivia and conspiracy theories. the point on the success of elimination of video piracy is a joke as anyone in the media industry will tell u. it has only created a much advanced piracyregime including that of internet and downloading etc. with DVD piracy on the rise. initial success does not equate with long term success. Idleguy 07:19, Jun 23, 2005 (UTC)

An article on a political figure is not a piece of propaganda. It does NOT need to include the person's successes, unless they have been noted by a national or international body or organisation in the form of an award or a title. -

Removing Successes and Failures[edit]

Successes and failures have to be supported by concrete facts and conferment of awards or titles by national and international agencies. For the lack of the above, and also for the very fact that success or failure is disputed, it has been removed from the main article. QUOTE

Major successes of her government[edit]

  1. Banning of High interest private loans
  2. Banning lottery tickets to encourage savings
  3. Elimination of the much feared bandit Veerappan.
  4. Introduction of Videoconferencing in Jails and Courts, thus eliminating the need to bring the accused to extend the remand every time.

Shortcomings and Failures[edit]

  1. Anticonversion law - which she subsequently withdrew following the drubbing she had in 2004 Lok Sabha Elections
  2. H Ration Cards - subsequently withdrawn
  3. Cancelling the entrance exams for admission to professional courses

UNQUOTE 1.Rain Harvesting Scheme introduced by J.Jayalaitha is Grand Success.

2.Rural Women Self Help Programme is also benifitted lakhs of ladies in villages.

NPOV tag added on 1 Dec 2005[edit]

Numerous PoV additions in the article. Some partially justified by links and criticisms, some are definitely in need of justification or removal. These are especially found in the 'Corruption Charges' and 'Extravagant Lifestyle' sections. Imc 19:48, 1 December 2005 (UTC)

wrong edits by[edit]

the following edit is factually incorrect.

"In line with the supreme court ruling she stepped down as the chief minister and O Panneerselvam a junior minister of her party was sworn in as the new chief minister. Her opponents called Mr. panneerselvam a "puppet". In the later days her conviction was overturned by a superior court resulting in her retunrning to the post she vacated in the first place."

There is no superior court than Supreme court in India. The earlier contents were more informative and correct. One wonders as to the need to delete the specific and correct points and include incorrect statements without even knowing that there is no superior court than Supreme Court.

The persons editing may kindly create an id and leave the id so that the continuity can be achieved. Aiadmk, dec 9, '05

Thanks --Lravikumar 16:54, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

Pl see my response here. Idleguy 18:18, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
You should have only blanked the page after a consensus was reached. More over, there is nothing called as Gossip Magazine. It is Magazine. And I don't agree with you calling all the sources as Gossip Magazines. You should note that the para is based on well cited sources, which no one in Tamil Nadu can disagree.
Point two. I disagree with your view that don't mind if you attack about her political decisions/political life etc Even that has to be cited and there should be more sources for that.
Remember that it is clearly given (in another article) that another Tamil Nadu CM has two wives.
If people go on blanking all that is not good about their favourite leaders, then we will have no articles in Wikipedia at all.
There is no policy in Wikipedia which says you cannot write about affairs. (Note that Sexual Orientation is different from affairs). See Princess Diana and Bill Clinton for example. Of course, you cannot write completely baseless affairs. But the para is question is NOT ORIGINAL RESEARCH and should be maintained as it is well cited.  Doctor Bruno  19:09, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
Given that consensus from the two who have responded on noticeboard suggests that no policies have been violated, I presume it's ok for me to now add some more sources for the live in relationship with MGR etc. Idleguy 10:25, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Personal Life[edit]

It is not correct to write something that one is not sure of. MGR had three wives - 1st wife's name was Thangamani. After her death MGR married Sadanandavathi and then he married V.N.Janaki. Manirathnam's movie is not a true biographical account of MGR's or Karunanidhi's life and if it is so that character of Aiswarya Rai - the actress dies before MGR. MGR never had a long standing extramaritial relationship with Jayalalitha. MGR never loved Jayalalitha and has never stated anywhere that he loves Jayalalitha. It would be better if the title of the picture of MGR and Jayalalitha that she was the lady love of MGR in real and reel life is removed. The media is making up things that are not true and that is being given as citations. kumarrajendran 18:00, 4 November 2006

I think you should read the previous messages on the same issue. This has already been discussed in length. Also see Wikipedia:Verifiability official policy. Tx Idleguy 14:33, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

I think the user Idleguy should re-check the official policy. There are lots of evience available regarding J Jayalalithaa's relationship with MGR. Infact one good example of citation can be from an article from the magazine Media:Outlook[[1]], over here: wikipedia makes collection of such points which the Idleguy is depriving the readers of Wikipedia. The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth—whether readers can check that material in Wikipedia has already been published by a reliable source, not whether editors think it is true. [under discussion] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Manish0680 (talkcontribs) 16:55, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

Screenshots removed[edit]

Film screenshots are not eligible for fair use in an article like this, unless the film in question is being critiqued/discussed. Therefore they have been removed from the article. kumarrajendran 04:00, 5 November 2006


Jayalalithaa was a very famous actress and had acted in scores of movies before she entered politics. It would be nice to see a section about her Movies and acting. In fact, I believe this should be the first section in this article (chronologically). The current article mentions a couple of lines about her movies then directly jumps to Politics. --Madhu 14:23, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Problem with a citation source[edit]

Citation 17, the one directed towards this quote, "Jayalalithaa's detractors draw attention to the 1995 wedding of her adopted son as an example of her extravagant show of wealth. Guinness Book of Records records the ensuing wedding banquet as the largest ever", does not work. The (not working) link is So a source that works is needed. Thank you. Battlecruiser 16:06, 9 April 2007 (UTC)


The entire section on achievements is completely unreferenced. Citations and sourcing are a must for claims of this nature. I've inserted a template calling for citations, rather than cluttering up the page with individual fact templates. Hornplease 01:18, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Foster Son wedding[edit]

I think the extravagant wedding of her Foster son Sudhakaran needs to be mentioned in this article. It is a wedding with a record breaking attendence and source of many controversies. Thanks! ώiki Ѕαи Яоzε †αLҝ 18:54, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

I fully support your point--Indianstar 19:00, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
Iagree to what is stated above too. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 20:04, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

POV tag for Personal life section[edit]

I have added NPOV tag due to following reasons. Sentence about her personal life needs to be removed due to following reasons.

1) Violates WP:UNDUE. She is the popular leader. Few citations based on views of certain editors is minority point of view. It is the viewpoint of extremely small minority so it does not belong to Wikipedia. Wellknown Indian newspapers does not mention about her relationship with MGR though she is very popular leader and appear in news reports on daily basis.

2) Some citations violates WP:SPS which discourages self published sources even if author is prominent editor. It asks us to be extremely careful on biographies.

3) Exceptional claims requires multiple high quality citations. Points about her personal life is not supported by multiple high quality citations. WP:REDFLAG asks us to be extremely careful about Biographies due to libel issues and politically charged issues.

4) Some citations are not verifiable since login is required.

5) Story has been built by taking cue from one word mistress mentioned in unreliable citations(as per WP:BLP) Mistress has multiple meanings including positive meanings. Citations does not say anything about her personal relationship except that word. Editors of good standing seems to have assumed in bad sense. Sentence in the article violates WP:SYN and can be termed as original research. She is not married so Extramarital does not come into picture.

6) This point is not mentioned in MGR article which shows bad faith editing.

I can quote violations of many Wikipedia rules. I want to keep my discussion short. Likes to chip in incase of further discussions.--Indianstar 19:00, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

I see no synthesis as the cited sources (Asian Times, for example) use the same terminology. Second, it's not extramarital for Jayalalithaa but for MGR. Please point out exactly which citations are unreliable or not verifiable. We can weed them out if required. Requiring logins do not amount to unverifiability, I think. As long as it is published in a reliable source that someone can look up (even at a cost), it should be deemed verifiable. If the remaining citations are insufficient, we can rewrite the section making fewer claims. -- Sundar \talk \contribs 03:38, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
I am opposing mainly on WP:UNDUE. Just check how many web sites talks about Jayalalitha and how many of them talks about her affair. This should prove it is a small minority view. As per Jimbo smally minority view don't belong to wikipedia. Dictionaries give different meanings for word mistress. Mistress is the only word which appears in citations. There are no additional sentences in any of the citation to show its context. Sentence currently in the article gives the impression that "extramarital" word is meant for Jayalalitha. Ref WP:BLPSTYLE, Biographies of living persons should be written in responsibly, conservatively, in neutral, encyclopedic tone. Availability of 2-3 web pages with word mistress in ambiguous way out of millions of web pages about Jayalalitha does not make statement as majority point of view. In Jimbo's words,
Even Wikipedia rules suggest to remove such derogatory words attributed to minority view citations immediately from Biographic articles without discussion in Talk page to avoid libel actions. Words in sentence like Extramarital, popular knowledge are synthesis. However irrespective of whether it is Synthesis or not, it has to be removed because it is a small minority view. None of the mainstream newspapers in India talked about this matter though her name appears on daily basis in these newspapers. --Indianstar 04:08, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
I have removed contents about her personal life as per Wikipedia:Avoiding harm which suggests to remove titilating claims first and then discuss in Talk page.[2]. Given statements clearly and unambiguously violates following guidelines of Wikipedia:Avoiding harm.
"Wikipedia is not a tabloid, and we are not in the business of "outing" people or publishing revelations about their private lives, whether such information is verifiable or not. As Wikipedia has a wider international readership than most individual newspapers, and Wikipedia articles tend to be permanent, it is important to use sensitivity and good judgment in determining whether a piece of information should be recorded for posterity."
Following quote of Jimbo is applicable for this article contents

Real people are involved, and they can be hurt by your words. We are not tabloid journalism, we are an encyclopedia.

Jimmy Wales [1]

--Indianstar 05:08, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

I left message in talk page and removed after 2 days as persuggested procedure. No discussions has taken place earlier whether it violates WP:UNDUE and Wikipedia:Avoiding harm. Suggested procedure clearly says to remove first and then discuss. I am open for discussions. We can go for Third opinion as suggested in suggested procedure. I have also mentioned that some citations violates WP:SPS and some citations leads to "Page cannot be displayed" message.--Indianstar 06:25, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

POV tag for entire article[edit]

I have added POV tag for entire article. Article covers only criticisms in depth. Other aspects are not covered. Violates WP:UNDUE and WP:BLP. It violates following points mentioned about Criticisms in WP:BLP

"The views of critics should be represented if they are relevant to the subject's notability and can be sourced to reliable secondary sources, and so long as the material is written in a manner that does not overwhelm the article or appear to side with the critics; rather, it needs to be presented responsibly, conservatively, and in a neutral, encyclopedic tone. Be careful not to give a disproportionate amount of space to critics, to avoid the effect of representing a minority view as if it were the majority one. If the criticism represents the views of a tiny minority, it has no place in the article. Care must be taken with article structure to ensure the overall presentation is broadly neutral, in particular, header structure for regions or subsections should reflect important areas to the subject's notability."

Criticism section overwhelms total article contents. She is notable even before joining politics. Article focusses mainly on her political criticisms.--Indianstar 07:04, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

I plan to shorten criticism section to make it comply with WP:BLP. If anybody has views on which important points needs to be retained and which points to be deleted, Please share it. I plan to add sections on Early life and Film career to cover all aspects of her life. If anybody has ideas about which sections to be added please share your viewpoints.--Indianstar 05:46, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
If you are a supporter of Jayalalitha, it doesn't mean you have to remove sourced criticism which amounts to only 2 lines and claim that it overwhelms the total article contents, especially when it is cited from reputable sources across the world and is pertinent to how she managed to get into power (from being MGR's mistress). As far as I know only you seem to object to this inclusion when other neutral disinterested editors have agreed to keep this section since it is properly cited and is not some blatant attack or unfounded rumour.
See [[3]] and then you'll see the consensus on this tricky issue. Thanks. --Idleguy 02:53, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Content being discussed is exactly like what is described in Wikipedia:Avoiding harm. I am telling again that it was removed as per Suggested procedure which clearly says to remove, discuss as per WP:HARM#TEST and then add after consensus. Please read what I told before clicking Undo button. Earlier discussions never focused about WP:UNDUE or WIKIPEDIA:Avoiding harm. Thanks for attributing motive for my edit. I know you are a “ideal guy” who is trying to improve this article as featured article by making various unsourced edits like this for the last 2 years. [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] Please read what I told before clicking Undo button.

POV tag for entire article is based on disproportionate amount of space for criticism. So please discuss it as separate issue. I never told issues in personal life section overwhelms article contents. Some people who told it is cited are reputed administrators. You can ask them to share their opinion whether it qualifies WP:UNDUE and qualifies POV tag for disproportionate amount of space for criticisms. People are disinterested because of numerous reverts by you and 24/7 watching whereas others may not be having that much energy and time. --Indianstar 13:39, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

  • Pl. do not attempt to misquote me by saying I added all the unsourced statements. I was merely readding it (as the edit summary clearly indicates) and to say I was adding it smacks of provocation without proof. I am the one who eventually added the sources for previously uncited claims and allowed unsourced lines to be eventually deleted. So please, read carefully and slowly before jumping to half baked conclusions. Further, consensus has already been reached by disinterested (pl. see dictionary for the correct meaning for it is not "uninterested" editors as u presume) parties and I have nothing to say about someone who violates past consensus on the issue. Idleguy 16:35, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
If you are readding something, you should make sure it is sourced and acceptable as per wikipedia policy. All edits quoted by me do not carry any sources. I quoted wiki rules, invited you for discussions, left message in your talk page. You were maintaining consensus is already reached. You are a good contributor but since beginning, you flouted all wiki rules in this article by adding lot of unsourced claims. Past consensus never discussed about WP:UNDUE. Availability of few sources does not mean it can be inserted into wikipedia. Add word "Gay" with any famous personality, you will get search results in thousands. Some of them may be from reputed websites.--Indianstar 16:52, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Inclusion Test[edit]

Following are the criteria in Inclusion test. Is the information already widely known?

As per Alexa rating, Rediff, India times, Sify, Hindu (Tamilnadu’s largest selling newspaper), NDTV, Indian express, Hindustan times etc are most accessed websites. In Tamil, Dinamalar, Daily Thanthi, Dinakaran, Thatstamil are most accessed websites and newspapers, This contentious issue never appeared in these mainstream newspapers or websites. Out of around 300 thousand web references, less than 10(Around 5?) websites, some blogs, some wikipedia mirror sites quotes this word which shows it is a small minority view.

Is the information definitive and factual?

Some of these citations added by Idleguy itself quotes that as rumours. If it is definitive then it would have received widespread coverage like Clinton or Diana episode

Is the information given due weight in relation to the subject's notability?

No. Very few web references out of large web references about her shows it is a candidate for WP:UNDUE weightage. Even those websites mentions only single word called Mistress. Few comes under WP:SPS. They don’t show any references, photos additional information about their relationship.

Sentences and wordings generated by Idleguy cannot be attributable to original citations.--Indianstar 13:39, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

You mean to say The Economic Times, New York Times, Asiaweek and other such sources which clearly indicate the close relationship with MGR are merely insignificant "websites, some blogs, some wikipedia mirror sites" in your own words? Please read the sources carefully, for I have carefully used atleast 3 citations that use the word "mistress" next to that particular word, which I believed was contentious. False accusations of editors of lying about citations as in your final comment, without having properly done the reading, is demeaning. Idleguy 16:43, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
Economic times citation leads to Page cannot be displayed message. Newyork times citation is Shashi Tharoor's website hosted by Newyork times. ( Which I told violates WP:SPS). Availability of few messages in 1 or 2 reputed magazines over the entire period of her history out of thousands of articles about her shows it is a small minority view. I told prominent Indian newspapers/websites as per Alexa rating and other sources never carried this news.--Indianstar 17:00, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
I think there are enough reliable sources that can be cited that she was indeed reputed to be MGR's mistress.[12] [13] Wiki San Roze †αLҝ 00:30, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Reason for WP:UNDUE[edit]

Google has 400 thousand plus references for the subject. Could be 300 thousand if you exclude other usages of her name. I was able to find at the maximum 20 less/more significant pages quoting about her relationship if you omit blogs,discussion forums, wikipedia mirror sites. Is it not Undue weightage. Idleguy created illusion that his sentence is well cited. I checked Alexa rating for websites of his citations and found most of them are insignificant sites with the exception of few.Questia Online collection. Rating for Individual article not relevant, Crisis states Alexa Rank 50009517,Aghilam Alexa Rank 695594, Asiaweek Alexa Rank 23674, Etimes See other section, Atimes Alexa Rank 23674, India Together Alexa Rank 252909.

Amazon rating for his books are 1312218,2255810,472609.(Somebody can suggest better way to evaluate significance of books). Barring Times of India, it does not appear[[14],[15][16][17] in Top Alexa rating sites of India (Probably he may be able to dig few references). If we decide this as Due weightage it will set wrong precedent for Biographies. I don't plan to argue any more on this subject. Let BLP Board decide.--Indianstar 12:19, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Your loyalty to this politician perhaps(?) means you have a warped view on the subject, coming up with excuses to discredit reputable magazines, journals and books by authors (one of whom is a vocal feminist) as insignificant. By your reckoning of using Amazon sales ranking to evaluate the reliability, fictional works like Harry Potter series will henceforth be a much more significant work to quote from, for real life facts. Idleguy 01:59, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
Your hatred to this politican has made you to write/readd unsourced nonsense about her sexual orientation, her marriages etc. I added criticisms/positive points to this article. I am a balanced person. This hatred makes you to believe anything negative written about her anywhere as encyclopedic quality. --Indianstar 05:17, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
Great. By your logic, this & this edit on article Karunanidhi - another prominent Tamil politician - where I was the one who added 2 reliable sources for a well known fact that he has more than one wife, should therefore mean I hate him, because I wrote about his marriages. To top it, this edit thus proves that because I added factual statements on terrorism in India, now I'm an India-hater! Great reasoning. Idleguy 16:58, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
You should differentiate between facts and rumours. Karunanidhi married 2 or 3 wives legally and he has never denied it. Terroism is seen by people. But in this edit, how did you ascertain fact about her homosexuality. Did you read it from Encyclopedia or whether somebody peeped through her house window. How you have verified availability of her son? Did you get photo from Jeppiar who was claiming to release photo. How did you know her jewels were bought using black money. Did you collect info from Chidambaram through RTI?. This article is unique in wikipedia. In past history, IP Addresses followed wiki rules and reputed named users with full of barnstars vandalised the page with unsourced info.(Please feel free to ask citation). Your past edits for this article are suitable for Uncyclopedia. I do appreciate your contributions to other articles and your relentless efforts to maintain quality(?) of this article. I will give up as I am not idle now. --Indianstar 14:58, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
Why is it that edits from way back in 2005 when I wasn't fully aware of Wikipedia policies, and when BLP was far different from today being used to talk about the currently discussed matter which is fully cited? Is it because I'm the only one who adds reliable sources as citation for well known facts which you personally disapprove of? It appears you know more about her illicit/illegal facts (Jeppiar link) than myself, so I don't know what the big fuss is all about. Idleguy 02:44, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

why was Successes and Failures removed when Criticisms still exists??[edit]

this articles seem to have been edited safely to keep the negative aspects on the forefront , when publishing an article about some famous personalities all the aspect's must be included , when writing about political career or personal both the success and failures must be included , when Criticisms finds a main stay in the article her success has been largely ignored

  • Elimination of the much feared bandit Veerappan
  • Banning of High interest private loans
  • Banning lottery tickets

these were even discussed as a major success and achievement in the well known media such as BBC[18], this article seem to been one sided and seem to deliver a wrong image to one and all . Pearll's sun (talk) 20:53, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

      • This article is mostly monitored by Jayalalitha haters who wants to maintain their own POV. Others don't have time and energy to fight with them. History of this article will show even administrators took full liberty to vandalise this article. Her policies are controversial which antagonized majority of educated masses. Since wikipedia is maintained by educated masses, systematic bias in this article is likely to persist. --Indianstar (talk) 12:34, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
  • yup ...u r right...this article has been diverted to go anti jaya to its full extent in all possible ways ....when doing something new controversy is inevitable , that to her policies catch much public and media attention , her every single move is watched by both the state and central .... this is the same for almost all political personalities.....every single party and political personality have their own pros & cons . but its so shocking to see even her bold moves are missing ...her creation of the India's first women commando force too seem to be absent in this article , where is the take over of liquor market by her government ?? where is veeranam ?? where is TESMA ?? where is the tsunami relief effort?? .....this article is nothing but a whole collection of anti jaya preach .....this will sure harm wiki image . Pearll's sun (talk) 19:42, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
      • I lost hope. I had quoted multiple wiki rules about how this article contents violates all wiki rules. A guy wants to insert minority view as a fact. He takes silence in BLP as acceptance of his views by wiki community. Many times, anonymous IP Addresses removed unsourced abusive languages which was reinserted by famous administrators. --Indianstar (talk) 15:29, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
  • well then should we bring this one under deletion (AFD) review , this type of one sided and substandard articles doesnt have the moral right to stay here i think , i think only this attempt will bring this issue to everyones notice else selected single sided and vandler's will continue to have their control this article and all our effort would go vain , sure like you even i would lost hope and start to ignore this then this article will be left out without any one to save . Pearll's sun (talk) 17:31, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
    • Poorly written or non neutral contents are not accepted as reasons for AFD. Only original research or non notability are accepted as reasons for AFD. --Indianstar (talk) 05:16, 22 March 2008 (UTC)


Why dont we rewrite the whole article abiding by the norms of WP:BLP? The article always can be biased either towards a WP:FAN or WP:NPOV, nevertheless, she is a very prominent leader with a huge following who has influenced both regional and national level politics. The LEAD paragraph is by itself pathetic in my opinion. Dravidian politics is ideology based and doesn't need the leader to be a Tamil. I see no point in mentioning that in the lead. Chronology of events are missing. I propose that the article should start with a least controvertial lead the proceeding on to

  • Early life
  • Movie career
  • Entry into politics
  • Rise to power
  • Tenure as CM
  • As leader of the opposition
  • Influence in national politics
  • Awards and recognitions
  • Criticism

This article will indeed attract suporters and haters alike, but that shouldn't stop anyone from being bold and putting the foot down. Opinions and suggestions are welcome. Cheers Wiki San Roze †αLҝ 06:18, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

    • good work , indeed this will include all that is needed for a living personality in wikipedia , indeed we must rewrite it the way you have mentioned , controversy is present in almost all leading politicians world wide moreover she is a very prominent and is the only possible candidate for the chief minister from the opposition , that too being a president of one of the biggest Dravidian politics party which came to power several times , as far as my knowledge she is a tamil like we find tamilians in Malaysia , Singapore , srilanka , Switzerland , Canada and in many parts of the world . this article really needs a rewrite to survive . --Pearll's sun (talk) 20:00, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
Thanks mate. It is my opinion that we may want to move about her mother tongue to Early life or background if need to be mentioned, rather than in the lead. Given that there are good number of sources that claim otherwise, we should bear in mind that she claims herself to be Tamil. Her oponents (for eg: EVKS Elangovan [19]) and atleast one third party source claims that she is not a Tamil [20]. The best for us to do is to state both sides or just not mention it. Either way, its best not to state that in the lead. Cheers Wiki San Roze †αLҝ 16:32, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
  • well we'll not put any thing about Tamil until it has been solved . so now lets start to improve the article . --Pearll's sun (talk) 11:56, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
  • i'v cleaned the article to some extent by removing story type infos , if you feel wht iv done is wrong u may very well correct it or undo it . i wont mistake , my primary intention is just to present a good article to users .--@ the $un$hine . (talk) 20:04, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
    • Main problem with this article is disproportionate amount of space to criticisms. In my opinion, Shortening criticism section to 1 paragraph with 4-5 sentence is the 1st step to bring neutrality to the article. Entire criticism section was developed out of competition between 3-4 wikipedians by adding Expand tag. Even Saddam Hussien, Osama Bin Laden or Adolf Hitler articles don't have this much of space for criticisms. This article has to be written in WP:Summary style, which means criticism has to be one small part of the article. If required Jayalalitha haters can write separate summary style article with the name of Criticisms of Jayalalitha like Criticism of George W. Bush or Criticism of Osama bin Laden. This new article can contain subsections like Extravagant lifestyle, Arrogance etc etc to satisfy whims and fancies of certain individuals --Indianstar (talk) 15:36, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
  • if the article is rewritten as u'v stated then it would be nice and neutral , im ready to assist u for the same .--@ the $un$hine . (talk) 11:16, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

  • well .i still dont find a reason for the inclusion of her personal life there . why not we make the criticism and and private life bigger than that of real article ?? the critisism , politics ,Personal Life & Corruption charges seems to have no difference than the change in subtitle's , i think the best way is to change the title to Criticisms of Jayalalitha which would atleast serve the real meaning of the article --@ the $un$hine . (talk) 17:00, 26 March 2008 (UTC)


      • why dont we use this pic from tamil wiki as the article main pic [[21]] .--@ the $un$hine . (talk) 11:19, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
The image there doesn't seem to be under fair use rational (correct me if am wrong), but alternatively I think we can crop the current image in this article. Do you think that will be a problem chaps? Wiki San Roze †αLҝ 11:35, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

yup croping the image will do , good idea .we dont need a group pic for a single person --@ the $un$hine . (talk) 11:46, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Its done. Wiki San Roze †αLҝ 11:51, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
    • good work ! but it would be nice if someone comes out with a good pic where only she is present .--@ the $un$hine . (talk) 13:25, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
  • the latest pic is amazing !! Wiki San Roze u r rocking !!--@ the $un$hine . (talk) 13:35, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
Thanks! Thats very kind. :) Wiki San Roze †αLҝ 19:37, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Early life[edit]

Chaps, I have found this nice article describing her Early life from a shy introvert to an Iron Lady (oops weasle!!). It can be found here, but am not adding details from it yet since am not sure if this would be WP:RS. Can someone more knowledgeable enlighten me on this please. Cheers Wiki San Roze †αLҝ 14:49, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Seems to be the good source. Jayalalitha wrote story in Kumudam about her early life which more or less confirm events mentioned in this article. --Indianstar (talk) 11:31, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
      • amazing ARTICLE !! welldone Wiki San Roze , indeed a good source , will do a lot help to improve this article .--@ the $un$hine . (talk) 13:31, 29 March 2008 (UTC)


Should the article be called Jayalalithaa Jayaram or J. Jayalalithaa? Isn't she known better by the latter? How many people in TN do know that the initial J stands for Jayaram? Wiki San Roze †αLҝ 23:52, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

        • In Karunanidhi's wikipage there is no foto of him. In that they mentioned 'Kalaignar'. But here in JJ's page under her foto, they put as ex-chief minister. If Karunanidhi's caption is correct, then we have to mention 'Puratchi Thalaivi' here too. --Sooooper
your request has been worked , now "Kalaignar" caption has been changed to "Karunanidhi" and a redirect of "Puratchi Thalaivi" "J. Jayalalithaa"to has been done . it would be really nice if you appear with a login name . --@ the $un$hine . (talk) 23:40, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
          • In Karunanidhi's wikipage there is no mention of his Sarkaria oozhal and all his loots. We have to mention that too. -- Sooooper —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 16:52, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
well soon we gonna split "criticism" in J. Jayalalithaa and create another article called criticism of J. Jayalalithaa and so will come the criticism of Karunanidhi too , if u could appear with a login name then it will be a lot helpful in creating and contributing to both .--@ the $un$hine . (talk) 23:43, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Protected J. Jayalalithaa: Semi-protection.[edit]

due to the sudden uprise of vandalism this article has now been Semi-Protected for a week , if again this article is subjected to similar works then we would request for an indefinite protection .--@ the $un$hine . (talk) 11:48, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Edit request from Vishnukumarr, 14 May 2011[edit]

Now Amma won the tamil nadu election, in couple of days she will become cheif minister of tamilnadu. so its time to change her profile. i dont want to see her calling former chief minister hereafter. thank you.Vishnukumarr (talk) 02:28, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

It can/will be updated on 16 may once the swearing in takes place. Till then karunanidhi remains the caretaker cm--Sodabottle (talk) 04:49, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

File:Jayalalithaaaftervictory.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion[edit]

Icon Now Commons orange.svg An image used in this article, File:Jayalalithaaaftervictory.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations
What should I do?
Speedy deletions at commons tend to take longer than they do on Wikipedia, so there is no rush to respond. If you feel the deletion can be contested then please do so (commons:COM:SPEEDY has further information). Otherwise consider finding a replacement image before deletion occurs.

A further notification will be placed when/if the image is deleted. This notification is provided by a Bot, currently under trial --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 17:57, 20 May 2011 (UTC)


The discussion again comes back to Jayalalithaa's origin and what her ancestors were doing here. Gangan claimed the former Tamil Nadu Chief Minister was born here and her family later migrated to Mysore in Karnataka.

"They were here only and her father was a lawyer... they come from a very well-off family" he said. He also claimed that almost everyone in Srirangam knew that Jayalalithaa belongs to this town and the outside world came to know about this only now after she herself said she hails from here.Gururajan, Manager of the Mutt, joins the discussions after keenly listening to it. Before one could ask a question, his answer is categorical.

"She is from this town of Srirangam and she will win. People used to think her family lived in the East Uthara Road, but Jayalalithaa says they stayed in South Chitirai Street," he claimed. - these lines from the site provide the online proof that birthplace is Srirangam.Paglakahinka (talk) 14:55, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

Thats not proof, thats the claim of one guy, even the media source reports it as a claim not a fact.--Sodabottle (talk) 15:51, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

place of birth and court cases[edit]

Pagalakahinka has been continuously pov pushing and edit warring in this article despite being reverted by multiple editors. There are two major areas where he continuously changes content to suit his pov

1) the "born in srirangam" bit - which has been discussed and explained above which has been reverted by two separate editors [22] [23] 2) the "dmk foisted the cases" bit - which has been reverted by three separate editors so far [24] [25] [26]

Paglakahinka please quit edit warring to restore your preferred version and discuss the changes here in the talk page. If the content is disputed (as it is clearly by multiple users) it can be added only if a consensus can be reached.--Sodabottle (talk) 15:08, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

And when your edits are reverted, do not sneak them in along with other edits, such activities are considered disruptive in wikipedia--Sodabottle (talk) 15:10, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

u claim that multiple people have edited info which i provided..its false claim. i have provided info regarding many things..her college, her mother, her grandpa, father, brother, hwat happened in year 1980 etc.. no one edited them. only issue is mysore srirangam. Dont revert. You are engaging in edit war.Paglakahinka (talk) 16:57, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Dont malign any person by directly naming him without checking facts. Also sodabottle!! you are removing most of the infos put with pain and reserach.Everone can see the history and know who provided which info.Paglakahinka (talk) 17:00, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

There are two issues mentioned above - srirangam and dmk foisted cases. And the diffs for who reverted you have been provided alongside. You are mixing other edits with these to sneak your version. If you want to add other info add them separately without mixing them with these two. There is no need for me to "malign" you. The diffs i have provided above will convince any admin who takes a cursory look as to who is doing the edit warring and sneaking in info.
Let me repeat it again - two issues are being contested - srirangam and foisted cases. Add other information with proper edit summaries. And dont add these two without arriving at consensus here at the talk page. As i am typing this you have done a third revert. One more revert and i will report you for edit warring and you will be blocked from editing--Sodabottle (talk) 17:08, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
Paglakahinka, other than the two issues that are being contested, you may add the rest with proper references and edit summaries. Who I am dude? Well I am a fellow editor out here. You really need to go through WP:BRD and WP:EW. When an editor constantly reverts without reaching consensus, he's nothing but engaged in an edit war. The diffs Sodabottle has provided clearly shows you are edit warring. Two other editors: MikeLynch and Ravichandar have disagrred with you, so please discuss here, establish a consensus on the disputed content instead of simply reverting. And yes, Sodabottle is not a biased editor, he is respected editor out here. See this. Abhishek Talk to me 17:29, 17 June 2011 (UTC) This link given clearly shows that I have provided all the necessary references and added lots of valid information. But the user is smartly trying to make excuse to block me and removing information from the wiki article on Jayalalithaa. Dont know whether this user Sodabottle is an anti Jaya, but its a blame on me that iam reverting. Iam searching for an interview which was telecast on Jaya TV of an eminent journalist and director (Chitra Lakshmanan) on 16th June 2011 saying Jaya was not born in Mysore but in Sriranagam.

Also do read this para.. In her 2011 campaign, she will be focusing on corruption. With DMK’s A Raja jailed in connection with the 2G scam, Karunanidhi may find it tough to counter her allegations. Opponents may ask whether she has any locus standi to speak about corruption since she herself has been an accused in many cases. “The DMK foisted some 11 cases over her. She has been acquitted in nine of those. She is fighting the remaining cases,” says Cho, who rates Amma as the best bet for Tamil Nadu politics. source (talk) 17:28, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

lay off the personal attacks and comment on the edits. Find and show the sources first and then add the info. Two issues are being contested now as i have told you multiple times here and in your talk page Add the other info seperately and i have no issue with them as long as they are properly sourced and neutrally worded. Do not sneak those two in while adding other information.
Now the dna source you provide quotes Cho ramasamy and doesnt state it as a fact. It is Cho ramasamy's opinion that "dmk foisted the cases on her". It is not a fact. You cannot add cho's opinion as fact here. It is not how wikipedia works. Similarly the second source you provided in my talk page [27] has jayalalitha herself saying "dmk foisted the cases". This is an excellent example of turning opinion into fact. What jayalalitha says is her opinion and view point not a fact. You can't use statements/viewpoints of jayalalitha and cho ramasamy to turn opinions into facts--Sodabottle (talk) 17:36, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

I Appeal to administrators and moderators and even other users to make notes of following 1) This link given clearly shows that I have provided all the necessary references and added lots of valid information. But the user is smartly trying to make excuse to block me and removing information from the wiki article on Jayalalithaa. Dont know whether this user Sodabottle is an anti Jaya, but its a blame on me that iam reverting. Iam searching for an interview which was telecast on Jaya TV of an eminent journalist and director (Chitra Lakshmanan) on 16th June 2011 saying Jaya was not born in Mysore but in Sriranagam.

2) Also do read this para.. In her 2011 campaign, she will be focusing on corruption. With DMK’s A Raja jailed in connection with the 2G scam, Karunanidhi may find it tough to counter her allegations. Opponents may ask whether she has any locus standi to speak about corruption since she herself has been an accused in many cases. “The DMK foisted some 11 cases over her. She has been acquitted in nine of those. She is fighting the remaining cases,” says Cho, who rates Amma as the best bet for Tamil Nadu politics. source

3)_ Read this link. Jayalalitha in interview to Times of India says herself that all cases foisted by DMK against her were false

continuing her tirade against the previous dmk government for the financial crisis being faced by the state, tamil nadu chief minister j. jayalalitha on monday accused the karunanidhi government of wasting nearly rs 57 crore in foisting false cases and fabricating evidence against her. but various courts finally acquitted her, jayalalitha said in theni, inaugurating various projects for her andipatti constituency.Paglakahinka (talk) 17:45, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Court has acquitted her and thats enough proof. Also interview quotes are always valid in wikipedia.Paglakahinka (talk) 17:47, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Court acquittal in the majority of the cases is clearly mentioned in the article and i havent disputed them. And where did any court say "dmk foisted" the cases. And quotes are valid only as quotes not as facts. The sources you provide can be used to say "jj and cho claim dmk foisted cases on jj" not "dmk foisted cases on jj". There is a whole world of a difference between these two. In wikipedia, we dont represent claims by involved parties as facts. And stop changing the header of the section claiming i am edit warring. A non involved third party editor has clearly explained to you were edit warring. Claiming that i am doing so is a personal attack. I have changed the header to reflect the issues discussed now.--Sodabottle (talk) 17:55, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
User:Paglakahinka, Jaya TV news reports are not considered reliable. Jaya TV is only a mouthpiece of the AIADMK. The rest of all are only Jaya's and Cho's accusations against DMK. As Sodabottle said, you cannot claim that "DMK foisted cases on JJ"-The EnforcerOffice of the secret service 09:46, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
If I may comment about the place of birth issue, I will give some links (other than the reference already given):
  • [28] This website is apparently owned by Jayalalithaa herself (the copyrights go to her).
  • [29] From Outlook, which is used widely as a Reliable Source.
  • [30] An outlook article again
I have more sources, but I'd rather not do an overkill. I hope I have made my point. Lynch7 18:25, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
Thanks mike. The second outlook source is a great one. I have added it to the article itself. The first website doesnt seem to be hers (the biography section has some unflattering things to say about her) --Sodabottle (talk) 18:39, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Outlook source has been provided by me and credit is given to some one else!!1 fantastic. Outlook artciles i provided with gave information regarding everything.History proves that most the references have been provided by me.Users compare and put the needed information back 1)Why the name jaya as prefix 2)Who is her brother, grandpa, father 3)Where they lived in Srirangam 4)Jaya entered in the political scene in 1980 and not 1981 5)How she had to enter acting 6)Details of her mother Vedvalli alais Snadhya and her elder sister 7)Her telugu debut detail and her entry in Tamil filmsPaglakahinka (talk) 19:26, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

By all means, please take the credit. I don't mind. I'm a bit confused though. We are debating Ms. Jayalalithaa's place of birth. I think that the sources I have given (including the outlook source, graciously given by you) state that Mysore is her place of birth. Isn't this enough for inclusion in the article? Lynch7 19:57, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
I am signing off from this discussion (after getting blocked for edit warring and losing my rollbacker rights :-)). And i think it would be wise for me to disengage from this article. I would appreciate, if other editors can make pagalakahinka see the issue clearly. Thanks--Sodabottle (talk) 21:04, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
I have read through all of this, and various edits/reversions. The place of birth issue appears to be settled. As far as the "foisting" issue goes, Sodabottle is correct: we cannot use a quote (and in particular a quote from an "opponent") as a statement of fact. Sure, it is factual to say that person ABC said "insert quote herecitation" about person XYZ but certainly in the case of BLPs I would expect to see the opportunity for rebuttal otherwise it would potentially be undue weight. So, we would really need to include "... but XYZ denied this, saying "another quote herecite". It gets very messy, very quickly and ideally the situation is best avoided. Certainly when there is a legal process which either has or should result in a decision regarding the veracity of the claims made by ABC, then we are best off hanging fire.
There is a lot of mudslinging in politics, Most of it is unseemly and of a temporary nature. A lot of it is also misreported (or is claimed to have been misreported by one or other of the involved politicians). Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a gossip magazine or political blog. We need to weigh up the pros and cons of statements before committing them to the article itself. - Sitush (talk) 21:20, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
Oh, and Wikipedia is not a repository for genealogical trivia, or indeed trivia of any kind. Unless JJ's relatives are or were themselves notable then they really do not need to be featured in the article, although convention does allow for a brief mention of the subject's parents and any spouse/children. Are JJ's older sister etc notable in their own right? Do they have their own WP article? If not, then they should not appear here, although you might get away with something like "JJ was one of X children born to Y and Z,", where X is a number and Y & Z are the parents' names.
This article is a mess. Let's not make it more messy. - Sitush (talk) 21:30, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Pls see [31], [32] and [33]. While an article by "Asian Tribune" claims that Jayalalithaa was born in Sriragam, this one by The Telegraph and this by Livemint contradicts it.-The EnforcerOffice of the secret service 04:14, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

As sodabottle said it's a claim of a person, which may not be a fact. As far as I know, she is a native of Srirangam, born and brought up at Karnataka. --Commander (Ping Me) 04:51, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

I've copy-edited the first paragraph on "Early life". Please do have a look. If anyone here does not agree, please feel free to revert. :-)-The EnforcerOffice of the secret service 05:04, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

Now the section looks good as everything is well sourced. --Commander (Ping Me) 05:16, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
We'll need nothing less than her birth certificate to clear this matter up completely, but I guess its OK now. And also, most of the sources that say that she was born in Srirangam are just stating people's beliefs or notions. [34] and [35] are strikingly similar, and I wouldn't be surprised if it was a complete copy. [36] mentions that it is her native place, and that her ancestors lived there, but nothing about her birth. Lynch7 10:07, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
Sorry, I thought that the birthplace issue was settled. Since it appears still to be in doubt, why not just remove it? There is no requirement to say where or even when she was born. Just remove the placename & stick an inline comment there to the effect that it is contentious and should not be added without first discussing on this talk page. If anyone does then add something back there without raising it here first, well, it is straight-out disruptive editing against consensus and they'll be warned for it. So, the sentence becomes something like, "X was born in YYYY. Her parents were ABC and DEF ..." type of thing.
Except in a few peculiar situations, a person's birthplace really is of little importance to a Wikipedia article. It is interesting, perhaps, but not usually vital. - Sitush (talk) 11:19, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
Hmm, I wouldn't be averse to that either. Anyway, I believe that its fine now; I agree with the way it is now. Lynch7 11:28, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
I don't think that would do. What if sometime in the future, the article goes for a WP:GAN and fails solely because the article does not have any proper information on her birthplace.-The EnforcerOffice of the secret service 12:48, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
Sorry, but GAN doesn't require birthplace info. Believe me: I've got some GAs to my name. - Sitush (talk) 12:49, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
Well, the present version seems to be good. For now at least, until we get conclusive evidence. Lynch7 12:52, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── With due respect to any previous place of birth discussion, I came across TN Government Website, profile of Jayalalithaa. Comments awaited. Lynch7 14:33, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

Great job! I would go with that, since govt. websites are considered more reliable. --Commander (Ping Me) 14:49, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
Hmmm, I doubt whether profiles on government websites can be considered reliable. Since Jayalithaa is the present CM of Tamil Nadu, it is doubtful whether the biography could be neutral.-The EnforcerOffice of the secret service 04:18, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
I don't know about other facts mentioned there in the website, but I believe the "birthplace" mentioned there must be true. --Commander (Ping Me) 05:30, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
Considering that it is a TN Govt website, if mysore is mentioned as the birthplace, it is more likely that it is true. Lynch7 05:45, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
Yeah, I agree-The EnforcerOffice of the secret service 08:38, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Birth, debut[edit]

Surprised surprised.... its so simple . Her film debut in Kannada was Chinnada Gombe (1964) AS A 15 YEAR OLD. I have always emphasised on fact in each and ever edit.People have just ignored what information i added and just been biased and reverted the article.

Jaya in her school days started acting in films as a pleasure and debuted in Kanada as a 15 yerar old as the lead heroine. But after her mother disclosed the financial condition she, after having attended one day in law college , had to join Tamil Film industry and this way debuted in Tamil films as a 16 year old.Remeber she started acting as lead heroine only from 1964 and 1965 respectively in Kannada and Tamil. Her debut in English film Epistle yes was in 1961. But it was a supporting role.Point to be noted is - she had to take up career in acting, only when her mother toled her...."u have to seriously take the profession of actimg due to our financial problems" After this , her first film was Venniradai in Tamil in 1965. So the films she in 1961 and 1964 were out of p[leasure and she was not doing them in the hope to establish her career in acting.Paglakahinka (talk) 15:24, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Well, it is very confusing. This is down to bad writing and not looking over the article before inserting information. As the article stood when I add the clarification tags, there were three separate "debuts", which is plain barmy. Can we get some sense of order here? Note in particular that you say her schoolday acting was as a 15 y.o. in 1964. So why do we have a statement saying she acted in Epistle in 1961? I fear that you are not getting my point & the citations are not a lot of help.
It is all about taking a little care and not just dumping information into an article. If there is a contradiction then either you need to resolve it or you bring the matter here for consideration and then the article is amended according to the consensus reached. If no consensus is manageable then the best solution always is to remove the awkward information. Better to say nothing at all than to say something which may be incorrect.
If, as you say, numerous people have ignored your additions then those additions would still be there, unaltered. Since in fact they have been altered, they have not been ignored. What appears to be happening is that you are sometimes adding information which is either wrong, poorly cited or contested. You have to learn to deal with this because Wikipedia works as a collaborative community. - Sitush (talk) 16:09, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

I have already told that there were three film debuts in three different languages. Epistle in English, Chinnada Gombe in Kannada in 1964 as a 15 year old, Venniradai in Tamil in 1965 as a 16 year old.As a leading heroine her first film is Chinnada Gombe and Venniradai respectively in Kannada and Tamil. In epistle she made her first appearance as an actress.She had a lengthy role in the film. Also, Sitush, I did not mean that people are ignoring my additions, what i actually meant was each and every additional fact with reference has been made by me, but in between many are not acknowledging that fact, but instead without knowing fact are accusing me of engaging in some edit war etc.Some are playing smart by removing facts placed by me and putting back them later. In short artcile remains the way i wanted it to be. Although one fact has been removed - which is - that Vedavalli entered film industry through her airhostess cum small time actress sister of hers.Paglakahinka (talk) 12:09, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

You need to work collaboratively here. At present you appear not to be doing so and, indeed, are verging on WP:OWN with some of your comments. This is not your article even right down at the level of a sentence or word. Nor are the citations "your" citations. In addition to this, perhaps it is a language issue but I felt that the article and your explanations were contradictory. She could not have been aged 15 in 1961 and 1964, for example, which is what you appear to have been saying although obviously it is not what you meant.
It is things like this that make me concerned that you are being a little slapdash. There is no problem because the issues can be fixed, but they can only be fixed if you accept comments, and in particular constructive criticism, gracefully. - Sitush (talk) 14:43, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

(Situshtalk) , you dont read what i write carefully. Jayalalithaa started working in film Chinnanda Gombe at the age of 15(1963) and the film was released in 1964 and she as a 15 year old(1964) started to work in Venniradai released in 1965. My citation -- that means/ implies that these citations were serched online and put by me in wikipedia article.Paglakahinka (talk) 11:39, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

Many websites are just duplicates of other websites.The place of birth is cited as Mysore in most of them. But the truth is Senior Journalist and film director Chitra Lakshamanan on June 16 th clarified in an interview telecasted in Jaya TV , which I am sure will be published in some newspaper as his interview , that Jayalalithaa was born in Srirangam and not Mysore. Her mother gave birth in Srirangam Hospital. Mysore they just had to migrate.As i have no online reference, i agreed to leave that matter for time being.Paglakahinka (talk) 15:28, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

I could probably just say Verifiability, not truth and get away with it, but take some time to look at it. A TN Government website saying that her birthplace is Mysore is bound to be more reliable than a Jaya TV broadcast. Lynch7 16:15, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Partial filmography[edit]

I feel a separate section for filmography could well be created and the "playback singing" section too can be moved there. By the way, Jayalalitha was a famous actress in Telugu films too but not in Kannada and Hindi. --Commander (Ping Me) 17:20, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for that. I see the telugu awards now. Agree with you on the filmography thing, may be a separate article too would be good, she has more than a hundred films i think and so it would be proper to have a separate article like we have in case of others.--Sodabottle (talk) 17:25, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
sorry! I meant a separate page. Commander (Ping Me) 18:00, 17 June 2011 (UTC) - I have created and updated this page long back.All updations should be made in this page. Its well formatted. Link must be given in main pagePaglakahinka (talk) 15:31, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Not bad. Use "italics" for film titles. --Commander (Ping Me) 15:42, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Recent Edit issues[edit]

1) - mentions clearly Chhnnada Gombe made her a star overhight. 2) Reason to mention who gave her break in Kannada -ie. B.R.Panthalu is to show who was responsible for briging Jaya a star in Kannada.It has nostalgic value and no one really has a problem if that appears in wiki. 3) Sitush has removed many facts. 4) Jayaram was was Jaya's father and Vedavaali was her mother. 5) Jayakumar was her brother 6) Although she attended Stella Maris College, Chennai for her law classes, she had to discontinue from second day and joined Vennira aadai sets as a 16 year old thereby debuted in Tamil films. 7) Jaya acted frequently with many stars, so what are we mentioning that she had a hit apiur with sivaji or gemini? No. Thats cause my references and history says their chemistry was appreciated and they established a popular onscreen pair. To empahsis that all 28 films with MGR were big hits and that their pair was declared a hit pair by the public, it needs to be mentioned in wiki article that she formed popular onscreen pair oppsoite MGR. The popular films of the pair of the 28 needs to be mentioned as otherwise how would the reader even know importance of the pair in Tamil film inustry and in its box office fortunes? 8) Jayalalithaa started working with MGR, so Saroja Devi STARTED getting lesser offers in Tamil.Saroja Devi did 27 films with MGR then from 1967, jaya did 28 films with MGR.So she displaced Saroja devi.Paglakahinka (talk) 14:40, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

I really, really do not care what you say. You are demonstrating an increasing tendency towards tendentious editing. Trust me, most of this film stuff is not irrelevant; her brother is not relevant; her parents' names are not relevant. Will you please leave this bone alone. Each time you go in and edit I have to go back and fix your writing, if only because it is often poorly phrased. - Sitush (talk) 14:45, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
I agree with User:Sitush, Jaya's colloboration with MGR can be mentioned but only in a few lines. You need not explain about all the 28 films they made together. By the way, her parents name can be mentioned, ("Early life" section). --Commander (Ping Me) 15:04, 5 July 2011 (UTC) [ This one is my version. Imorvement shsould be made from here on in this article.Paglakahinka (talk) 15:05, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

I am reporting Pagla... for breaching 3RR. There have been warnings issued, so it should be an immediate block from editing. Her parents are mentioned; there is no need to mention them umpteen times. - Sitush (talk) 15:07, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

History clearly says your version did not have parents names. You are playing smart now. I knew plans would be made to block me.Request everyone to go through history properly. What can i do if Sitush keeps editing continuously without seeing my version patiently (talk) 15:11, 5 July 2011 (UTC) iam not saying that all 28 films be mentioned but the few popular of the 28 needs to be mentioned thats what i have done and i mentioned the number 28 thats all.There is no big issue but Sitush keeps getting excitedPaglakahinka (talk) 15:12, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

Mother's name is there; father's was not. his name is irrelevant as he was not notable. It disrupted the flow. Of course I will look to have you blocked because you are ignoring consensus, policy etc here and on other articles and showing no sign of changing your ways. We need a break from your disruptive editing, and you need some time to read up on policy. You have now re-added at least one source here that does not support the statement made. Honestly, just revert your last two edits and talk it out here. If you self-revert then you will not be blocked. - Sitush (talk) 15:16, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
Paglakahinka blocked as a sock. - Sitush (talk) 17:24, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

File:J Jayalalitha, CM of Tamil Nadu (2011-2016).jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion[edit]

Icon Now Commons orange.svg An image used in this article, File:J Jayalalitha, CM of Tamil Nadu (2011-2016).jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations
What should I do?
Speedy deletions at commons tend to take longer than they do on Wikipedia, so there is no rush to respond. If you feel the deletion can be contested then please do so (commons:COM:SPEEDY has further information). Otherwise consider finding a replacement image before deletion occurs.

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 05:00, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

File:J Jayalalitha, Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu (2011-2016).jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion[edit]

Image-x-generic.svg An image used in this article, File:J Jayalalitha, Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu (2011-2016).jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations
What should I do?

Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.
  • If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Commons Undeletion Request

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 12:16, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

Acting career section needs justice[edit] I have provided facts with references and also cleared the clarifications previously required (regarding Award function). But still its being said that the edits by me is in good faith, thats all. Wiki article doe not do justice to her acting career. User Sitush has been removing facts since very long....history of edits show this. Prsent article on her covers well only with respect to her political career. But what about her acting career from 1960-69 and 1970-1980? Some senior editor needs to interfere and ensure that Sitush does not edit or revert such article in this manner.Typekept (talk) 18:47, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

You are almost certainly a sockpuppet. The pattern is the same and several different usernames have been blocked for contributing in the manner that you recently did here. - Sitush (talk) 18:53, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

Present wiki article as is being edited and reverted by Sitush is reducing Jayalalithaa's acting career to some small time actor. There are many issues which has never been discussed with any one for that matter even in the past.User Sitush has boycotted this particular wiki article it seems - since April-May 2011. His continuous edits has reduced the content which is not good for the article. What are the issues?

  1. Jayalalithaa won her first Filmfare award for Best Actress in Tamil films in 1972 for Pattikatu Pattanama.What clarification is needed? Again and again Clarification is being asked unnecessarily.Before 1972 she had never won any Fimfare award.
  2. It was only in 1972 that Filmfare awards was launched for Telugu Films. Thats the reason its said "Jaya won the first ever Filmfare Best Actress Award for Telugu Films in 1972.
  3. In a row, she recived Filmfare Best Actress award in Tamil Films for two times, which is a record ie. 1972 & 1973.
  4. Jaya's popularity raised when she was paired with MGR in 28 films from 1965-1973. These films were mass entertainers and was not woman oriented films. Jayalalithaa concentrated in author backed roles from 1971 and so started reducing her assignments opposite MGR.
  5. Jaya did maximmum films with Muthuraman and Ravichandran in seventies and they were all women orineted films. Even in her films with Sivaji Ganeshan and other actors - in the seventies her role was found to be more powerful than her hero. This continued till 1980, when she decided not to accept film assignments.
  6. Arasa Kattali was released in 1967 so why is it appearing in later career? Sumathi En Sundari, Enga Maama, Raja, Deiva Magan, Thaai, Avanthan Manithan, Pattum Bharathamum and Neenga Nalla Erukkanum - they were all landmark films with Sivaji in seventies ie. part of Later career section. Why there is no mention of them?
  7. Why her film hits with Muthuraman, Ravichandran and Jaishankar are not being mentioned properly in Later career section?
  8. There are many actors from Hindi Cinema - in whose articles - there is description of their famous hits released year by year. - Refer Madhuri Dixit, Sharukh Khan, Aamir Khan, Salman Khan etc....

Just because these actors made their debuts in 1986-1992 and there are many articles available on them in internet, so many stuffs have been put on their career.... Why injustice should be done to actress like Jayalalithaa in wikipedia? She has had many hit films to her credit opposite many heroes in each year, but that finds no mention.

  1. Remember India went online / computer savvy only post 2000, so less details are available on actresses or actors , especially actors from other than Hindi films.But still the version i put, does justice to her acting career
  2. Agreed there is filmography section separately. But that is about list of films.

But the significance of some of the films in her acting career as well as for Tamil cinema...needs to find mention in acting career section.

  1. Madhuri Dixit, Sharukh Khan, Aamir Khan, Salman Khan - infact if you see the wiki articles on them, you will observe, there are many issues in them. Again and again film names have been repeated. Even the films which did not work at the box office and films panned by critics have been shown as hits. There is POV and hell lot of other violations of Wiki policy.
  2. Galata Kalyanam , Naan they were released before 1970 so how can it appear in later career section?

Kandan Karunai is also a 1967 film. I request and also suggest other editors to involve themselves in this article and take notice of my contribution and restore the article and then make improvements on it. - This is the difference and my version does justice to her acting career.Typekept (talk) 13:16, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

Requested move[edit]

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: page moved. Vegaswikian (talk) 00:38, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

J. JayalalithaaJayalalithaa – I think this is a no brainer; her name rarely occurs in common use as "J. Jayalalithaa". Its always "Jayalalithaa" in newspapers and reports, all RS. Even most sources used in the article itself. Needless to say, this is under WP:UCN. Lynch7 17:54, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Personal Life missing.[edit]

After a few years I come across this topic & find the whole section of Personal Life missing. Ironically it was one with a lot of citations & previous editors had approved that this is not a hagiography that we are set to write about her but the facts. I propose to reinstate the whole section again, even if it offends those who don't wish to let the facts (fully verifiable infact) about here. In fact the other links provided don't work at all. What's going on here? --Idleguy (talk) 02:57, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

Weasel words[edit]

I hope that there is nomore weasel words remaining in this Article.--Hariharavelan N 07:46, 15 January 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Harivel17 (talkcontribs)


I just visited the article after a long time and was shocked to see the Controversies missing, being acquitted doesn't mean that it doesn't need a place in the article, any notable event in the individuals life needs to be there. Every single politician has this section and this article exempted from it resembles a fan site. is an excellent example, he too was acquitted from several scandals.Pearll's SunTALK 14:35, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

I have never fully read the article. But if the controversy section is removed, it should be put back. Acquitted or not, doesn't matter. The result of the case will just form a part of that section.--Vigyanitalkਯੋਗਦਾਨ 14:39, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
The legal issues are covered in the relevant sections of the article already, although if someone wants to add another sentence to them then that is fine. Anything more would be excessive given that she was acquitted in a court of law and that has never been challenged. In other words, she differs from, say, Narendra Modi, whose "controversies" continue to be questioned.

As a rule, we try to avoid "Controversy" sections, especially in BLPs. They can tend to look like undue weight. We (as in people contributing to this article) have had this discussion on several past occasions. I noted also that unless you can associate Jayalalithaa withe the orchestration of AIADMK violence then it should not be mentioned here: it creates an unacceptable inference. - Sitush (talk) 16:52, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

I'm not pointing at Your edit alone, but that section used to be a larger one and now gone missing over time and your edit was the latest one. And i personally feel that an online encyclopedia like wiki should discuss all the topics need to describe a person and their life, even a false accusation when got popular and gets more people attention needs to have its presence as they are also an important part of the persons life. The point of being acquitted or guilty is a part of the topic and should not be a reason for being removed. May be due to my low availability in wiki these days, it sounds new to me to to remove Controversies from the article is they are no longer questioned. Then may be most of the articles about politicians with the section controversies would removed with time as they will eventually get included in the list of no longer questionable. Pearll's SunTALK 17:41, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
Just to fill you in on the missing months ;) The section was completely absent for a long time and then reappeared recently, complete with copyright violations and the usual POV (ie: it didn't even mention that she had been acquitted). Not that this matters, for the reasons that I have already given. - Sitush (talk) 17:56, 10 May 2013 (UTC)


We do not show the alleged caste affiliation of living people unless they have self-identified as being of a particular caste. Since, in the context of Wikipedia, caste is a social construct rather than something that one is born into, there is also no relevance in showing the caste of a person's parents etc even if those people are dead. These issues have been discussed at WT:INB, WP:VPP, WP:BLPN and across numerous talk pages; I rather think they even hit WP:ANI on one occasion. Some links can be found at User:Sitush/Common#Castelists. - Sitush (talk) 06:59, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

I am not very sure if there are enough 'solid' citations that can be given, but common knowledge on internet -- read semi-reliable sources like Nakkeeran (magazine) (Although its a news magazine, its often cited as cheap sensationalist magazine), Gnani Sankaran's blog, some book on Dalit history(but I didn't read beyond the google excerpt which was just few words) and few more -- refer to the incident that happened in 1990's in which Jayalalitha made a pride statement "Yes, I am a Paappathi" (Derogatory term in common use for brahmin woman) on the Tamil nadu assembly. There is lack of reliable source, clarity on context, etc. Even if we find something, would it be still relevant to say she identifies and wishes to be identified by her caste? Evano1van(எவனோ ஓருவன்) 13:03, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

Criticisms of Jayalalitha[edit]

My last few edits have been warned and i'm been criticized for trying to write Criticisms of Jayalalitha!. I don't understand what wrong they found in my writing. I'm all ears to discuss my edit. When you remove my edit, you should justify your reason that i'm being unfair. But 2 guys (Gfosankar, VQuakr) just warned me for violating the WP BLP without providing reasons what part of the article violates it ?? I'm ready to discuss about it here!

As mentioned above by lot of users, this article has been cleverly edited to be pro and removed all contents that covers whole part. I'm openly accusing above two guys i mentioned, for restricting me from writing the true content. I request all to join me and lets create a true article about Criticisms of Jayalalitha Icommoner (talk) 00:01, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

Hi Icommoner, WP:BLP should be written within the polices such as Neutral point of view, Verifiability, No original research and your contents does not met BLP polices. Your whole contents are against the BLP polices. You asked for reasons, already i provide basic reason on your talk page about why I reverted your edits (Adding original research). I give some example from your contents as follows which violates BLP polices.
Later, after her party suffered, Jayalalithaa reversed the decisions and reinstated all the dismissed employees and withdrew the penalties imposed, despite the Committee of Judges’ findings.[1] (dead link)(original research)
She has constantly been at the heart of controversy over the numerous defamation suits[4] filed against opposition leaders and members of the press, using privileges available to her in the official capacity and by using government funds. She has been accused of being highly intolerant to negative criticism. (POV)
TIME magazine, and many other newspapers in India observed that the ceremony was "a vulgar display of wealth".[14][15] (Sources not mention it)(non verifiable)
Interestingly, she is regarded as one of the wealthiest politicians in India, despite drawing a salary of Re. 1[16] (original research)
Serina. She was alleged to have had relations with Sasikala's ex husband Natarajan.[17][19] (not in sources) (original research)
All other sources which you mention, most of them are dead links or does not have the provide information which you write in the article. --Gfosankar (talk) 05:43, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

Tax Evasion charges?[edit]

Should the news item that Tamil Nadu Chief Minister Jayalalithaa will be prosecuted for tax evasion be added?. The Supreme Court bench rejected her contention that non-filing of returns per se was not an offence as there was no income and no tax evasion, and directed the lower court to complete the trial in four months. Uncletomwood (talk) 06:38, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

What sources would we use? The implication from your summary is that the charges relate to non-filing of tax returns rather than actually not paying tax that she should have paid. If that is correct then it seems pretty trivial, although I suppose some sources might argue that a person who has been in public office should set an example. - Sitush (talk) 06:15, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

Semi Protection Request[edit]

Required due to possible vandalism after arrest

Padlock-dash2.svg Not done: requests for increases to the page protection level should be made at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection.

But please note we do not protect articles due to possible vandalism, only when there has been repetitive vandalism. - Arjayay (talk) 13:39, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 28 September 2014[edit]

Introduction Phase Second Paragraph Last line reads: She is the second elected female chief minister of Tamil Nadu; the first was Janaki Ramachandran.

Section 3.3 - First term as Chief Minister, 1991 Third line reads: Re-elected to the assembly, she became the first elected female chief minister and the youngest ever chief minister of Tamil Nadu, serving the full tenure from 24 June 1991 to 12 May 1996. (talk) 14:42, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done The wording was confusing but the facts were correct:-

  1. She was the second female chief minister of Tamil Nadu; the first was Janaki Ramachandran. - However, Ramachandran only served for 23 days
  2. She was the first female chief minister of Tamil Nadu (and the youngest) to serve the full tenure

I have tried to reword the second use to make it clearer - If you can think of a better wording - please suggest it. - Arjayay (talk) 15:51, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

  1. ^ . "WikiEN-l Zero information is preferred to misleading or false information", May 19, 2006