|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
Material for the write up was obtained from the following URLs
--Amit 181 09:01, 5 January 2006 (UTC) Amit
Please don't keep reversing mention of Josh's years in India, with the refrain: "He did not have dual nationality." No one is saying he did. But he was a citizen of the Republic of India from 1947 to 1957, when he emigrated to Pakistan and became a naturalized Pakistani citizen. A person's nationality at death is not his only nationality. See the wikipedia page on Enrico Fermi, born in Italy in 1901, who emigrated to the US in the late 1930s and became a naturalized US citizen in 1944 at the age of 43. The lead on his page says: "Enrico Fermi (September 29, 1901 – November 28, 1954) was an Italian physicist most noted for his work on the development ..." and only much later does it say, "He became a naturalized citizen of the United States of America in 1944."
Or, look at the Wikipedia page for the physicist E. P. Wigner, who was born in 1902 in Hungary and became a citizen of the US in in 1937 at the age of 34 and remained one until he died in 1995 at the age of 92. His lead says: "Eugene Paul Wigner (E. P. Wigner among physicists, his peers) (Hungarian Wigner Pál Jenő) (November 17, 1902 – January 1, 1995) was a Hungarian physicist and mathematician who received the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1963 ..." Only much later Wigner#Middle_years do they mention: "On January 8, 1937, Wigner became a naturalized citizen of the United States." This in spite of the fact that Wigner was a citizen of the US much longer than he was one of Hungary.
In light of this, it is perfectly plausible to mention both India and Pakistan in Josh's lead. Not only was Josh a citizen of independent India for ten years, but all the places he lived before that were in UP or Delhi, areas that are in current day India and not Pakistan. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 19:57, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
- Dear Schaizder, You say in your edit summary, "did not spend enough time in India to be called indian." Well, 60 years (from 1898 to 1958) in Agra, Hyderabad (South India) and Delhi, is not enough time? Not one day of those 60 years was spent in Lahore, Karachi, or Rawalpindi, or any town that was to become a part of Pakistan. BTW, Josh spent more time in independent India (a total of ten years) than Gandhi, who died on 30 January 1948, and lived a mere 6 months in independent India. What does that make Gandhi according to your arithmetic? South African or British? Gandhi certainly spent more time in those countries than independent India. And I am not even addressing Josh's misgivings about becoming Pakistani and the false promise that was given him about initially only spending four months a year in Pakistan, about getting a free plot in Karachi for his children, and about not needing to become a Pakistani citizen for all this .... Fowler&fowler«Talk» 17:12, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
|“||.... I went back to Panditji (Nehru) after two days. I noticed the relaxed, bright expression that comes naturally to those who have solved a knotty problem. Beaming and smiling, he announced that he had come up with a solution.
"Is it not true that you are going to Pakistan to safeguard the material and cultural interests of your family, and to promote the cause of Urdu?"
I agreed, "There is no second reason."
"In that case your children can be Pakistanis. But you stay put in India. Make a trip to Pakistan for four months each year and serve the cause of Urdu. The Government of India will grant you leave and pay your salary for the period of absence."
I jumped at Panditji's suggestion. I told him that I endorsed his idea wholeheartedly. In this way I would have the best of both the worlds.
Panditji was delighted and hugged me. The very next day the media men cornered me. I explained my discussions with Nehru. My interview appeared in the English and Urdu newspapers two days later.
... Naqvi saheb (Syed Abu Talib Naqvi, chief commissioner of Karachi) dampened my spirits when I revealed my future plans in the light of discussions with Panditji. He made it clear that no land allotment could take place unless I agreed to be a Pakistani citizen. Nobody would build a cinema hall or raise an orchard. "Your children are dear to us because they are yours," he said.
Naqvi added: "Besides, to which country would you belong to? In Pakistan you would be treated as an Indian, whereas the Indians would be suspicious of you because your family members are citizens of Pakistan. And haven't you decided to spend four months in Pakistan? Josh saheb, you can't cross a river with your feet anchored in two boats. Mind you, your credibility would be undermined in both the countries." I was rudely shaken by what Naqvi said. He was realistic and talked sense. I accepted his arguments and became a citizen of Pakistan.
Now, about the evil spirits.
Soon thereafter, there was a massive outcry in Pakistan. All hell broke loose in Karachi. It seemed as if the bugle announcing doomsday had been proclaimed (goya sur-i qayamat phoonk dya gaya hai). Urdu and English newspapers came out into the open and declared war against me. (Taman adba wa shuara our cartoon-saazon ne apne apne qalmon ki talwaren miyan se nikal kar mere khilaaf mazameen, qataat aur cartoonon ke bharmaar kar di).
.... News of the uproar reached the ministry of external affairs. Naqvi was asked to give an explanation. Realising that I was the source of difficulties, I quietly surrendered the plot of orchard land and the cinema.
In those days Chaudhri Muhammad Ali was the Prime Minister., Naqvi fell out with him. He took on the Prime Minister on the strength of Iskander Mirza's backing. But the Mirza turned his back on Naqvi. He was removed from office. Naqvi's downfall was the last straw. I was left high and dry.
I thought of returning to India, but did not do so to protect my self-respect and dignity. I asked myself, "Khan saheb, what next?"
Photograph File:Josh Malihabadi.jpg
Dear User:GorgeCustersSabre, I do not think that en.wiki or Commons requires for the source to say if a particular work is in public domain. The Indian law seems to be very clear to me on this issue as can be read from Commons:Template:PD-India-photo-1958. The file under consideration is a 1949 work. Being part of a government propaganda machine, it is presumed to have been published around the same time as the date of work. At any rate, this is a debate for Commons to worry about and not en.wiki. As long as the file is there on Commons, I see no reason why it should not be shown here. Thanks and Regards, Rahul Bott (talk) 11:06, 20 December 2015 (UTC)
- Dear friend Rahul Bott, I hope you are well. Lots of images on Commons are later deleted because of inadequate or non-existent copyright provision. Please see WP:IUP. The Guideline states: Before you upload an image, make sure that the image falls in one of the four categories: Own work: You own all rights to the image, usually meaning that you created it entirely yourself. (example, see below for details) Freely licensed: You can prove that the copyright holder has released the image under an acceptable free license. Note that images that are licensed for use only on Wikipedia, or only for non-commercial or educational use, or under a license that doesn't allow for the creation of modified/derived works, are unsuitable. (example, see below for details) When in doubt, do not upload copyrighted images. Public domain: You can prove that the image is in the public domain, i.e. free of all copyrights. (example, see below for details) Fair use: You believe that the image meets the special conditions for non-free content, which exceptionally allow the use of unlicensed material, and you can provide an explicit non-free use rationale explaining why and how you intend to use it. (example, see below for details)
Dear GorgeCustersSabre, I think the source says clearly it is a 1949 work. That "proves" it is in public domain in India. Moreover, this is a file hosted on Commons and en.wiki rules don't apply. If you think the file is a possible copyright violation, please feel free to bring it up for discussion at the Commons. Till then, I request that you reinstate the link to the file I gave in the infobox. Regards, Rahul Bott (talk) 12:37, 22 December 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Josh Malihabadi. 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:
- Added archive http://www.webcitation.org/6U68ulwpb?url=http://mha.nic.in/sites/upload_files/mha/files/LST-PDAWD-2013.pdf to http://mha.nic.in/sites/upload_files/mha/files/LST-PDAWD-2013.pdf
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.