Talk:Namantar Andolan

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject India / Maharashtra (Rated Start-class, Low-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.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Maharashtra (marked as Low-importance).
 
Note icon
This article was last assessed in May 2012.

Original call for change of name[edit]

Somewhere in my reading I've seen a vague mention that there was an earlier call for the university name to be changed. The source said something like "20 years earlier", which presumably places it somewhere around the time of Ambedkar's death in December 1956. Can we find out any more about this? - Sitush (talk) 18:42, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Dear Sitush,
Dalit Panthers demanded (not protested) for name to the government before 1978. Maharashtra Legislature approved it in July 1978. On this approval, the upper caste Hindus reacted by anti-Dalit violence. As a result government postponed renaming for uncertain period. And then Dalits started Andolan by Satygraha, Jail Bharo Andolan and Long March.
Many thanks. Bhooshannpy (talk) 12:54, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

Dear Sitush, source please?? Many thanks.-----Bhooshan NPY (talk) 23:31, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

Title and certain sources[edit]

(1) We have a statement about Fauzdar Bhurevar, sourced from "The caste question [electronic resource]: Dalits and the politics of modern India" this book informs that Maharashtra's chief minister was Sharad Patil (page 212) and that Nanded has a Kanher taluka (page 210), both bad facts[1][2] afaik, now this book has been used 8 times in the said article. Can we use a source that is poor on simple facts? (2)Shouldn't we move the page to an English title, "Namantar Andolan" has as good as no use in reliable sources say google books Yogesh Khandke (talk) 23:41, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

Kanher is likely a variant spelling of Kandhar. The book incorrectly changes Pawar's last name to Patil but, in and of itself, that may be an editing error. There may be more substantive reasons for not using this as a source but this is insufficient. --regentspark (comment) 19:38, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

Questions[edit]

@Bhooshannpy: In editing what are now the first four paragraphs, there are some places where I feel a need for clarification.

  • What does "land reordering" mean? I took it out, but it might be important.
  • In rearanging things, I'm sure I've moved references away from where they should be. Since I don't have access to many of the references, please check to make sure they are in the right places.
  • In reorganizing the third paragraph into two paragraphs I've used many different words and phrases, and I'm worried that I may have altered the meaning. Please check carefully.

Thank you, SchreiberBike talk 06:45, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

Dear SchreiberBike,
  • Land recording has historical significance, Mahars were forced to stay outside the villages (generally on the boundaries of villages). So Mahars use to keep track of lands of that particular village. In case of land dispute (between any community) they were considered as Honest by all villagers. They use to resolve disputes between villagers.
  • I will keep watch, in case you misplace the citations. But its very easy to read those journal articles on JSTOR. Please open your account on JSTOR, all articles can be accessed free once you open an account. I am sure will add something if I miss something. Please have a look over 1, 2, 3 etc.
  • I have supported your sentence by accurate citation in third paragraph.
  • Previous opening line was The word namantar means...... you changed it to Namantar means name change.I think previous was accurate?
Many thanks.-----Bhooshan NPY (talk) 15:01, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

Category[edit]

Dear Everyone,

  • Some editors are trying to remove the category "persecution by Hindus" from Namantar Andolan. In the edit note those editors have expressed their personal views.
  • In support of category "persecution by Hindus" for Namantar Andolan please read A, B CPage 285-296 D etc... The Hindu community have persecuted neo-Buddhist people. Hinduism and Buddhism are different religion, so "persecution by Hindus" is accurate category. Additionally, Hindus have killed Untouchables so it falls in other category also.
  • Persecution meaning

I will explain the meaning for those who dont understand:

  1. unfair or cruel treatment towards Buddhist - Yes
  2. over a long period of time - Yes
  3. because of race, religion, or political beliefs - Yes, because of religion
  • The citations above attached explains "persecution by Hindus" also. Please read the citations before you comment.

Many thanks.-----Bhooshan NPY (talk) 20:08, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

Economics and Political Weekly is not a reliable source - it is a left-wing, campaigning rag masquerading as an academic journal. The fact that you have relied so much on it to push your POV in this article says a lot. - Sitush (talk) 20:49, 18 August 2013 (UTC)
Daer Sitush,
Please read the citations before you comment. Read other two as well.
I believe Wikipedia (saying similar) claim over Gyan Publisher. When Wikipedia said about Economics and Political Weekly??
Many thanks.----Bhooshan NPY (talk) 12:11, 19 August 2013 (UTC)
I cannot read the other sources but your very evident pov and mis-citing of other sources that I can see makes me very concerned about the state of this article as, indeed, I have been from the outset. It is a notable topic but one that is being driven by an agenda here. - Sitush (talk) 12:16, 19 August 2013 (UTC)
Dear Sitush,
I asked you "When Wikipedia said about Economics and Political Weekly?? similar to Gyan Publisher...
Bhooshan NPY (talk) 12:33, 19 August 2013 (UTC)
Sorry but I never said E&PW has been determined to be similar to Gyan. That publisher mirrors Wikipedia content and as far as I am aware, E&PW does not. The reliability of E&PW is, however, often contested - for example, it was discussed at Talk:Narendra Modi recently. One particular item from it was raised at WP:RSN in relation to this article and I still maintain that particular item most certainly should not be used here, ie: the kneejerk report of n anonymous samiti that, indeed, has subsequently been described on such lines by other writers in E&PW itself. - Sitush (talk) 12:46, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── The category Persecution by Hindus is completely justified in this article. Not only are there reliable sources in support of this, but more importantly, the article itself is sufficient to justify this. The article clearly enumerates the Hindu persecution against the Dalit. Some of such information/lines are below:

  • Although historically an oppressed community in Hindu society, as with all untouchable groups, the Mahars had sought...
  • They were not allowed to enter Hindu temples and had to live outside of villages.
  • Police helped Upper caste Hindus for this attempt.
  • Ambedkar’s statue at Bhim Nagar was broken into pieces by Hindu students and youth
  • Mahajanrao Patil, a Lingayat, an Upper caste Hindu, helped Dalits so he was beaten badly
  • Dalits were banned from buying grocery items in their villages by non-Dalits and Upper caste Hindus
  • Shiv Sena, the Hindutva political party, initially declared itself opposed to the Namantar.

In this backdrop, no one but a POV editor can remove this category. Eye-washing logics like Hindus persecuting hindus? and The article is not saying that is the purpose of the category are not expected from experienced editor like Sitush. Such logics absolutely have no meaning. Please be bold to express the truth because, after all, you can’t hide it. Edit-war can't remove a truth because there are other means to seek remedy.--AsceticRosé 16:06, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

The only reason you can draw that conclusion is because Bhooshannpy has succeeded in producing a very biased article. If you read even the sources that are cited, rather than the many alternates, you will realise that this was a social persecution rather than a religious one. For example, yes, Buddhists were targeted in some areas but they were targeted not for being Buddhist but for being dalit upstarts, challenging their traditional place in society. It was not a religious movement. - Sitush (talk) 11:48, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
Your answer is fundamentally flawed, and funny as well. Yes, it is a social persecution. So what? Are social persecutions not persecutions? What a funny logic! Yes, they are persecuted for being Dalit, and the article is also saying so. So, where is the contradiction? The article mentions Dalit approximately 83 times while it mentions Buddhist for 8 times.
As you yourself admit it is a persecution by Hindus, the category is further justified, and you can't remove it.--AsceticRosé 15:54, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
It mentions things as it does precisely because one particular contributor is pushing a certain point of view. For example, Omvedt is selectively used but she is consistent in arguing that the issue is one of class, not religion. Don't believe what you read in this article because it is in large part not a true reflection of the sources. We have a major issue with ownership and pov pushing here. - Sitush (talk) 00:41, 24 August 2013 (UTC)
I have already proved the category with accurate citations. I advise other editor to refer one more citation: Murugkar, Lata (1991) Dalit Panther Movement in Maharashtra. A Sociological Appraisal. Bombay: Popular Prakashan.Pgae 171
Many thanks.-----Bhooshan NPY (talk) 07:40, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

Marathi sources[edit]

Please can someone provide English translations of all the Marathi sources used in this article. It has had a troubled history of pov, plagiarism, copyright violation etc and we need to be sure that what is said is supported by the sources. - Sitush (talk) 21:12, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

I will translate the Marathi quotes that we have taken in the article. Shortly I will do that.----Bhooshan NPY (talk) 19:20, 19 August 2013 (UTC)
Still waiting and, meanwhile, you are continuing to push an angle on this article with yet more unnecessary stuff. You might want to take a look at WP:OWN. - Sitush (talk) 21:22, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

Citations[edit]

The Namantar Andolan was a 16-year-long Dalit campaign to rename Marathwada University in recognition of B. R. Ambedkar 1,the jurist, politician and social reformer who had proposed that untouchability should be made illegal.23

See, you are doing it again. As in the article, you are suggesting that the reader should examine a large range of pages to find verification of your point. I'm not prepared to do it: what page numbers are you wanting me to look at in those documents? - Sitush (talk) 11:45, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
  • India adopted Constitution of India in 1949.Citation
  • Many Dalits converted to Buddhism, following the example of Ambedkar to separate themselves from the strictures of the Hindu caste system.Citation Sangharakshita (2006). Ambedkar and Buddhism (1st South Asian ed. ed.). New Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass Publishers. pp. 127–140. ISBN 8120830237.
I do not deny either of these points but they do not require (a) citation of a primary source or synthesis to reach an original conclusion. - Sitush (talk) 00:36, 24 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Many intellectuals were shocked by violent incidents in the Marathwada region, the region of saints which has given many social reformation movements to the state in medieval India.
  1. Omvedt, Gail (1993). Reinventing revolution: new social movements and the socialist tradition in India. M.E. Sharpe Publishers. pp. 64–66. ISBN 9780765631763.
  2. Damle, Y. B. (January-June 1994). "Holocaust in Marathwad: 1978". ICSSR Research Abstracts Quarterly (Indian Council of Social Science and Research). XXIII.

Soapboxing[edit]

I've just removed this. It cherrypicks from a source, seems to be in the wrong place and is certainly a non sequitor. Does it have any place in the article? Perhaps, but only if we balance it with other opinions. - Sitush (talk) 12:55, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Dear Sitush,
The correct place would be before the last paragraph of Background. This has many point such as untouchability, Politicss etc.. I believe without other opinion also this is important in the article.
Many thanks.-----Bhooshan NPY (talk) 22:17, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
Well, I disagree and I am becoming fed up of your controlling attitude to this article. It seems obvious to me that you have a massive vested interest, probably as a Buddhist dalit yourself. - Sitush (talk) 00:37, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

Contradiction[edit]

We say that The bridges and culverts were intentionally broken or damaged to paralyse the Military and Police aid in villages during the time of attacks, which is fair enough if that is what the source says and it is reliable. But we also have several statements that say the police refused to help/sided with the non-Dalits and so on. If different sources say different things then that, too, is fine but the way that things are currently organised makes it look contradictory. I'm still reading through sources that have been introduced recently but I retain the opinion that this article - despite improvements to the early sections by myself and others - still resembles a list that has been put together with the intention of making things look bad. Of course, things were bad but we have to try to produce readable prose that summarises sources in a way that makes sense. The police issue right now doesn't and I really, really do not think it is helped by using the E&PW sources. As for the military bit, well, do we even mention them anywhere else? What was the military response? Who was in charge of making police/military decisions? Were there any repercussions and official reports as, for example, in Uttar Pradesh after the 2002 riots? - Sitush (talk) 13:13, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Dear Sitush,
Generally, Army help is asked by the Central Govt when violence crosses limits. I believe, Marathwada witnessed similar violence. Please see this example.
Many thanks.----Bhooshan NPY (talk) 22:05, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
I am not interested in examples elsewhere because they are original research. Your response does not resolve the contradiction, which seems to result from poor phrasing and dreadful use of sources. - Sitush (talk) 00:39, 24 August 2013 (UTC)
There is no contradiction about the Police. Because the source (Y B Damle) does not claim that Police went to villages and helped victims. Additionally, read Vakil, Mayaram(2005) etc... these sources have examples of Police behavior during the attacks. Many thanks.-----Bhooshan NPY (talk) 23:08, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

Duration[edit]

There are few sources that even refer to this campaign as the Namantar Andolan - an issue that was raised here a few weeks ago. Please could someone point to which of the five sources mentioned for its alleged 16-year duration actually refers to the Andolan as being of that length. - Sitush (talk) 00:46, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

Name[edit]

  • (Indian) English newspapers have referred it as Namantar 'Movement' Indian Express, Nagpur Today. ( they have mentioned a synonym of Andolan)

If anyone want to add/comment. Please provide accurate citations (rather than vague comment/s). Many thanks.-----Bhooshan NPY (talk) 22:11, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

Media Focus[edit]

Please read this Marathi citation to know, how Namantar Andolan came into the media focus. Many thanks.-----Bhooshan NPY (talk) 22:32, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

English translation[edit]

Dear everyone, Please refer "References" section (if anyone interested) to learn about the English translations (from vernacular sources). Many thanks.-----Bhooshan NPY (talk) 12:39, 19 September 2013 (UTC)