Talk:Father of the Nation
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] POV and bogus information
The article is very POV
1. The sentence
Perhaps the most famous "Father of the Nation" is the American revolutionary general and first president of the United States, George Washington. Washington's image as a national icon of pride and leadership has become almost a cliché to the point where other countries even sometimes refer to their own independence leaders as "our George Washington."
is POV and w/o sources
2. I think that dozens of African and Asian dictators do not fit into what "Father of the Nation" means.
3. The items for Czech Republic and Czechoslovakia are wrong (Masaryk doesn't belong there, Czech Republic isn't nation)
I recommend to reduce the table to half a dozen of names that are no controversial. Pavel Vozenilek 19:24, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- Why is the Czech Republic "not a nation"? Guettarda 19:46, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- OK, the table lists states, maybe states OR nations should be used (in this case Czechs, Czech Republic and Palacky sounds very funny to my ear, he lived so long before Czech Rep. was constituted) Pavel Vozenilek 20:22, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- I had previously listed Václav Havel, but then (I think it was an anonymous IP) asserted something to the effect of "Palacky has been Czech FOTN for over 400 years." You can check the edit history for the exact note. --Sesel 20:24, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- OK, the table lists states, maybe states OR nations should be used (in this case Czechs, Czech Republic and Palacky sounds very funny to my ear, he lived so long before Czech Rep. was constituted) Pavel Vozenilek 20:22, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- The recent edits by 80.222.96.251 are (as far as I can tell) bogus with no basis in fact. I am the user responsible for much of the expansion of this list, for I believe Wikipedia should be as comprehensive and inclusive as possible; I have made some mistakes and later removed them. The recent inclusions of Nehru and Mao (figures who I tried to add a long time ago) contradict what has been discussed with regard to this page, and monarchs such as Idris and Faisal are, for the most part, reviled by their people. I will look over this page again. --Sesel 19:49, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- What do you think about having just minimal table with few names - just those who are broadly acknowledged? The term became overloaded by journalists and is almost meaningless, IMHO - like the mentioning of Afghan king by local politician. Pavel Vozenilek 20:22, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- The United States isn't a nation either because their is no "American" ethnic group or "American" language, just as there is no "Tanzanian" ethnic group or "Tanzanian language." But we use the terminology anyway because "father of the state" sounds too clinical. --Sesel 19:51, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
-
- Thanks for offering to sort it out - it looks like 80.222.96.251 made quite a mess of this page. Guettarda 20:28, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- I agree, that sentence is very POV. I've never heard anyone refered to as that country's "George Washington".
[edit] About the cut
Is the massive truncation of the list in the interest of the article and of Knowledge? I doubt it. I vote for a revert. Add your voice if you agree. --Liberlogos 06:41, 23 Feb 2005 (UTC)
-
- In my opinion it is good thing. I would truncate it even more to just half a dozen of representative names.
-
- For example Czech Republic may be removed: the term is almost unused here. I saw it only once in combination with Palacky and this was from 19th century text.
-
- If loss of information is feared then new article "Dictators and politicians claming to be Father of the Nation" may be created and filled ad nauseum. Pavel Vozenilek 19:25, 24 Feb 2005 (UTC)
-
- Personally I think the cut could go a lot further. For example Alfred the Great is never referred to as the father of the English nation, indeed he never even managed to rule the whole nation simultaneously let alone be the "father" of it. Personally I think this list should only contain those who are explicitly referred to as the "father of x nation" or similar, otherwise it is mere opinion. Rje 01:36, Mar 25, 2005 (UTC)
-
- I agree with Rje. If Alfred is never called father of the nation. To include him in the list seems to come from some concept that what a nation is is clear and objective and that all nations have fathers.Dejvid 17:20, 2 May 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Fiji's father
Ratu Sukuna is considered the founder of modern Fiji. He was the first university graduate, founded Fiji's first political party, founded the Great Council of Chiefs (which still has a constitutional role), and was the first speaker of Fiji's legislature. His birthday (mondayized to the last Monday in May) is a national holiday. Sources [1], [2], [3].
Sukuna is "official" as a father of the nation; beyond any question, he needs to be in this list. Mara and Ganilau are unofficial, both supporters and opponents labeled them as such at their funerals. Whether that will stand the test of time cannot be proved; I personally believe it will, as one intimately familiar with Fijian affairs (but I cannot put my original research in Wikipedia). However, if a strict criteria of "official" national fathers is applied, I would not object to removing Mara and Ganilau. Sukuna should definitely stay.
Seru Epenisa Cakobau also has some claim to be the nation's father, too, as it was he who unified all of Fiji's warring tribes into a single kingdom for the first time (in 1871). He was not the founder of the modern nation state, but definitely forged the first identifiable entity known as Fiji. David Cannon 01:14, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Cliche on George Washington
I am confused about the appropriateness of this sentence
- Washington's image as a national icon of pride and leadership has become almost a cliché to the point where other countries even sometimes refer to their own independence leaders as "our George Washington.
I have never heard anyone calling their national leaders "our George Washington". Isn't it a little out of context.... can anyone provide references on this? Thanks. --Ragib 02:34, 24 May 2005 (UTC)
- I've cleaned up that section, provided references, and generally tried to remove POV. Any objections to removing the POV tag?--BaronLarf July 7, 2005 13:43 (UTC)
-
- The line is simply irrelevant to the article. Besides it shows somewhat of a Systemic bias. --Ragib 9 July 2005 01:53 (UTC)
-
-
-
- Completely opposite. My objection is not to George Washington or Nepoleon or any great leader. The question is whether other countries call their leaders "Our X", x being Washington or anyone. Claiming that is POV. Because you really can't prove it from a news item, that would be speculation, right? This article is quite in good shape with the facts it presents, rather than comparing leaders and saying any one of them is so great, others are compared to them in that way. Washington was the great American Father of the nation, So was Bolivar, of South America, and Gandhi of India. Let them all be in their own glory, without putting any one of them in the others shadows. I hope you get my point. Thanks. /--Ragib 9 July 2005 07:38 (UTC)
-
-
[edit] Mannerheim?
Why Carl Gustaf Emil Mannerheim is Father of Finland? I would prefer Elias Lönnrot, J. L. Runeberg and J. V. Snellman, maybe Mikael Agricola too. Kahkonen 17:06, 17 July 2005 (UTC)
- Please edit the article appropriatelly. Pavel Vozenilek 23:19, 17 July 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Scottland's Donald Dewar
Is this person really widely considered as "father of the nation"? He is recently died politician and some time may be needed for opinion on him to evolve and stabilize. Pavel Vozenilek
[edit] Soviet Union
As other people have brought up before, why is this still on the list? It is a country that no longer exists.
I'm not sure who would be considered the Father of the Nation for the Russian Federation (Yeltsin?) but having the USSR up there is a joke.
[edit] Thank you
I just wanted to tank David for the encouragement he gave me. Thanks again. The Unknown 04:01, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Dubious
I suspect many of the men listed in the table are rarely or never referred to as "Father of the Nation". One can play an enjoyable parlour game by asking "if country X had a 'father of the nation', who would it be?" but Wikipedia is not a parlour game. I've added an unreferenced template accordingly. jnestorius(talk) 01:50, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
- Yes... Perhaps an approach such as that at List of people known as father or mother of something might lend more credence...? Regards, David Kernow 09:23, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
