Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hindu politics

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 08:11, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hindu politics

The article is a neologism, created with the purpose of attributing Hinduism to a certain political current. Soman 09:03, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

• Strong keep Well, that 'political current' claims to be inspired by Hinduism. Islamic politics or Christian politics are valid topics, however, following a broad pattern of anti-Hindu prejudice, this article is seen as not fit for Wikipedia by this user. I'm disappointed. --^Babub→Talk 09:07, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Comment I'm not very happy about Islamic politics or Christian politics-articles either. Whats the point of arbitrary attributions a wide religious tradition to political currents? --Soman 09:28, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Surely, though. if a political party or movement is inspired by the ideals of a particular religion, that's a useful thing to discuss? The "Christian right" is a phenomenon in America without which it's quite difficult to understand their politics, and similar comments can be made about trying to understand Iran or Saudi Arabia without the conception of "Islamic politics". BigHaz 09:35, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

• Strong keep per above, and someone with more of a background in either the religion or the political ideologies should expand it forthwith. Additionally, to the nominator, please make your nominations at the bottom of the list, per the instructions. BigHaz 09:23, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
• Strong Keep Per Babub. Of course it should stay if there are other Religion politics articles. This might be a case of trolling. Gizza^{Chat ©} 09:25, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
• Keep Per Babub Nick Catalano _contrib ^talk 09:33, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
• Strong Delete the article is neology also see WP:NOR, the terminology is not even used by any credible source.Another article with which merger is proposed should also be deleted.Afterall wikipedia cannot host RSS propaganda page,the article's relevant content may be shifted to Sangh Parivar to which it is dedicated.Holy | Warrior 09:46, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Comment Do you think that Islam politics and Christian politics should be deleted as well or just Hindu politics? Gizza^{Chat ©} 09:57, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Comment HW, You've got some serious POV problems. This page is not "dedicated" to Sangh Parivar, nor is it "RSS propaganda". I, the creator of this page, am no fan of nationalism of any sort, but I opppose subverting all Hindu pages bcos of the nationalism of some Hindus. --^Babub→Talk 10:02, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Comment Answer is Hindu politics as a term just don't exist whereas muslim and christian politics do exist.Me too approach cannot be appreciated.Holy | Warrior 10:10, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Reply Do a search on google and you'll get around 9 million hits. 'nuff said. --^Babub→Talk 10:13, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Use those results for substitutiong {{fact} tags.Can you????Holy | Warrior 10:18, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Okey-dokey.--^Babub→Talk 10:22, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Your comments are misleading as [1] is result for Hindu+politics and does not mean Hindu Politics in general.Holy | Warrior 10:24, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Let me understand this. "Hindu politics" is not "Hindu politics"? What is it then? --^Babub→Talk 10:26, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Go through the google link It lists even articles that appeared in newspaper Hindu,dealing with politics GOT IT???Holy | Warrior 10:29, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Thats irrelevant, but thanks for pointing it out. BTW, DYK typing in capitals implies shouting?--^Babub→Talk 10:52, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

All links are like that only.I hope you understood it.Sometimes one need to pitch like that.A request to you ---Use relevant edit summaries which does not have connotations like you have used on this page.Holy | Warrior 11:01, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Comment - guys, just calm down a moment. Don't anyone lose their tempers if it's at all avoidable. BigHaz 11:22, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
Comment References are made to Christian politics and Islamic politics. However, the 'Christian politics' is a redirect to Christian politics (index), an index Christian influences in various political field. Moreover there is a Christianity and politics article, that gives a historical account of interrelation between Christian thought and political practice. Neither of these to articles correspond to the agenda of the Hindu politics article (the equivalient would be if the material at Christian Democracy would be moved to Christian politics). The Islamic politics article on the other hand is just a few links, and its title is highly redundat to Islam as a political movement (which is a fiercely disputed article on its own). --Soman 12:48, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

So? --^Babub→Talk 14:18, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

So, the argument that since 'Christian politics' and 'Islamic politics' exists then this article should automatically stay falls short. --Soman 14:21, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, I didn't get you. You claim that absolutely no politics/political ideas are inspired by Islam, Christianity, Hinduism or any other religion? You are denying that the Republicans don't quote from Bible in the US or the Ayatollahs don't use Quran as justification for their politics? If so, your statements don't match to reality; secularists and marxists in India call the Sangh "Hindu communalists". Are you saying they are wrong? --^Babub→Talk 14:45, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

• Keep: This article is massively unsourced (as are many of the Hindu-related articles it links to) but if editors can provide proper sources, I don't think that identifying political movements that claim to be relate to Hinduism is OR. TheronJ 13:38, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
• Keep Per having such articles for Islam and Christianity, it would be systemic bias to not keep this one. At current the article is completely OR however. I therefore urge sourcing and keeping per TheronJ. If the article doesn't have any good sources in a month, re-AfD it. JoshuaZ 14:36, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

I'll source it. --^Babub→Talk 14:45, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

• Keep for now... but someone write an article here please. Right now it is essentially a set of lists and an info box. I've tagged it for cleanup.--Isotope23 15:50, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

• Strong Keep - Hinduism is a driving force in politics of India, Indonesia (Bali), Mauritius (Majorty Hindu), Nepal, and Sri Lanka. Not to mention a strong force in a few South American countries.Bakaman%%
• speedy keep of course, but merge with Hindu nationalism since the scope is identical (or show that "Hindu politics" is a true subset of "Hindu nationalism", or vice versa). dab (ᛏ) 16:33, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

'Comment See Template Talk:Hindu politics. --^Babub→Talk 05:23, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

• Keep and clean up. It's a worthy topic for an article, but it needs to become an actual article. --Coredesat talk. ^_^ 18:50, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
• Comment there is little difference between deleting the article and throughly rewriting it to remove its obvious POV-agenda. There is of course a great scope of having one or more articles dealing with Hinduism and politics. What would be highly interesting would be an article on Hinduism in political discourse, how Hindu symbolisms are used in political life in India (and other countries with Hindu populations), not only by the Hindutva movement but by practically all political forces in the country. I was quite suprised that an article titled 'Hindu politics' lacked any mention of how Hindu concepts were introduced into modern political discourse for mass mobilisation by Gandhi. One could also discuss issues relating to how awodly secular groups like LTTE include Hindu mythology into their discourse (in the case of LTTE it mainly relates to ideas of self-sacrifice for a higher cause). Another topic that might actually deserve a separate article would be Hindu minority politics (in Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, etc.). Caste in Indian politics (as well as Caste in Nepalese politics) would be another given article, if a similar one doesn't already exist. --Soman 08:14, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Since you have so many ideas, why don't you edit it? I had no intention of any POV pushing in the first place. --^Babub→Talk 08:44, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

• Merge with something. Currently we have Hindu politics, Hindu Rashtra, Hindutva, Hindu nationalism and quite a few others, all of which are insufficiently distinct from each other on WP, even if they are in reality, which I am not sure about. Hornplease

Comment---To Soman and Babub, We already have articles like Votebank and Votebank politics in India.Holy | Warrior 09:50, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Comment -- Hindu politics applies to Indonesia (almost 6% Hindu), Mauritius (52%) Hindu, Guyana/Suriname/Trinidad (30-40%) Hindu. Its not just India-Centric. And of course Nepal (90% Hindu). But of course the anti-RSS people on Wiki don't want this article.Bakaman _Bakatalk 15:31, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Comment - Searching "hindu politics" in Google Gives 586 links.Doctor Bruno 15:26, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Check it out. nearly 9 million hits.^Babub→Talk 08:02, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Google results are good indication of notability only when you search for Single word.Otherwise two words each of which may be noatable in themselves should not be used to conclude that they are equally notable when used together.Holy|Warrior 08:10, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Wow, you are winning this argument!. Kudos to you. ^Babub→Talk 08:28, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

To be perfectly fair, Doctor Bruno has a point. A search for the two words "hindu" and "politics" on Google will give you nine million-odd responses. Searching for "Hindu politics" (so that the two words need to appear next to each other, as they would if we were to say "This is an example of Hindu politics") only gives 586 results. A lot of those 9 million pages could contain phrases such as "Professor [Name] is a Hindu professor of Politics", which isn't what we're after. BigHaz 08:41, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Babub as you have already gone through that link (both literaly and PRACticaly),you need to see this now[2].Also see WP:Civil.Holy|Warrior 14:37, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.