Talk:History of Goa

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

WikiProject_India 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.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
This article is maintained by the Indian history workgroup.
More information about this article...

[edit] Infighting

Unfortunately, a whole lot of religion-tinged infighting creeping into how we understand and narrate our history. Can't a NPOV be mentioned here? The impression one gets on reading this -- Muslim bad guys, Hindus the victims, Portuguese the aggressors always out to finish local religion and culture. I think history is more complex than that, though there are many unpleasant aspects to history which we all need to come to terms with. A special appeal to the moderators -- please take note of the religious bigotry that is growing in South Asia (on all sides, in all religions) that shouldn't get an encouragement from laudable and well-intentioned initiatives like Wikipedia! PS: On the other hand, there is also an attempt to glorify the Portuguese rule, or criticise India through subtle words inserted strategically. Can Wikipedia work to get a really NPOV which is acceptable to all, regardless of our perspectives, politics, beliefs and religious backgrounds? This will be the real test for Wikipedia. ('--fredericknoronha 21:26, 22 May 2005 (UTC)',,)

[edit] POV

This article is full of POV that is alternatingly pro-Portuguese and pro-Hindu/anti-Portuguese/whatever. Even the references are annoted with remarks such as "A patriotic critique of Indian imperialism and colonialism in Goa", "An Indianist account in English" and "A patriotic account in Portuguese". Is there any reason this article should not get a POV tag? --Kunal (talk) 14:52, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

I've nominated this article for a POV check as per my previous comment. Some specific parts that I believe violate the NPOV rule are:

  • "Albuquerque and his successors left almost untouched the customs and constitutions of the thirty village communities on the island, only abolishing the rite of sati (widow-burning)." This passage seems unnecessarily pro-Portuguese and contrary to other evidence (see Goa Inquisition).
  • "This angered the Portuguese authorities, who formed a heinous plan, a method frequently used by the Europeans to capture the small Indian towns and villages." - (Emphasis mine)
  • "Goan Freedom Movement, Nehru's Aggression Condemned - A patriotic critique of Indian imperialism and colonialism in Goa." - (Emphasis mine)
  • "Dr. Prakashchandra P. Shirodcar, Goa's Struggle For Freedom - An Indianist account in English." - (Emphasis mine)
  • "Advocado A.A. Bruto da Costa, Um caso para a indignacao da humanidade ocorrido em Goa, 1972 - A patriotic account in Portuguese." - (Emphasis mine)

--Kunal (talk) 15:46, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

Yes, it is a POV, but should be cleaned up as soon as possible. =Nichalp «Talk»= 04:06, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
Yes, it is POV and Bharatveer makes it worse. I just reverted his last changes. Otto 20:56, 15 August 2006 (UTC)