Talk:Madhav Sadashiv Golwalkar

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.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale. (add comments)
This article is maintained by the Indian politics workgroup.
More information about this article...
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.
Biography Portal
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]
This article is supported by the Politics and government work group.

Contents

[edit] Not Self-explanatory

Please address article to a non-expert in the field. As it is, this article is very difficult to understand for anyone not familiar with Indian politics. Some explanation of what this man's position was and what his party represented would be a start. Feeeshboy 07:45, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

This person wasn't a political personality. He was the head of a cultural organization. Though, he did influence the political leaders, he wasn't directly involved in the politics himself. He never ran for any office or stood in any elections.Sjain 22:52, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

I have submitted a partial history of his life,pls pass on your comments....akarkare 23 Feb 2007.

his death place is mixed up on table and in article

[edit] article highly biased

The article seems to be heavily biased towards Golwalkar. "Guruji" used as a mode of reference is not neutral but is highly deferential and not in keeping with the standards of a reference work.


What is wrong with the use of "Guruji"? Its a sort of nickname, isn't it? It's kinda like "MJ" for Michael Jordan.

[edit] We or our Nationhood is over used

I think the refereces to "We or our Nationhood" are overblown. Considering, "The fact is that the book ‘We…’ neither represents the views Page 4 of the grown Guruji nor of the RSS. He himself acceded this when he revealed that the book carried not his own views but was ‘an abridged version of G. D. Savarkar’s work Rashtra Mimnsa’ (Keer : 527)." (http://www.golwalkarguruji.org/download/books/en/Shri_Guruji_and_Indian_Muslim.pdf) ...

Besides, this book was diaowned by Golwalkr in 1947. No edition of the book has been printed since 1947. Over 99.9% of the current RSS workers have never heard of this book, let alone read this book. Sjain 22:03, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] repudiated etc

The quote should clarify his position amply. Interpreting it as 'repudiation' etc is the privilege of the reader, and not one we should usurp. Suggestions for alternate wording would be helpful. Hornplease 06:13, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

I have changed it to "denounced".-Bharatveer 10:01, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject class rating

This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 18:37, 9 November 2007 (UTC)