Talk:The Mughal Harem

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Books Portal
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate, you can edit the article. You can discuss the Project at its talk page.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the Project's quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary at in the comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article.
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.
More information about this article...
align="left" This article is part of WikiProject Gender Studies. This WikiProject aims to improve the quality of articles dealing with gender studies and to remove systematic gender bias from Wikipedia. If you would like to participate in the project, you can choose to edit this article, or visit the project page for more information.
??? This article has not yet received a rating.

[edit] Deletions

As explained here this was deleted in the article by Hornplease (talk ยท contribs) long time ago. Could the reason please be explained, since the deletion without explanation is vandalism? The Mughal Harem has been reviewed by dozens of journals and has often earned praise. K. S. Lal writes: Since its publication The Mughal Harem has been reviewed in dozens of journals and magazines both in English and in Hindi. A couple of letters from a scholar in California are indeed touching: "I am quite aware of the years of research that has gone into your work and it is very much appreciated," and "My greatest admiration for your work and thanks for all you have given me in my research for understanding and knowledge."[1] The review by A. Jan Qaiser of the Aligarh Muslim University (Indian Historical Review, New Delhi, 1991) was very dismissive of the book. K. S. Lal chided Jan Qaiser's review of his book for using improper language:

"This is a specimen of how a review may not be written. For it contains sentences like "whom do you think you are bluffing Mr. Lal?" or "what a consistency, Mr. Lal.?" (p. 346). Such is not the language of scholars."[2]

K. S. Lal also responded to Qaiser's criticism by pointing out that other historians (Professor M. Athar Ali of Aligarh university) arrived at the same conclusions than he.[3] References

Librorum Prohibitorum (talk) 02:29, 22 December 2007 (UTC)