Talk:Vinayak Damodar Savarkar

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Vinayak Damodar Savarkar article.
Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (`~~~~`). Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.	Be polite Assume good faith No personal attacks Be welcoming	Article policies No original research Neutral point of view Verifiability

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 been rated as B-Class on the quality scale. (add comments)

[edit] Recent major edits =======

Recent edits to this page provide a non-neutral point of view. A lot of earlier useful material has been discarded and the article entirely re-written.

[edit] Write History not opinions....

Actually I wanted to start this page to give the readers a knowledge about one of the leaders of India who contributed in the freedom struggle.But I suppose the whole concept of article has been changed and it looks as if the article is anti-sawarkar. I think we shouldn't write what others say about a person but what his life and contributions were. -- Tanul 06:25, Mar 11, 2005 (UTC)

Feel free to edit the article to bring it to NPOV. By the way you can sign your posts to talk pages by typing ~~~~. -- Sundar 05:29, Mar 9, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Surprise, surprise!

I'm surprised to see all this misinformation stacked up on an article on wikipedia that should have the information and actual facts about this freedom fighter. 'What he's said' 'what the other guy has said may not necessarily be *facts*. Thats their opinions and things they claim true.

Take the issue of VD Savarkar not taking part in the hunger strike for example. It is known that he was in a serious health condition - thanks to the torture and so was advised not to take part in the hunger strike, though he started it. Savarkar himself admits the fact that he didn't take part in the hunger strike and also quotes the reasons in his Autobiography. But here, you've stated that he didn't take part in it, and the reason : why he didn't? - never care to mention, eh?

This is a totally one sided article, with texts copied from the copyrighted material of rediff articles that state the opinions of few individuals. Please correct the article.

P.S: If these things need to be mentioned, please mention it under the 'controversy' section, adding Mr. Chakravarthy's opinions and things he claims are true. But then please make sure you add what individuals keep saying about prominent personalities from time to time to make it to the headlines, on all wikipedia articles related to reknown people.

It's a wiki, be bold in editing; you are free to add content that is verifiable and is neutral point of view. -- Sundar (talk · contribs) 04:24, Mar 31, 2005 (UTC)

Thats a good one. stack up some needless crap and ask others to be bold ;) Not everyone has the time to add up and edit - *real facts* on an article need more time and research than adding some crap. Please do everyone a favour and mark this page for deletion. That would be far more better than misleading people with "someone told" facts rather than the real ones. Once deleted, Someone can start afresh with an article on this personality.

Why delete the article? Anyone can rewrite it from scratch even now. Didn't you notice the two tags on the top of the article {{cleanup}}, {{npov}} that warn the user against getting misled? -- Sundar (talk · contribs) 04:00, Apr 12, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Rewrite of the article

Is it possible to write the whole article on Savarkar again? This one is utterly biased and only spreads misinformation. I am ready to contribute on this.

I've been telling repeatedly: it's a wiki, be bold in editing; you are free to add content that is verifiable and is neutral point of view. -- Sundar (talk · contribs) 05:21, Apr 3, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] The much needed repair to the article

ok, I've replaced all the "he said this, he said that" with some solid facts. Feel free to copyedit and correct any mistakes in the writeup. The previous article had some cut and pasted material from Outlook, rediff and other sites.

[edit] POV

The current article seems to be extremely POV. "greates revolutionary of India's freedom struggle", "devoted entire life to the independeance movement " etc are what I mean. -- Sundar (talk · contribs) 05:43, May 6, 2005 (UTC)

There should be no two opinions about these since he certainly devoted his entire life for India. There could be two opinions about the means he used but there is no doubt about the cause he championed before the independence period. Not mentioning these fact would be a POV. Incase you want to delete these words, please mention a period of his life that he devoted to some other cause before India was free. He indeed was a great reolutionary only matched by Bose. But then Bose was a politician turned revolutionary only in the later period of his life. King1 (talk · contribs) may 6

I'm somehow not comfortable with the use of superlatives like "greatest" etc since it is very subjective. We can rank entities only according to well-defined metrics like GDP etc -- Sundar (talk · contribs) 04:11, May 9, 2005 (UTC)

Right. In that case you could say "one of the greatest", though not many would dispute it. Infact there aren't too many to compare. As for your argument about ranking, in that case we wouldn't be able to say words like 'great' either. But we still use adjectives and compare things even if there are no objective criteria in most cases. I think its commonly understood that when such and adjective is used, it reflects subjective judgement of most of the people. So it COULD be used when appropriate. The only point to argue about is that whether it is VALID or not. But I don't think you are arguing about its validity here.King1 (talk · contribs) may 9

[edit] Gandhi Murder POV

The whole Gandhi Murder Section is biased against Veer Savarkar all changes made by anonymous user from 69.148.70.104 should be checked for neutrality.

The sections under contentions are Support for Nazi Germany, Murder of Gandhi, On Minorities.

This user 69.148.70.104 has changed the following from Literary Works section

from

He put forward the atrocities of British and Muslims on Hindu Resident in State of Kerala, summarized in the book, "Mopalyanche Band" (Muslims' Strike) also "Gandhi Gondhal", a political commentary on the contemporary politics by Gandhi.

He wrote an inflammatory books alleging atrocities of British and Muslims on Hindus in Kerala, summarized in the book, "Mopalyanche Band" (Muslims' Strike) also "Gandhi Gondhal" (Gandhi's nonsense), a political commentary on the contemporary politics by Gandhi.

All his/her changes should be carefully examined and corrected.

-Wces423 06:05, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

The section On Minorities is copied verbatim from copyrighted Frontline article The Real Savarkar.

The section Murder of Gandhi is copied verbatim from copyrighted source [1].

Both do not conform to the copyright policy of Wikipedia.

-Wces423 06:34, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Feel free to tone down POV here and remove the copyrighted material. But, there should definitely be a mention of his controversial religious and political views and the allegation of his role in the murder of Gandhi. -- Sundar (talk · contribs) 06:48, Jun 2, 2005 (UTC)

It appears that you're taking the article to the other extreme POV, removing many references of allegations. -- Sundar 09:29, Jun 2, 2005 (UTC)

For the sake of neutrality, one should quote and reference from the Frontline article and a couple of news items in "The Hindu" publishing purported letters written by Savarkar to Godse. -- Sundar 09:32, Jun 2, 2005 (UTC)

Definitely, some points from here and here must be referenced to bring NPOV. -- Sundar 09:47, Jun 2, 2005 (UTC)

Stating fact that he was implicated, tried and acquitted is enough. You can add links to these articles in external links. -- Wces423 10:19, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Attack Hindus....They are the best things for that

On following each and every page about Hinduism or something that deals with Hindus or Some Anicient Hindu Culture of India. I can See the Stop Hand. The Big NPOV Introduced by our brothers.....

Its amazing that all pages that refer the letters "H","I","N","D" are being destroyed by NPOV. Who are the people Behind It?????

[edit] No need of NPOV here

We cant bear the attack against this proud Son of India. No Need of NPOV When there is both +Ve and -ve aspects discussed

Please study the life of the great son of Mother India "Veer Savarkar" and then write about him.

[edit] Removal of list of accused

I think the "list of accused" should not be part of article about "Veer Savarkar". His part in the plan has been discussed in a separate section. And this list doesn't add any more information about Savarkar. Wces423 11:22, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Removed POV line

"To this day , he is widely regarded all over India as a coward for not helping India gain independence .He is also scorned upon for his alleged involvement in the murder of the great Mahatma Gandhi ."

I removed this line from the article. It is heavily POV and is redundant -- the gist of this line is already stated in the previous two paragraphs in the introduction. Thank you. Gujuguy 22:23, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] References

The referencing of this article needs to be improved. All the direct references we have for this immense article are simply two bare-bones, non-primary websites. Specific page references to primary resources should be done, especially to what is already listed but just "sitting there" in the references section:

AG Noorani, Savarkar and Hindutva: The Godse Connection, LeftWord, New Delhi, 2002, paperback, 159 pages, ISBN 81-87496-28-2; hardcover, Manohar Publishers, 2003, ISBN 81-87496-28-2

Vinayak Damodar Savarkar, Savarkar Samagra: Complete Works of Vinayak Damodar Savarkar in 10 volumes, ISBN 81-7315-331-0

Hindutva by Veer Savarkar

Tuncrypt 04:26, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

True enough. In particular, all citations that depend on the article on rediff.com should be removed, as it's obviously non-scholarly. Hornplease 23:42, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] great or fanatic

brothers, savarkar's role in the assasination of oyr father of nation , should /cannot be ignored. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.42.21.156 (talk) 13:38, August 30, 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Repetition

Hello,

Why does this "He is considered to be the central icon of modern Hindu nationalist political parties." twice in the first paragraph? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.42.23.72 (talk) 11:13, 2 June 2008 (UTC)