Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 17:04, 8 April 2014

Ayodhya and After: Issues Before Hindu Society

Ayodhya and After: Issues Before Hindu Society (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NBOOK Darkness Shines (talk) 20:58, 29 March 2014 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:23, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:23, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:23, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Hinduism-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:23, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

• Keep satisfies criterion 1. Not only it is referred to as an important book on the subject , , but is also used as reference in many books. --Redtigerxyz 05:43, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

No, it fails on 1, neither of those sources give any coverage, just a single mention. Darkness Shines (talk) 09:48, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

And neither of those sources actually say that this is an important book on the subject. Darkness Shines (talk) 15:06, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

• Merge and redriect to the author as unreferenced. Neither the article nor the links above contain anything that looks like in depth coverage to me. Name dropping is not in depth coverage. Stuartyeates (talk) 01:20, 2 April 2014 (UTC)
• Keep There are hundreds of articles in the Book stub cat, many of them more obscure than this one; so why is this one being singled out? If the article is too short or missing sources, you could first have asked for them. You didn't even notify the deletion sorting lists about this nomination for deletion. The nominator has said the same about an entire group of books by the same author, it is apparently a campaign against the author because of the author's views. I am beginning to lose my assumption of good faith in these nominations. There is no precedent "very very notable" in the Misplaced Pages:Notability (books) proposed guideline or anywhere else (and by analogy, we should have almost no articles on television episodes or music albums if that were the case). There are probably over ten thousand articles about books in WP. The guidelines do not say that only the most exceeding universally known go in. They just say notable. But I will continue to assume your good faith in making this nomination. Not liking what a book says is not really a good reason for voting for its deletion; in fact it is a very bad reason. Book pages are absolutely relevant to Misplaced Pages. I think a lot of people are voting because they don't like the idea of the book. The problem is not that his works are not notable, the problem is that the author is very controversial. It is a very controversial author, so that even 20 years after the publication, some people still advocate to shun him and censor his writings (I'm not referring to the nominator for deletion).

It is not only the book article which should be expanded and also enlarged with sources, it it the author article itself which has serious NPOV problems, according to this link:

Koenraad Elsts books on the Ayodhya debate were the first publications by a western scholar on the debate, and remain the most well-known ones on the Hindu side. Very prominent politicians like L.K. Advani have cited extensively from his books on Ayodhya debate, as was reported in Indian newspapers. "The book was presented to the world by L.K. Advani and Girilal Jain, and thereby appeared on the cover of most Indian newspapers." Peter Heehs in " Myth, History and Theory" calls Elsts books on the Ayodhya debate the "best-known publications" for the Hindu side. Elst also participated/published his Ayodhya research (some of it in his Ayodhya book) in conferences like the World Archaeology Congress, International Ramayana Conference and the South Asia Conference, and journals and book chapters in scholarly books and in an official publication by the Bar Council of India Trust. Others who have reviewed his work on this debate are Paul Teunissen and many more. The famous author Kushwant Singh also commented on it. Elst's books on the Ayodhya debate have been reviewed by professor R.N. Rao and Koenraad Elst himself has reviewed books on this topic in academic journals and published articles in journals including the Journal of Indian History and Culture about the Ayodhya debate.

To show how controversial this book is, I can quote from one of the chapters in the book:

This paper was written as an adaptation from an earlier paper, "The Ayodhya debate", published in the conference proceedings of the 1991 International Ramayana Conference, which had taken place in my hometown, Leuven.1 The present version represents my own text prepared for the October 1995 Annual South Asia Conference in Madison, Wisconsin, U. S.A. A few notes have been added. When it was my turn, I was heckled somewhat by the Leftist crowd, especially by a well-known Indo-American Communist academic, who was rolling his eyes like a madman and making obscene gestures until an elderly American lady sitting next to him told him to behave. At the end, Mathew came to collect a copy of my text (the book version, of which I had some author's copies handy), called me a "liar", and told his buddies that they needed to write a scholarly rebuttal. Which is still being awaited today.--Calypsomusic (talk) 16:34, 3 April 2014 (UTC)— Calypsomusic (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

• Delete for failing to meet WP:BKCRIT. Iniciativass (talk) 18:02, 3 April 2014 (UTC)
• Comment: I have added some more sources in the article and below, even as Darkness Shines keeps removing all the sources I added from the other book article. I added below also some bits on his other Ayodhya book, as this is relevant to this article.

• Elst's book Ram Janmabhoomi vs. Babri Masjid, a Case Study in Hindu-Muslim conflict (1990) was the first book published by a non-Indian on the Ayodhya debate. His opinion is that "until 1989, there was a complete consensus in all sources (Hindu, Muslim and European) which spoke out on the matter, viz. that the Babri Masjid had been built in forcible replacement of a Hindu temple." He claimed that politically motivated academics have, through their grip on the media, manufactured doubts concerning this coherent and well-attested tradition. Elst alleges that the anti-Temple group in the Ayodhya conflict have committed serious breaches of academic deontology and says that the "overruling of historical evidence with a high-handed use of academic and media power" in the Ayodhya controversy was the immediate reason to involve himself in the debate.

• K. Elst sent Goel a manuscript of his first book Ram Janmabhoomi Vs. Babri Masjid: A Case Study in Hindu Muslim Conflict. Goel was impressed with Elst's script: "I could not stop after I started reading it. I took it to Ram Swarup the same evening. He read it during the night and rang me up next morning. Koenraad Elst's book, he said, should be published immediately." In August 1990, L. K. Advani released Koenraad Elst's book about the Ayodhya conflict at a public function presided over by Girilal Jain. The book was presented to the world by L.K. Advani and Girilal Jain, together with Sita Ram Goel’s Hindu Temples, What Happened to Them, and thereby appeared on the cover of most Indian newspapers.

• Koenraad Elsts books on the Ayodhya debate were the first publications by a western scholar on the debate, and remain the most well-known ones on the Hindu side. Very prominent politicians like L.K. Advani have cited extensively from his books on Ayodhya debate, as was reported in Indian newspapers. "The book was presented to the world by L.K. Advani and Girilal Jain, and thereby appeared on the cover of most Indian newspapers."

• Peter Heehs in " Myth, History and Theory" calls Elsts books on the Ayodhya debate the "best-known publications" for the Hindu side. Elst also participated/published his Ayodhya research (some of it in his Ayodhya book) in conferences like the World Archaeology Congress, International Ramayana Conference and the South Asia Conference, and journals and book chapters in scholarly books and in an official publication by the Bar Council of India Trust. Others who have reviewed his work on this debate are Paul Teunissen and many more.

• The famous author Kushwant Singh also commented on it. Elst's books on the Ayodhya debate have been reviewed by professor R.N. Rao and Koenraad Elst himself has reviewed books on this topic in academic journals and published articles in journals including the Journal of Indian History and Culture about the Ayodhya debate.

• The book was reviewed by professor Ramesh Rao.

• Indologist Gerald James Larson called the book a good treatment of the Neo Hindu interpretation of the evidence.

• The book is cited in numerous publications, like Thomas Gilly's The Ethics of Terrorism, D. Anands "Hindu nationalism in India", Rebecca Frey's "Fundamentalism", Edwin Bryants "Quest for the origins of Vedic culture", and many more.

• The Ayodhya demolition: an evaluation", in Dasgupta, S., et al.: The Ayodhya Reference, q.v., p. 123-154.

  The Ayodhya debate in Pollet, G., ed.: Indian Epic Values. Râmâyana and Its Impact. Leuven: Peeters. 1995, q.v., p. 21-42. (adapted from a paper of the International Ramayana Conference and the October 1995 Annual South Asia Conference in Madison, Wisconsin)

  The Ayodhya debate: focus on the "no temple" evidence, World Archaeological Congress, 1998

1. ^ Ayodhya and After: Issues Before Hindu Society (1991)
2. Koenraad Elst. Who is a Hindu? Chapter Nine
3. Koenraad Elst. Who is a Hindu? Chapter Eleven
4. ^ Sitam Ram Goel, How I became a Hindu. ch.9
5. Ayodhya and After: Issues Before Hindu Society (1991) Footnote 64
6. http://koenraadelst.blogspot.com/2014/01/what-have-i-done.html
7. http://koenraadelst.blogspot.com/2014/03/no-more-khushwant-singh.html
8. http://www.rameshnrao.com/history-ayodhya-after.html
9. India's Agony Over Religion By Gerald James Larson

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica 03:59, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

• Delete fails WP:BKCRIT Shrikanthv (talk) 10:42, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Prof. Edwin Bryant notes that the third Ayodhya book is one of Elsts notable works.

1. The Indo-Aryan Controversy: Evidence and Inference in Indian History edited by Edwin Francis Bryant, Laurie L. Patton Among twenty published titles, most attention has been drawn by his Update on the Aryan Invasion ..... and Ayodhya, the Case against the Temple.

• AfD debates (Society topics)
• AfD debates
• Relisted AfD debates