Revision as of 14:39, 26 March 2024 editCapitals00 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers9,292 edits →Sourced content removal← Previous edit | Revision as of 16:24, 26 March 2024 edit undoHaani40 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users913 edits →Sourced content removal: QuestionTags: Mobile edit Mobile web editNext edit → | ||
Line 20: | Line 20: | ||
== Sourced content removal == | == Sourced content removal == | ||
{{U|Capitals00}}, I had added some text which I copied from the source with edit but you have removed it. Please explain why you did so.-] (]) 17:05, 25 March 2024 (UTC) | {{U|Capitals00}}, I had added some text which I copied from the source with edit but you have removed it. Please explain why you did so.-] (]) 17:05, 25 March 2024 (UTC) | ||
:You have also removed the text, "..... and the storyline," with edit.-] (]) 17:12, 25 March 2024 (UTC) | :You have also removed the text, "..... and the storyline," with edit.-] (]) 17:12, 25 March 2024 (UTC) | ||
:: (reference no. 14) does say, "for telling a factual story but in a very textbook like way". That source, by the way, was there already; I did not add it.-] (]) 17:07, 25 March 2024 (UTC) | :: (reference no. 14) does say, "for telling a factual story but in a very textbook like way". That source, by the way, was there already; I did not add it.-] (]) 17:07, 25 March 2024 (UTC) | ||
Line 37: | Line 37: | ||
:::No it is a false Hindutva claim and ironically the cabinet discussion involved their own Hindutva icon ] as per his own admission before the matter was referred to the UN.<ref name="Roy 2018 p. 351">{{cite book | last=Roy | first=T. | title=Syama Prasad Mookerjee: Life and Times | publisher=Penguin Random House India Private Limited | year=2018 | isbn=978-93-5305-004-7 | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=v3JQDwAAQBAJ&pg=PT351 | language=id | page=351}}</ref> There was no blunder. | :::No it is a false Hindutva claim and ironically the cabinet discussion involved their own Hindutva icon ] as per his own admission before the matter was referred to the UN.<ref name="Roy 2018 p. 351">{{cite book | last=Roy | first=T. | title=Syama Prasad Mookerjee: Life and Times | publisher=Penguin Random House India Private Limited | year=2018 | isbn=978-93-5305-004-7 | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=v3JQDwAAQBAJ&pg=PT351 | language=id | page=351}}</ref> There was no blunder. | ||
:::Let me know if those make-believe experts you are thinking of, if they cite all these details or they have blindly bought the fringe Hindutva claim just like that Ambedkar opposed 370, and more similarly false claims that we see across the literature of such experts. ] (]) 14:39, 26 March 2024 (UTC) | :::Let me know if those make-believe experts you are thinking of, if they cite all these details or they have blindly bought the fringe Hindutva claim just like that Ambedkar opposed 370, and more similarly false claims that we see across the literature of such experts. ] (]) 14:39, 26 March 2024 (UTC) | ||
::::{{re|Capitals00|Kautilya3}} Is there a bias against Hindutva/] and the BJP on wikipedia?-] (]) 16:24, 26 March 2024 (UTC) | |||
{{reflist-talk}} | {{reflist-talk}} |
Revision as of 16:24, 26 March 2024
This article is rated C-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Warning: active arbitration remedies The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. This article is related to India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan, which is a contentious topic. Furthermore, the following rules apply when editing this article:
Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Misplaced Pages, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. |
Semi-protected edit request on 4 March 2024
This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Request to edit is being submitted in order to substantiate on the characters portrayed in the film and their real-life counterparts. As it has been mentioned in the film's disclaimer, the film does not want to bear resemblance to any living person. However, to make it easier for people who did not comprehend the movie, to understand it, the edits need to be made. Xyznwa (talk) 19:16, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
- Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Jamedeus (talk) 22:09, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
Movie criticism is highlighted in the description - with polical overtones.
the comment about movie being in favor of the ruling party needs to be moved to reviews section. This is nothing but narrative mounding. Misplaced Pages is better than this. Please update it 73.189.128.83 (talk) 18:31, 15 March 2024 (UTC)
Sourced content removal
Capitals00, I had added some text which I copied from the source with this edit but you have removed it. Please explain why you did so.-Haani40 (talk) 17:05, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
- You have also removed the text, "..... and the storyline," with this edit.-Haani40 (talk) 17:12, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
- This (reference no. 14) does say, "for telling a factual story but in a very textbook like way". That source, by the way, was there already; I did not add it.-Haani40 (talk) 17:07, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
- I removed the source which clearly doesn't support the content. In fact, I don't find the other two sources supporting either. Somebody seems to have jumped the gun. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 19:14, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
- I suggest we remove these pithy made-up summaries, and write a proper section in the body summarising the reviews. I am sure more reviews will be coming through. By the way, movie reviewers are not authorities on the "facts" so that they can claim that the "facts" have been distorted. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 19:20, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
- @Kautilya3: So if the text,
is not mentioned in the references cited for it (reference nos. 13&14), you must remove it (that text) - it is not a neutral statement.-Haani40 (talk) 20:07, 25 March 2024 (UTC).....but criticised the film for its distortion of facts and promotion of the agenda of the ruling government of the Bharatiya Janata Party
- I did some fixing. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 21:27, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
- @Kautilya3: So if the text,
- I suggest we remove these pithy made-up summaries, and write a proper section in the body summarising the reviews. I am sure more reviews will be coming through. By the way, movie reviewers are not authorities on the "facts" so that they can claim that the "facts" have been distorted. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 19:20, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
- I removed the source which clearly doesn't support the content. In fact, I don't find the other two sources supporting either. Somebody seems to have jumped the gun. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 19:14, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
- This (reference no. 14) does say, "for telling a factual story but in a very textbook like way". That source, by the way, was there already; I did not add it.-Haani40 (talk) 17:07, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
Indian express said the film "serves its politics unabashedly as it mixes facts with fiction". Koimoi also noted that the movie promotes propaganda. I did little modification to reflect that. Capitals00 (talk) 02:45, 26 March 2024 (UTC)
- Yawn. Feature films always mix fact with faction. That doesn't amount to "distortion". But I also don't regard the reviewer's idea of "fact" as being reliable. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 12:55, 26 March 2024 (UTC)
- Let us take this line, for example:
Mixing facts with fiction, and some convenient untruths, dipping into the right-wing narrative of Jawaharlal Nehru’s “blunders” in Kashmir and Maharaja Hari Singh’s “inclination” towards India,
- I know plenty of experts who admit Nehru's "blunders" in Kashmir. Probably 90% of Indians would agree that taking Kashmir to the UN was a blunder. Even Nehru himself might have agreed with it.
- As for Mahara's inclination, here is Srinath Raghavan:
Pakistan's assessment that the maharaja would accede to India was correct.
- -- Kautilya3 (talk) 13:08, 26 March 2024 (UTC)
- No it is a false Hindutva claim and ironically the cabinet discussion involved their own Hindutva icon Syama Prasad Mukherjee as per his own admission before the matter was referred to the UN. There was no blunder.
- Let me know if those make-believe experts you are thinking of, if they cite all these details or they have blindly bought the fringe Hindutva claim just like that Ambedkar opposed 370, and more similarly false claims that we see across the literature of such experts. Capitals00 (talk) 14:39, 26 March 2024 (UTC)
- @Capitals00 and Kautilya3: Is there a bias against Hindutva/Hinduism and the BJP on wikipedia?-Haani40 (talk) 16:24, 26 March 2024 (UTC)
References
- Raghavan, War and Peace in Modern India (2010), p. 106. sfnp error: no target: CITEREFRaghavan,_War_and_Peace_in_Modern_India2010 (help)
- Roy, T. (2018). Syama Prasad Mookerjee: Life and Times (in Indonesian). Penguin Random House India Private Limited. p. 351. ISBN 978-93-5305-004-7.
- C-Class India articles
- Low-importance India articles
- C-Class India articles of Low-importance
- C-Class Indian cinema articles
- Low-importance Indian cinema articles
- C-Class Indian cinema articles of Low-importance
- WikiProject Indian cinema articles
- WikiProject India articles
- C-Class film articles
- Indian cinema task force articles
- WikiProject Film articles