Misplaced Pages

talk:WikiProject Misplaced Pagesns against censorship: Difference between revisions - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 13:00, 3 December 2007 editHiding (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators45,138 edits nowt to see here, WP:RTV using AWB← Previous edit Revision as of 01:50, 22 December 2007 edit undoLibrorum Prohibitorum (talk | contribs)136 edits →Censorship against (pro-) Hindu authors: new sectionNext edit →
Line 781: Line 781:


::::::Any place should be a proper place to request that people help other people stop being discriminated against. ] 23:15, 19 October 2007 (UTC) ::::::Any place should be a proper place to request that people help other people stop being discriminated against. ] 23:15, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

== Censorship against (pro-) Hindu authors ==

I have observed a lot of censorship in articles on Hinduism and Indian politics/history. One thing which is very often done: Deleting the mention of atrocities or genocide during the Islamic invasions of India, and also in more recent history, for example the terrorism in Kashmir, or the massacres in the Bangladesh Liberation War. This is done wether it is sourced or not, and is rarely discussed on talkpages. Just put a couple of these articles on your watchlist (], ], ],...) and watch.

As a an example, {{user|Hornplease}} has been deleting almost every mention of pro-Hindu authors or of authors critical of Islam on wikipedia articles. These are not some unknown, obscur authors, but they are the most well known political authors that the Hindus have. He is not only doing this against political authors, but also against historians like ].

He usually only explains his deletions on the talkpage if he is asked to do (and even in his edit summaries, he often does not explain himself). Even he himself says (when it is convenient for him) that . And if he has to explain his deletions, after being questioned, he sometimes uses bogus excuses, like the editors were paid by an Indian publishing house, or the links were added for the google engine. He actually admits that he is "monitoring" the use of the names of these Hindu authors on wikipedia: "Discussion can be suspended, and I will monitor the use of his name." If he says a citation by one of these authors, he usually just removes it without discussion (unless asked for it), and in that process diminishing the value of the wikipedia article because of the loss of information. He is not doing the same scrutinizing and singling out of authors with anti-Hindu authors, or with pro-Islamic authors (on the contrary).

On , Jewish editors have told him that he "can't take an entire community's resources and label them all biased" and that " if all the community resources do not meet that standard" one has "to simply accept the most well-known source as the best voice for the views, since that would be the best we could get" and they asked him: "are we going to accept that the job of an encyclopedia is to provide awareness and access to several different views contained in published works?"

===Evidence===

Some examples:

He the fact that ]'s books were banned in West Bengal. In another edit, KS Lal's own rebuttal of the criticism against him, but he leaves all the criticism against KS Lal in the article. He also KS Lal's books from other articles. He also makes edits that basically whitewash the record of the most intolerant Islamic rulers, like Muhammed bin Qasim and Aurangzeb.

*In the article about the historian K.S. Lal, he asks for a for this sentence: "The Mughal Harem has been reviewed by dozens of journals and has often earned praise." His edit summary is "wow".
**When later a reference was provided, he just deletes it, with the edit summary "letters! please.", and nothing at all on the talkpage. The removal of text without any rational explanation is , plain and simple. Arbcom has said that edit summaries are not enough to explain controversial removals (and his "edit summary" didn't explain anything).
***What this edit shows, is what he has done in many other articles: delete the mention that pro-Hindu authors are notable (even for the Hindus themselves), and afterwards claim that the same authors are not notable, or that they are fanatical, or nazis like David Irving, so that he can continue deleting every mention of them as a result.

These are some other examples where he has censored pro-Hindu authors:

{|class="navbox collapsible collapsed" style="text-align: left;"
|-
! Expand to see
|-
|

<small>
Examples of what he deleted from wikipedia:

'''K.S. Lal'''

He deleted:

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."<ref>K.S. Lal. In "Theory and Practice of Muslim State in India" (1999) ISBN 81-86471-72-3 </ref>
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."<ref>K.S. Lal. In "Theory and Practice of Muslim State in India" (1999) ISBN 81-86471-72-3 </ref>
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.<ref>K.S. Lal. In "Theory and Practice of Muslim State in India" (1999) ISBN 81-86471-72-3 </ref>
References
* Theory and Practice of Muslim State in India (1999) ISBN 81-86471-72-3
* The Mughal Harem (1988) ISBN 81-85179-03-4

* <small> They only destroyed the existing ones at ], ], ], ], ] etc. to which thousands of scholars from all over India and Asia used to seek admission. Thus, with the coming of Muslims, India ceased to be a centre of higher Hindu and Buddhist learning for Asians. The Muslims did not set up even Muslim institutions of higher learning. Their maktabs and madrasas catered just for repetitive, conservative and orthodox schooling. There was little original thinking, little growth of knowledge as such."</small>

* <small>K.S. Lal wrote a rebuttal to many criticisms in his book "Theory and Practice of Muslim State in India". He explained:
:One does grow during the course of half a century if one continues with his studies and I have surely grown. And since I do no believe that "Muslim rule should not attract any criticism. Destruction of temples by Muslim invaders and rulers should not be mentioned and forcible conversions to Islam should be ignored and deleted, etc. etc.", my books are free from such restrictions. I now also apply the same yardstick to medieval Indian history as is done with respect to modem Indian history. ... We in India write the history of British rule not from the point of view of European imperialism but from that of the victims of colonization. I apply the same methodology to the history of Muslim rule. I write about it from the people's point of view rather than from the view of Islamic imperialists. We cannot apply different standards of approach and methodology to different periods of Indian history.] (pov deletion, he only deletes Lal's rebuttal to the partisan criticism of Lal, and leaves the lengthy partisan criticism in the article)
</small>

* <small>
*Elliot and Dowson: ], New Delhi reprint, 1990.
*]: The Legacy of Muslim Rule in India
*K.S. Lal. Indian Muslims - Who are they.
* Timur's memoirs on his invasion of India; describes in detail the massacre of Hindus, forced conversions to Islam and the plunder of the wealth of Hindustan (India). Compiled in the book: "]", by Sir H. M. Elliot, Edited by John Dowson; London, Trubner Company; 1867–1877

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Muslim_conquest_in_the_Indian_subcontinent&diff=prev&oldid=154967612 He deletes some correct information on Gahzni and Timur and deletes external links that are critical of the Islamic invasion of India.
*
*
*
He deletes these books from the bibliography. The books he censors include all books by K.S. Lal, Misra Ram Gopal, Shourie and Sita Ram Goel.
*Al-Biladhuri: Kitãb Futûh Al-Buldãn, translated into English by F.C. Murgotte, New York, 1924.'' See for a list of 80 Muslim historians writing on the invasions.''
*]: ] 2 vols. ISBN 81-85990-49-2 ;
*Sita Ram Goel: The Story of Islamic Imperialism in India
*Koenraad Elst: Negationism in India - Concealing the record of Islam ,
*François Gautier: Rewriting Indian History , ,
*]: The Legacy of Muslim Rule in India
*K.S. Lal. Indian Muslims - Who are they.
*K.S. Lal: The Growth of Muslim Population in India, Voice of India, New Delhi
*Misra, Ram Gopal, Indian Resistance to Early Muslim Invaders up to AD 1206, Meerut City, 1983.
*]: ]. New Delhi, 1998.
</small>

'''Koenraad Elst'''
Deletions about Elst:

<small>
http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Pusyamitra_Sunga&diff=prev&oldid=126354485
] posits that historical facts confirm that Pushyamitra allowed and patronized the construction of monasteries and Buddhist universities in his domains, as well as the still-existent stupa of Sanchi. ] states: ''“To judge from the documents, Pushyamitra must be acquitted through lack of proof.”'' <ref> Ashoka and Pushyamitra, iconoclasts? by Koneraad Elst </ref>

*http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Guru&diff=prev&oldid=126354717
The Belgian Indologist ] criticized Storr's book for its avoidance of the term ] instead of guru for several people. Elst asserts that this is possibly due to Storr's pro-Western, pro-Christian cultural bias.

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Ayodhya_and_After:_Issues_Before_Hindu_Society&diff=prev&oldid=125739910 In fact, this conclusion is merely a restatement of what was a matter of consensus until a few years ago. This time it is supported by a bundle of evidence, but it had been known all along. It is only recently that politically motivated academics have manufactured doubts concerning this coherent and well-attested tradition." He says that the anti-Temple side gave no evidence, and ignored the pro-Temple evidence and concludes that "the way the anti-Mandir falsehoods have been given wide currency in 1989-91 will make an interesting case study for future scholars. A classic in ]."

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Negationism_in_India_-_Concealing_the_Record_of_Islam&diff=prev&oldid=125742140
The book is a study on censorship, the prohibition of criticism of Islam and the denial of its historic crimes against humanity. Elst also writes about some Western authors like P. Spear, co-author (with Romila Thapar) of the ''Penguin History of India'' and accuses him of whitewashing the record of ]. He also claims that the Indian media and academia are often untrustworthy when it comes to reporting on the Hindu-Muslim conflict and that the Western Press often only copies non-neutral press-reports. Elst criticizes what he considers to be an "extreme ignorance and gullibility of the foreign press" and claims that there was also a disinformation campaign in the ] debate. In one chapter, he writes about what he calls the "negationist's second front": Some historians or writers sometimes claim that the Hindus have also destroyed temples or monasteries of other religions. Elst claims that the Indian media sometimes alleges that the Hindus destroyed the ] university, which was in fact destroyed by ] during the Islamic conquest of South Asia. Elst claims that Hinduism, while not being without its faults, has not produced the same fanaticism as some of the other ], ], ] and ].

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Hindu&diff=prev&oldid=125983129
* ]: '']'' (2001) ISBN 81-85990-74-3
* ]: How I became a Hindu - My discovery of Vedic Dharma
* ]: '']'' (1982, enlarged 1993) ISBN 81-85990-05-0 -: Hindu and Hinduism, Manipulation of Meanings. Voice of India, Delhi 1993.

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Hindu&diff=prev&oldid=125983269
Dileep Karanth's article about the terms "Hindu" and "India"
By Stephen Knapp
*

Not sure if User:195.210.243.231 was Hornplease, but his edits are similar: (, , deletes this: And according to ]: ''"When it is said that Agni, the fire, “puts the dark demons to flight”, one should keep in mind that the darkness was thought to be filled with ghosts or ghouls, so that making light frees the atmosphere of their presence. And when Usha, the dawn, is said to chase the "dark skin" or "the black monster" away, it obviously refers to the cover of nightly darkness over the surface of the earth."'' <ref>Elst 1999; Cf. Sir ]: A Sanskrit-English Dictionary, entry tvac, Reference is to Rgveda 1:92:5 and 4:51:9.</ref>, , and wrote in an article, and added Adolf Hitler to the list of Hindu incarnations .

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Manu_Smriti&diff=prev&oldid=126354534
] posits that historical facts confirm that Pushyamitra allowed and patronized the construction of monasteries and Buddhist universities in his domains, as well as the still-existent stupa of Sanchi. ] states: ''“To judge from the documents, Pushyamitra must be acquitted through lack of proof.”''<ref> by Koneraad Elst </ref>

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Ikshvaku&diff=prev&oldid=126354065 The word Ikshvaku means "]". Some scholars have pointed out that the legends of Ikshvaku and Sumati may have their origin in the Southeast-Asian myth of the birth of humanity from a Sugarcane.<ref>{{cite book | first=Koenraad | last=Elst | authorlink=Koenraad Elst | title=] | publisher=Aditya Prakashan | year=1999 | id=ISBN 81-86471-77-4}}; Sergent, Bernard: Genèse de l'Inde, 1997.</ref>

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Genetics_and_Archaeogenetics_of_South_Asia&diff=prev&oldid=126353980
*{{cite book | first=Koenraad | last=Elst | authorlink=Koenraad Elst | title=] | publisher=Aditya Prakashan | year=1999 | id=ISBN 81-86471-77-4}} ,

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=History_of_the_Indian_caste_system&diff=prev&oldid=126353878
{{cite book
|last = Elst
|first = Koenraad
|authorlink = Koenraad Elst
|title = The saffron swastika: The notion of "Hindu fascism"
|year =
|publisher = Voice of India
|id = ISBN 0-818-59906-9
}}

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Ikshvaku_dynasty&diff=prev&oldid=126353792
Since the word ''Ikshvaku'' means ], scholars have suggested that the legend of ] may have originated in the ancient myth of humanity's birth from a bitter gourd. <ref>{{cite book | first=Koenraad | last=Elst | authorlink=Koenraad Elst | title=] | publisher=Aditya Prakashan | year=1999 | id=ISBN 81-86471-77-4}}; Sergent, Bernard: Genèse de l'Inde, 1997.</ref>

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Indra&diff=prev&oldid=126353688 * - By ]

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Indra&diff=prev&oldid=126353590
Some scholars have also argued that there is a continuity between Indra and ] (]).<ref>{{cite book | first=Koenraad | last=Elst | authorlink=Koenraad Elst | title=] | publisher=Aditya Prakashan | year=1999 | id=ISBN 81-86471-77-4}}; Frawley, David: Gods, Sages and Kings, 1991. Lotus Press, Twin Lakes, Wisconsin, p.224-225 and Frawley, David: Arise Arjuna, p.170-181</ref> Scholars such as Dr. David Frawley, Koenraad Elst and many Hindu dovotees believe that Indra in indeed Shiva. Lord Indra is said to be a bull while Lord Shiva has a bull as a vehicle. Lord Indra fights with the Maruts (who as children of Lord Rudra) as his soldiers. Lord Indra is too an outsider as is Lord Shiva and is also connected with tiger skin (e.g. in RV 5:4:1:11), which is what Lord Shiva meditates upon.

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Mahatma_Gandhi&diff=prev&oldid=126353491
] ] also critiqued Gandhi. He questioned the effectiveness of Gandhi's theory of non-violence and argued that it achieved only a few token concessions from the British. Elst also argued that it was British fear of violence (along with depletion due to the after effects of ]) rather than non-violence, that led to ]. According to Elst, this was exemplified by Indian public support for ]'s ].<ref></ref> As praise, "Gandhi's major claim to fame was that he, almost alone among the freedom leaders in the entire colonized world, had sought and developed policies and strategies rooted in native culture rather than borrowed from Western models (nationalism, socialism etc.)—"<ref></ref>

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Neo-fascism_and_religion&diff=127378974&oldid=125809019
This kind of criticism is primarily made by politicians and academics who are sympathetic to ] ideologies.<ref name="Rosser">, ''Yvette Rosser''</ref>
] explains that Golwalkar's text mentions "racial purity" as Germany's concern but does not "make a plea" for it, and that he never described Hitler as "a source of inspiration.That alleged Golwalkar quotations turn out to be excerpted from the invective of his critics, is symptomatic of Hindutva-watching in general: first-hand information is spurned in favour of hostile second-hand claims made by unscrupled commentators. In most journalistic and academic publications on Hindutva, the number of direct quotations is tiny in comparison with quotations from secondary, hostile sources... If we do not just focus on the selected quotation (as we are led to do by those who made the selection in the first place), but read the whole book, we find that Golwalkar is definitely not asking the Hindus to emulate Nazi Germany."<ref> by Koenraad Elst</ref>
Elst further argues that the statement made was more a reactionary response to the ethnic separatism of the ] made during that period when ] wanted to segregate Muslims from Hindus on the basis of the ].<ref> by Koenraad Elst</ref>He further asserts that Hindutva groups have largely renounced the book where such quotes were made, including Golwalkar himself. It hasn't been published since 1948 and that basically, it is a tool to vilify/ harass those who subscribe to Hindutva.<ref></ref><ref></ref> Some scholars contend that the traditional meaning of the term fascism does not apply to ] groups — and that analysis of such groups must be performed without the use of politically loaded terminology.
Other peer-reviewed scholars such as Yvette Rosser<ref>Credentials of Yvette Rosser , </ref> argue that to describe Hindu nationalism as fascist evokes double standards against Hindus in political and academic discourse, is part of an attempt to conflate political Hindutva with the religion of ], and is part of a systemic ] bias in western academia and scholarship.<ref name="Rosser"/>
The description of Hindutva as fascist has been particularly condemned by pro-Hindutva authors such as ] who claim that the ideology of Hindutva meets none of the characteristics of other fascist ideologies. Claims that Hindutva social service organisations such as the ] are "fascist" have been disputed by academics such as ] <ref></ref> <ref></ref>.
In addition, accusations of "fascism" in the Hindutva movement coming from the left wing parties and western academics such as ] (who argues that Hindutva draws on the ''cultural'' nationalism of ], rather than the ''racial'' nationalism of the Nazis themselves) have been criticized by former professor of political philosophy<ref>, Jyotirmaya Sharma</ref> and '']'' commentator ] as a "simplistic transference has done great injustice to our knowledge of Hindu nationalist politics"<ref>,J. Sharma ''Times of India''</ref>.

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Historical_revisionism_%28negationism%29&diff=prev&oldid=126711190 "Historical revisionism" (also but less often in English "'''negationism'''"<ref> is the denial of historic crimes. The word is derived from the French term ''Le négationnisme'', which refers to Holocaust denial. It is now also sometimes used for more general political historical revisionism as in:
:* Dr ] '']'' (1992). ISBN 81-85990-01-8

He says: "Thanks for making an effort to cite in the Indian Nationalism page. However, I have an objection to this edit. Note that is still unresolved. I thought that you had agreed to hold off on discussion of Dr. Elst for a while. To go ahead and make additional citations of his material seems to be a violation of an agreement in good faith. Please do consider this and find an alternative citation. Thanks. Hornplease 05:37, 31 August 2006 (UTC)"

"I will ask you to return to the status quo ante and not cite him any further, and to remove any citations that you have added since the discussion went on hold - which was done at your request. Hornplease 07:56, 2 September 2006 (UTC)" (I still dont understand why you need to cite him at all; please reconsider the entire drift of that article.)

Koenraad Elst claimed that "None of the negationist historians has come forward with a reply or with the announcement that a mistake has been discovered in Mr. Goel's list of monuments of Islamic fanaticism. Manini Chatterjee, reviewer for ], could do no more than calling it a "very bad book". Very bad for the negationists, indeed." And Elst further claimed: "Of the hundreds of secularist historians who have signed statements denouncing "communal history distortion", not a single one has been able to challenge even one of the 2000 claims in the list."

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Hindu_Temples_-_What_Happened_to_Them&diff=prev&oldid=154212023
He deletes "See also" Section and links to Koenraad Elst. Koenraad Elst is an authority on Sita Ram Goel, having written a book chapter about him, and edited a book about Goel.
* ,
*
*

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Hindu_Temples_-_What_Happened_to_Them&diff=prev&oldid=140687689
In August 1990 while releasing the book "Hindu Temples - What Happened To Them", Bharatiya Janta Party leader L. K. Advani chided Goel for using strong language.<ref>Goel, Sita Ram, "How I became a Hindu", Chapter 9</ref> There were proposals in November 1990 in ] to ban the book. .
Koenraad Elst claimed that "None of the negationist historians has come forward with a reply or with the announcement that a mistake has been discovered in Mr. Goel's list of monuments of Islamic fanaticism. Manini Chatterjee, reviewer for ], could do no more than calling it a "very bad book". Very bad for the negationists, indeed." And Elst further claimed: "Of the hundreds of secularist historians who have signed statements denouncing "communal history distortion", not a single one has been able to challenge even one of the 2000 claims in the list."
Cynthia Talbot in ] claimed that Goel's list of destroyed temples is "greatly inflated", but also called for a systematic and unbiased study of the subject, without which it is very difficult to gauge the extent of damage wrought on Indian temples.<ref>Cynthia Talbot. Inscribing the Other,Inscribing the Self:Hindu-Muslim Identities in Pre-Colonial India. Comparative Studies in Society and History, Vol.37,No.4 (Oct. 1995).</ref> Cynthia Talbot noted that in the decades after ] temple desecration were on the rise in ], which is in accord with the dates in Goel's list of temple destructions (in Goel's chapter "Let the Mute Witness speak"). Reflecting on Goel's list, she says: "Five date from the fourteenth century (phase one), six come from phase two, and nineteen date from 1565 to ] CE (phase three). The remaining thirty or so cases stem from the century after 1650, with a notable bunching of incidents in the late 1600s, when the Mughal empire was absorbing the former Qutb Shahi Kingdom of ]."<ref>Cynthia Talbot. Inscribing the Other,Inscribing the Self:Hindu-Muslim Identities in Pre-Colonial India. Comparative Studies in Society and History, Vol.37,No.4 (Oct. 1995).</ref>
*]: ] (1992)
* ,
*
]

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Koenraad_Elst&diff=prev&oldid=136471947
In an article, he argued that the current tendency to accuse ]s of “fascism” is nothing but a "replay of an old ] tactic."<ref>Was Veer Savarkar a Nazi? </ref> With this article, he has no problems with WP:LEAD ( the sentence "without ] affiliation", which is wrong, is in the lead.) On other articles, he complains about WP:LEAD.

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Countering_systemic_bias_in_religion&oldid=139717663#Book_banning_on_Wikipedia.3F
Previously, he asked Hindu editors to stop citing Koenraad Elst in wikipedia articles, and told them that he will "monitor the use of his name". He compares Elst with Holocaust denier David Irving.(User_talk:Shiva's_Trident Makes (indirect) comparison of Elst with the anti-semite David Irving) He tries to discredit ] (or what he claims to be the Asian or Indian Routledge division) only because Elst published a paper at this publisher. He claims that Witzel had a dinner with the president of India (but I couldn't find any such reference on the Web).

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Talk%3AThe_Saffron_Swastika&diff=118273722&oldid=105977116 proposes the deletion of all his books
</small>

|}

'''Other Hindu or pro-Hindu authors'''

{|class="navbox collapsible collapsed" style="text-align: left;"
|-
! Expand to see
|-
|
<small>
He deleted:

'''Ram Swarup'''
*http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Understanding_Islam_through_Hadis&diff=118341304&oldid=118311192
The "victories" in having ] reversed, in having ] banned - "victories" which were loudly applauded by the "secularists"; the success in convincing political parties - with maps and lists - that Muslims would decide their fate in hundreds of constituencies; to say nothing of the "victories" of the violence in Punjab and ] - the reaction is the cumulative result of these distortions in our polity. AND He writes: is a book by ] (here he has no problems with WP:LEAD and WP:NPOV or even truth (Ram Swarup is not a Hindutvadi))

'''Sita Ram Goel'''
<small>
http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Sita_Ram_Goel&diff=118090191&oldid=prev American author ] wrote, ''"While Voice of India had a controversial reputation, I found nothing irrational, much less extreme about their ideas or publications... Their criticisms of Islam were on par with the criticisms of the ] Church and of ] done by such Western thinkers as ] or ]. In fact they went far beyond such mere rational or historical criticisms of other religions and brought in a profound spiritual and yogic view as well." '' <ref name = "HIBAH DF">] </ref>

*http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Niyogi_Committee_Report_On_Christian_Missionary_Activities&diff=prev&oldid=96782429
The recommendations of the report
The committee gave the following recommendations
*(1) those missionaries whose primary object is proselytisation should be asked to withdraw and the large influx of foreign missionaries should be checked;
*(2) the use of medical and other professional services as a direct means of making conversions should be prohibited by law;
*(3) attempts to convert by force or fraud or material inducements, or by taking advantage of a person’s inexperience or confidence or spiritual weakness or thoughtlessness, or by penetrating into the religious conscience of persons for the purpose of consciously altering their faith, should be absolutely prohibited;
*(4) the Constitution of India should be amended in order to rule out propagation by foreigners and conversions by force, fraud and other illicit means;
*(5) legislative measures should be enacted for controlling conversion by illegal means;
*(6) rules relating to registration of doctors, nurses and other personnel employed in hospitals should be suitably amended to provide a condition against evangelistic activities during professional service; and
*(7) circulation of literature meant for religious propaganda without approval of the State Government should be prohibited. (Goel 1998, 163-164)
adds strong pov/OR: The supposed Report, which Goel claims to quote from liberally, is not otherwise available. Goel's explanation for this circumstance repeats the allegations of one 'Baba' Madhavdas, who had claimed Christian ] "had bought" all available copies of the report and destroyed them.

*http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Censorship_in_India&diff=prev&oldid=79540057
*Elst, Koenraad: '']'' (1992) ISBN 81-85990-01-8
*Chandmal Chopra and Goel, Sita Ram ''The Calcutta Quran Petition'' (1986, enlarged 1987 and again 1999) ISBN 81-85990-58-1
*Goel, Sita Ram (editor): ''Freedom of expression - Secular Theocracy Versus Liberal Democracy'' (1998) ISBN 81-85990-55-7
*]: ]. New Delhi, 1998.

*http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Muslim_Separatism_-_Causes_and_Consequences&diff=96782008&oldid=96731093 He cites from the work of Professor ] which show that these Sufis made objectionable statements about Hindus and Hinduism. The book also discusses ] book ''The Tragic Story of Partition (Bangalore, 1982).''
http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=The_Calcutta_Quran_Petition&diff=prev&oldid=126091322
Further reading
*Elst, Koenraad, Ayodhya and After: Issues Before Hindu Society (1991)
*Freedom of expression - Secular Theocracy Versus Liberal Democracy (1998, edited by Sita Ram Goel)
External links
*
*
*
* About the "poster"
*
* by N.S. Rajaram
*

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Conversion_of_non-Muslim_places_of_worship_into_mosques&diff=127646807&oldid=126856273
The destruction of ] temples in ] during the ] had occurred from the beginning of Muslim conquest until the end the ] throughout the ]. <ref name="Goel">{{cite book|author=] | title=Hindu Temples: What happened to Them: Islamic Evidence (Second Enlarged Edition). Volume II. Chapter 8: Summing Up|publisher=Voice of India|location=New Dehli | url=http://voi.org/books/htemples2/ch8.htm}}</ref> Numerous Indian mosques bear inscriptions that they were constructed on the sites of destroyed Hindu temples; in many cases materials from the demolished temples were used for construction of mosques. <ref>{{cite book|author=] |title=Hindu Temples: What happened to Them: Islamic Evidence (Second Enlarged Edition). Volume II.Chapter 6: The Epigraphic Evidence|publisher=Voice of India|location=New Dehli|url=http://voi.org/books/htemples2/ch6.htm}}</ref> The total number of mosques on the Indian subcontinent that were built on the sites of former Hindu temples is difficult to estimate; however, the number of demolished temples is in the tens of thousands, and in most cases the destruction was accompanied by construction of mosques on the freed places.<ref name="Goel"/>

*http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=The_Story_of_Islamic_Imperialism_in_India&diff=114191724&oldid=106831310 is a book that was published by radical publisher (Compare with http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Hizbul_Mujahideen&diff=prev&oldid=96727598)

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Freedom_of_expression_-_Secular_Theocracy_Versus_Liberal_Democracy&diff=prev&oldid=126090991 In particular it criticizes the banning of ]'s book ]. Goel's work contains court orders and proceedings which Goel describes as 'documenting' the ] and what he calls the banning of criticism of religion in India/
Goel argues that "In the Indian context it should have meant a revolt against the closed creed of Islam as well, and keeping the state aloof from the influence of mullahs."
Goel furthermore claims that India has become in many ways a "]". He says: "Leftists in general have always opposed Theocracy in Muslim and Christian countries. It is only in India that they have become its unrivalled champions."

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Persecution_of_Buddhists&diff=prev&oldid=155327501
*]: ] 2 vols. ISBN 81-85990-49-2 ;
</small>

'''Yvette Rosser'''
<small>
*http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Yvette_Rosser&diff=prev&oldid=118364458 proposes deletion
*http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Yvette_Rosser&diff=prev&oldid=118363848
deletes: *
*
]
and writes: Rosser is a vociferous advocate of expanding academic teaching and research on what she describes as the "medieval imperialism" and "Hindu genocide" carried out by Muslim rulers in South Asia starting in the 8th century. This position - shared by Hindu right wing scholars - has assisted her in forging close contact with other US and India based Hindu nationalist advocacy groups, such as Rajiv Malhotra's Infinity Foundation.

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Saffronization&diff=prev&oldid=152386380
Deletes a link to a Rosser article on Infinity Foundation<ref>, Yvette Rosser</ref>
Rosser says he lies to her and spreads untruths and propaganda about what she does and believes. There is possible WP:BLP violation by Hornplease. (e.g. http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Articles_for_deletion/Yvette_Rosser&diff=prev&oldid=119230264, http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=User_talk:Yrosser&diff=70276632&oldid=70272902

'''Taslima Nasrin'''
http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Censorship_in_India&diff=prev&oldid=155362701 Books by ] were banned in West Bengal.<ref> Retrieved 29 May 2006.</ref>.

'''Arun Shourie'''
http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Arun_Shourie&diff=prev&oldid=127629698
*]
*

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Arun_Shourie&diff=127629698&oldid=127585972
]
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*

*http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Eminent_Historians:_Their_Technology%2C_Their_Line%2C_Their_Fraud&diff=prev&oldid=124046560 (BLP violation on BLP page)

*http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Arun_Shourie&diff=153109011&oldid=153101582

'''Nicholas Kazanas'''
*http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Nicholas_Kazanas&diff=118268954&oldid=118266412 he deletes the entire article, see also the talkpage

'''Vishal Agarwal'''
*http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Vishal_Agarwal&diff=119362007&oldid=119361026 . He also gives talks and presentations on Hinduism and ancient India in High Schools, Colleges, old age homes, etc., upon invitation. His views on relevant matters have been sought by newspapers such as the Minnesota Star, Metro News (from San Jose), Baltimore Sun, The Wall Street Journal (by the Pullitzer prize winning journalist ]) and he has been referenced in publications in journals such as the Journal of Indo-European Studies. Agarwal was also embroiled recently in the ] where he testified multiple times before the Board of Education of the State of California, and consulted by certain advocacy groups. He was also interviewed by Dr Martha Nussbaum (Professor of Law, University of Chicago) for her forthcoming book on the state of democracy in Indian in the year 2004. In July 2006, he was awarded the 'Praachavidyaa-paarangata' award by the World Association of Vedic Studies, at their annual conference in ], ] (USA).
http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Vishal_Agarwal&diff=prev&oldid=126102096 wants to delete the article with PROD

'''Subhash Kak'''
http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Indology&diff=prev&oldid=157380672
* by Abhijit Bagal (indiacause.com, on alleged bias in the US American education system)
* by ] (omilosmeleton.gr)
* by ]
* (hinduwisdom.info)
* by Satsvarupa dasa Goswami (iskcon.com)

'''Gurbachan Singh Talib'''
*http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Muslim_League_Attack_on_Sikhs_and_Hindus_in_the_Punjab_1947&diff=prev&oldid=94021689

He deletes the bibliography and external links to Infinity Foundation and Rediff.com
http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Anti-Hinduism&diff=prev&oldid=153984591, http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Anti-Hinduism&diff=prev&oldid=153984232, http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Anti-Hinduism&diff=prev&oldid=153984112
* {{cite book|last=Talib|first=Gurbachan|authorlink=Gurbachan Singh Talib|title= ]|year=1950|publisher=]|location=India}}
* Timur's memoirs on his invasion of India; describes in detail the massacre of Hindus, forced conversions to Islam and the plunder of the wealth of Hindustan (India). Compiled in the book: "]", by Sir H. M. Elliot, Edited by John Dowson; London, Trubner Company; 1867–1877

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Anti-Hinduism&diff=prev&oldid=154491041 While at the same time removing pro-Hindu text, he adds this unsourced line:There are also allegations of Anti-Hinduism voiced by members of the ] in the West against their host societies, notably in the United States, where these form part of the so-called "]", with cases such as the ].
He then deletes the paragraphs on Aurangzeb and on bin Qasim: Several Islamic scholars, theologians and Emperors held virulently anti-Hindu stances during the ]. They regarded Hindus as "infidels" who had to be slaughtered with no mercy. In particular, the Arab invaders in the 8th century held anti-Hindu attitudes, such as the testament of the superior of ], Hajjaj, who quoted the ] to justify the slaughter of Hindus.
He deletes books and links:
* {{cite book|last=Talib|first=Gurbachan|authorlink=Gurbachan Singh Talib|title= ]|year=1950|publisher=]|location=India}}
* Timur's memoirs on his invasion of India; describes in detail the massacre of Hindus, forced conversions to Islam and the plunder of the wealth of Hindustan (India). Compiled in the book: "]", by Sir H. M. Elliot, Edited by John Dowson; London, Trubner Company; 1867–1877
*
*
*

'''David Frawley'''
http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Articles_for_deletion/Dharmic_religion&diff=prev&oldid=155309849 *If you do not believe Frawley is fringe, take it up at the fringe noticeboard. I certainly intend to remove him as a reference from any article not in his specific area of expertise, which is the teaching if yoga, unless I am wrong. ] 00:04, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Dharmic_religion&diff=155237491&oldid=154143957 deletes ref <ref>Frawley, David. ''From the River of Heaven: Hindu and Vedic Knowledge for the Modern Age''. Pg 27. Berkeley, California: Book Passage Press, 1990. ISBN 1878423010.</ref><ref>York, Michael.''Pagan Theology: Paganism as a World Religion''. Pg 166. New York: NYU Press, 2005. ISBN 0814797083.</ref>

'''Hindu American Foundation'''

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Anti-Hinduism&diff=prev&oldid=155098262 He deletes mostly unsourced (but correct) information. He deletes the word "fundamentalist christian", but in other articles inserts the word fundamentalist Hindu. He deletes the entire section on the Human Rights report of the ]:
The ], an advocacy group for Hindus, released a report in 2005 on the status of the human rights of Hindus, mainly in ], ], and the ] valley. The report attempts to increase awareness of anti-Hindu views propagated and used to justify violations of the human rights of many Hindus in the region. The report introduces as:
{{cquote|
] are by definition universal. Hence, in an ideal world there would be no need to write a separate report on the human rights of Hindus, or for that matter any other group. In the real world, unfortunately, there is a gaping hole when it comes to the awareness of human rights for Hindus, mainly in Bangladesh, ] and in the ] valley.<ref name="HAFreport"></ref>}}
The 71-page report compiles media coverage and firsthand accounts of human rights violations perpetrated against Hindus because of their religious identity. The incidents are documented, often quoting from well-known international human rights organizations.<ref name="HAFreport"/>The Hindu American Foundation presented the report to the co-chairs of the ]ional Caucus on India and ], Representatives ], a ], and ], a ]. Both of these members of Congress endorsed it.<ref name="Pacislands">
Second Annual Report On Hindu Human Rights Released, ''Pacific Magazine''</ref>Rabbi Abraham Cooper, Associate Dean and co-founder of the ], praised the HAF for the report.
{{cquote|The Simon Wiesenthal Center welcomes this report which will help the international community and Non-governmental Organizations to have a broader understanding of the human rights situation in that important region of the world.<ref name="Pacislands"/>}}
Several academics on campuses around the U.S. also reviewed this year’s report. Florida International University Professor of religious Studies, Nathan Katz, remarked on the promulgation of various anti-Hindu sentiments recorded in the report:
{{cquote|“This report by the Hindu American Foundation…is a real eye-opener”.“As a minority in Islamic societies that consider them to be ‘idolaters,’ Hindus in Bangladesh, Pakistan and Afghanistan face unimaginable persecution routinely.<ref name="Pacislands"/>}}
The report documents the long history of anti-Hindu atrocities in Bangladesh, a topic that many Indians and Indian governments over the years have preferred not to acknowledge. Such atrocities, including targeted attacks against temples, open theft of Hindu property, and ] of young Hindu women and enticements to ] to ], have increased sharply in recent years after the ] joined the coalition government led by the ].
The report concludes with:
{{cquote|Some Indians may feel uncomfortable with this report because they do not want to be reminded about the problems of Hindus outside their milieu. And for some in the Indian ], it is a badge of honour to distance themselves from these ]s as a mark of their supposed enlightenment, oddly trashing their own ] in the process. Many more Indians are reluctant to speak out against atrocities committed against Hindus for fear of being labeled "communal". Merely speaking about human rights for Hindus is for them a form of ]}}

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Hindu_American_Foundation&diff=125596610&oldid=98002055 The report documents the long history of anti-Hindu atrocities in Bangladesh, a topic that many Indians and Indian governments over the years have preferred not to acknowledge. Such atrocities, including targeted attacks against temples, open theft of Hindu property, and ] of young Hindu women and enticements to ] to ], have increased sharply in recent years after the ] joined the coalition government led by the ].The report concludes with:
{{cquote|Some Indians may feel uncomfortable with this report because they do not want to be reminded about the problems of Hindus outside their milieu. And for some in the Indian ], it is a badge of honour to distance themselves from these ]s as a mark of their supposed enlightenment, oddly trashing their own ] in the process. Many more Indians are reluctant to speak out against atrocities committed against Hindus for fear of being labeled "communal". Merely speaking about human rights for Hindus is for them a form of ]}}
The people whose persecution is amply documented in this report are being persecuted because they are Hindu, not because they are poor or because of their political views. Human rights activists in Bangladesh and Pakistan, many of whom are not Hindus, have painstakingly documented the violations of basic human rights of Hindus in their country.

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Hinduism_in_the_United_States&diff=prev&oldid=152169206

'''Vincent Kundukulam'''
http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Hindutva&diff=prev&oldid=139969281 He reverts a "mainstream", often edited article back to a few weeks ago. He doesn't use the talkpage, even in his next four reverts he only uses a edit summary (http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Hindutva&diff=prev&oldid=140060213 etc.). Of course, there are a lot of deletions, e.g. : Similar is the ], which is a ] religious party but maintains ties with Hindutva organizations, as they also represent Sikhism.<ref> Indian Express</ref>
* denunciation of the ] as too passive with regard to the ] Kashmiri Hindus <ref></ref><ref></ref> by Kashmiri muslim separatists and advocates of Hindutva wish a harder stance in ].<ref> by Robert Jenkins</ref>
The Supreme Court also ruled that "Ordinarily, Hindutva is understood as a way of life or a state of mind and is not to be equated with or understood as religious Hindu fundamentalism. A Hindu may embrace a non-Hindu religion without ceasing to be a Hindu and since the Hindu is disposed to think synthetically and to regard other forms of worship, strange gods and divergent doctrines as inadequate rather than wrong or objectionable, he tends to believe that the highest divine powers complement each other for the well-being of the world and mankind."<ref> FOI report supports IDRF activities; questions Sabrang/FOIL</ref>
The Uniform Civil Code is opposed by Muslims, Christians and parties like the ] and The ].
The amendment of the Indian constitution by the late Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi to overturn a Supreme Court judgment under pressure from the conservative Muslims incensed some Hindus who became Hindutva supporters. The amended laws, more in tune with the ], reduced the rights that divorced Muslim women previously had. <ref></ref>
They also often feel that ] ] implies equal laws for all religions, and want a Uniform Civil Code passed for the same reason.
One must also differentiate between the word "secularism" as used in the Western and Indian contexts. ] in the West implies "separation of church & state" whereas secularism in India means "equal respect for all religions".
This statement comes from the fact that when ] came to India, he called for an entire conversion of Asia in the lines of that carried out in Europe and Africa in the earlier millennia.<ref></ref>
The epithet of "Fascism" is also used to evoke double standards against Hindus in political and academic discourse. The academia and polity have been accused of engaging in a form of ] ] against Hindu political expression by levelling the accusation of "Fascism" against anyone who expresses sympathy for Hindus<ref>, ''Yvette Rosser''</ref>.
Marxist critics <ref>eg. , ], ], ]</ref>, have used the inflammatory political epithets of "Indian fascism" and "Hindu fascism" to describe the ideology of the ]. For example, Marxist social scientist ] has written that the Hindutva movement as it has emerged is "classically ] in class support, methods and programme"<ref>"The Fascism of Our Times" ''Social Scientist'' VOl 21 No.3-4, 1993, p.69</ref></blockquote>
The description of Hindutva as fascist has been condemned by pro-Hindutva authors such as ] who claim that the ideology of Hindutva meets none of the characteristics of fascist ideologies. Claims that Hindutva social service organisations such as the ] are "fascist" have been disputed by academics such as ].<ref></ref> <ref></ref>
In addition, accusations of "fascism" in the Hindutva movement coming from the left wing parties and western academics such as ] (who argues that Hindutva draws on the ''cultural'' nationalism of ], rather than the ''racial'' nationalism of the Nazis themselves) have been criticized by former professor of political philosophy.<ref>, Jyotirmaya Sharma</ref> and ] commentator ] as a "simplistic transference has done great injustice to our knowledge of Hindu nationalist politics"<ref>,J. Sharma ''Times of India''</ref>
He removes the fact tag for this sentence: Outside observers, on the other hand, describe Hindutva philosophy as ].
(includes allegations that Golwalkar was a Nazi).

'''Elliot and Dowson'''

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Delhi_Sultanate&diff=prev&oldid=155327420 removes Elliot and Dowson from bibliography

'''VS Naipual and Tom Bottomore and Vishal Agarwal'''

He deletes sources like Tom Bottomore and , but for Elst, an inadequate source (editorial) and non-specialist of Belgian politics is quite ok as source:

Another double standard is when Hornplease reverted an user who deleted a comment on the talkpage: At the same day, the same user removed this sentence, which Hornplease didn't revert: " In peer-reviewed literature, he has published in the ]." Then he claims that Vishal Agarwal is not notable.


'''Thomas Trautmann'''

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Indophobia&diff=157380525&oldid=156864610
Trautmann (1997) argues that British Indophobia was constructed by ] and ]{{Fact|date=March 2007}} and its chief architects were ] and ].
Claims of Indophobic Bias in South Asian Studies have often been made. Such real or perceived bias can imply old-fashioned and prejudiced outsider interpretations of Eastern cultures and peoples:
*Biased interpretation of Indian history. For example James Mill's History of India downplays Indian history.<ref>Mill 1858</ref>
*One-sided, unfair, exaggerated or exclusively negative presentation of some aspects of Hinduism or Indian culture. For example exaggerations or misrepresentations about Hindu theology, misrepresentations about the status of women in Hinduism, etc.
*Claims that the Indological scholarship of Indians themselves is not scientific or that it is motivated by political motives, i.e. by Marxist, nationalist, Hindu, Muslim, Dravidian separatist or other motives.
He advocated the creation of a middle Anglicised class that was "Indian in blood and colour, but English in taste, in opinions, in morals, and in intellect".<ref>Macaulay, Thomas Babington, 1835:249, Minute on Indian education.</ref> This class of anglicized Indians would then in turn anglicize the Indian people.
His work "History of British India" (1817) may be the "single most important source of British Indophobia and hostility to Orientalism".<ref>Trautmann 1997:117</ref>
. American views of India, that have been quite negative, can be noted in the use of characterization like "Very Benighted Heathens", "the White Man's Burden" and the "Lesser Breed". <ref>http://www.jstor.org/view/00182745/ap020041/02a00040/6?</ref>
</small

|}

'''Whitewashing of the most intolerant Islamic rulers like Aurangzeb etc'''

{|class="navbox collapsible collapsed" style="text-align: left;"
|-
! Expand to see
|-
|

<small>

He deleted:

'''Andre Wink'''

Muhammed bin Qasim:
Strategy of Temple Plunder
The plunder was also achieved by an ingenious system of leaving the prosperous population alone, so that they would continue to bring donations to the temples, and then the Muslims would loot these temples. In order to save their temple from destruction, many Hindu warriors refused to fight: According to '''Wink''' : <ref name="wink1"> Wink, pg.187-188</ref><br>
"An even greater part of the revenue of these rulers was derived from the gifts donated by pilgrims who came from all over Sind and Hind to the great idol (sanam) of the sun-temple at Multan… When Muhammad al-Qasim conquered Multan, he quickly discovered that it was this temple which was one of the main reasons for the great wealth of the town. He 'made captives of the custodians of the budd, numbering 6000' and confiscated its wealth, but not the idol itself – which was made of wood, covered with red leather and two red rubies for its eyes and wearing a crown of gold inlaid with gems --, 'thinking it best to leave the idol where it was,<br>
but hanging a piece of cow's flesh on its neck by way of mockery".

Strategy of Temples as Ransom
According to '''Wink'''<ref name="wink1"> Wink, pg.187-188</ref>
AI-Qasim built his mosque in the same place, in the most crowded bazaar in the center of the town. The possession of the sun-temple -- rather than the mosque -- is what in later times the geographers see as the reason why the local governors or rulers could hold out against the neighboring Hindu powers. Whenever an 'infidel king' marched against Multan and the Muslims found it difficult to offer adequate resistance, they threatened to break the idol or mutilate it, and this, allegedly, made the enemy withdraw. In the late tenth century however the Isma'ilis who occupied Multan broke the idol into pieces and killed its priests. A new mosque was then erected on its site…"

Treatment of Jats
The narrative in the Chach Namah a persian book translated from an earlier arab book conveys that Chach humiliated the Jats and Lohanas .Ibbetson records on page 358 volume II that "Muhammad bin Qasim maintained these regulations , declaring that the jats resembled the savages of Persia "

Enslavement of non combatants priests women and children
On the other hand in the matter of treatment of brahmins and enslavement of women and children '''Farishta''' the muslim historian records in Chapter IX of his chronicle <br>
"In a few days after which the place fell. Mahomed Kasim levelled the temple and its walls with the ground, and circumcised the bramins. The infidels highly resented this treatment, by invectives against him and the true faith. On which Mahomed Kasim caused every bramin, from the age of seventeen and upwards, to be put to death: the young women and children of both sexes were retained in bondage; and the old women being released, were permitted to go whithersoever they chose. <ref name=" Farishta "> Farishta, Chapter IX </ref>

'''F. B. Flood'''

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Iconoclasm&diff=prev&oldid=154852950 There is also evidence for destruction of icons by medieval Muslim rulers of ]. The most famous concerns a stone ], an aniconic representation of the ] god ], which was housed in the temple complex at ] in ]. According to a tradition preserved by the 16th century historian ], the ] emperor ] raided Somnath in ], looting the temple. The temple ]s offered to buy the lingam back, but Mahmud refused, and his army carried it back to ]. There the lingam was broken, and a portion of it was re-used as the threshold of the congregational mosque.<ref>F.B. Flood, "Between cult and culture: Bamiyan, Islamic iconoclasm, and the museum," ''The Art Bulletin'' 84 (2002), 650.</ref>


'''Deletion of Saqi Mustad Khan and whitewashing of Aurangzeb'''

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Aurangzeb&diff=prev&oldid=131624585 He makes major deletions on the Aurangzeb article. Aurangzeb was one of the most intolerant Muslim rulers, infamous for his temple destructions, fanaticism, massacres and the submission of Hindus under the Jyzia. He claims that he is only reverting Hkelkar, and it's not true.
He deletes:
During his reign, allegedly many ] temples were defaced and destroyed, and many non-Muslims converted to ], both by inducement and by force.<ref>{{cite book | last = Richards | first = John F. | title = The Mughal Empire | year = 1995 | publisher = Cambridge University Press | location = Cambridge | id = ISBN 0-521-56603-7 | pages = 130,177 | quote =Jujhar Singh's outright defiance of this order inflamed Shah Jahan. He sent another large army under the nominal command of the sixteen-year-old Prince Aurangzeb to invade Bundelkhand....When overtaken by Mughal troops, Jujhar Singh's principal queens were killed by their attendants, but the remaining royal women were sent to join the Mughal harem. ''Two very young sons and a grandson were converted to Islam. Another older son who refused to convert was killed outright.''}}</ref> The ], a head tax on non-Muslims, was reinstated during his rule.
he interfered with non-Muslim religious practice through sweeping and often violent methods.
Accounts of iconoclasm
During his reign, many hundreds -- perhaps many thousands -- of temples were desecrated: facades and interiors were defaced and their ]s (idols) looted. In many cases, temples were destroyed entirely; in numerous instances mosques were built on their foundations, sometimes using the same stones.His edicts show that he authorized and encouraged these acts. The history of the Mughal reign under Aurangzeb was chronicled as the Maāsir-i-ʻālamgiri, which states that:

#Aurangzeb issued a general order to destroy all centers of Hindu learnings including Varnasi and destroyed the temple at Mathura and rename it as Islamabad<ref name="Harbans">Mukhia, Harbans,"The Mughals of India" P25,Blackwell Publishing,2004,ISBN 0631185550</ref><ref name="Maasir">
{{cite book
| last = Khan
| first = Saqi Mustad
| authorlink = Saqi Mustad Khan
| coauthors = Jadunath Sarkar
| title = "Maasir-i-' Alamgiri : a history of the emperor Aurangzib-'Alamgir, reign 1658-1707 A. D. / of Saqi Musta'ad Khan ; translated into English and annotated by Jadu-Nath Sarkar"
| year = 1986 (reprint)
| publisher = Oriental books Reprint Corporation
| language = English
| url = http://www.amazon.com/Maasir-I-Alamgiri-History-Emperor-Auranzib-Alamgir-1658-1707/dp/8170690013/sr=8-1/qid=1171876614/ref=sr_1_1/103-5884052-1974266?ie=UTF8&s=books
| isbn = 8170690013
}}</ref>
#In Khandela (Rajastan) he killed 300 Hindus in one day for they resisted the destruction of their temple.
#In ] and ] in ], Aurangzeb ordered the governors to "demolish the schools and temples of the infidels and with utmost urgency put down the teachings and practices of these religious misbelievers "<ref name="Harbans"/><ref name="Maasir"/>
#In Udaipur all Hindus of the town were killed as they vowed to defend the temple of Udaipur from destruction.172 temples were destroyed in Udaipur.<ref name="Maasir"/>
#66 temples were pulled down in Amber. All Hindu clerks were dismissed from the office of the Imperial empire.
#In ], ], the Emperor ordered and executed the destruction of temple and butchering of cows within the temple.<ref name="Maasir"/>

From the beginning of his reign, Aurangzeb permitted and even encouraged the defacement and destruction of Hindu temples. Other edicts added to the impact. In ] he forbade Hindus to display illuminations at Diwali festivals.<ref name="Mehta">{{cite book
| last = Mehta
| first = Jaswant Lal
| authorlink = Jaswant Lal Mehta
| title = Advanced Study in the History of Medieval India P362
| year = 1987
| publisher = Stosius Inc/Advent Books Division; 2nd Rev edition
| language = English
| isbn = 8120705734
}}</ref> Hindu religious fairs were outlawed in ]. The following year, he prohibited construction of new Hindu temples as well as the repair of existing ones. In ] Aurangzeb issued an order that only Muslims could be landlords of crown lands. He ordered provincial Viceroys to dismiss all Hindu clerks. In ] certain lands owned by Hindus in Gujarat were confiscated. The customs duties levied on merchants was doubled for non-Muslims. In ], contrary to the advice of many of his court nobles and theologians, Aurangzeb reimposed the ] tax on all non-Muslims.<ref name="Mehta"/>

Speaking of the devastating persecution of the Hindu and his architectural symbols,] has written ''" This is such a big and bad event that people still have to find polite, destiny-defying ways of speaking about it" ''

Among those that Aurangzeb is said to have destroyed were two most sacred to Hindus, in ] and ]. In both cases, he had large mosques built on the sites. Some historians opine that these temples were destroyed more for political reasons than religious, e.g. the ] temple in ], which marked the place believed to be the birth place of Shri ], was destroyed as a reprisal for the peasant rebellions in the locality. The temple had large, gilded spires that could be seen from ]. In ] Aurangzeb ordered the demolition of the temple, and constructed the ] mosque. Traces of the ancient Hindu temple can be seen from the back of the mosque.
Such claims have also been criticized by ] when he wrote 'And indeed is the case, when it comes to the number of temples Aurangzeb demolished, the inclusion of the sentence: "...number of such desecrations is probably much exaggerated...", is an unwritten law among Indian historians.'

He deletes critical links:*
*
* - ]

Critical Views
* -- ''Aurangzeb destroyed temple after evidence of crimes''
* -- ''Cites multiple edicts issued and Mughal court documents''
* -- ''Expands article above with additional source materials''
* -- ''Presents a review of several theories regarding motivation for temple destruction''

He removes "latter-day", which is wrong: http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Aurangzeb&diff=prev&oldid=131441096

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Aurangzeb&diff=131446753&oldid=131194156, http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Aurangzeb&diff=prev&oldid=134262441 He deletes: The history of the Mughal reign under Aurangzeb was chronicled as the Maāsir-i-ʻālamgiri, which states that:
#Aurangzeb issued a general order to destroy all centers of Hindu learnings including Varnasi and destroyed the temple at Mathura and rename it as Islamabad<ref name="Harbans">Mukhia, Harbans,"The Mughals of India" P25,Blackwell Publishing,2004,ISBN 0631185550</ref><ref name="Maasir">
{{cite book
| last = Khan
| first = Saqi Mustad
| authorlink = Saqi Mustad Khan
| coauthors = Jadunath Sarkar
| title = "Maasir-i-' Alamgiri : a history of the emperor Aurangzib-'Alamgir, reign 1658-1707 A. D. / of Saqi Musta'ad Khan ; translated into English and annotated by Jadu-Nath Sarkar"
| year = 1986 (reprint)
| publisher = Oriental books Reprint Corporation
| language = English
| url = http://www.amazon.com/Maasir-I-Alamgiri-History-Emperor-Auranzib-Alamgir-1658-1707/dp/8170690013/sr=8-1/qid=1171876614/ref=sr_1_1/103-5884052-1974266?ie=UTF8&s=books
| isbn = 8170690013
}}</ref>
#In Khandela (Rajastan) he killed 300 Hindus in one day for they resisted the destruction of their temple.
#In ] and ] in ], Aurangzeb ordered the governors to "demolish the schools and temples of the infidels and with utmost urgency put down the teachings and practices of these religious misbelievers "<ref name="Harbans"/><ref name="Maasir"/>
#In Udaipur all Hindus of the town were killed as they vowed to defend the temple of Udaipur from destruction.172 temples were destroyed in Udaipur.<ref name="Maasir"/>
#66 temples were pulled down in Amber. All Hindu clerks were dismissed from the office of the Imperial empire.
#In ], ], the Emperor ordered and executed the destruction of temple and butchering of cows within the temple.<ref name="Maasir"/>
From the beginning of his reign, Aurangzeb permitted and even encouraged the defacement and destruction of Hindu temples. Other edicts added to the impact. In ] he forbade Hindus to display illuminations at Diwali festivals.<ref name="Mehta">{{cite book
| last = Mehta
| first = Jaswant Lal
| authorlink = Jaswant Lal Mehta
| title = Advanced Study in the History of Medieval India P362
| year = 1987
| publisher = Stosius Inc/Advent Books Division; 2nd Rev edition
| language = English
| isbn = 8120705734
}}</ref> Hindu religious fairs were outlawed in ]. The following year, he prohibited construction of new Hindu temples as well as the repair of existing ones. In ] Aurangzeb issued an order that only Muslims could be landlords of crown lands. He ordered provincial Viceroys to dismiss all Hindu clerks. In ] certain lands owned by Hindus in Gujarat were confiscated. The customs duties levied on merchants was doubled for non-Muslims. In ], contrary to the advice of many of his court nobles and theologians, Aurangzeb reimposed the ] tax on all non-Muslims.<ref name="Mehta"/>
Speaking of the devastating persecution of the Hindu and his architectural symbols,] has written ''" This is such a big and bad event that people still have to find polite, destiny-defying ways of speaking about it" ''
Among those that Aurangzeb is said to have destroyed were two most sacred to Hindus, in ] and ].
The Sikh Guru was offered a choice between accepting Islam or death; and he willingly accepted the latter.His response led to his death. The Guru "laid down his life, but not the principles"

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Aurangzeb&diff=prev&oldid=134063371 deletions and this:
changes : Soldiers and citizens were also given free rein to deface architectural images such as faces and any image representing a living being — to : Soldiers and citizens were also given free rein to deface architectural images such as faces, flowers and vines —

'''Deletions and Whitewashing of Muhammed bin Qasim'''
http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Muhammad_bin_Qasim&diff=prev&oldid=157201530
The status of ] (protected people) was conferred upon Hindus and Buddhists<ref name="Gier"/> Dhimmi communities were subjected to the payment of taxes in favor of Muslims &mdash; a requirement that was central to ''dhimma'' as a whole. Sura ] stipulates that ''jizya'' be exacted from non-Muslims as a condition required for jihad to cease. Failure to pay the ] could result in the pledge of protection of a dhimmi's life and property becoming void, with the dhimmi facing the alternatives of conversion, enslavement or death (or imprisonment, as advocated by ], the chief '']'' &mdash; religious judge &mdash; of Abbasid caliph Harun al-Rashid).<ref name="lewis1415">Lewis (1984), pp. 14&ndash;15</ref>

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Muhammad_bin_Qasim&diff=prev&oldid=155939107
Here a report tells of the capture of another of Dahir's wives, Ladi, whom Qasim later married, and of the two daughters of Dahir from a third wife, who were sent on to the ] as war booty.
According to Wink , "a considerable number of Jats was captured as prisoners of war and deported to Iraq and elsewhere as slaves." <ref name=" Andre Wink "> Wink, pg.161</ref>
The plunder was also achieved by an ingenious system of leaving the prosperous population alone, so that they would continue to bring donations to the temples, and then the Muslims would loot these temples. In order to save their temple from destruction, many Hindu warriors refused to fight: According to '''Wink''' : <ref name="wink1"> Wink, pg.187-188</ref><br>
"An even greater part of the revenue of these rulers was derived from the gifts donated by pilgrims who came from all over Sind and Hind to the great idol (sanam) of the sun-temple at Multan… When Muhammad al-Qasim conquered Multan, he quickly discovered that it was this temple which was one of the main reasons for the great wealth of the town. He 'made captives of the custodians of the budd, numbering 6000' and confiscated its wealth, but not the idol itself – which was made of wood, covered with red leather and two red rubies for its eyes and wearing a crown of gold inlaid with gems --, 'thinking it best to leave the idol where it was,<br> but hanging a piece of cow's flesh on its neck by way of mockery".
According to '''Wink'''<ref name="wink1"> Wink, pg.187-188</ref>
AI-Qasim built his mosque in the same place, in the most crowded bazaar in the center of the town. The possession of the sun-temple -- rather than the mosque -- is what in later times the geographers see as the reason why the local governors or rulers could hold out against the neighboring Hindu powers. Whenever an 'infidel king' marched against Multan and the Muslims found it difficult to offer adequate resistance, they threatened to break the idol or mutilate it, and this, allegedly, made the enemy withdraw. In the late tenth century however the Isma'ilis who occupied Multan broke the idol into pieces and killed its priests. A new mosque was then erected on its site…"
On the other hand in the matter of treatment of brahmins and enslavement of women and children '''Farishta''' the muslim historian records in Chapter IX of his chronicle <br>
"In a few days after which the place fell. Mahomed Kasim levelled the temple and its walls with the ground, and circumcised the bramins. The infidels highly resented this treatment, by invectives against him and the true faith. On which Mahomed Kasim caused every bramin, from the age of seventeen and upwards, to be put to death: the young women and children of both sexes were retained in bondage; and the old women being released, were permitted to go whithersoever they chose. <ref name=" Farishta ">
Farishta, Chapter IX </ref>
The narrative in the Chach Namah a persian book translated from an earlier arab book conveys that Chach humiliated the Jats and Lohanas .Ibbetson records on page 358 volume II that "Muhammad bin Qasim maintained these regulations , declaring that the jats resembled the savages of Persia "
and destroyed an old and historic temple in Multan that bin Qasim had protected and built a mosque in its place.<ref name="Gier"/><ref> Keay, pg 186-187</ref>

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Muhammad_bin_Qasim&diff=prev&oldid=157763275
Practical, expedient considerations lead Muhammad to desist from
carrying out the strict injunctions of Islamic Law <ref> From a translation of Ziauddin Barani's Fatawa—i Jahandari,
circa, 1358—9 C.E., in Mohammad Habib. The political theory of the
Delhi sultanate., Allahabad, Kitab Mahal, 1961, pp. 46—47. </ref>.
and the wishes
of al—Hajjaj <ref> Chachnama, Elliot and Dowson, pp. 173—174</ref>. by massacring the (pagan) infidel Hindus of Sindh.
Instead, he imposed upon the vanquished Hindus the ] and
associated restrictive regulations of ]. As a result, the
Chachnama records, 'some resolved to live in their native
land, but others took flight in order to maintain the faith of their
ancestors, and their horses, domestics, and other property' <ref> Majumdar, The Classical Age, pp. 460 </ref>.
Thusa lasting pattern was set that would persist, as noted by Majumdar,
until the Mughal Empire collapsed at the end of Aurangzeb's reign (in
1707), <ref> Majumdar, The Classical Age, pp. 461—462</ref>.
The imposition of dhimmitude
upon the vanquished Hindu populations is also characterized, in brief.
The Muslim chroniclers al—Baladhuri (in Kitab Futuh al—Buldan) and
al—Kufi (in the Chachnama) include enough isolated details to
establish the overall nature of the conquest of Sindh by Muhammad b.
Qasim in 712 C.E. <ref> Al—Baladhuri. The Origins of the Islamic State (Kitab Futuh
Al—Buldan). Part II, Translated by F.C. Murgotten, New York, Columbia
University, 1924, pp. 217—224; Al—Kufi. The Chachnama, excerpts
translated in H.M. Elliot and J. Dowson. A History of India As Told By
Its Own Historians—The Muhammadan Period, 1867—1877 (reprinted 2001,
Delhi), Vol. 1, pp. 157—211</ref>
These narratives, and the processes they
describe, make clear that the Arab invaders intended from the outset
to Islamize Sindh by conquest, colonization, and local conversion.
Baladhuri, for example, records that following the capture of Debal,
Muhammad b. Qasim earmarked a section of the city exclusively for
Muslims, constructed a mosque, and established four thousand colonists
there. <ref> Al—Baladhuri. The Origins of the Islamic State, Part II, p. 218</ref> . The conquest of Debal had been a brutal affair, as
summarized from the Muslim sources by Majumdar. <ref> R.C. Majumdar (editor). The History and Culture of the Indian
People, Vol. 3, The Classical Age, Bombay, 1954, p. 458. </ref>
Despite appeals for mercy from the besieged Indians (who opened their
gates after the Muslims scaled the fort walls), Muhammad b. Qasim
declared that he had no orders (i.e., from his superior al—Hajjaj, the
Governor of Iraq) to spare the inhabitants, and thus for three days a
ruthless and indiscriminate slaughter ensued. In the aftermath, the
local temple was defiled, and '700 beautiful females who had sought
for shelter there, were all captured'. The capture of Raor was
accompanied by a similar tragic outcome. <ref> Majumdar, The Classical Age, pp. 458—459</ref>
Muhammad massacred 6000 fighting men who were found in the fort, and
their followers and dependents, as well as their women and children
were taken prisoners. Sixty thousand slaves, including 30 young ladies
of royal blood, were sent to Hajjaj, along with the head of Dahar [the
Hindu ruler].
We can now well understand why the capture of a fort by
the Muslim forces was followed by the terrible jauhar ceremony (in
which females threw themselves in fire kindled by themselves), the
earliest recorded instance of which is found in the Chachnama.
The word Samání (originally Shráman) occurs several times, and we are told of Buddha temples, Buddha monas¬teries, and even of Buddha extremists, who considered it against their religion to take up arms in their own defence against the Mussalmans <ref> Dayaram Gidumal the Introduction Chachnama,</ref>

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Persecution_of_Buddhists&diff=prev&oldid=155937610
] conquerors also described Indian Pagans as But-parast, and idol-breakers as but-shikan. The word "but" is derived from the ] word for Buddha, but was used by subsequent Muslims for "Indian paganism" in general.<ref>Elliot & Dowson: History of India, vol.1, p.119, 120. Koenraad Elst: Who is a Hindu. 2001</ref> Therefore in Muslim chronicles it is not always evident if Buddhists, Hindus or other Indian religions are described by term.
In the 7th century ] conquered ] and though he incorporated Buddhists into the into his administration as governors and is seen as having been welcomed against an unpopular Hindu king, is also noted to have demolished and sacked temples and monasteries and established Muslim rule.<ref>Elliot & Dowson: History of India, vol.1, p.158</ref><ref>Nicholas F. Gier, ''FROM MONGOLS TO MUGHALS: RELIGIOUS VIOLENCE IN INDIA 9TH-18TH CENTURIES'', Presented at the Pacific Northwest Regional Meeting American Academy of Religion, Gonzaga University, May, 2006</ref><ref>Elliot & Dowson: History of India, vol.1, p.158</ref>
Around ] CE, ], ], and ] Muslims began major incursions into India through the traditional invasion routes of the northwest. ] (]-]) established a base in ] and raided nearby areas.
Mahmud of Ghazni is said to have been an ].<ref>Notes on the Religious, Moral, and Political State of India Before the Mohammedan Invasion:... By Faxian, Sykes (William Henry) pg.?? </ref> Hindu and Buddhist statues, shrines and temples were looted and destroyed, and many Buddhists had to take refuge in Tibet.<ref> How to Prepare for the Sat II: World History By Marilynn Hitchens, Heidi Roupp, pg. ??</ref>
He demolished numerous monasteries alongside temples during his raid across north-western India. In ], ], a Turkish commander, seized control of ], leaving defenseless the northeastern territories that were the heart of Buddhist India. The ] was almost completely destroyed by the invading ] forces. <ref>The Maha-Bodhi By Maha Bodhi Society, Calcutta (page 205) </ref> One of Qutb-ud-Din's generals, ], invaded Magadha and destroyed the great Buddhist shrines at ]. <ref>The Maha-Bodhi By Maha Bodhi Society, Calcutta (page 8) </ref> The Buddhism of ] suffered a tremendous decline under Khilji. <ref>The Maha-Bodhi By Maha Bodhi Society, Calcutta (page 205) </ref>
] attacked the North-Western regions of the ] many times. Gujarat later fell to Muhammad of Ghor's armies in ]. Muhammad of Ghor's armies destroyed many Buddhist structures, including the great Buddhist university of ]. <ref>Historia Religionum: Handbook for the History of Religions By C. J. Bleeker, G. Widengren page 381</ref>
In ] ], one of ]'s generals destroyed monasteries fortified by the ] armies, such as the one at ]. Many monuments of ancient Indian civilization were destroyed by the invading armies, including Buddhist sanctuaries near ]. Buddhist monks who escaped the massacre fled to ], ] and ]. <ref>Islam at War: A History By Mark W. Walton, George F. Nafziger, Laurent W. Mbanda (page 226)</ref>
In ], ] conquered ]. In ], after his death, his conquest was divided. ] then established the ], where his son ] made Buddhism the state religion. At the same time, he came down harshly on ] and demolished mosques to build many stupas. He was succeeded by his brother, and then his son ] who converted to Islam and in 1295 changed the state religion. After his reign, and the splitting of the Chagatai Khanate, little mention of ] or the stupas built by the Mongols can be found in Afghanistan and Central Asia.<ref></ref>
Timur was a 14th-century ] of ] descent <ref name="EI">B.F. Manz, ''"Tīmūr Lang"'', in ], Online Edition, 2006</ref><ref>The Columbia Electronic Encyclopedia, "Timur", 6th ed., Columbia University Press: ''"... Timur (timoor') or Tamerlane (tăm'urlān), c.1336–1405, <u>Mongol conqueror</u>, b. Kesh, near Samarkand. ..."'', ()</ref><ref>, in ]: ''"... was a member of the Turkic Barlas clan of Mongols..."''</ref><ref>, in ]: ''"... Baber first tried to recover Samarkand, the former capital of the empire founded by his Mongol ancestor Timur Lenk ..."''</ref>, conqueror of much of Western and central Asia, and founder of the ].
] destroyed Buddhist establishments and raided areas in which Buddhism had flourished. <ref>Sir Aurel Stein: Archaeological Explorer By Jeannette Mirsky</ref><ref>Ethnicity & Family Therapy edited by Nydia Garcia-Preto, Joe Giordano, Monica McGoldrick</ref>
] rule also contributed to the decline of Buddhism. They are reported to have destroyed many Hindu temples and Buddhist shrines alike or converted many sacred Hindu places into Muslim shrines and mosques.<ref>War at the Top of the World: The Struggle for Afghanistan, Kashmir, and Tibet By Eric S. Margolis page 165</ref> Mughal rulers like ] destroyed Buddhist temples and monasteries and replaced them with Islamic mosques. <ref>India By Sarina Singh</ref>
*Al-Biladhuri: Kitãb Futûh Al-Buldãn, translated into English by F.C. Murgotte, New York, 1924.'' See for a list of 80 Muslim historians writing on the Islamic invasions.''
*]: ] 2 vols. ISBN 81-85990-49-2 ;
*Elliot and Dowson: ], New Delhi reprint, 1990.
*Majumdar, R. C. (ed.), The History and Culture of the Indian People, Volume VI, The Delhi Sultanate, Bombay, 1960; Volume VII, The Mughal Empire, Bombay, 1973.
*] on allegations of "Hindu iconoclasm": , , , ,

'''Other censorship, deletions'''
<small>
http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Caste_system_among_South_Asian_Muslims&diff=prev&oldid=155160718 deletes info about Ghazala Shaheen who was gang-raped in Pakistan, source is timesonline

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Indus_Valley_Civilization&diff=prev&oldid=155156048 (deletes reference, his explanation: http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Talk:Indus_Valley_Civilization&diff=prev&oldid=155156449, http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Talk:Indus_Valley_Civilization&diff=prev&oldid=154977868) This name diversity appears partly because the original association with "Indus valley" was tenuous: of the 1400 sites, only 44 are on the ] and its tributaries, while nearly 1000 lie along the ] / ]s.<ref name=maisels/>

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Hindu_Students_Council&diff=prev&oldid=154846295 He removes and deemphasizes some positive statments about this Hindu organisation by Warner and Kurian.

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Aurangzeb&diff=prev&oldid=154919712 His edits in this article, about one of the most intolerant and fanatic Muslim rulers, try to show Aurangzeb as a rather benevolent and tolerant ruler.

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Californian_Hindu_textbook_controversy&diff=prev&oldid=143923341 He deletes links (all of them pro-Hindu), and leaves the almost dozens of other links in the article. Some of the links are important for the Hindu-POV, such as *

*http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=K._B._Hedgewar&diff=prev&oldid=136486122 Deletions with nothing on talk
*http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=National_Liberation_Front_of_Tripura&diff=prev&oldid=136480860 deletions

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Delhi_Sultanate&diff=prev&oldid=155327361 * Timur's memoirs on his invasion of India; describes in detail the massacre of Hindus, forced conversions to Islam and the plunder of the wealth of Hindustan (India). Compiled in the book: "]", by Sir H. M. Elliot, Edited by John Dowson; London, Trubner Company; 1867–1877

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Uniform_civil_code&diff=prev&oldid=125756097 The secular Uniform Civil Code is opposed by ]s, ]s and parties like the ] and the ]<sup>]</sup>. This is a contradiction to these parties' commitment to secularism, and has led to claims that they are ]<sup>]</sup>. Those in favour of a secular Uniform Civil Code are the ] , the ] and the ]<sup>]</sup>. These are also referred to as "Communalists"<sup>]</sup>. Thus, in India, there exists a peculiar situation where the opponents of this law are called "]" while those in favour of a secular law are termed "]" or "]"<sup>]</sup>.

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Anti-Hinduism&diff=prev&oldid=155668825 removes HAF report and other things

*http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Anti-Hinduism&diff=prev&oldid=155704287 removes cited source
http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Anti-Hinduism&diff=prev&oldid=155705895 removes source "clnup"
http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Anti-Hinduism&diff=prev&oldid=156091892
In addition, H.D. Sharma points out that, contrary to the claims of other scholars such as Mohibbul Hasan, he did not carry out the conversions as a punitive measure for rebellion, but as part of a campaign to eradicate Hinduism from his kingdom.<ref name="Realtipu"/> In addition, he cites examples such as Tippu's conquest of Malabar in 1788 CE, when he appointed a "]" in each village to carry out forced conversions in an organized manner. This was primarily done to the well-educated ] Hindus in the region, including those in Coorg, as Tippu perceived their intellect to be a threat to his Islamic rule.<ref name="Realtipu"/> C. K. Kareem also notes that Tippu Sultan issued an edict for the destruction of Hindu temples in ].<ref name="rpersecutor5">{{cite book
Historians such as Sharma cites letters that Tippu wrote to the ] Sultan in 1792 CE as proof of his claims of Tippu's religious persecution. In the letters Tippu expressed his disdain for Hindus as "polytheists" and "infidels", as well as his intent to Islamize his territories.<ref name="Realtipu"/>Sharma further states that Tippu's disdain for Hindus manifested in the fact that he ranked his army according to Muslim Castes, with the Arab-descended ''Ashraf'' castes at the top ranks, the converted "Ajlaf" castes at the middle ranks, and Hindus at the lowest rank. Mir Hussain Ali Khan Kirmani wrote in his ''Neshan-e Haidari'' that Tippu "developed a great aversion to Brahmins, Hindus and other tribes and he did not consider any but the people of Islam to be his friends, and, therefore, on all accounts, his chief object was to promote and provide for them. At this time he tried to eliminate Hindu worship from his territory. He confiscated funds from the temples being intended to balance the loss of revenue derived so far from intoxicating substances, the production of which he has banned earlier." Tippu also changed the names of towns from Dravidian names to Urdu ones. He destroyed Calicut because it was named after ], then depopulated the surrounding areas to repopulate the renamed town of "Ferozabad". The Hindus "returned jubilant" when the town was liberated.<ref name="Realtipu"/>

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=User_talk:Dbachmann/Wikipedia_and_nationalism&diff=prev&oldid=115520428 (wondering..) Falun Gong

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Voice_of_India&diff=118348788&oldid=118315074 ''''Voice of India''''' (since 2002 '''''Bharatvani Institute'''''; since 2004 '''''Voice of Dharma''''') is a heavily subsidised <ref name="Routledge">], ' (WP:LEAD and WP:NPOV, compare with http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Hizbul_Mujahideen&diff=prev&oldid=96727598)

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Narendra_Modi&diff=130100638&oldid=130095356
In addition,B. Raman, the Director of the Institute For Topical Studies, ], Distinguished Fellow and Convenor, Observer Research Foundation (ORF), and regulat contributor to the India-based think tank ] has published that the denial of Modi's visa was covertly spearheaded by several evangelical Christian groups, such as the ] and the "Institute on Religion and Democracy" (a alliance of ] campaigning against ], ], ], ] and other liberal ideas)<ref></ref>.

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Madhav_Sadashiv_Golwalkar&diff=125748972&oldid=124364779
"Note that Golwalkar's text mentions "racial purity" as Germany's concern but does not "make a plea" for it, and that he never described Hitler as "a source of inspiration.That alleged Golwalkar quotations turn out to be excerpted from the invective of his critics, is symptomatic of Hindutva-watching in general: first-hand information is spurned in favour of hostile second-hand claims made by unscrupled commentators. In most journalistic and academic publications on Hindutva, the number of direct quotations is tiny in comparison with quotations from secondary, hostile sources... If we do not just focus on the selected quotation (as we are led to do by those who made the selection in the first place), but read the whole book, we find that Golwalkar is definitely not asking the Hindus to emulate Nazi Germany."<ref name="Elst"/>
He further asserts that Hindutva groups have largely renounced the book where such quotes were made, including Golwalkar himself. It hasn't been published since 1948 and that basically, it is a tool to vilify/ harass those who subscribe to Hindutva.<ref></ref><ref></ref>
Elst further argues that the statement made was more a reactionary response to the ethnic separatism of the ] made during that period when ] wanted to segregate Muslims from Hindus on the basis of the ].<ref name="Elst">

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Voice_of_India&diff=120678391&oldid=120678328 However, the criticism may be biased and inaccurate considering that Kalyanaraman and Rajaram and not emigrants to the United States but are instead residents of India, Frawley is a Hindu and not a New Ager (Frawley 2000), Klostermaier is an ordained Catholic priest (not a New Ager), Misra is not a nationalist (Hock 1999), Shengde is not a nationalist and fiction writer Bhagawan Gidwani is not known to be a supporter of Nationalism either! Witzel has been criticized in Voice of India and Aditya Prakashan publications (e.g., Talageri 2000).

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Ram_Janmabhoomi&diff=64905255&oldid=64878328 It was commonly believed by Hindus until about 1990 that an ancient Ram Janmabhoomi temple was demolished and replaced with the Babri Mosque. The ] of 1986 ..., ], Marxist <ref>e.g. Romila Thapar. Tom Bottomore: Dictionary of Marxist Thought, Blackwell, Oxford 1988, entry “Hinduism”.</ref>
adds:It strong tradition existed, particularly in certain Hindu communities, that an ancient Ram Janmabhoomi temple was demolished and replaced with the Babri Mosque. It was in reference to this tradition that the 1986 edition ] reported that ... a claim the editors later removed as 'misleading'.

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Indian_Rebellion_of_1857&diff=prev&oldid=9399974 adds . Other than Indian units of the Company's army, most of the resistance came from the old aristocracy, which feared that under British rule they would become irrelevant and replaced by a new ] class.(pov without citation)

*http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Anti-Hinduism&diff=124055978&oldid=124013670 deletes the ref:During the ] of the Indian Subcontinent, several evangelical Christian missionaries spread anti-Hindu propaganda in India during the 19th century as a means to convert them to Christianity. Examples include missionaries like Abbe J.A. Dubois, who wrote that, in order to make a "New race of Hindus", the foundations of Hindu civilization have to be undermined, and they be turned into "Atheists and barbarians".<ref> Abbe J.A. Dubois, and Henry King Beauchamp, Hindu Manners, Customs and Ceremonies, Clarendon Press, 1897, P96, </ref>
deletes:], who introduced English education into India, claimed: "I have never found one among them who could deny that a single shelf of a good European library was worth the whole native literature of ] and ]."<ref> A Tribute to Hinduism</ref> He wrote that Arabic and Sanskrit works on medicine contain "medical doctrines which would disgrace an English Farrier - Astronomy, which would move laughter in girls at an English boarding school - History, abounding with kings thirty feet high, and reigns thirty thousand years long - and Geography made up of seas of treacle and seas of butter".<ref name="Macaulay">Macaulay, Thomas Babington, 1835:242-243, Minute on Indian education.</ref> He advocated to create a middle Anglicised class that was "Indian in blood and colour, but English in taste, in opinions, in morals, and in intellect".<ref name="Macaulay"/> This class of anglicized Indians would then in turn anglicize the Indian people.One of the most influential historians of India during the British Empire, ] was criticized for being prejudiced against Hindus. His work "History of British India" (1817) may be the "single most important source of British Indophobia and hostility to Orientalism".<ref>Trautmann 1997:117</ref> The Indologist H.H. Wilson wrote that the tendency of Mill's work is "evil".<ref>H.H. Wilson 1858 in James Mill 1858, The history of British India, Preface of the editor</ref> Mill claimed that both Indians and Chinese people are cowardly, unfeeling and mendacious. Both Mill and Grant attacked Orientalist scholarship that was too respectful of Indian culture: "It was unfortunate that a mind so pure, so warm in the pursuit of truth, and so devoted to oriental learning, as that of Sir ], should have adopted the hypothesis of a high state of civilization in the principal countries of Asia".<ref>Mill, James - 1858, 2:109, The history of British India</ref> ]'s writings were also prejudiced against Indians.<ref name="Marx">{{cite journal | author=Suniti Kumar Ghosh | title=Marx on India | journal=Monthly Review | year=1984}}</ref> In addition, RISA scholars are accused of holding the Hindu diaspora in the United States with contempt and making derogatory remarks about Hindus and Hinduism that are "patently false".<ref name="Bagal pt4"> by Abhijit Bagal</ref> RISA is also criticized by the same organisations and individuals for stressing on obscure practices within Hinduism that were never widely implemented (such as the ] horse sacrifice) in what they portray as a 'deliberate' ploy to characterise Hinduism as a "repulsive religion" while almost completely ignoring normative Hindu scripture and normative Hindu practices.<ref name="Bagal pt4"/> However, it has also been alleged that South Asian organizations in the US that defame Hinduism are funded and supported by several Islamist organizations prevalent in ], ] and ], as well as Christian Missionary organizations. These organizations have generally an anti-Indian, pro-Communist agenda.

*http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Anti-Hinduism&diff=119321559&oldid=118945399
*Biased interpretation of Indian history. For example James Mill's History of India downplays Indian history.<ref>Mill 1858</ref>
*One-sided, unfair, exaggerated or exclusively negative presentation of some aspects of Hinduism or Indian culture. For example exaggerations or misrepresentations about Hindu theology, misrepresentations about the status of women in Hinduism, etc.
*Claims that the Indological scholarship of Indians themselves is not scientific or that it is motivated by political motives, i.e. by Marxist, nationalist, Hindu, Muslim, Dravidian separatist or other motives.
*Claims that India has not produced any worthwhile literature.<ref name="Macaulay"/>
*Pervasive influence of racialist ideas in western scholarship of Indian society .
Historians have noted that during the British Empire "evangelical influence drove British policy down a path that tended to minimize and denigrate the accomplishments of Indian civilization and to position itself as the negation of the earlier British ] that was nourished by belief in Indian wisdom".<ref> Trautmann 1997:113</ref> The contemporary academia in the ] has been criticized for portraying a biased interpretation of Hinduism and Hindus.<ref name="Bagal pt 1"> by Abhijit Bagal</ref> According to Abhijit Bagal, Rajiv Malhotra has claimed that an unnamed United States congressman who is a member of the India Caucus has commented that several works published by the "Religions in South Asia" (RISA) subgroup of the "American Academy of Religion" have a systemic anti-Hindu prejudice that "borders on hate-speech".<ref name="Bagal pt 1"/> The influence of such scholarship in American schools has also been criticized, with studies showing systemic bias against Hindus in the social studies curricula of American schools.<ref name="Bagal pt4"/> .A recent controversy regarding the ] also earned ] author ] allegations of anti-Hindu prejudices when he persisted in the misinformation that the massacre was perpetrated by Hindus against Sikhs, despite the confession to the massacre by an ] militant who was part of the ] cadre that attacked the Sikh community. According to ], the criticism of ] often goes beyond the criticism of a political/religious movement and degenerates into anti-Hindu rhetoric and hatemongering.<ref> by Yvette Claire Rosser, The Infinity Foundation</ref> Publications such as ] have routinely conflated Hinduism with Hindutva<ref>Dalit Voice, vol.25, No.1</ref> and have been criticized for anti-Hindu and ] attacks.<ref> Ayodhya and After, Koenraad Elst (Chpt 14)</ref><ref>{{cite book
| last = Heuzé
| first = Gérard
| authorlink = Gérard Heuzé
| title = Où va l’Inde moderne? (p 87)
| publisher = L’Harmattan
| date = 1993
}}
</ref>

*http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Indology&diff=118270627&oldid=117988437 Such real or perceived bias can imply:
*Biased interpretation of Indian history. For example James Mill's History of India downplays Indian history.<ref>Mill 1858</ref>
*One-sided, unfair, exaggerated or exclusively negative presentation of some aspects of Hinduism or Indian culture. For example exaggerations or misrepresentations about Hindu theology, misrepresentations about the status of women in Hinduism, etc.
*Claims that the Indological scholarship of Indians themselves is not scientific or that it is motivated by political motives, i.e. by Marxist, nationalist, Hindu, Muslim, Dravidian separatist or other motives.
*Claims that during the British Empire "evangelical influence drove British policy down a path that tended to minimize and denigrate the accomplishments of Indian civilization and to position itself as the negation of the earlier British ] that was nourished by belief in Indian wisdom."<ref> Trautmann 1997:113</ref>

In ]'s highly influential "Observations on the ...Asiatic subjects of Great Britain" (1796),<ref>Grant, Charles. (1796) Observations on the state of society among the Asiatic subjects of Great Britain, particularly with respect to morals; and on the means of improving it, written chiefly in the year 1792.</ref> Grant criticized the Orientalists for being too respectful to Indian culture and religion. His work tried to determine the Hindu's "true place in the moral scale", and he alleged that the Hindus are "a people exceedingly depraved".

], who introduced English education into India, claimed: "I have never found one among them who could deny that a single shelf of a good European library was worth the whole native literature of ] and ]."<ref>http://www.atributetohinduism.com/FirstIndologists.htm</ref> He wrote that Arabic and Sanskrit works on medecine contain "medical doctrines which would disgrace an English Farrier - Astronomy, which would move laughter in girls at an English boarding school - History, abounding with kings thirty feet high, and reigns thirty thousand years long - and Geography made up of seas of treacle and seas of butter".<ref>Macaulay, Thomas Babington, 1835:242-243, Minute on Indian education.</ref> He advocated to create a middle Anglicised class that was "Indian in blood and colour, but English in taste, in opinions, in morals, and in intellect".<ref>Macaulay, Thomas Babington, 1835:249, Minute on Indian education.</ref> This class of anglicized Indians would then in turn anglicize the Indian people.

One of the most influential historians of India during the British Empire, ] was criticized for being prejudiced against Hindus. His work "History of British India" (1817) may be the "single most important source of British Indophobia and hostility to Orientalism".<ref>Trautmann 1997:117</ref> The Indologist H.H. Wilson wrote that the tendency of Mill's work is "evil".<ref>H.H. Wilson 1858 in James Mill 1858, The history of British India, Preface of the editor</ref> Mill claimed that both Indians and Chinese people are cowardly, unfeeling and mendacious. Both Mill and Grant attacked Orientalist scholarship that was too respectful of Indian culture: "It was unfortunate that a mind so pure, so warm in the pursuit of truth, and so devoted to oriental learning, as that of Sir ], should have adopted the hypothesis of a high state of civilization in the principal countries of Asia."<ref>Mill, James - 1858, 2:109, The history of British India.</ref> ]'s writings were also prejudiced against Indians.

*http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Michael_E._J._Witzel&diff=prev&oldid=115491173 deletes criticism by Frawley, Kazanas, Danino and the Harvard Crimson (double standard, he don't do this on Hindu people articles)

He often deletes sourced material from articles with the pretext that it was inserted by banned user Hkelkar (Misplaced Pages:Requests_for_arbitration/Hkelkar) (Examples: http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Timeline_of_antisemitism&diff=prev&oldid=151639523, http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Hindu_nationalism&diff=prev&oldid=151466403, http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Homosexuality_and_Hinduism&diff=prev&oldid=151468093, http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Hinduism_in_the_West_Indies&diff=prev&oldid=134021192, http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Aurangzeb&diff=prev&oldid=131440891 ). It is true in some cases, but it is not true in all cases (Muslim conquest of India, Aurangzeb and other articles), and he never gives any proof. If he doesn't like a article, or part of a article, he only (and probably often wrongly) claims it is Hkelkar cruft, so he can delete everything. Some of his deletions are those that Hkelkar has inserted before he got banned (I'm almost sure, but have to find the diffs again).
*http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Martial_Race&diff=prev&oldid=155700738 every time Jew is mentioned in an article its Hkelkar

*http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=User_talk:Dbachmann&diff=prev&oldid=118275704 proposes... Censorship

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Abul_Kalam_Azad&diff=prev&oldid=126354601 deletes reference Azad has been criticised by ] ] ] who alleges Azad of insincerity and two-facedness in his dealings with Hindus; that is, underlying his call for Hindu-Muslim amity and opposition to partition was a desire for the eventual Islamisation of all of India, in line with the orthodox ] ] ]. Elst considers this exemplified in Azad's equating of Hindu-Muslim cooperation to ]'s treaty with the ]s of ], however with Hindus unaware of the tale's closing: two of the three tribes were driven away, the other was massacred. Elst furthers cites Azad's proposal to stave off partition by giving the 24% Muslim minority 50% representation, as well as Azad's criticism of the tolerant ] ] ], and praise for his hardline theologian ].<ref name="NOI">{{cite news
| author = Koenraad Elst
| url = http://koenraadelst.bharatvani.org/books/negaind/ch2.htm
| title = Chapter 2, Negationism in India
| work = Negationism in India
| format = HTML
| accessdate = 2007-02-05
}}</ref>

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Manabendra_Nath_Roy&diff=prev&oldid=126353394 deletes reference Roy has been criticized by ] for downplaying and distorting the negative effects of the ].

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Human_rights_in_India&diff=127491701&oldid=127488095 Yatindra Bhatnagar, chief editor of "International Opinion", has criticized Human Rights Watch representatives and those of related organizations of having an anti-India bias with regards to their reports of communal riots in India between Hindus and Muslims, particularly in reference to the ]. He writes that, instead of trying to heal the wounds of such incidents, organizations like Human Rights Watch focus disproportionately on blaming Hindus exclusively for the incident and trying to deflect attention from the violence perpetrated by ]s in the ] that precipitated the riots. In particular, he criticizes Human Rights Watch representative Smita Narula and her colleagues for providing a "blatantly one-sided" account of events and dismissing his concerns to that effect.
<ref>, bu Yatindra Bhatnagar,''International Opinion''.</ref>

In addition, the reports on the ] compiled by Human Rights Watch have been criticized by Arvin Bahl, a guest contributor to the "]", as "one-sided" and "biased". He claims that the reports generally "are based on half-truths, distortions and sometimes outright falsehoods". He points out that Human Rights Watch's claims about the ] advocating a Hindu Nation as its core ideology are false. He further says that his analysis of the reports accuse the Gujarat government for planning the riots but do not provide any evidence to back those assertions. He also criticizes Human Rights Watch's labeling of the attacks on Hindus by Muslims during the riots as "retaliatory". In his analysis he states that while he does not deny that Hindu extremists were responsible for the riots, he "objectively analyze the complexity of communal conflict in India and avoid the generalizations associated with Human Rights Watch reports."<ref>,saag.org</ref>

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Subhas_Chandra_Bose&diff=129975280&oldid=129969006 (deletes that he was a counterweight to European imperialism, like he also deleted the description of Savarkar as a freedom fighter) deletes books by Peter W. Fay and Donald Moore
* Netaji - ''Dead or Alive?'' / Samar Guha; 1978
* Back from Dead: ''Inside the Subhas Bose Mystery'' / Anuj Dhar, Manas Publications, New Delhi; 2005
* A WILL FOR FREEDOM: Subhas Chandra Bose and the Indian Independence Movement in Southeast Asia" / Romen Bose, V.J. Times, Singapore, 1993
* Jungle alliance, Japan and the Indian National Army / Joyce C. Lebra, Singapore, Donald Moore for Asia Pacific Press,1971
* The Forgotten Army: India's Armed Struggle for Independence / Peter Ward Fay, Calcutta: Rupa & Co., 1994
*
*
*
* in
* in
BengalRen template

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=National_Liberation_Front_of_Tripura&diff=prev&oldid=136480860, http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=National_Liberation_Front_of_Tripura&diff=131481389&oldid=126456796 deletes a lot of text, and thees links: ***** BBC 18 April, 2000.
</small>

|}


===Discussion===

On the Censorship, I do not expect any answers. It is just too much, so it might be better if it is ignored. So I do not ask why. I only ask how: Misplaced Pages policy and the Arbcom say that removals must be explained, and for controversial deletions, this should be on the talkpage. There will always be Censorship and its supporters, but it should be done in an "ethical" honest way: it should be made clear on the talkpage of the article, stating a clear reason for the deletion.

The problem is also that the Hindus are either too lazy or cowardly, at least on wikipedia. Despite the bullying against Hindus by such editors, if the Hindus would make a minimal honest effort, the articles would be much better. As ] and others have observed, the average Hindu knows even less about history than Americans (!) .

I will not be taking the effort to revert all such deletions, which are also made by many other users, but I expect that they be at the very least explained on the talkpage. ] (]) 01:50, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Revision as of 01:50, 22 December 2007

Miscellany for deletion This miscellaneous page was nominated for deletion on 12 March 2006. The result of the discussion was keep. An archived record of this discussion can be found here.

Jimbo quote

That email from jimbo said nude models on the main page, not hardcore pornography! --Phroziac 21:17, 20 August 2005 (UTC)

He is actually quoted as saying that Misplaced Pages could display "full-blown mainstream pornography" on the main page without violating any laws. I've changed the paragraph to say "full-blown pornography" rather than "hardcore pornography" since that was his actual quote.
"We could show full-blown mainstream pornography on the main page of Misplaced Pages 24 hours a day and not be in violation of any laws in the United States. It is pretty difficult to come up with something which is legally "obscene" by US standards in the context of Misplaced Pages." - Jimbo Wales
Kaldari 21:36, 20 August 2005 (UTC)
You are right. I checked. --Phroziac 21:50, 20 August 2005 (UTC)

In the interest of fairness, what say we include the other part of the quote too? The one the Decency folks have? WikidSmaht (talk) 18:03, 26 September 2005 (UTC)

Kill this project

Suggestion: kill this project now, before it generates even more heat on the whole discussion than the project that inspired it. Kill this project and all other political projects. A more rotten way of undermining consensus has never been invented. Do not segregate users into camps. Nobody wants Misplaced Pages to be censored (because "censorship" = "bad"), and that's not what the discussion, such as it is, was ever about. Do we need a neutral place to discuss when what content is most appropriate for the goal of writing an encyclopedia? Yes. Do we need factionalized niches where people can organize in "pro" and "con" camps and attack each other from the far ends? No. In its goal this project may be very noble. In its execution it is fundamentally undermining Misplaced Pages (as is, in its current form, its sister project that ostensibly promotes "decency"). This WikiProject madness has to stop. Where is the WikiLove, people? JRM · Talk 21:41, 20 August 2005 (UTC)

I agree, please stop....this is madness...polarizing madness. Rx StrangeLove 22:00, 20 August 2005 (UTC)
If WikiProject Wikipedians for Decency is deleted, I will probably nominate this project for deletion as well. Otherwise, this project is necessary to coordinate defense against an organized effort to undermine Misplaced Pages policies. Kaldari 21:47, 20 August 2005 (UTC)
No, it is not. Have you even considered the possibility that we can just edit and "reeducate" that WikiProject if it is not deleted? You have already lost in accepting that we must "organize efforts" against each other. We must not. We will not as long as I have anything to say about it. If the project is kept (and there is all the signs that it will) then both that project and this one will disappear and be merged into one project that does have value to Misplaced Pages, or I am severely misjudging what Misplaced Pages is. JRM · Talk 21:56, 20 August 2005 (UTC)
That's an interesting idea: merging the two projects. How would you propose to do that? Keep in mind that this project is not specifically about indecency, but is also for defending against political and other forms of censorship.
A project specifically about indecency was never worthwhile. And neither is one for defending against censorship! Both decency and censorship are loaded and overloaded concepts, and are very much in the eye of the beholder. (Is removing an utterly non-notable POV in compliance with NPOV censorship? You better believe its proponent(s) will argue so.) What you want doesn't need a WikiProject designed from the outset to polarize matters by labeling some things "censorship". WP:NOT and WP:NPOV should be taking care of business, and they don't need a WikiProject to be defended: everyone is expected to work in harmony with them. You want discussions on individual topics, but there is simply no added value to a project where all these discussions are centralized, unless you fancy gathering lots of sheep votes in issues. Who doesn't want to oppose censorship? Who will not argue removing this or that is censorship, when it suits them? This project is poorly defined and offers no constructive goal to work to; instead it encourages "opposition" of an abstraction.
What should replace these projects? I don't know. I don't have all the answers either. We should first identify the issues that are problematic, then deal with them. Directly, not in generalizations. "Possibly offensive images" is one clear issue. We could have a place (and I'm not saying it should be a WikiProject) to discuss what images are appropriate where, and under what circumstances, in a less acrimonious environment than WP:IFD; a way to integrate the individual discussions on images that have been going on now. The discussions would still be charged, but they wouldn't be doomed from the outset to degenerate into "well you're just from the pro-censorship project so obviously you're evil" discussions. JRM · Talk 22:49, 20 August 2005 (UTC)
For the most part I agree with you. However, I would be reluctant to remove this project while the other was still functioning, as it is ostensibly acting as a counter-balance. If you have a specific proposal for merging or deleting both projects, I would be open to your suggestions. Kaldari 23:04, 20 August 2005 (UTC)
Oh, don't worry about that. When the VfD on that other thing runs out, there are going to be suggestions, you can be sure of that. Very strong, bold suggestions. In fact, I may just move the whole shebang and completely rewrite it. :-) I feel very strongly about there not being any "Wikipedians against/for X" projects. They must be refactored or perish in the attempt, otherwise Misplaced Pages really will end up like "just a bunch of flamewars". JRM · Talk 23:11, 20 August 2005 (UTC)
I agree with JRM. See my WikiEN-L post for more details. --Phroziac 21:50, 20 August 2005 (UTC)
I agree with JRM, but rather than kill it just put it on ice. If the "Wikipedians for Decency" project doesn't get deleted then this project may come in handy. Christiaan 21:51, 20 August 2005 (UTC)
I'm not sure what you mean by "put it on ice". Kaldari 21:54, 20 August 2005 (UTC)
Suspend its development. Christiaan 22:09, 20 August 2005 (UTC)

Although this project was ostensibly created in response to Wikipedians for Decency, I believe the value of this project can be much broader than opposing those who would censor Misplaced Pages in the name of decency. Misplaced Pages is also commonly the target of political censorship - usually the removal of information which is useful to those opposing a certain group, person, or situation. Recent examples include articles concerning Scientology, Lyndon LaRouche, the Nationalist Movement, etc. Is it not valuable to have a place where people interested in opposing censorship can be notified of such issues? Kaldari 22:49, 20 August 2005 (UTC)

JRM is completely correct that this project will undermine the fundamental way of doing things here, by taking a first step toward institutionalizing the factionalism and politicization that so far just simmers and breaks out in incoherent ways. But separately, this project is misguided. It states as its purpose to defend against something that does not exist here, and essentially cannot exist. Censorship happens when a group in a position of power directs that something not be published, and that directive is enforced, by the cops or whoever. The WfD people just can't censor in that sense. They can edit something out of an article, and that's it. Guess what, people. You can just put it back. The processes that are already in place here will make sure that people who care about the content of a particular article find out when it's edited by a bluenose, and bowdlerizing will quickly get reverted. Same goes for articles on topics that attract, um, excitable types like Scientologists and LaRoucheniks. No censorship, nothing that needs to get organized to defend against. The harm from this project is going to outweigh any benefit of having an organized clearinghouse against the WfD people. -EDM 05:50, 21 August 2005 (UTC)

Censorship doesn't require cops. Censorship happens when someone destroys or prevents access to a work of communication for the purpose of suppressing a viewpoint. For instance, there have been many cases in the United States where radical groups at universities have stolen campus newspapers when those newspapers have expressed views to the groups' disliking. This is censorship, even though the radical group is still a marginalized group with no access to cops to enforce their way of thinking.
An organized group with the purpose of censoring Misplaced Pages can certainly do a great deal of damage, and could, for instance:
  1. "win" revert wars by being able to deploy editors to revert in an organized fashion -- locking the censored articles up in revert war and suppressing their development;
  2. suppress whole articles by deploying editors to VfD in an organized fashion, in the manner of the group that campaigns against deletion of articles about schools;
  3. drive people off the project with intimidation, insults, and harassment; or simply because people who thought Misplaced Pages was an open-minded project will be very dismayed to find their contributions labeled "indecent".
The presence of an organized, efficient pro-censorship group, willing to defy Misplaced Pages policy or to "game the system", is a hazard for these reasons. Misplaced Pages procedures such as VfD are not immune to gaming or to being overwhelmed by an organized group, even if that group is far from the whole project's consensus. Just because there are more of us who oppose censorship than there are people who are for it, doesn't mean that we should slack off if they organize.
Because censorship is antithetical to Misplaced Pages's policies, it is entirely reasonable that a group intent on censoring Misplaced Pages be disallowed from organizing -- just as a group intent on vandalizing, or creating vanity articles, or posting personal attacks, or in any other way breaking the rules should be disallowed from organizing. But if it cannot be prevented, those who wish to protect Misplaced Pages's policies against censorship should likewise organize: to draw attention to abuses committed by censors; to countervail organized efforts to revert or delete articles for the purpose of censorship; to offer support to those being intimidated by censors; and to advocate for the protection and enforcement of policies against censorship and harassment. --FOo 16:00, 21 August 2005 (UTC)
Let's not forget that they would sap and impurify our precious bodily fluids. Fluoridation of the drinking water is the way your basic hard-core censor operates. WikiProject Purity of Essence is needed to provide counterbalance.
Applying your analogy, explain to me what added value WikiProject Vandalism, WikiProject Vanity and WikiProject Personal Attacks would have. No, wait, I know: centralizing. Organizing. Specializing. Factionalizing.
"If it cannot be prevented", but it can. And no centralized anti-censorship project will improve things if it can't. We are already lost if that's the case. The next step would be witchhunts for invisible "terrorist" censorship organizations: "I suspect you have ties to al-POVda, the group we stamped out last month... Tell us the other members of your organization and repent, or be banned!"
Countervailing organized efforts to revert? How? By organizing efforts to prevent reverting no matter what? By organizing reverts yourself? Policies against censorship? Like what? "Don't remove things just because you don't like them"? I think we got that part covered.
I know I'm being violently and unproductively dismissive of the idea, but this has a good reason. I know how this project sounds in theory (yay free speech! Boo censorship! Fuzzy feelings!), but it will never work in practice. What we are talking about here, and let's call it what it is, is a project against POV pushing. It works on the assumption that centralizing and organizing will be effective to stamp out individual cases. Sure it will—you just get enough people to hit the POV pusher and he'll go away.
This project's vision of a noble bulwark against the organized masses of censorship is a chimera. If such groups ever formed, it stands to reason they have something to say that goes beyond "censorship", and opposing them on those grounds is silly. The people you oppose are the people you're not listening to.
Again, what is censorship? If a kook adds nonsense to a physics article and is reverted by everyone and their mother, will this project be under the obligation to "offer support"? Well, no, since that's not censorship, right?
"Censorship is the use of governmental power to control speech and other forms of human expression." From Misplaced Pages, the free encyclopedia. There are no censors here. Only other editors. If they organize to push a POV, with reckless disregard to the representation of other POVs, they should be educated and integrated. If individuals cannot, they should be shown the door. But a centralized project to "oppose" other centralized projects? No. This is not Misplaced Pages's way. JRM · Talk 17:55, 21 August 2005 (UTC)
This project is great and needs to stay. Misplaced Pages has starting to reach censorship on many articles and needs a group to protect against it. Anyone who wants to remove this group is a communist.

Jerry Jones 22:25, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

The indecency tag

Who gets to decide who should have an indecency tag? How are they removed?

Tagging articles with this type of stuff is really a way of imposing a point of view on people. It is coercive and has to stop. --Gorgonzilla 21:52, 20 August 2005 (UTC)

I suspect it was more of a joke than a serious criticism. Kaldari 21:55, 20 August 2005 (UTC)
The vast majority of the tags were put on articles by those in opposition to the Wikikepedians for decency in an effort to make them appear to be cnesors. If you trace my history of edits along with the other two users that originally signed up for the decency project, you'll see that I put none up and in only a few isolated incidents, did the other two users utilize the tag. The templates were voted out as far as I know in Tfd and I removed them from the decency project main page.--MONGO 05:42, August 21, 2005 (UTC)
The question I was asking here was what the proposed use is and what the process to decide on their removal is intended to be. As it is I think I will just delete any tag I see as an offensive attempt to impose a POV. --Gorgonzilla 22:01, 21 August 2005 (UTC)

Keep this project

I see nothing wrong with this project and I encourage no one to try and nominate it for Vfd as it has a right to existence. I am completely opposed to censorship but I am not opposed to establishing a criteria of encyclopedic merit. Just my thoughts.--MONGO 05:45, August 21, 2005 (UTC)

Depends in my view on what the role and scope of the project is. If it is to identify attempts to introduce bias through censorship and to redress them within the spirit and methods of Misplaced Pages, then all well and good. I am not sure that it is necessary, or desirable, at the present time given the serious issues with Wikipedians for Decency and the concentration a lot of people ar giving that. The Land 15:24, 22 August 2005 (UTC)

I agree with MONGO that we should keep this project. As I've said elsewhere, editors should have freedom to choose how to contribute and they should have the freedom of association with other editors, including the right to form projects to aid in their collaboration together. There are probably some projects that should not be allowed, like "Wikiproject to promote vandalism", but in general we should make room for WikiProjects. Johntex 17:10, 24 August 2005 (UTC)

Time to Merge

The old Project for Decency has become Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Wikipedians for encyclopedic merit. At this point I think it's clear that this project should be merged into that title, too; what's really important isn't mindlessly removing things or protecting them from removal, but including everything of encyclopedic merit, regardless of how people feel about it. Discussion of what constitutes the boundry of encyclopedic merit and what doesn't can then continue there, without the vitriolic and useless soapbox campaigning that these two projects have sparked. Aquillion 10:35, 24 August 2005 (UTC)

Against merger. The big difference between the two projects is that in the merit project the members are "holier than thou" about explicit images and in the ant-censorship project the members are "holier than thou" about freedom of expression. Both views are being adhered to rigidly and without much compromise as it stands now. There is no way in the forseeable future that these two kinds of people can work together in a project. Not untill the trollcalling and nazicalling on both sides has subsided. In the mean time, both projects consist of member that have nothing but the wellbeing of Misplaced Pages as their highest goal. Just let the projects be and see what develops. --Lomedae 13:13, August 24, 2005 (UTC)
I don't see too many people refusing to compromise right now, actually. Everyone seems to be saying that other people will refuse to compromise, that the merge can't possibly succeed because of all the trollcallers and nazi-slingers with rigid views who apparently dominate one or both groups. Well, I think it's time to call those trollcallers out. Would anyone like to come forward as of Lomedae's hypothetical trollcalling, nazi-slinging rigid-viewers who would ruin any compromise as it stands now? I thought not.
Seriously, though, I am aware that there is a certain amount of bad blood between the two groups; that's a good part of why I suggested the merger in the first place. At the moment, that bad blood seem to me to entirely overshadowing anything that either of the two groups claims to stand for. Indeed, you yourself just admitted that these groups are often characterized by namecalling, holier-than-thou extremism, and rigid division. That is bad, a lot worse than any of the censorship or obscene images I've seen around here lately. Misplaced Pages is built on consensus. Removing an obscene image or reversing censorship just takes one click; getting hardheaded people to agree with each other takes a lot longer.
You say that we should wait and see what develops? Well, so far they seem to have developed primarily three things: trollcalling, nazi-slinging, and a proposal. If you want things to develop any further, then sooner or later you're going to have to put your foot down about the first two and decide on something; it seems to me it might as well be this. Aquillion 14:38, 24 August 2005 (UTC)
Weak Support. In the intersts of Wikilove, perhaps it would be best to merge, however, the other projcet could still use some editing to remove the pro-censorship bias. Kaldari 14:31, 24 August 2005 (UTC)
  • Against merger. It should be obvious that this Project was formed as a reaction to the formation of the other project. Have the two projects now moved towards each other so much that they are now the same thing? Maybe. I don't think so. Maybe they will. There is no harm in keeping them separate a while to see how they each evolve.
Yes, people need to compromise, and strive for consensus, but for the time being we can have those discussions on article talk pages. If common themes are developing, then it may prove productive to work together on new guidelines such as "WP:When nudity is/is-not appropriate in an article" or "WP:When does a political point-of-view or new religious group merit an article?" or "WP:NPOV use of titles or honorifics (such as 'His Holiness' or 'Supreme Commander')".
I would also like to point out that we have made room for other sets of projects that are similar to each other. For example, we have a different projects for "Fix common mistakes", "Grammar", "Typo", "Wiki Syntax", etc. Yet we do not require them to merge into one big project to fix all gramatical and style problems. Similarly, we have not merged Misplaced Pages:WikiProject_Military with Misplaced Pages:WikiProject_Battles or a host of other projects related to ships, airplanes, etc. just because they might be construed to have a similar focus. On the contrary, we let each group of people find their niche and contribute as they feel they are best able. Johntex 16:58, 24 August 2005 (UTC)
  • Against merger. The two projects, as currently defined, have significantly different focuses. Both can be consistent with underlying WP goals and policies w/o thereby being identical in focus. Maybe in a month the matter could be reconsidered. Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters 17:11, 2005 August 24 (UTC)
  • Against Merger, for oh so many reasons. 1. This group has a different focus then that group, this one opposes censorship, that one proports to support "encyclopedic merit". 2. Despite that name change that group has not changed to a significant degree and this group was created in direct opposition to that group. 3. Consensus appears to be against this merger espeically among this group's members.Gateman1997 22:57, 24 August 2005 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Toby

Perhaps ladies and gentlemen here will find this proposal acceptable, if not entirely palatable. I'm posting the same message here, as well as over in the opposite camp. Maybe all parties will find it equally unsatisfactory; that is the nature of compromise. But I hope that most will find it meets our needs. — Xiong熊talk* 04:19, 2005 August 26 (UTC)

Project tag

Someone more knowledgable than I should make something we can put on our userpages. I suggest it include the image image:Autofree.png, currently up for IFD at .

GODS NO. I want a worksafe userpage. ~~ N (t/c) 14:46, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
Good point. Not inline, linked? Hipocrite 14:55, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
Why not just link to the project page, then? ~~ N (t/c) 15:22, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

A resounding vote of NO for that image, linked or not, we're trying to be taken seriously here last time I checked. This project is not about sex per se, and choosing an image like that only opens us up to ridicule. Apart from that, an image and link to project page is indeed needed. I'm certainly no expert in making these thing but if no other images are forthcoming then I'll give it a go. Lomedae 09:48, August 27, 2005 (UTC)

How about Image:Censorship mosaic.jpg? Found it while looking through Category:Public domain images. ~⌈Markaci⌋ 2005-08-27 T 16:49:29 Z

A bit more subtlety: . Of course, a thumbnail could only be iconic, you need to look at fullsize to understand the significance. Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters 17:25, 2005 August 27 (UTC)


File:Blue ribbon.png

Why reinvent the wheel when there's aleady an icon for this kind of initiative?--Lomedae 09:40, August 28, 2005 (UTC)

Yeah! ~~ N (t/c) 17:26, 28 August 2005 (UTC)

For those interested in more meta issues:

This is not in line with the goal of our project, but I'd think that Misplaced Pages:Requests_for_comment/User_names/Trollderella might be of interest to many of the members here. "Troll*" appears to be a banned username if you believe in voting "keep" on VfDs. Hipocrite 12:30, 31 August 2005 (UTC)

Well, if they're going to name yourself after an offense against the rules, they might expect to have their actions looked into a little more closely. If I set up a business called "Fubar's Thievery and Extortion", I'd expect to get investigated. Likewise, a user named "troll" or "POV pusher" or "Personal Attacker" or whatnot, should expect some resistance. --FOo 14:41, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
For someone that has the word "fuck" in their username, you certainly are willing to take that first step down the cliff. I respect your opinion, but I disagree. The user in question isn't a troll whatsoever, and no one has alledged that they are. Hipocrite 15:39, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
They're not a troll, perhaps, but someone here is. --FOo 15:52, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
Excuse me? I'm merely pointing out that by taking this (worthless) step against usernames, you, or I, could be next. Who wants a hypocrite editing here, especially one who can't spell? Who want's someone who is Fucked Up Beyond All Recognition, but hiding it? That I am a troll dosen't mean I'm trolling. That his username had "troll" in it, means neither that they are a troll nor that they were trolling. Hipocrite 16:40, 31 August 2005 (UTC)

Technological Solution for Allowing users to select what images they see

I (and others) have suggested at various times that ultimately a technological solution could exist. Images could be tagged with descriptive words such as "simulated violence" "partial nudity" "sexuality". Users would then have the option (probably through browser cookies) of choosing that they are OK with seeing nudity but not sexuality, or whatever their choice is. I recognize that there will still be arguments, (E.g. "what about a picture of two people kissing, does that qualify as sexuality?") but at least it would be an improvement. Johntex 17:14, 31 August 2005 (UTC)

  • I paste here some comments that came into the Help desk which is relevant to this discussion:
"Is it possible to sanitise content within Misplaced Pages for profane language, for example http://en.wikipedia.org/Cunt , for use within a Primary school. We would like to use this resource as its probably more complete then any encyclopedia we currently have access to, but we need to make sure that things that parents might object to cannot be viewed easly. Thanks, John Bradshaw"
  • He was basically pointed in the direction of filtering software - but it was pointed out that filtering software can't interpret images. He was also told he could mirror Misplaced Pages and remove objectionable content itself (true, but a ton of work, and loses the ongoing additions to the project).
  • Then, apparently still John Bradshaw but now with a username said:
"...is it possible to suggest to the 'powers that be' some sort of Family Filter similar to google, where you actively have to click off or view if someone considers this to be unsafe material. Similar to the 'This content is controversial' options that you can have on entries into the encyclopedia? Machtzu 02:53, 29 August 2005 (UTC)"
  • I would like to reiterate my support for such a technological solution. This would allow the user to have some control over the encyclopedic nature of their experience here. Johntex 17:14, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
Filterware is only as good as the filter. Who decides what's blocked? I'll tell you right now that I think war is far more disgusting than penises, and would block accordingly. Hipocrite 17:48, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
  • Well, with the right browser, one can always browse with images turned off in the browser, and selectively view images as necessary. All I'd ask for is that the image tags are accurate, so that an image tagged as "Pink fluffy bunnies in a field of buttercups" isn't actually the goatse.cx image. It is possible to argue that the article text should, to the extent possible, be capable of standing alone (which would help blind users of Misplaced Pages, as would accurate image tagging).
    From a technological point of view, it would certainly be possible to add labels to each image saying "Passed for viewing by the Brobdignagian Committee" and/or "Passed for viewing by the Liliputian Committee", and digitally signed by the appropiate committee. Then, all you have to do is decide whether your viewpoint co-incides with one or several committees, and view only those images passed by them. Libertarians would of course, browse viewing *all* images - thus censorship would apply only to those who wanted it. While conceivable, such a system would require a lot of development, so anyone wanting it would probably be encourage to fork Misplaced Pages and design it to meet their own ends.
    That brings us to the crux of the matter - those wishing to censor Misplaced Pages are in fact attempting to take a commonhold resource and bend it to their own ends, and I object to that. Nobody is forced to use Misplaced Pages, and anyone may take a copy, so interest groups that attempt to restrict Misplaced Pages are in fact being selfish. Such interest groups are completely free to set up a Wiki according to their own rules, even using Misplaced Pages content - the fact that they choose not to indicates to me that they do not believe their goals are sufficiently interesting to enough people to make such a project viable. WLD 21:04, 31 August 2005 (UTC)

They name it Orphanage

Amber Evans is the second try. Sad sad sad .MutterErde 00:27, 1 September 2005 (UTC)

all from today : http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Images_and_media_for_deletion/August_31%2C_2005 , all from one guy ( OR. — THOR 21:01, 31 August )

see also  : : http://en.wikipedia.org/User_talk:Noitall#Image:JoanSeverance-PBApril1990.JPG and its history .


Many of them are commons images. This individual probably used my gallery to compile this list. ~⌈Markaci⌋ 2005-09-1 T 00:55:35 Z



Here comes "decency"

Starting with porn: Hipocrite - «Talk» 05:09, 2 September 2005 (UTC)

  • That's right User:Hipocrite (how about signing those posts you are so proud of), it is call unencyclopedic and your comments and actions are extremely juvenile. Also, your actions today trolling edits and making bad faith edits because you don't get your way promoting your kiddie porn shows your true self. --Noitall 04:59, September 2, 2005 (UTC)Deleted because User demonstrated capability for good faith edits. --Noitall 05:06, September 2, 2005 (UTC)

The actress in question was born on January 4, 1980, making a 2003 shot of her from when she was 23, a 2004 shot of her from 24, and a 2005 shot of her from 25. I can't believe I married my wife when she was underage! Hipocrite - «Talk» 05:09, 2 September 2005 (UTC)

The comment was lined out and kiddie referred to mental age, not actual age. --Noitall 05:14, September 2, 2005 (UTC)
I don't disagree with that consensus. The pictures are terrible - the box covers are just stupid to leave out there without comment.Hipocrite - «Talk» 13:38, 2 September 2005 (UTC)
em , but you have reverted the attacks of the mullahs ?! How can this version ( = minus 3 pics ) be a consense ? Confused MutterErde 16:25, 2 September 2005 (UTC) btw. What´s wrong with this pic Image:Bobbi-eden-please-flesh10.jpg ?? ( only one example) 16:38, 2 September 2005 (UTC)
The box covers don't make the article better - both from an informative perspective, and from a visual perspective. The big picture to the right does. Find more glamor shots and I'll defend them. Hipocrite - «Talk» 21:45, 2 September 2005 (UTC)

This is NOT wikipedia:USA

by the way: This is not wikipedia:USA , this is wikipedia:en , and that includes not only the christian mullahs , that includes some more english speaking countries round the world. For example: While Mom is buying a newspaper in Sydney her kids can watch all these gorgeous boobs on the covers. They seem to whisper: "Buy us! Buy us! When you have not enough money , help your Mom washing the dishes. You will get a little money and then come back.We have not only gorgeous boobs - we can show you what your Daddy loves most on your Mom."

Lucky minors outside the USA !

Image:GoddardPlayboyEspana0195.jpg , Image:PBSamanthaFox11-88.JPG , Image:PBDrewBarrymoreGreeceFeb95.jpg , Image:HollyWitt-PB-February1996.JPG , Image:BoDerek-Dec-1994.JPG

MutterErde 08:24, 13 September 2005 (UTC)

  • Special offer to the christian mullah crew , section USA:

Have fun MutterErde 09:32, 13 September 2005 (UTC)


Note: Link spam/commercial advertisement is not permitted in WP. Not even in the talk pages where the intention is obviously just googlebombing. Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters 15:22, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

(just because the commercial site seems to have something to do with pornography/dating doesn't make it of interest to an anti-censorship project)

Ok, I agree with that. I must also add:

  • Not only is wikipedia:en there for English speaking countries which are not USA, it's also there for any other people who can read (and write) in English. Many of which live in countries with completely different norms and mindsets than in the USA (or even any other English-speaking country). Misplaced Pages:en is a Misplaced Pages written in a most widespread language on Earth, and so it bears the responsibility of actually being the whole world's Misplaced Pages; biases should be avoided here even more than on any other language Misplaced Pages.
  • Similarly to the example from Australia above, here where I live, the last thing I'd try to protect my children from, would be seeing a pair of boobs or stuff like that. Come on, aren't there more important stuff out there? Why such an obsession with censoring stuff which mainly deal with sex? I can see that sex is presented as something horrible, and plain nudity and such are very much mixed up with the actual sex (and plain nudity and pornography should really be treated different). If I had to choose, I myself would prefer to let my children watch a mainstream movie sex-scene, than a firefight scene full of blood and death. I actually find it disturbing that American censorship principles work exactly the opposite. --Arny 06:17, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

Censorship Alert

Let's actually use this project for its purpose and now is our chance:

images up for deletion

It appears many images that were released under the GNU FDL are up for deletion by a user called THOR with no explanation given as to the problem. --ShaunMacPherson 15:43, 3 September 2005 (UTC)

Censorship alert

SPUI (talk · contribs) made a recent test run of the WP:TOBY proposal, which basically calls for people to put the Toby image on any pages they object to for any reason, so that other people won't see those pages any more (through a requested software feature that hides all pages containing that image, and makes it impossible to remove the image once in place). In other words, a censorship policy. Maybe some people should go to that proposal's talk page and explain why it's not a good idea. Radiant_>|< 08:03, September 4, 2005 (UTC)

Toby is more complicated than that - for one, it's opt-in, so images are only hidden from people who choose to have images hidden. Also, it's not forever - there's some complicated algorithm (Misplaced Pages:Toby/Do) that allows it to fade over time (or something like that, I don't quite get the idea). But do feel free to come comment on the proposal. ~~ N (t/c) 17:14, 4 September 2005 (UTC)

Userbox

I know the big blue ribbon is already out there, but it's big so I made a userbox:

File:Blue ribbon.pngThis user supports Wikipedians against censorship

Tom 12:21, 21 September 2005 (UTC)

It looks good, but it's really difficult to read the lettering against that shade of blue. --Angr/tɔk tə mi 17:05, 21 September 2005 (UTC)
File:Blue ribbon.pngThis user supports Wikipedians against censorship

How about this version? The image is a little smaller, making the box narrower from the top to bottom, which (at least on my display) allows the text to fill it more. The background is changed from blue to lightblue, and the text is bolded. --FOo 18:31, 21 September 2005 (UTC)

That looks much better! --Angr/tɔk tə mi 19:00, 21 September 2005 (UTC)
Hi folks , I would like to have a similiar version , in red colour and with a instead of the blue ribbon. Anyone could do this for me and others? Greetings MutterErde 21:20, 21 September 2005 (UTC)
Not I. That image is copyrighted, and we don't have permission to use it for that purpose -- neither from the creator, nor the model, nor from fair use / fair comment. --FOo 22:32, 21 September 2005 (UTC)
And in any case, why the hell would I want gratuitous nudity on my user page? ~~ N (t/c) 22:44, 21 September 2005 (UTC)
This user supports Wikipedians against censorship{{{info}}}
OK OK , it was only an idea . Greetings MutterErde 22:59, 21 September 2005 (UTC)
I think it would more appropriate for a different group, like Wikipedians for pornography, which is not what this group is. --Angr/tɔk tə mi 23:36, 21 September 2005 (UTC)
A woman with gorgeous boobs is "pornography" ? Hey Man , what you are doing here ?
Are you a spy of the christian mullah crew ? Hang him !
MutterErde 06:38, 22 September 2005 (UTC)


The light blue one definitely looks better. Tom 12:03, 27 September 2005 (UTC)

Could someone please take a look at hogtie bondage. There are two users, one an admin, who is determined to keep certain images off of the page, that don't actually show anything but he has deemed them to be nudity, and has also decided that he doesn't want them there, dispite a lot of discussion on the subject, the vast majority against what he has done. There is also heaps of talk about how Misplaced Pages shouldn't have such images at all and is "G" rated and heaps of other censorship rubbish. The original material was on the page hogtie, and in all fairness it may have been an inappropriate place to have such images, but there is no mistaking what the subject hogtie bondage is on about, yet the images have been chopped. The admin says that the images arn't neccessary to the subject, citing that nudity is irrelivent to the subject, but the article explains that this is a sexual practise and so such images are to be expected. Anyway, can someone please take a look at the original version before the Admins edits and post their opions here and/or on it's discussion page because I really think this guy is pro censorship. --61.9.148.239 00:50, 22 October 2005 (UTC)

It may be porn, but it's encyclopediedic. The Republican 01:35, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

About "porn", "crv" and more

see: http://en.wikipedia.org/User_talk:Joe_Beaudoin_Jr.#I_expect_your_excuse

MutterErde 20:08, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

The following comment was added on article by User:Paeris

They have try and censor on Doggy style. Help please.

Userbox v2

I have made a userbox easy for people to use.

{{User:Feureau/UserBox/freespeech}}

Thanks to whoever made it originally (I saw it somewhere an added it to my page, then improved on it and made it a real template, you inspired me. :) --Mistress Selina Kyle 01:40, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

Doggy style

See http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Doggy_style&diff=prev&oldid=32040635

Editor is trying to remove nude image (that doesn't actually even show anything just is suggestive..), keeping only drawn pictures. Reasoning in Talk:Doggy style#Image is "Nobody has ever been offended by an orange, but many are offended by sexual photos" (User:Hedley).. I'm not involved in this but I thought I'd point out what the problem is in a more articulate way than the poor paniced newbie :) --Mistress Selina Kyle 01:44, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

Project Template

I looked at the project templates I have for the Association of Inclusionist Wikipedians and for AWWDMBJAWGCAWAIFDSPBATDMTD, and thought to myself ' why doesn't WikiProject Wikipedians against censorship have one of these?. ' So, I made one:

This user is a member of Wikipedians against censorship

This anti-censorship WikiProject includes opposition to censorship of materials which some may deem indecent, but which are nevertheless encyclopedic and appropriate in the context of Misplaced Pages. It also includes political censorship, such as efforts to remove information about political dissent or information useful to those opposing a particular group, person, or situation.

WikiProject Wikipedians against censorship
WikiProject Wikipedians against censorship

What do you think? I think the text could use a rewording. I just copied the project info from the project page because I couldn't think of what to put. Any ideas?

The template is {{Freespeech}}, if anybody would like to use it now.

That should have been a userbox, it's way too big. The Republican 20:38, 26 February 2006 (UTC) --¿ WhyBeNormal ? 06:09, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

Note that TfD has now deleted this template; the appearance above is hardcoded into this page.
That should be a userbox. The Republican 20:39, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

It is. Template:User freespeech. Gerard Foley 21:52, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:User Bill of Rights

Hi, I'm sorry you did not feel the issue at Misplaced Pages:User Bill of Rights was worth of notice on the notice board. The notice board states:

This notice board is intended to inform members of the project of votes or other current Misplaced Pages events which warrant their attention with regards to this project. Please do not list articles in need of attention here, but rather votes for deletion, votes for policy change or other current and ongoing events which warrant the immediate attention of the member base of this WikiProject. Please remove notices when votes are closed, or the event is no longer current.

and this is clearly a question of policy change. I also respectfully disagree that the question is related to censorship. Censorship takes many forms, one of which hides itself as adminstrative privelige.

I am adding my notice to the talk section here, in case other members of this assoication feel that the issue is worth consideration. --BostonMA 18:13, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

30 Dec 2005

Misplaced Pages:User Bill of Rights is a proposed policy / guideline that has been supported by Wikipedians who are concerned that the long term neutrality of Misplaced Pages depends upon input from minority viewpoints. Continued input from minority viewpoints, in turn can be assured only if the actions of admins and ArbCom are applied fairly and with an even hand. Although the proposed policy / guideline is under active discussion , , there have been attempts to close the discussion on the grounds that "there is not a snowball's chance in hell" that such a proposed policy / guideline will be accepted. One editor was sanctioned for an allegedly "disruptive" edit, of removing a "rejected" template while discussion was ongoing . Your input on this matter would be greatly appreciated. (The current version of the proposal appearing on the page is a semi-blanked version which was semi-blanked by opponents of the proposal.) --BostonMA 14:01, 30 December 2005 (UTC

I do see how the proposed policy could be indirectly related to censorship, but the connection seems weak at best. I imagine most of the people watching the notice board are more interested in issues directly related to Misplaced Pages censorship. Perhaps a better place to promote the policy would be Misplaced Pages:Village pump (proposals). Kaldari 21:05, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

Shock sites

I'm just trying to make sure I get this right; you don't condone material that can be found on shock sites, do you? I don't think I need to go into specifics. --Anittas 17:37, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

We don't condone anything. We support the current Misplaced Pages policy, which states: "While obviously inappropriate content (such as inappropriate links to shock sites) is usually removed immediately, except from an article directly concerning the content (such as the article about pornography), some articles may include objectionable text, images, or links, provided they do not violate any of our existing policies (especially Neutral point of view), nor the law of the state of Florida in the United States, where the servers are hosted." Kaldari 23:54, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

userboxes.

Stop with the userboxes alerts, please. This project, and it's longest term members, come down on differing sides of said controversy. Do not obscure our purpose (RF - the change to the censorship clause, the Quaran picture) Hipocrite - «Talk» 16:44, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedians against censorship on Japanese Misplaced Pages

I just created the "Wikipedians against censorship" project page on Japanese Misplaced Pages. link Hermeneus (user/talk) 12:00, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

If my Japanese was any good I would help you out, but I wish you good luck with it! 頑張って！Gerard Foley 17:48, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

Refactored from alerts page:

Problem at Sun tanning

I tried to add free license images to this article but User:Wyss is being funny about it, reverting my version here and claiming that the top image will eventually be removed by "other users". I would appreciate peoples help and/or advice on this. Thanks Sven the merciless 04:30, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

I can see why this picture can be interchangible with other pictures which are less revealing, but I don't see why removing that picture for another picture is censorship. Plus, I feel only one or two pictures are needed for the article, and atleast one picture should be a picture which documents sun damage upclose. A sun burn perhaps? --OrbitOne 19:29, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

LordRevan and Admin Cencorship of Templates

I am OUTRAGED to learn that the powers-that-be have cencored many of the templates that were considered "politically incorrect." We as the Wikipedians aganist Cencorship should fight against this. Considering the fact that the Administration has cencored these right-winged based templates, I believe that many of the left-wing templates should be taken off of this site. Some of the right-wing templates that have been censored are Anti-UN, Wikipedians who believe that marriage is between a man and a woman, Wikipedians who consider themselves Politically Incorrect, Wikipedians who are Pro-life, Wikipedians who consider themsleves Born Again Christians. These are all of the ones that I can think of that have been cencored, but there could be more. As a user, I believe we should combat all forms of censorship. I think all those who agree with me should rise up against the left-wing held admin and set things right. LordRevan 22:33, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

This is for censorship of Misplaced Pages articles. The place to complain about your userboxes being censored is WP:UBP. Hipocrite - «Talk» 16:48, 24 February 2006 (UTC)


Help

Guys, i need help. As you know, wikipedia has every type of things that are notable only withing a small group, everything from articles disgusting sex games, to pokemon cards, to warhammer to UFO.

My problem is that as soon as i creat a article in good faith and in aimes to enirch wikipedia with representation of the ideas of the 9/11 Truth movement, there comes a AFD on the article within 5 houres, claiming it has no notability in the big world. Take a look at this, and give me a comment:

Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Conspiracies_Guild#AFD.27s

Thanks and peace. --Striver 17:48, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

Also, is there any other WikiProject that could be intrested in taking a look at this? --Striver 17:50, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

It is not censorship to delete your poorly written, uncited, unverifiable bad articles. Hipocrite - «Talk» 14:38, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Userbox policy poll

I only just found this poll. Perhaps people here would be interested. Gerard Foley 21:43, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

Stop it. Hipocrite - «Talk» 13:17, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Censorship Alert - Justin Berry

In an unprecedented move, Jimbo deleted an article about Justin Berry after Justin Berry called Jimbo over the phone and complained to him about the content of the article (the contents of the original article can be seen here). Since Jimbo violated his own rules regarding the handling of content disputes and never specifically listed what was wrong with the article, nobody is quite certain of what facts are "appropriate" for the article, and which are not. Attempts at reinserting the factual information from the deleted article are now being censored by a handful of editors. Corax 22:28, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

This isn't censorship - it is asking for sensitivity about a living person - and there are no restrictions on the recreation of the article. There is just extra vigilence expected taht everything included by verifiable and meet the rules of the NPOV. Trödel&#149;talk 01:30, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
First, restricting the content of what is supposed to be an encyclopedia because that content might offend or otherwise miff people reeks of third-reich book-burning. If the verifiable facts in a certain article rub you the wrong way, you always have the option of not reading it. If we are going to pull back from reporting information about Justin Berry because Justin Berry does not like it being reported, are we going to hold back on reporting information on Jim Bakker because Jim Bakker does not like it? How about Bill Clinton? How about Scott Peterson?
Second, there apparently are restrictions on what can be contained in the article: whatever offends Justin cannot be included, no matter how factual that content is. That is why I posted about this debacle here. Corax 01:36, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
Please provide an example of a factual statement that cannot be included in the article because it "offends Justin". Thanks! JesseW, the juggling janitor 01:54, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
Well, just take a look at the history of the article. Pretty much everything but a small, two-sentence paragraph keeps being removed in spite of the fact that the content is taken directly from a New York Times article. Corax 01:56, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
I've moved this to the talk page for two reasons: It falsely identifies Jimbo as a censor (see WP:OFFICE), and it is too long for an acceptable notice. Having said that, there is obviously a censorship problem on the page and I encourage advocates to attend the discussion of the new article. ॐ Metta Bubble 11:51, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

ALERT

Just thought I'd make you all aware of Misplaced Pages:Wikiethics which is in short a censorship proposal. Pegasus1138 ---- 03:11, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

If I recall correctly, the user who started the Wikiethics proposal was offended by the Mohammed cartoons, and upset that they could not be removed under standing wikipedia policy. I think that this is rather telling as to the intent of the new proposal; it seems likely one of the first uses of such a new policy would be to strike the cartoons as "offensive." Sensitivity should only be a concern in writing the encyclopedia when choosing among equivalently informative options. Preferences over information and sensitivity must be lexicographic. Tomyumgoong 20:17, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Rename?

Given the mfd on this project, would you perhaps consider a renaming of the project, perhaps renaming to WikiProject Freedom of information or some such variation, which delineates the goal better than the somewhat misleading title, which imples that people who are not members are supportive of censorship. Hiding talk 10:15, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

The mfd appears to be more related to the heat on the Justin Berry article. From what I can garner, the mfd is entirely inappropriate and based on incorrect facts, and very few actual members of WAC are actually involved. So, I respect your suggestion but I don't think it should be based on any findings from the mfd.
But I think your request has merit anyway. Please remember we're talking about defending a policy wikipedia is not censored. If the policy changes it's wording to wikipedia is an exercise in freedom of information we could lose the word 'censorship', but we should follow the wording of the WP:NOT policy.
It seems you are more opposing the word against than anything. Perhaps wikipedians patrolling censorship is a better name for dealing with your concerns, or even the freedom from censorship project. Since you've implied that your stance on censorship is neither pro nor anti, I am open to changing the name so it embraces users of a variety of sliding scale opinions on how actively you would like to partake in censorship issues. Would you feel more welcome to participate if the name were changed? Do you think it would help the group avoid group mentality problems? ॐ Metta Bubble 11:13, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
Wikipedians Patrolling Censorship is a better name than we have now, but it still sounds clunky... Keep those ideas comin? Copysan 00:22, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
My editing style is to follow WP:V, WP:NOR and WP:NPOV, so I find myself already contributing whether you or I are aware of each other. I don't really wish to join a wikiproject merely to express myself as being against censorship, nor do I feel it should be neccessary to do so. Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Freedom from censorship is certainly an alternative. Please note my concern is not based in the affair but rather the divisive quality of the name. I endorse the policy at WP:NOT but feel the policy should be at the heart of the issue, not the users battling it. The WikiProject term already denotes that it is a group of users who have gathered together, thus I do not see the need to restate it. Please note, I do not wish to cast aspersions on the goal itself. I would hope that you would look at Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Fair use as an inspiration, they have not seen fit to declare themselves Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Wikipedians for fair use. Hiding talk 12:38, 13 March 2006 (UTC)2
It's not a conspiracy Hiding. It's simply a group with a goal. If you think the wording can be improved you can make a suggestion without making a case that someone deliberately created a false dichotomy to incite a revolution. Peace. ॐ Metta Bubble 13:25, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
At no point have I meant to declare that someone deliberately created a false dichotomy to incite a revolution. I find it hard to even read such an accusation in my words. I am merely offering my opinion that the current name is thought divisive, as per comments at the mfd, and offering a suggested alternative. Hiding talk 13:51, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
Truly I mean no offense Hiding, but I notice you merely took 300 words to offer a 4 word name change?
  • You say: "(the name of this group) implies that people who are not members are supportive of censorship."
This is saying that you think the name alone causes division on censorship issues. This is a false dichotomy.
  • You say: "I endorse the policy at WP:NOT but feel the policy should be at the heart of the issue, not the users battling it."
This is saying that you think users come here to start battles.
Did you not expect someone would want to discuss your critical judgements against this group? I request you add Misplaced Pages:Assume_good_faith to the list of policies you like to follow. The WAC group was started in good faith. ॐ Metta Bubble 14:29, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
Um. I'm not sure what's happening here. I came here and asked if the project would think about changing its name. Doesn't seem too unfair a proposition. You seemed to agree. After that, I'm not entirely sure how it went pear shaped. I'm quite happy for people to take my suggestion and do with it what they want, I recognise the consensual nature of the Misplaced Pages. I thought there was a reasonable suggestion with Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Freedom from censorship, perhaps people will consider that, fair play to you if you reject it, all I can do, and indeed, all I did, was to ask you to consider my suggestion. I can't see any point discussing your interpretation of my words, since I don't actually agree with that interpretation, and have already stated that any such interpretation was not meant, so I am happy to let my words rest as they are and be my own defence. As to your request to assume good faith, please be assured I follow it daily, but thanks for the gentle reminder. I hope you are not too offended if I ask you to consider your own words in the light of that policy. Happy editing! Hiding talk 16:31, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
I'm glad you didn't mean to lace your words with critical judgements of the group. Like I said, no offense intended. Happy editing to you to. ॐ Metta Bubble 23:06, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
I would like to propose wikipedians and censorship as a possible name to change to.--Clawed 02:27, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

Accuracy and Sensitivities

Hello editors. Many users have this noticeboard on their watchlist. If you are unsure of the accuracy and neutrality of a statement, run it by another editor before you post it on the board. It very would be very easy to mercilessly delete an anti-censorship group if we were perceived as hostile towards well meaning wikipedians.

So, simple. Don't be hostile. It isn't necessary. Please respect peoples sensitivities. This is too serious an issue to be sensationalised. ॐ Metta Bubble 22:24, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

Objection To The Justin Berry Notice

This was posted on the notice board. I've copied it here (which is more than it deserves):

  • I still haven't seen any evidence that WP:OFFICE was ever invoked on the Justin Berry article by anyone authorized to exercise it, which according to the current draft of the policy, is one individual with the name "Danny." The Justin article was never listed on the WP:OFFICE page, and claims of WP:OFFICE by various admins seem to have been little more than a convenient pretense to blank everything added to the Justin article without any forthcoming explanation, and to ban anyone who complained. Since the rewritten article, which is currently being left alone, is a superset of properly sourced information which mere days ago, was being deleted on sight, it is pretty clear that several admins in this dispute greatly exceeded their authority. I'm not going to single them out by name, but given the egregious admin misconduct here, I think it would be a nice PR gesture to reverse all the blocks which stemmed from the Justin controversy. Jimbo merely blanked the article, and politely asked that it be rewritten by new authors. He didn't ask for an Inquisition to be held. Some people here have let their personal views about sex abuse, minors, and minor-attracted adults motivate them to use their admin privileges to attack others, and that has damaged Misplaced Pages's public reputation. Dismissing the resulting mess as an "edit war" is at best disingenuous. 66.109.195.60 07:40, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
And I only just got finished asking users not to be hostile. I apologise for any misunderstanding we might have. It's really as simple as 123:

1.) WP:OFFICE The Wikimedia Foundation receives an increasingly large number of phone calls and emails from people who are upset about various things on the site. Sometimes these complaints are valid; more often they are not. However, in most cases, even with the invalid complaints, there is a short-term action which can and should be taken as a courtesy in order to soothe feelings and build a better encyclopedia in the long run. WP:OFFICE reverting a WP:OFFICE may be grounds for blocking.

2.) Mr Berry called and complained. Jimbo reset the article.

3.) The end.

What followed was an issue of discrimination and ethics, not censorship. How much these two issues overlap is something to be discussed on talk pages, not on noticeboards. The article on Justin Berry is now rewritten and editors have expressed their happiness that the article is much better. There doesn't appear to be any remaining issues of censorship. If you want to start a discussion below please talk about the issues, finger point and say whatever you want. Just keep hysterical outbursts off the noticeboard, it's inappropriate. ॐ Metta Bubble 12:54, 15 March 2006 (UTC)


1. from WP:OFFICE..."I have created this page for Danny (Danny is a longtime Wikipedian who is an admin in English Misplaced Pages, and globally a steward. He works for the foundation, primarily as my assistant, but increasingly in working on grant applications) to use to signify why he is deleting or blanking something per my authorization. This does not signify any authoritarian top-down action without approval, but rather signifies a temporary action to allow us to be kind while we sort out the encyclopedic way forward.

"If this works out, I may authorize other people to use it as well (people handling OTRS email queues, people on the legal team, etc.)--Jimbo Wales 21:43, 6 February 2006 (UTC)"

2. In the preceeding, Jimbo states that all WP:OFFICE blankings will be done by Danny, who will cite WP:OFFICE when doing them.

3. Jimbo is not Danny, nor did Jimbo cite WP:OFFICE when blanking the Justin article.

4. What followed included discrimination and ethical lapses, but was also censorship. The fact that we now have an article, and all new material is not being instantly deleted, has to do with admins backing off their earlier feeding frenzy, for whatever reason.

5. This is not an "hysterical outburst." If Jimbo wishes to state that the original blanking was done under WP:OFFICE and the admins acted appropriately in citing WP:OFFICE for their actions, (although they claimed reverting stuff on other related articles was WP:OFFICE, when it clearly was multiple reversion of non-vandalism), I will cede the point.

6. Undoing all Justin-related blocking would demonstrate good will on the part of Misplaced Pages, soothe the feelings of the angered, and encourage them to contribute to Misplaced Pages in the future, instead of spending their time trashing Misplaced Pages in their blogs, perhaps justifiably.

7. Good PR is avoiding even the appearance of censorship, even if you think you have some complex explanation of why something technically isn't censorship. 66.109.195.60 15:47, 15 March 2006 (UTC)


Based on additional information I've obtained from an offsite mirror of the original Justin Berry article, I'm going to revise my comments above. It appears that Jimbo originally blanked the article with the comment "This page temporarily blank.' WP:OFFICE" in the edit history, but when he deleted the article and its revision history to create a new one, he erased his own WP:OFFICE notice. Never assume malice where stupidity will suffice, I guess. My comments about it being censorship, the admins deleting new stuff that was not taken from the blanked article, frivolous banning, and suggested remedies still apply. Overall, I would now characterize the episode as "poor communication." 66.109.195.60 18.46, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Dismissing it as "poor communication" disingenuous at best!!! Hehe, just kidding! Yes, I agree. Peace. ॐ Metta Bubble 01:06, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
Where did you find this original copy of the article? Copysan 00:54, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
There's an interesting new Web Site about Misplaced Pages. They have the original Justin article, as well as other deleted things, and biting commentary. 71.212.67.10 06:50, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

Censorship alert

http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/List_of_Jewish_American_criminals_and_victims

I believe it has encyclopedic value but it shows some Jews in a negative light so its being considered for deletion. Please offer some assistance.

Jerry Jones 22:32, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

It looks like a standard VfD to me. I see nothing there that suggests an attempt at censorship. Gerard Foley 00:56, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

Member list

I feel like what I'm saying is rather unimportant in comparison, but...I could, if people wanted, to reorganize the member list in alphabetical order. —Mirlen 02:06, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

Major Censorship alert!

On the Talmud page posting anti Christian quotes which are verifiable factual information which is in fact in the Talmud have been continually removed. The article is extremely one sided. Both the Quran and Christian pages have all of the anti-Semetic quotes posted and I dont see why the Talmud should have another standard. Why should the Talmud be given special treatment? Please assist.

Jerry Jones 09:51, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

Maybe it would be helpful it they weren't false quotes invented by anti-Semites. Jayjg 10:08, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

censorship of inconvenient facts

here's a fact: some members of the jewish community are world-class musicians, chess-players, physicists, mathematicians etc. i'd imagine this fact is well noted at wikipedia in category boxes etc. if it isn't, you'll encounter no problems in noting it. here's another fact: some members of the jewish community have been involved in fraud and financial and political scandal. for examples of the difficulty you will face in noting this fact, up to and including a threat of indefinite blocking, examine the history of e.g. David Garrard (property developer), Barry Townsley, Jewish Care, Conservative Friends of Israel. nothing that suggests any link between the jewish community and wrongdoing is permitted, and is quickly removed on often ludicrous grounds, e.g. marriage by a businessman into an important business family is trivia. jamaissur

It's odd to stick in the first paragraph of an article the name of the subject's father-in-law, unless of course you're an anti-Semite desperate to find a Jewish link to the subject because he's involved in a scandal, and flailing around are able to find only that the wife's father is a Jew, so bang, in that goes as practically the first sentence. If you discover that the subject's dog walked past a synagogue last week, that'll doubtless be your next edit. SlimVirgin 09:03, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
Actually SV, I'm not sure why you chose to revert here. I presume you are doing so because you feel the comments had undue weight? Can you elaborate? It looks like the facts were cited correctly and were indeed true information for the article. ॐ Metta Bubble 03:59, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
I will add though, the entire article looks a little slim. ॐ Metta Bubble 04:00, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
"A little slim"? If you have a look at User:Jamaissur's contributions (including the now deleted articles), you will note that they consist almost entirely of entries intended to tie alleged British Jews to scandal and Israel. After seeing this go on in two dozen articles, he has been informed that he needs to actually write proper articles about individuals, not just copy often unsourced boilerplate attempting to smear British Jews. I'm not going to continue going around turning his defamatory boilerplate crap articles into proper stubs. Until he starts doing so, his edits simply will not stick. Jayjg 00:22, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
They have not been 'often unsourced' and you censor sourced material anyway. The rule I'm breaking is 'Obey the orders of Jewish admins' -- who do not follow to follow the rules they apply to others. If I'd described your comments as 'bleating' or your edits as 'crap', this would have been another big ground for blocking me. jamaissur
Unfortunately, Metta Bubble, you won't get unevasive or accurate answers from Slimvirgin or Jayjg, if you get any at all. In reply to her comments: it is not odd to note that a businessman has married into an important business family. Nor was that the "only" fact about Barry Townsley censored by admin User:Jayjg. The Guardian doesn't care about his dog either, but she cut a fact about him taken from The Guardian (see Jewish Care). jamaissur
Back from a 48-hour block (after two 24-hr blocks).
The rule has been: censor all facts linking members of the Jewish community to wrongdoing and harass users attempting to include them. This happens because Jewish admins and their allies have very great influence and power here at Misplaced Pages -- another fact that cannot be acknowledged or discussed. Andrew Rosenfeld has been linked with a general charity, the National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children, by the same admin, User:Jayjg, who has worked to censor 1) Rosenfeld's links with Jewish Care; 2) Barry Townsley's links with Jewish Care and with the Israel Center for Economic and Social Progress; 3) Townsley's marriage into an important Jewish business family. All 'trivia' according to Jayjg. Same for David Garrard (property developer)'s links with Jewish Care, World ORT and Conservative Friends of Israel. 'Trivia' again. Admin User:Slimvirgin and her friend admin User:Sean Black have censored facts in a way that no-one they disagreed with would have been allowed. So what I'd like to know is:
  • Why doesn't Misplaced Pages acknowledge that truth and comprehensive encyclopedic content take second place to favoured special interests and that censorship has been and will be employed whenever a favoured group so decides? If this is a good thing, why not let everyone know?
  • Why isn't the enormous power wielded by Jewish admins and their allies openly acknowledged by Misplaced Pages? Again, if it's a good thing, why not let everyone know?
  • Even if it is a good thing, will it remain so? Power tends to corrupt, and unexamined power tends to corrupt faster. Would Jayjg, Slimvirgin et al be happy to see some other group have the power their team presently has? (Rhetorical question, obviously.)
jamaissur
Jamaissur, your agenda at Misplaced Pages has been to create articles on people you believe are British Jews involved in a particular political scandal. There were several non-Jews involved in the same scandal, but you notably haven't created articles about them. To have an article on a charity, Jewish care, consist almost entirely of the allegedly controversial activities (unrelated to the charity) of one of its donors is clearly absurd. As I've warned you, if this situation continues, you'll be blocked indefinitely. Finally, you don't know whether the admins who are watching you are Jewish or not. That they must be to want to remove your edits is another one of your anti-Semitic conspiracy theories. SlimVirgin 23:14, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for the discussion. That helped a lot. Jamaissur? Is it possible you could team up with somebody capable of writing the pro information about the relevant articles? I feel confident I would enjoy the articles a lot more if they were the product of a process like that. Overall, I find it hard to label this a censorship issue because it documents a current event. Yet, I don't have an opinion on the matter, except to say Misplaced Pages isn't a newspaper. Peace. ॐ Metta Bubble 01:23, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
true, it isn't, but facts from newspapers are freely used here -- except when a favoured special interest group decides to censor them. i'd also have thought that censorship of facts in current events still counts as censorship, and is possibly an even more serious kind, given that more people will be coming here to read about the current event while it's current than later. note also that for raising the points above, i got blocked for a week. jamaissur
WP:NOT includes the policy that Misplaced Pages is not a news source; such readers as you mention should be using Wikinews instead. Trying to limit Misplaced Pages articles on current events to verifiable and NPOV facts, rather than everybody's unencyclopedic interpretations and speculations, is not censorship, it's a proper standard. Many editors are trying to keep any "special interest group" from including one-sided news content. Barno 14:10, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

Precious gem to watch

User:Markaci/Nudity

When a square goes white it means the image has been deleted. CrayZ 01:10, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

To date only 4 images there have been deleted.
The first and last seem to have been deleted improperly. I've contacted the users asking for more information. ~MDD4696 14:13, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
User:Humus sapiens responded saying he was reverting vandalism; User:BradPatrick was removing blatant copyright infringement. Everything seems fine. ~MDD4696 20:55, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Has project gone inactive?

There have been no changes to the project page or this talk page in almost a month now. If nobody replies, I will mark this as inactive.--Frenchman113 on wheels! 00:44, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

Strangely the member's page is active. -- 127.*.*.1 02:54, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
What? Wikipedians against censorship inactive? That would be a shame. Why do you think so? gala.martin (what?) 16:35, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
This project is definitely NOT inactive! --Siva1979 18:22, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
I would give it longer than a month. Most projects on Misplaced Pages go through periods of inactivity. They usually aren't marked as inactive, though, unless they've been stagnant for several months. Kaldari 15:53, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
The thing is that unlike content projects we don't usually go out and edit articles unless there's censorship going on. It's more of a "values" project, like Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Wikipedians for writing an encyclopedia. Loom91 06:48, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Critics being silenced

Please keep an eye out. Some people are trying hard to remove criticsim of wikipedia even if it could be constructive criticism. We should have freedom of speech here. User:Sceptre has a talk page full of "don't remove other peopl's comments" from other users and has been deleting pages he disagree with. Please keep an eye out. Navigatrix 12:07, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

User:Sceptre's talk page has only two comments on removing talk page comments, both related to a single issue. User:Lou franklin (which I suspect was your original account, Navigatrix) was spamming people's talk pages with a frustrated rant. Sceptre reverted these. ~MDD4696 13:42, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

Hi All

This User 87.17.136.171 has categorized as Humor the project page against censorship. I am wondering how this "fact" is considered in the English Misplaced Pages. --Fragolino - 17:48, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

I think it is viewed with disdain and lo! It was quickly reverted. We have enemies as past events have indicated. ;) -- 127.*.*.1 00:51, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Please give a consensus and offer assistance -Censorship

I have worked on an article for Charles Coughlin and I have entered a dispute with an editor. I want the opinions of wikipedians against censorship on whether or not this is censorship. This editor refuses to discuss this and deletes this sentence continually without a reason which leads me to believe that he takes personal offense to it and that is why he wants it removed even if its informative and has great encyclopedic value.

Here is the article and the line in bold is disputed and being continually removed:

After 1936, however, Coughlin increasingly expressed sympathy for the fascist policies of Hitler and Mussolini as an antidote to Bolshevism, though this was before World War II began. His radio broadcasts also became overtly anti-Semitic. He also began publication of a newspaper, Social Justice, during this period, in which he printed anti-Semitic accusations such as The Protocols of the Elders of Zion. Like Joseph Goebbels, Coughlin claimed that Marxist atheism in Europe was a Jewish plot. On Nov. 20, 1938, two weeks after Kristallnacht, when Jews across Germany were attacked and killed, and Jewish businesses and homes burned, Coughlin blamed the Jewish victims, saying that "Jewish persecution only followed after Christians first were persecuted."

File:CharlesCoughlin222.jpg

After this speech, and as his programs became more anti-Semitic, some radio stations, including those in New York and Chicago, began refusing to air his speeches without pre-approved scripts. This made Coughlin a hero in Nazi Germany, where papers ran headlines like "America is Not Allowed to Hear the Truth." On December 18, 1938 two thousand of Coughlin's followers marched in New York protesting potential asylum law changes that would allow more Jews to enter the country, chanting, "Send Jews back where they came from in leaky boats!" and "Wait until Hitler comes over here!" these protests continued for several months. Donald Warren, using information from the FBI and German government archives, has also argued that Coughlin received indirect funding from Nazi Germany during this period.

Why I think it should stay: I believe this line should stay because I feel the whole article just says that Father Coughlin is anti semetic. It doesnt say why he is anti semetic and there are major holes in the article. Its one sided. This one line explains a lot because one:

1-It's accurate. It makes a connection to fascism as the article goes over. 2-It explains why someone like Father Coughlin, as a priest, would support a Nazi regime 3-The article talks about Father Coughlin being fascist but doesnt explain why. This one sentence makes a big connection to Coughlin supporting fascism. 4-It's Father Coughlin's viewpoint and explains why he supported the Nazis.

I am just trying to make the article fair and balanced without it being one sided. The whole article joes goes on about him being anti semetic facist but it doesnt say even one time why he was anti Semetic. I tried to add Father Coughlins viewpoint and it was being continually deleted without even a reason. I won't even get an answer. Please read the whole article over and give you opinion on whether or not this is censorship or if I am wrong. Here is the article: Charles Coughlin

Thanks,

Jerry Jones 21:03, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

First, I should point out that I do not know much about Charles Coughlin. Secondly, you don't have to copy the entire article here. Finally, I'm not sure if this is censorship but reverting that sentence over POV is definately not right. However, the points over original research and verifiability still stand. If you can provide citations to back it up I think you have a case. -- 127.*.*.1 13:12, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
You need some references to state your sentence (this is true in general, and expecially if the issue is disputed). On the other hand, if true, the part Coughlin claimed that Marxist atheism in Europe was a Jewish plot should stay. Anyway, in Europe there were many people claiming Jewish plots, so I do not understand why referring to Goebbles; of course, this also can be cleared with a suitable reference. --gala.martin (what?) 13:37, 19 May 2006 (UTC)


Help Request

Category:Anti-Semitic people

NEW VOTE

KEEP - This category was already voted on Vote and the decision was to KEEP. This +cat was posted for deletion without posting a

CFR may refer to:

Biology

Organizations

Places

Protocols

Titles

Other

Topics referred to by the same term

Disambiguation iconThis disambiguation page lists pages associated with the title Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Wikipedians against censorship.
If an internal link led you here, you may wish to change the link to point directly to the intended page.

or mentioning it on the +cats talk page. Just another sneaky trick to try to get it closed without a fair opportunity to vote. Please note, there are a lot of anti-Semites on the Internet that would love to shut this +cat down, they should not be allowed to do so Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Wikipedians against censorship SirIsaacBrock 10:22, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Userbox vandalized

The Template:User freespeech userbox was vandalized, changing the box text and removing all references to this project. I have reverted the changes. Just a quick FYI. — Wwagner 16:00, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Userbox poll

A userbox poll is nearly done, and could do with a bit of support. It aims to stop Admins deleting userboxes and censoring people's opinions on their own userpages. - • The Giant Puffin • 12:50, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

"It is important to monitor the fact that POV pushers (in this case pedophiles)..." - Jimmy Wales

See here: Skinnyweed 20:02, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Israeli apartheid deletion

http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Israeli_apartheid_%28phrase%29

This term is apparently offensive to some people, but the article itself is well-researched and balanced. I think it needs a little tweaking in the lead, but is otherwise of high quality. Despite this, it seems as though a lot of people want to delete it for reasons that do not seem entirely reasonable to me. I feel that this is a form of censorship. Al 21:08, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

In case it's not already clear, you'll note that I'm not asking anyone to vote pro or con. Rather, I'm bringing this issue to the attention of a group dedicated to fighting censorship. In fact, I regret voting on this issue and would not recommend it to anyone. It seems clear that people are not voting on an honest basis, so any participation only lends legitimacy to this censorship attempt. Thank you for understanding. Al 23:18, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
When the scientists went mum (and still are going) on the issue of intelligent design in order to not lend legitmacy to the debate, they got a couple school districts changing it anyways. Shutting up about injustice simply allows a group to continue its oppression without publicity by your silenced comments. Therefore, if you've got a view, speak it up. Copysan 01:13, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Question

Would anyone like to investigate as to why User:Pimpalicious was banned, and whether it was discussed beforehand? 131.111.8.104 16:39, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

censorship alert- discussion

I strongly disagree with the accusation against my putting the alert on the notice board, I believe this is EXACTLY the appropriate place for this as this project is against ANY censorship in Misplaced Pages not just articles. For my full explanation you can refer to the discussion page on the issue.By the way, I find it ironic that Hipocrite as a member of Wikipedians against censorship tries to censor both my opinion and the very crucial vote thats been going on that is all about censorship, in addition I find it more than ironic that I'm accused of a "non-neutral" comment on the notice board by a user that himself expresses a clear "non-nuetral" comment in the sentence previous to his acustion of inuetrality (number 1). This irony also goes to the comment Hipocrite posted below. Tal :) 16:44, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

This project was designed to deal with article content, not your whinging about how you can't have pretty boxes and call yourself a satanist on your user page. Go somewhere else. I'm not a member - I'm a founding member. Hipocrite - «Talk» 16:34, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
N.B the fact that you are allegedly the "founding member" gives you no special privileges over other members, and thus your historical role is insignifcant to my argument... And note that I'm not going anywhere unless you block me (which will be a very clear cut case of rude form of censorship).Tal :) 16:46, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Note that my very comment has been self-censored by me due to alleged "threats" by a certain member...Tal :) 16:50, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Calm down guys. It's not worth busting an artery about. Kaldari 21:43, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Hans Christian Andersen

I would like to enlist my fellow anti-censorship members to suppress the campaign by one member to remove the cited academic references to Hans Christian Andersen's sexuality. Her complaint is that her child read it. Misplaced Pages should not be a place where references are removed because they mention homosexuality or masturbation. I would post this to the notice board, but I'm not quite sure how to yet :) Thanks! Wjhonson 05:39, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up Wjhonson, I'm keeping an eye on it now although I doubt you'll have any more trouble from that particular user (Perri Rhoades) a quick glance through their other contributions and it looks like they've decided to part ways with wikipedia for other reasons. Caprosser 09:24, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
Well I was wrong about Perri Rhoades going away, they are still at it unfortunately, I reverted their edit putting the material into its own section but I think its within reason to add the citations needed request and from what I gather that shouldn't be much of a problem for you to do so I'd recommend doing it quickly and hopefully everyone can move on. Caprosser 01:52, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Paulinus of Nola

Again an alert, an anon editor keeps reverting Paulinus of Nola when I've posted a portion of a letter he wrote, which was published in an anthology. The portion I've posted is the exact (translated) words of Paulinus. The other editor is reverting based on an POV. So I'd appreciate support in reverting back, as I'm at my 2revert limit now. Thanks. Wjhonson 16:45, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Oh and the other editor refuses, so far, to discuss the scholarly issues of the text (if there are any), he just reverts based on his opinion, not that of a published source. Wjhonson 16:46, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

"Wikiporn" deletions

I included information regarding the "wikiporn" deletions on the project page. CharonX/talk 12:16, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

The MFDs seem to be against Userspace galleries. We should move all the User space links and etc to this WP Talk against censorship space (note that a gallery has already been created within this WP talk page at Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Wikipedians against censorship/Gallery).
The reason can be: "Pornographic or sexually explicit pictures are often the subject of some controversy, and are often the targets of attempts to censor Misplaced Pages. This page is intended to make sure any pornographic picture has its due process in AfD. Any time a box goes blank or a red link goes red, interested parties should read on the AfD or the Speedy Delete page to see if the deletions were a part of censorship or just normal goings on in Misplaced Pages."
Also we should not include Commons pictures (since the scope of this project is Misplaced Pages). Fair use and otherwise article-only pictures should be linked. Copysan 18:18, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

Inquisition censorship

I am seeing some religious censorship in Inquisition article. Some people are deleting any references to Inquisition practices, statistic death count, or persecution to any religion references (hindu, jew). I need help

I will look into this. Darthgriz98 19:13, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
I see what you mean, expecialy when they used the term coercion, there was no coercion involved, more like if you don't join you will be executed and persecuted if you were lucky enough. Probably someone defending the RCC or someone trying to butter up the article, it happens all the time. Nobody likes to hear mean things, except this is not what wiki is for. I'll help you out. Darthgriz98 19:15, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Project directory

Hello. The WikiProject Council has recently updated the Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Council/Directory. This new directory includes a variety of categories and subcategories which will, with luck, potentially draw new members to the projects who are interested in those specific subjects. Please review the directory and make any changes to the entries for your project that you see fit. There is also a directory of portals, at User:B2T2/Portal, listing all the existing portals. Feel free to add any of them to the portals or comments section of your entries in the directory. The three columns regarding assessment, peer review, and collaboration are included in the directory for both the use of the projects themselves and for that of others. Having such departments will allow a project to more quickly and easily identify its most important articles and its articles in greatest need of improvement. If you have not already done so, please consider whether your project would benefit from having departments which deal in these matters. It is my hope that all the changes to the directory can be finished by the first of next month. Please feel free to make any changes you see fit to the entries for your project before then. If you should have any questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me. Thank you. B2T2 14:36, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages Day Awards

Hello, all. It was initially my hope to try to have this done as part of Esperanza's proposal for an appreciation week to end on Misplaced Pages Day, January 15. However, several people have once again proposed the entirety of Esperanza for deletion, so that might not work. It was the intention of the Appreciation Week proposal to set aside a given time when the various individuals who have made significant, valuable contributions to the encyclopedia would be recognized and honored. I believe that, with some effort, this could still be done. My proposal is to, with luck, try to organize the various WikiProjects and other entities of wikipedia to take part in a larger celebrartion of its contributors to take place in January, probably beginning January 15, 2007. I have created yet another new subpage for myself (a weakness of mine, I'm afraid) at User talk:Badbilltucker/Appreciation Week where I would greatly appreciate any indications from the members of this project as to whether and how they might be willing and/or able to assist in recognizing the contributions of our editors. Thank you for your attention. Badbilltucker 19:41, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedians for censorship/decency

If I disagree with you policies, is there a project name Wikipedians for Censorship I could maybe join. I believe that the Misplaced Pages should be censored for minors and if you disagree with me, I would be more than happy to join the debate. Freedom to share 18:40, 12 January 2007 (UTC) Please leave comments on .

On Censorship

Misplaced Pages is an encyclopedia. I ask all, how is the world to know what the world is really about if we sugar-coat it?

  • Everyone will be offended at some point, seeing that these articles are printed in so many languages.
  • If a picture is relevant, it deserves to be on that page! I don't care if it's ography, if it's relevant them put it on!
  • We fight for facts, not just politically correct ideas, everyone.

--Raystlyn 04:15, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Username censorship

Does WP:RFCN constitute censorship? One username named "tortureiswrong" was almost prohibited. Wooyi 03:52, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

It constitutes a form of censorship, but it's also in part a security measure and doesn't really violate the speech of the actual encyclopedia. That said, I'd keep and eye on it for absurd nominations like "tortureiswrong" and respond accordingly. Gateman1997 04:37, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
Thank you! I will also report here if any such absurd nom appear there. Wooyi 04:42, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
Can we please not turn this into the "I disagree so opposing opinions are censorship" noticeboard? -Amarkov moo! 04:44, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
I don't think anyone is advocating that. However certain noms on that page could and do constitute censorship. ToutureisWrong appears to have been WP:POINT violation so it's a valid thing to bring here in my opinion. Gateman1997 04:47, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
Here is an absurd nomination today Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment/User names/Pothead12345, but ended up in allow. Wooyi 16:11, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
I thought the worst part of that nomination was someone mentioning the "12345" having no significance, as if that held any real weight in forcing someone to change their name or simply deleting them. It is a bit ridiculous. ≈ The Haunted Angel 23:25, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Censorship of information about Jewish businesspeople

I'd like to let everyone know that there is a massive censorship campaign underway dealing with information about Jewish businesspeople. Category:Jewish American businesspeople was the first to go, and then List of Jewish American businesspeople (take a look at the page's history). Now Category:Jewish businesspeople will soon be deleted. Note that these categories/articles are unjustly targeted for deletion despite the fact that dozens if not hundreds of very similar categories/articles currently exist on Misplaced Pages. --Wassermann 09:44, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

I can't find that there ever was a Category:Jewish American businesspeople. As for List of Jewish American businesspeople, Wassermann may add as many names as he wishes to that list provided that they are all sourced. What he may not do is add inappropriate names and then complain when they are removed.--Runcorn 13:19, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
It was Category:Jewish-American businesspeople (I forgot the hyphen). It was deleted with less than 5 'votes' , overturned and relisted , and then deleted again . You also state that all names must be sourced, but have you taken a look at all of the other Lists of Jews and/or Lists of Jewish Americans lately? How many lists/articles do you notice are sourced amongst those pages? --Wassermann 22:30, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
I'm not excusing any deletion, nor do I know why they are doing it; however they may be deleting it bc they feel that the category is part of the racial stereotype of the "money-grubbing Jew". VanTucky 22:47, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
It is nothing to do with censorship, just a straightforward judgement about what categories are appropriate for navigation, based on community consensus. If you think that is censorship, you should spend some time living in a totalitarian state to learn what censorship really means. Sumahoy 01:48, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

This project is poisonous and should be deleted

This is just a place for gangs of people with certain fashionable prejudices that they like to imagine are high principles, to get together and try to use mob power to try to impose their values on the whole user base and readership. It has no legitimate purpose. It is not neutral, it does not improve information, it creates ill-will and encourages bullying and witch hunts. It forgets that Misplaced Pages is an encylopedia, not a means of self-expression. It should he killed off. Sumahoy 01:46, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

If you believe that the project should be deleted, then nominate it at Misplaced Pages:Miscellany for deletion. Thryduulf 08:53, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
Although we clearly do improve information by ensuring that legitimate information isn't removed. ≈ The Haunted Angel 10:42, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Template:User against censorship

This template has been deleted. Please contribute to the Deletion Review discussion at Misplaced Pages:Deletion review/Log/2007 June 19, so we can hopefully get it reinstated. Willy turner 22:22, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

If it's a userbox you're talking about, most of them have been moved to userspace per the Misplaced Pages:Userbox migration. There are a couple folks who have a copy of the WaC userbox: {{User:Disavian/Userboxes/Free Speech}} or {{User:Feureau/UserBox/freespeech}}. If it's a different userbox, feel free to recreate it in your own userspace. — Wwagner 22:32, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Regarding WikiProject: Pedophilia Article Watch

I've been observing this WikiProject for a while now, and I'm little concerned about their activities regarding pedophilia-based articles. Their goal is to eliminate POV issues in pedophilia-based articles, as you can see by their page here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Pedophilia_Article_Watch

When this project had began, I expected them to work as much as on anti-pedophile POV issues as much as pro-pedophile issues, but if you check out their talk page as well as their members' comments on many of the pedophilia articles in this site, you'll notice that most of them concentrate solely on the pro-pedophile POV issues. Not to mention, some of its members deliberately attack people who may bring up a reasonable argument against them by calling them "Pro Pedophiles". Considering this, is it possible that this whole project could be used as an excuse to censoring potentially will-argued and sourced counter points in pedophilia articles? With this possibility in mind, I'd like WP:WAC to keep an eye on their activities. 71.63.3.227 18:49, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

I'm a recent member of the project, and while I do not edit the central articles of the project's purview, I have had some small interaction with long-standing members. It should be noted that the project was created expressly as a counterpoint to the influence of the very real pro-pedophile lobby that was using Misplaced Pages articles about pedophilia and child sexuality as a soapbox to support their views. So it's not really as if there is this beleaguered minority of Misplaced Pages users who aren't personally pro-pedophilia but are advocating for more NPOV, but are being blocked by this evil anti-pedophile propaganda machine. It was created to combat bias already in articles, and in my experience, I have seen most of those involved with the project to have no more strong anti-pedophilia stance than does any member of the general public only a more ardent belief in protecting the sanctity of the Misplaced Pages's neutrality. It isn't exactly a COI to be vehemenently against pedophilia, just as it's not to be against anti-semitism and edit the Holocaust article. A strong moral stance against violence isn't to be equated with POV-pushing. VanTucky 19:33, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
It was developed as a counterpoint to pro-pedophile lobbies? Forgive me if this is just my misinterpretation, but shouldn't the proper way of addressing POV issues be to just eliminate POV edits instead of just balancing/replacing it with opposite but equal POV edits? I don't care about its moral stance. I'm concerned about its potential to push its moral stance to where they use censorship tactics and turn Misplaced Pages as a political soapbox for their views, just like the pro-pedophile lobbies you mentioned. There needs to be a referee that has NO acutal stance on the issues. Two wrongs don't make a right. 71.63.3.227 21:20, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
You are misunderstanding what I meant. The project wasn't developed to insert counterpoint into articles, it was created as an ideological counterpoint to POV-pushing by pedophiles, i.e. as an organization expressly created to ensure a NPOV in articles of this subject matter. VanTucky 21:38, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
This may just be ignorance on my part, but if it's to ensure NPOV in articles regarding pedophilia, I'm not sure what you mean by "ideological counterpoint". 71.63.3.227 21:42, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
I'm saying that the project wasn't created to push an anti-pedophilia POV, but that it was created solely to ensure NPOV by acting as a watchdog for articles that have notoriously been perverted (if you'll allow the pun) to advocate for a subtle, or not so subtle, pro-pedophilia point of view. VanTucky 21:46, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
If that's the case, to put me at ease, does the project have anything to prevent itself from being abused to push anti-pedophilia POV once they fixed pro-pedo POV issues? Some of its members, for example SqueakBox, have been edit warring in relevant articles (like lolicon) under the suspicion of other users, of pushing an anti-pedo POV. 71.63.3.227 21:51, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
There's no guarantee of any project, article or user being completely NPOV, that's just Misplaced Pages. I can't comment on Squeakbox's actions, but if you have concerns this is not the place to bring it up. You might try the Wikiquette notice board or the Admin's incident noticeboard. But just being realistic, a anon user going up against an long-time admin on that latter talk page will probably be shouted down. I suggest first creating an account (though not simply for the single purpose of attacking Sqeuakbox, that will get you blocked in a jiffy), and then trying to work out content disputes before going after what you may see as a pattern of behavior. VanTucky 22:15, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Rusty trombone

if you disagree with my idea that the issue at hand is one of censorship, then simply say so. Do not presume to think your sole opinion on an issue makes it unworthy of listing. If consensus shouts me down, that's acceptable. But unilateral dismissal is not. VanTucky 05:39, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Do we really need...

...that rather abrasive and incivil message about userboxes? Haven't most of them been moved to user's subpages and the problem (mostly) solved? 68.39.174.238 21:17, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

SVG blue ribbon

I replaced the PNG image with an SVG one, and made it 360 pixels wide. have a look and tell me if you have comments, or edit the page if you think it doesn't look good. NerdyNSK 03:45, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Pedophiles

What do the Wikipedians against censorship think about not allowing users to identify themselves as pedophiles on their user pages? A.Z. 06:58, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

It's an enormous can of worms and regardless of any principle involved I feel that the time is better spent elsewhere. Orpheus 07:12, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
It is beyond debate that allowing the statement "this user is a homosexual" but disallowing the statement "this user is a pedophile" is a violation of foundation:Non discrimination policy (The Wikimedia Foundation prohibits discrimination against current or prospective users and employees on the basis of (...) sexual orientation), but as Orpheus said, let's not open that can of worms again. Melsaran (talk) 13:55, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
Did you check that link? It goes to a blank page. Orpheus 16:31, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
Oops, fixed. Melsaran (talk) 09:05, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

There isn't a "non-discrimination policy" for Misplaced Pages contributors, even if there is one for Wikimedia foundation employees. There's WP:NPOV, which requires that relevant points of view be represented in articles. But there's also WP:POINT, which forbids deliberate disruption of the project, and WP:NOT, which forbids making Misplaced Pages into a battlefield or a MySpace page.

Part of the problem here is that "pedophile" is generally taken to mean one of two things:

  • a person who does have sexual relations with children; that is, a child-molester, someone who does something both illegal and morally revolting to most people; or
  • a person who feels powerful compulsions to have sexual relations with children; that is, someone who is psychologically abnormal in a way that leads them to do the above.

To understand the way that people respond to the former, consider what would happen if a person labeled themselves as a rapist or a murderer. To understand the latter, consider if they labeled themselves a psychopath or a kleptomaniac.

I understand that there are other interpretations of the term "pedophile". I know about Alcibiades, thank you, and I also know about the history of the gay-rights movement. (Mainstream gay-rights organizations in the post-Stonewall 1970s opposed age-of-consent laws.) However, it is also quite understandable that people react to a userbox that says "I'm a pedophile" in more or less the same way they'd react to "I'm a serial killer" or "I'm a slave trader".

As such, it's disruptive to the project for pedophile contributors to proclaim themselves as such, in a way that it is not disruptive for gay contributors to proclaim themselves as such. In civilized countries, including the U.S. where Misplaced Pages is hosted, gay sex is not illegal, nor is it considered by the medical establishment to be a psychological derangement; adult/child sex is. --FOo 03:32, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

I'll echo Obfusco's points. Self-identifying pedophiles are blocked on sight for good reason. Allowing Misplaced Pages to get identified as an outlet for pedophiles would be immeasurably damaging to the project. Comparing homosexuality and pedophilia in this arena is not just incorrect, it's patently absurd. Homosexuality is something that is, in many instances, protected from discrimination by law. Pedophiles are those who are discriminated against under the law, and for good damn reason. VanTucky 03:42, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Pedophiles who do not engage actively in sex with children are not discriminated against under the law. Melsaran (talk) 09:07, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
Pedophiles are not discriminated against under the law in civilized countries. A.Z. 05:33, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
That may be true, but I reiterate my statement above - regardless of the principle or merits of either side of this, there's better ways to spend the time instead of trying to reopen this discussion. (this comment is directed generally, rather than specifically at Melsaran, btw) Orpheus 09:16, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
For what it's worth, I do not agree with VanTucky, and s/he misstates my position in claiming to agree with me. I do not think it makes sense to block a Misplaced Pages contributor for self-identifying as a pedophile:
  • It alienates that person from the project, making it nearly 100% certain that they will come back to cause us other problems in the future (disruption, vandalism).
  • It increases their identification with a "pedophile" identity, and their belief that being such is some kind of persecuted victim status rather than what it is, a paraphilia.
Hell, I don't think someone should be blocked for self-identifying as a murderer. But it's a bad idea for people to do so, and it should probably be reverted if they do it. --FOo 05:42, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
The sexual attraction of adults to children is not in itself considered a paraphilia -not even by the DSM. It is just a perfectly acceptable sexual attraction. The DSM considers that people who are older than 16 years old and try to have sex with children, or become disturbed due to this attraction to children, have a paraphilia. I don't know on what they base this opinion. A.Z. 20:37, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
The short answer is that the goal of this wikiproject is to help correct situations where article content is censored. Userspace is entirely different, and not within the scope. WilyD 20:58, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
I'm sorry, but, as you can see above, there are people being discriminated against, which makes the scope of this WikiProject pretty much an irrelevant matter. A.Z. 01:03, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
It's entirely relevant. Whether or not there's any discrimination, this isn't WikiProject:Help! I'm being oppressed! Orpheus 03:30, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
Your post didn't change my mind. A.Z. 03:41, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
Roughly speaking, if you want help with the issue, this is not the place to request it. WilyD 15:28, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
Any place should be a proper place to request that people help other people stop being discriminated against. A.Z. 23:15, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Censorship against (pro-) Hindu authors

I have observed a lot of censorship in articles on Hinduism and Indian politics/history. One thing which is very often done: Deleting the mention of atrocities or genocide during the Islamic invasions of India, and also in more recent history, for example the terrorism in Kashmir, or the massacres in the Bangladesh Liberation War. This is done wether it is sourced or not, and is rarely discussed on talkpages. Just put a couple of these articles on your watchlist (Aurangzeb, Muhammed bin Qasim, Terrorism in Kashmir,...) and watch.

As a an example, Hornplease (talk · contribs) has been for months deleting almost every mention of pro-Hindu authors or of authors critical of Islam on wikipedia articles. These are not some unknown, obscur authors, but they are the most well known political authors that the Hindus have. He is not only doing this against political authors, but also against historians like K.S. Lal.

He usually only explains his deletions on the talkpage if he is asked to do (and even in his edit summaries, he often does not explain himself). Even he himself says (when it is convenient for him) that "if you're making a claim that it's non-notable, you'd have to back that up with some reasoning or have it ignored". And if he has to explain his deletions, after being questioned, he sometimes uses bogus excuses, like the editors were paid by an Indian publishing house, or the links were added for the google engine. He actually admits that he is "monitoring" the use of the names of these Hindu authors on wikipedia: "Discussion can be suspended, and I will monitor the use of his name." If he says a citation by one of these authors, he usually just removes it without discussion (unless asked for it), and in that process diminishing the value of the wikipedia article because of the loss of information. He is not doing the same scrutinizing and singling out of authors with anti-Hindu authors, or with pro-Islamic authors (on the contrary).

On another article, Jewish editors have told him that he "can't take an entire community's resources and label them all biased" and that " if all the community resources do not meet that standard" one has "to simply accept the most well-known source as the best voice for the views, since that would be the best we could get" and they asked him: "are we going to accept that the job of an encyclopedia is to provide awareness and access to several different views contained in published works?"

Evidence

Some examples:

He deletes the fact that Taslima Nasrin's books were banned in West Bengal. In another edit, he deletes KS Lal's own rebuttal of the criticism against him, but he leaves all the criticism against KS Lal in the article. He also deletes KS Lal's books from other articles. He also makes edits that basically whitewash the record of the most intolerant Islamic rulers, like Muhammed bin Qasim and Aurangzeb.

  • In the article about the historian K.S. Lal, he asks for a citation for this sentence: "The Mughal Harem has been reviewed by dozens of journals and has often earned praise." His edit summary is "wow".
    • When later a reference was provided, he just deletes it, with the edit summary "letters! please.", and nothing at all on the talkpage. The removal of text without any rational explanation is , plain and simple. Arbcom has said that edit summaries are not enough to explain controversial removals (and his "edit summary" didn't explain anything).
      • What this edit shows, is what he has done in many other articles: delete the mention that pro-Hindu authors are notable (even for the Hindus themselves), and afterwards claim that the same authors are not notable, or that they are fanatical, or nazis like David Irving, so that he can continue deleting every mention of them as a result.

These are some other examples where he has censored pro-Hindu authors:

Expand to see

Examples of what he deleted from wikipedia:

K.S. Lal

He deleted:

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." 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."

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. References

  • Theory and Practice of Muslim State in India (1999) ISBN 81-86471-72-3
  • The Mughal Harem (1988) ISBN 81-85179-03-4
  • They only destroyed the existing ones at Sarnath, Vaishali, Odantapuri, Nalanda, Vikramshila etc. to which thousands of scholars from all over India and Asia used to seek admission. Thus, with the coming of Muslims, India ceased to be a centre of higher Hindu and Buddhist learning for Asians. The Muslims did not set up even Muslim institutions of higher learning. Their maktabs and madrasas catered just for repetitive, conservative and orthodox schooling. There was little original thinking, little growth of knowledge as such."
  • K.S. Lal wrote a rebuttal to many criticisms in his book "Theory and Practice of Muslim State in India". He explained:
One does grow during the course of half a century if one continues with his studies and I have surely grown. And since I do no believe that "Muslim rule should not attract any criticism. Destruction of temples by Muslim invaders and rulers should not be mentioned and forcible conversions to Islam should be ignored and deleted, etc. etc.", my books are free from such restrictions. I now also apply the same yardstick to medieval Indian history as is done with respect to modem Indian history. ... We in India write the history of British rule not from the point of view of European imperialism but from that of the victims of colonization. I apply the same methodology to the history of Muslim rule. I write about it from the people's point of view rather than from the view of Islamic imperialists. We cannot apply different standards of approach and methodology to different periods of Indian history.] (pov deletion, he only deletes Lal's rebuttal to the partisan criticism of Lal, and leaves the lengthy partisan criticism in the article)

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Muslim_conquest_in_the_Indian_subcontinent&diff=prev&oldid=154967612 He deletes some correct information on Gahzni and Timur and deletes external links that are critical of the Islamic invasion of India.

He deletes these books from the bibliography. The books he censors include all books by K.S. Lal, Misra Ram Gopal, Shourie and Sita Ram Goel.

Koenraad Elst Deletions about Elst:

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Pusyamitra_Sunga&diff=prev&oldid=126354485 Koenraad Elst posits that historical facts confirm that Pushyamitra allowed and patronized the construction of monasteries and Buddhist universities in his domains, as well as the still-existent stupa of Sanchi. Etienne Lamotte states: “To judge from the documents, Pushyamitra must be acquitted through lack of proof.”

The Belgian Indologist Koenraad Elst criticized Storr's book for its avoidance of the term prophet instead of guru for several people. Elst asserts that this is possibly due to Storr's pro-Western, pro-Christian cultural bias.

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Ayodhya_and_After:_Issues_Before_Hindu_Society&diff=prev&oldid=125739910 In fact, this conclusion is merely a restatement of what was a matter of consensus until a few years ago. This time it is supported by a bundle of evidence, but it had been known all along. It is only recently that politically motivated academics have manufactured doubts concerning this coherent and well-attested tradition." He says that the anti-Temple side gave no evidence, and ignored the pro-Temple evidence and concludes that "the way the anti-Mandir falsehoods have been given wide currency in 1989-91 will make an interesting case study for future scholars. A classic in propaganda."

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Negationism_in_India_-_Concealing_the_Record_of_Islam&diff=prev&oldid=125742140 The book is a study on censorship, the prohibition of criticism of Islam and the denial of its historic crimes against humanity. Elst also writes about some Western authors like P. Spear, co-author (with Romila Thapar) of the Penguin History of India and accuses him of whitewashing the record of Aurangzeb. He also claims that the Indian media and academia are often untrustworthy when it comes to reporting on the Hindu-Muslim conflict and that the Western Press often only copies non-neutral press-reports. Elst criticizes what he considers to be an "extreme ignorance and gullibility of the foreign press" and claims that there was also a disinformation campaign in the Ayodhya debate. In one chapter, he writes about what he calls the "negationist's second front": Some historians or writers sometimes claim that the Hindus have also destroyed temples or monasteries of other religions. Elst claims that the Indian media sometimes alleges that the Hindus destroyed the Nalanda university, which was in fact destroyed by Bakhtiyar Khalji during the Islamic conquest of South Asia. Elst claims that Hinduism, while not being without its faults, has not produced the same fanaticism as some of the other [[world religions or ideologies. Some of the cases that are discussed by Elst in this book are Pusyamitra Sunga, Shashank, Harsha of Kashmir and Subhataverman.

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Hindu&diff=prev&oldid=125983129

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Hindu&diff=prev&oldid=125983269 The Unity of India Dileep Karanth's article about the terms "Hindu" and "India" ABOUT THE NAME “HINDU” By Stephen Knapp

Not sure if User:195.210.243.231 was Hornplease, but his edits are similar: (, , deletes this: And according to Koenraad Elst: "When it is said that Agni, the fire, “puts the dark demons to flight”, one should keep in mind that the darkness was thought to be filled with ghosts or ghouls, so that making light frees the atmosphere of their presence. And when Usha, the dawn, is said to chase the "dark skin" or "the black monster" away, it obviously refers to the cover of nightly darkness over the surface of the earth." , , and wrote "f*ing crazy, f*ing fundamentalists!!" in an article, and added Adolf Hitler to the list of Hindu incarnations .

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Manu_Smriti&diff=prev&oldid=126354534 Koenraad Elst posits that historical facts confirm that Pushyamitra allowed and patronized the construction of monasteries and Buddhist universities in his domains, as well as the still-existent stupa of Sanchi. Etienne Lamotte states: “To judge from the documents, Pushyamitra must be acquitted through lack of proof.”

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Ikshvaku&diff=prev&oldid=126354065 The word Ikshvaku means "Sugarcane". Some scholars have pointed out that the legends of Ikshvaku and Sumati may have their origin in the Southeast-Asian myth of the birth of humanity from a Sugarcane.

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Genetics_and_Archaeogenetics_of_South_Asia&diff=prev&oldid=126353980

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=History_of_the_Indian_caste_system&diff=prev&oldid=126353878 Elst, Koenraad. The saffron swastika: The notion of "Hindu fascism". Voice of India. ISBN 0-818-59906-9.

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Ikshvaku_dynasty&diff=prev&oldid=126353792 Since the word Ikshvaku means bitter gourd, scholars have suggested that the legend of Ikshvaku may have originated in the ancient myth of humanity's birth from a bitter gourd.

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Indra&diff=prev&oldid=126353688 *Indra and Shiva - By Koenraad Elst

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Indra&diff=prev&oldid=126353590 Some scholars have also argued that there is a continuity between Indra and Shiva (Rudra). Scholars such as Dr. David Frawley, Koenraad Elst and many Hindu dovotees believe that Indra in indeed Shiva. Lord Indra is said to be a bull while Lord Shiva has a bull as a vehicle. Lord Indra fights with the Maruts (who as children of Lord Rudra) as his soldiers. Lord Indra is too an outsider as is Lord Shiva and is also connected with tiger skin (e.g. in RV 5:4:1:11), which is what Lord Shiva meditates upon.

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Mahatma_Gandhi&diff=prev&oldid=126353491 Indologist Koenraad Elst also critiqued Gandhi. He questioned the effectiveness of Gandhi's theory of non-violence and argued that it achieved only a few token concessions from the British. Elst also argued that it was British fear of violence (along with depletion due to the after effects of World War II) rather than non-violence, that led to Indian Independence. According to Elst, this was exemplified by Indian public support for Subhash Chandra Bose's Indian National Army. As praise, "Gandhi's major claim to fame was that he, almost alone among the freedom leaders in the entire colonized world, had sought and developed policies and strategies rooted in native culture rather than borrowed from Western models (nationalism, socialism etc.)—"

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Neo-fascism_and_religion&diff=127378974&oldid=125809019 This kind of criticism is primarily made by politicians and academics who are sympathetic to Marxist ideologies. Koenraad Elst explains that Golwalkar's text mentions "racial purity" as Germany's concern but does not "make a plea" for it, and that he never described Hitler as "a source of inspiration.That alleged Golwalkar quotations turn out to be excerpted from the invective of his critics, is symptomatic of Hindutva-watching in general: first-hand information is spurned in favour of hostile second-hand claims made by unscrupled commentators. In most journalistic and academic publications on Hindutva, the number of direct quotations is tiny in comparison with quotations from secondary, hostile sources... If we do not just focus on the selected quotation (as we are led to do by those who made the selection in the first place), but read the whole book, we find that Golwalkar is definitely not asking the Hindus to emulate Nazi Germany." Elst further argues that the statement made was more a reactionary response to the ethnic separatism of the Muslim League made during that period when Muhammad Ali Jinnah wanted to segregate Muslims from Hindus on the basis of the Two Nation Theory.He further asserts that Hindutva groups have largely renounced the book where such quotes were made, including Golwalkar himself. It hasn't been published since 1948 and that basically, it is a tool to vilify/ harass those who subscribe to Hindutva. Some scholars contend that the traditional meaning of the term fascism does not apply to Hindutva groups — and that analysis of such groups must be performed without the use of politically loaded terminology. Other peer-reviewed scholars such as Yvette Rosser argue that to describe Hindu nationalism as fascist evokes double standards against Hindus in political and academic discourse, is part of an attempt to conflate political Hindutva with the religion of Hinduism, and is part of a systemic anti-Hindu bias in western academia and scholarship. The description of Hindutva as fascist has been particularly condemned by pro-Hindutva authors such as Koenraad Elst who claim that the ideology of Hindutva meets none of the characteristics of other fascist ideologies. Claims that Hindutva social service organisations such as the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh are "fascist" have been disputed by academics such as Vincent Kundukulam . In addition, accusations of "fascism" in the Hindutva movement coming from the left wing parties and western academics such as Christoffe Jaffrelot (who argues that Hindutva draws on the cultural nationalism of Bluntschli, rather than the racial nationalism of the Nazis themselves) have been criticized by former professor of political philosophy and Times of India commentator Jyotirmaya Sharma as a "simplistic transference has done great injustice to our knowledge of Hindu nationalist politics".

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Historical_revisionism_%28negationism%29&diff=prev&oldid=126711190 "Historical revisionism" (also but less often in English "negationism"Cite error: A <ref> tag is missing the closing </ref> (see the help page). There were proposals in November 1990 in Uttar Pradesh to ban the book. . Koenraad Elst claimed that "None of the negationist historians has come forward with a reply or with the announcement that a mistake has been discovered in Mr. Goel's list of monuments of Islamic fanaticism. Manini Chatterjee, reviewer for The Telegraph, could do no more than calling it a "very bad book". Very bad for the negationists, indeed." And Elst further claimed: "Of the hundreds of secularist historians who have signed statements denouncing "communal history distortion", not a single one has been able to challenge even one of the 2000 claims in the list." Cynthia Talbot in 1995 claimed that Goel's list of destroyed temples is "greatly inflated", but also called for a systematic and unbiased study of the subject, without which it is very difficult to gauge the extent of damage wrought on Indian temples. Cynthia Talbot noted that in the decades after 1565 temple desecration were on the rise in Andhra Pradesh, which is in accord with the dates in Goel's list of temple destructions (in Goel's chapter "Let the Mute Witness speak"). Reflecting on Goel's list, she says: "Five date from the fourteenth century (phase one), six come from phase two, and nineteen date from 1565 to 1650 CE (phase three). The remaining thirty or so cases stem from the century after 1650, with a notable bunching of incidents in the late 1600s, when the Mughal empire was absorbing the former Qutb Shahi Kingdom of Golkonda."

Category:Anti-Hinduism

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Koenraad_Elst&diff=prev&oldid=136471947 In an article, he argued that the current tendency to accuse Hindu movements of “fascism” is nothing but a "replay of an old colonial tactic." With this article, he has no problems with WP:LEAD ( the sentence "without institutional affiliation", which is wrong, is in the lead.) On other articles, he complains about WP:LEAD.

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Countering_systemic_bias_in_religion&oldid=139717663#Book_banning_on_Wikipedia.3F Previously, he asked Hindu editors to stop citing Koenraad Elst in wikipedia articles, and told them that he will "monitor the use of his name". He compares Elst with Holocaust denier David Irving.(User_talk:Shiva's_Trident Makes (indirect) comparison of Elst with the anti-semite David Irving) He tries to discredit Routledge (or what he claims to be the Asian or Indian Routledge division) only because Elst published a paper at this publisher. He claims that Witzel had a dinner with the president of India (but I couldn't find any such reference on the Web).

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Talk%3AThe_Saffron_Swastika&diff=118273722&oldid=105977116 proposes the deletion of all his books

Other Hindu or pro-Hindu authors

Expand to see

He deleted:

Ram Swarup

The "victories" in having Shah Bano reversed, in having Rushdie banned - "victories" which were loudly applauded by the "secularists"; the success in convincing political parties - with maps and lists - that Muslims would decide their fate in hundreds of constituencies; to say nothing of the "victories" of the violence in Punjab and Kashmir - the reaction is the cumulative result of these distortions in our polity. AND He writes: is a book by [[Hindutva ideologue Ram Swarup (here he has no problems with WP:LEAD and WP:NPOV or even truth (Ram Swarup is not a Hindutvadi))

Sita Ram Goel http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Sita_Ram_Goel&diff=118090191&oldid=prev American author David Frawley wrote, "While Voice of India had a controversial reputation, I found nothing irrational, much less extreme about their ideas or publications... Their criticisms of Islam were on par with the criticisms of the Catholic Church and of Christianity done by such Western thinkers as Voltaire or Thomas Jefferson. In fact they went far beyond such mere rational or historical criticisms of other religions and brought in a profound spiritual and yogic view as well."

The recommendations of the report The committee gave the following recommendations

  • (1) those missionaries whose primary object is proselytisation should be asked to withdraw and the large influx of foreign missionaries should be checked;
  • (2) the use of medical and other professional services as a direct means of making conversions should be prohibited by law;
  • (3) attempts to convert by force or fraud or material inducements, or by taking advantage of a person’s inexperience or confidence or spiritual weakness or thoughtlessness, or by penetrating into the religious conscience of persons for the purpose of consciously altering their faith, should be absolutely prohibited;
  • (4) the Constitution of India should be amended in order to rule out propagation by foreigners and conversions by force, fraud and other illicit means;
  • (5) legislative measures should be enacted for controlling conversion by illegal means;
  • (6) rules relating to registration of doctors, nurses and other personnel employed in hospitals should be suitably amended to provide a condition against evangelistic activities during professional service; and
  • (7) circulation of literature meant for religious propaganda without approval of the State Government should be prohibited. (Goel 1998, 163-164)

adds strong pov/OR: The supposed Report, which Goel claims to quote from liberally, is not otherwise available. Goel's explanation for this circumstance repeats the allegations of one 'Baba' Madhavdas, who had claimed Christian missionaries "had bought" all available copies of the report and destroyed them.

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=The_Calcutta_Quran_Petition&diff=prev&oldid=126091322 Further reading

  • Elst, Koenraad, Ayodhya and After: Issues Before Hindu Society (1991)
  • Freedom of expression - Secular Theocracy Versus Liberal Democracy (1998, edited by Sita Ram Goel)

External links

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Conversion_of_non-Muslim_places_of_worship_into_mosques&diff=127646807&oldid=126856273 The destruction of Hindu temples in India during the Islamic conquest had occurred from the beginning of Muslim conquest until the end the Mughal Empire throughout the Indian subcontinent. Numerous Indian mosques bear inscriptions that they were constructed on the sites of destroyed Hindu temples; in many cases materials from the demolished temples were used for construction of mosques. The total number of mosques on the Indian subcontinent that were built on the sites of former Hindu temples is difficult to estimate; however, the number of demolished temples is in the tens of thousands, and in most cases the destruction was accompanied by construction of mosques on the freed places.

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Freedom_of_expression_-_Secular_Theocracy_Versus_Liberal_Democracy&diff=prev&oldid=126090991 In particular it criticizes the banning of Ram Swarup's book Understanding Islam through Hadis. Goel's work contains court orders and proceedings which Goel describes as 'documenting' the banning of books and what he calls the banning of criticism of religion in India/ Goel argues that "In the Indian context it should have meant a revolt against the closed creed of Islam as well, and keeping the state aloof from the influence of mullahs." Goel furthermore claims that India has become in many ways a "Theocracy". He says: "Leftists in general have always opposed Theocracy in Muslim and Christian countries. It is only in India that they have become its unrivalled champions."

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Persecution_of_Buddhists&diff=prev&oldid=155327501

Yvette Rosser

deletes: *Yvette Rosser

Rosser and writes: Rosser is a vociferous advocate of expanding academic teaching and research on what she describes as the "medieval imperialism" and "Hindu genocide" carried out by Muslim rulers in South Asia starting in the 8th century. This position - shared by Hindu right wing scholars - has assisted her in forging close contact with other US and India based Hindu nationalist advocacy groups, such as Rajiv Malhotra's Infinity Foundation.

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Saffronization&diff=prev&oldid=152386380 Deletes a link to a Rosser article on Infinity Foundation Rosser says he lies to her and spreads untruths and propaganda about what she does and believes. There is possible WP:BLP violation by Hornplease. (e.g. http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Articles_for_deletion/Yvette_Rosser&diff=prev&oldid=119230264, http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=User_talk:Yrosser&diff=70276632&oldid=70272902

Taslima Nasrin http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Censorship_in_India&diff=prev&oldid=155362701 Books by Taslima Nasrin were banned in West Bengal..

Arun Shourie http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Arun_Shourie&diff=prev&oldid=127629698

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Arun_Shourie&diff=127629698&oldid=127585972 Missionaries in India

Nicholas Kazanas

Vishal Agarwal

  • http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Vishal_Agarwal&diff=119362007&oldid=119361026 . He also gives talks and presentations on Hinduism and ancient India in High Schools, Colleges, old age homes, etc., upon invitation. His views on relevant matters have been sought by newspapers such as the Minnesota Star, Metro News (from San Jose), Baltimore Sun, The Wall Street Journal (by the Pullitzer prize winning journalist Daniel Golden) and he has been referenced in publications in journals such as the Journal of Indo-European Studies. Agarwal was also embroiled recently in the California Textbook Hindu controversy where he testified multiple times before the Board of Education of the State of California, and consulted by certain advocacy groups. He was also interviewed by Dr Martha Nussbaum (Professor of Law, University of Chicago) for her forthcoming book on the state of democracy in Indian in the year 2004. In July 2006, he was awarded the 'Praachavidyaa-paarangata' award by the World Association of Vedic Studies, at their annual conference in Houston, Texas (USA).

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Vishal_Agarwal&diff=prev&oldid=126102096 wants to delete the article with PROD

Subhash Kak http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Indology&diff=prev&oldid=157380672

Gurbachan Singh Talib

He deletes the bibliography and external links to Infinity Foundation and Rediff.com http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Anti-Hinduism&diff=prev&oldid=153984591, http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Anti-Hinduism&diff=prev&oldid=153984232, http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Anti-Hinduism&diff=prev&oldid=153984112

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Anti-Hinduism&diff=prev&oldid=154491041 While at the same time removing pro-Hindu text, he adds this unsourced line:There are also allegations of Anti-Hinduism voiced by members of the Hindu diaspora in the West against their host societies, notably in the United States, where these form part of the so-called "culture wars", with cases such as the Californian Hindu textbook case. He then deletes the paragraphs on Aurangzeb and on bin Qasim: Several Islamic scholars, theologians and Emperors held virulently anti-Hindu stances during the Islamic invasion of India. They regarded Hindus as "infidels" who had to be slaughtered with no mercy. In particular, the Arab invaders in the 8th century held anti-Hindu attitudes, such as the testament of the superior of Muhammad bin-Qasim, Hajjaj, who quoted the Quran to justify the slaughter of Hindus. He deletes books and links:

David Frawley http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Articles_for_deletion/Dharmic_religion&diff=prev&oldid=155309849 *If you do not believe Frawley is fringe, take it up at the fringe noticeboard. I certainly intend to remove him as a reference from any article not in his specific area of expertise, which is the teaching if yoga, unless I am wrong. Hornplease 00:04, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Dharmic_religion&diff=155237491&oldid=154143957 deletes ref

Hindu American Foundation

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Anti-Hinduism&diff=prev&oldid=155098262 He deletes mostly unsourced (but correct) information. He deletes the word "fundamentalist christian", but in other articles inserts the word fundamentalist Hindu. He deletes the entire section on the Human Rights report of the Hindu American Foundation: The Hindu American Foundation, an advocacy group for Hindus, released a report in 2005 on the status of the human rights of Hindus, mainly in Bangladesh, Pakistan, and the Kashmir valley. The report attempts to increase awareness of anti-Hindu views propagated and used to justify violations of the human rights of many Hindus in the region. The report introduces as:

“ Human rights are by definition universal. Hence, in an ideal world there would be no need to write a separate report on the human rights of Hindus, or for that matter any other group. In the real world, unfortunately, there is a gaping hole when it comes to the awareness of human rights for Hindus, mainly in Bangladesh, Pakistan and in the Kashmir valley. ”

The 71-page report compiles media coverage and firsthand accounts of human rights violations perpetrated against Hindus because of their religious identity. The incidents are documented, often quoting from well-known international human rights organizations.The Hindu American Foundation presented the report to the co-chairs of the US Congressional Caucus on India and Indian-Americans, Representatives Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, a Republican, and Gary Ackerman, a Democrat. Both of these members of Congress endorsed it.Rabbi Abraham Cooper, Associate Dean and co-founder of the Simon Wiesenthal Center, praised the HAF for the report.

“ The Simon Wiesenthal Center welcomes this report which will help the international community and Non-governmental Organizations to have a broader understanding of the human rights situation in that important region of the world. ”

Several academics on campuses around the U.S. also reviewed this year’s report. Florida International University Professor of religious Studies, Nathan Katz, remarked on the promulgation of various anti-Hindu sentiments recorded in the report:

“ “This report by the Hindu American Foundation…is a real eye-opener”.“As a minority in Islamic societies that consider them to be ‘idolaters,’ Hindus in Bangladesh, Pakistan and Afghanistan face unimaginable persecution routinely. ”

The report documents the long history of anti-Hindu atrocities in Bangladesh, a topic that many Indians and Indian governments over the years have preferred not to acknowledge. Such atrocities, including targeted attacks against temples, open theft of Hindu property, and rape of young Hindu women and enticements to convert to Islam, have increased sharply in recent years after the Jamat-e-Islami joined the coalition government led by the Bangladesh National Party. The report concludes with:

“ Some Indians may feel uncomfortable with this report because they do not want to be reminded about the problems of Hindus outside their milieu. And for some in the Indian intelligentsia, it is a badge of honour to distance themselves from these pogroms as a mark of their supposed enlightenment, oddly trashing their own ethos in the process. Many more Indians are reluctant to speak out against atrocities committed against Hindus for fear of being labeled "communal". Merely speaking about human rights for Hindus is for them a form of communalism ”

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Hindu_American_Foundation&diff=125596610&oldid=98002055 The report documents the long history of anti-Hindu atrocities in Bangladesh, a topic that many Indians and Indian governments over the years have preferred not to acknowledge. Such atrocities, including targeted attacks against temples, open theft of Hindu property, and rape of young Hindu women and enticements to convert to Islam, have increased sharply in recent years after the Jamat-e-Islami joined the coalition government led by the Bangladesh National Party.The report concludes with:

“ Some Indians may feel uncomfortable with this report because they do not want to be reminded about the problems of Hindus outside their milieu. And for some in the Indian intelligentsia, it is a badge of honour to distance themselves from these pogroms as a mark of their supposed enlightenment, oddly trashing their own ethos in the process. Many more Indians are reluctant to speak out against atrocities committed against Hindus for fear of being labeled "communal". Merely speaking about human rights for Hindus is for them a form of communalism ”

The people whose persecution is amply documented in this report are being persecuted because they are Hindu, not because they are poor or because of their political views. Human rights activists in Bangladesh and Pakistan, many of whom are not Hindus, have painstakingly documented the violations of basic human rights of Hindus in their country.

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Hinduism_in_the_United_States&diff=prev&oldid=152169206

Vincent Kundukulam http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Hindutva&diff=prev&oldid=139969281 He reverts a "mainstream", often edited article back to a few weeks ago. He doesn't use the talkpage, even in his next four reverts he only uses a edit summary (http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Hindutva&diff=prev&oldid=140060213 etc.). Of course, there are a lot of deletions, e.g. : Similar is the Shiromani Akali Dal, which is a Sikh religious party but maintains ties with Hindutva organizations, as they also represent Sikhism.

The Supreme Court also ruled that "Ordinarily, Hindutva is understood as a way of life or a state of mind and is not to be equated with or understood as religious Hindu fundamentalism. A Hindu may embrace a non-Hindu religion without ceasing to be a Hindu and since the Hindu is disposed to think synthetically and to regard other forms of worship, strange gods and divergent doctrines as inadequate rather than wrong or objectionable, he tends to believe that the highest divine powers complement each other for the well-being of the world and mankind." The Uniform Civil Code is opposed by Muslims, Christians and parties like the Indian National Congress and The Communist Party of India (Marxist). The amendment of the Indian constitution by the late Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi to overturn a Supreme Court judgment under pressure from the conservative Muslims incensed some Hindus who became Hindutva supporters. The amended laws, more in tune with the Shariat, reduced the rights that divorced Muslim women previously had. They also often feel that secular democracy implies equal laws for all religions, and want a Uniform Civil Code passed for the same reason. One must also differentiate between the word "secularism" as used in the Western and Indian contexts. Secularism in the West implies "separation of church & state" whereas secularism in India means "equal respect for all religions". This statement comes from the fact that when Pope John Paul II came to India, he called for an entire conversion of Asia in the lines of that carried out in Europe and Africa in the earlier millennia. The epithet of "Fascism" is also used to evoke double standards against Hindus in political and academic discourse. The academia and polity have been accused of engaging in a form of anti-Hindu Mccarthyism against Hindu political expression by levelling the accusation of "Fascism" against anyone who expresses sympathy for Hindus.

Marxist critics , have used the inflammatory political epithets of "Indian fascism" and "Hindu fascism" to describe the ideology of the Sangh Parivar. For example, Marxist social scientist Prabhat Patnaik has written that the Hindutva movement as it has emerged is "classically fascist in class support, methods and programme"

The description of Hindutva as fascist has been condemned by pro-Hindutva authors such as Koenraad Elst who claim that the ideology of Hindutva meets none of the characteristics of fascist ideologies. Claims that Hindutva social service organisations such as the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh are "fascist" have been disputed by academics such as Vincent Kundukulam. In addition, accusations of "fascism" in the Hindutva movement coming from the left wing parties and western academics such as Christoffe Jaffrelot (who argues that Hindutva draws on the cultural nationalism of Bluntschli, rather than the racial nationalism of the Nazis themselves) have been criticized by former professor of political philosophy. and Times of India commentator Jyotirmaya Sharma as a "simplistic transference has done great injustice to our knowledge of Hindu nationalist politics" He removes the fact tag for this sentence: Outside observers, on the other hand, describe Hindutva philosophy as fundamentalism. (includes allegations that Golwalkar was a Nazi).

Elliot and Dowson

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Delhi_Sultanate&diff=prev&oldid=155327420 removes Elliot and Dowson from bibliography

VS Naipual and Tom Bottomore and Vishal Agarwal

He deletes sources like Tom Bottomore and VS Naipaul, but for Elst, an inadequate source (editorial) and non-specialist of Belgian politics is quite ok as source:

Another double standard is when Hornplease reverted an user who deleted a comment on the talkpage: At the same day, the same user removed this sentence, which Hornplease didn't revert: " In peer-reviewed literature, he has published in the Journal of Indo-European Studies." Then he claims that Vishal Agarwal is not notable.

Thomas Trautmann

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Indophobia&diff=157380525&oldid=156864610 Trautmann (1997) argues that British Indophobia was constructed by Evangelicalism and Utilitarianism and its chief architects were Charles Grant and James Mill. Claims of Indophobic Bias in South Asian Studies have often been made. Such real or perceived bias can imply old-fashioned and prejudiced outsider interpretations of Eastern cultures and peoples:

  • Biased interpretation of Indian history. For example James Mill's History of India downplays Indian history.
  • One-sided, unfair, exaggerated or exclusively negative presentation of some aspects of Hinduism or Indian culture. For example exaggerations or misrepresentations about Hindu theology, misrepresentations about the status of women in Hinduism, etc.
  • Claims that the Indological scholarship of Indians themselves is not scientific or that it is motivated by political motives, i.e. by Marxist, nationalist, Hindu, Muslim, Dravidian separatist or other motives.

He advocated the creation of a middle Anglicised class that was "Indian in blood and colour, but English in taste, in opinions, in morals, and in intellect". This class of anglicized Indians would then in turn anglicize the Indian people. His work "History of British India" (1817) may be the "single most important source of British Indophobia and hostility to Orientalism". . American views of India, that have been quite negative, can be noted in the use of characterization like "Very Benighted Heathens", "the White Man's Burden" and the "Lesser Breed". </small

Whitewashing of the most intolerant Islamic rulers like Aurangzeb etc

Expand to see

He deleted:

Andre Wink

Muhammed bin Qasim: Strategy of Temple Plunder The plunder was also achieved by an ingenious system of leaving the prosperous population alone, so that they would continue to bring donations to the temples, and then the Muslims would loot these temples. In order to save their temple from destruction, many Hindu warriors refused to fight: According to Wink :
"An even greater part of the revenue of these rulers was derived from the gifts donated by pilgrims who came from all over Sind and Hind to the great idol (sanam) of the sun-temple at Multan… When Muhammad al-Qasim conquered Multan, he quickly discovered that it was this temple which was one of the main reasons for the great wealth of the town. He 'made captives of the custodians of the budd, numbering 6000' and confiscated its wealth, but not the idol itself – which was made of wood, covered with red leather and two red rubies for its eyes and wearing a crown of gold inlaid with gems --, 'thinking it best to leave the idol where it was,
but hanging a piece of cow's flesh on its neck by way of mockery".

Strategy of Temples as Ransom According to Wink AI-Qasim built his mosque in the same place, in the most crowded bazaar in the center of the town. The possession of the sun-temple -- rather than the mosque -- is what in later times the geographers see as the reason why the local governors or rulers could hold out against the neighboring Hindu powers. Whenever an 'infidel king' marched against Multan and the Muslims found it difficult to offer adequate resistance, they threatened to break the idol or mutilate it, and this, allegedly, made the enemy withdraw. In the late tenth century however the Isma'ilis who occupied Multan broke the idol into pieces and killed its priests. A new mosque was then erected on its site…"

Treatment of Jats The narrative in the Chach Namah a persian book translated from an earlier arab book conveys that Chach humiliated the Jats and Lohanas .Ibbetson records on page 358 volume II that "Muhammad bin Qasim maintained these regulations , declaring that the jats resembled the savages of Persia "

Enslavement of non combatants priests women and children On the other hand in the matter of treatment of brahmins and enslavement of women and children Farishta the muslim historian records in Chapter IX of his chronicle
"In a few days after which the place fell. Mahomed Kasim levelled the temple and its walls with the ground, and circumcised the bramins. The infidels highly resented this treatment, by invectives against him and the true faith. On which Mahomed Kasim caused every bramin, from the age of seventeen and upwards, to be put to death: the young women and children of both sexes were retained in bondage; and the old women being released, were permitted to go whithersoever they chose.

F. B. Flood

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Iconoclasm&diff=prev&oldid=154852950 There is also evidence for destruction of icons by medieval Muslim rulers of South Asia. The most famous concerns a stone lingam, an aniconic representation of the Hindu god Shiva, which was housed in the temple complex at Somnath in Gujarat. According to a tradition preserved by the 16th century historian Mahommed Kasim Ferishta, the Ghaznavid emperor Mahmud of Ghazni raided Somnath in 1025, looting the temple. The temple Brahmins offered to buy the lingam back, but Mahmud refused, and his army carried it back to Ghazni. There the lingam was broken, and a portion of it was re-used as the threshold of the congregational mosque.


Deletion of Saqi Mustad Khan and whitewashing of Aurangzeb

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Aurangzeb&diff=prev&oldid=131624585 He makes major deletions on the Aurangzeb article. Aurangzeb was one of the most intolerant Muslim rulers, infamous for his temple destructions, fanaticism, massacres and the submission of Hindus under the Jyzia. He claims that he is only reverting Hkelkar, and it's not true. He deletes: During his reign, allegedly many Hindu temples were defaced and destroyed, and many non-Muslims converted to Islam, both by inducement and by force. The Jizya, a head tax on non-Muslims, was reinstated during his rule. he interfered with non-Muslim religious practice through sweeping and often violent methods. Accounts of iconoclasm During his reign, many hundreds -- perhaps many thousands -- of temples were desecrated: facades and interiors were defaced and their murtis (idols) looted. In many cases, temples were destroyed entirely; in numerous instances mosques were built on their foundations, sometimes using the same stones.His edicts show that he authorized and encouraged these acts. The history of the Mughal reign under Aurangzeb was chronicled as the Maāsir-i-ʻālamgiri, which states that:

  1. Aurangzeb issued a general order to destroy all centers of Hindu learnings including Varnasi and destroyed the temple at Mathura and rename it as Islamabad
  2. In Khandela (Rajastan) he killed 300 Hindus in one day for they resisted the destruction of their temple.
  3. In Multan and Thatta in Sind, Aurangzeb ordered the governors to "demolish the schools and temples of the infidels and with utmost urgency put down the teachings and practices of these religious misbelievers "
  4. In Udaipur all Hindus of the town were killed as they vowed to defend the temple of Udaipur from destruction.172 temples were destroyed in Udaipur.
  5. 66 temples were pulled down in Amber. All Hindu clerks were dismissed from the office of the Imperial empire.
  6. In Pandhpur, Maharashtra, the Emperor ordered and executed the destruction of temple and butchering of cows within the temple.

From the beginning of his reign, Aurangzeb permitted and even encouraged the defacement and destruction of Hindu temples. Other edicts added to the impact. In 1665 he forbade Hindus to display illuminations at Diwali festivals. Hindu religious fairs were outlawed in 1668. The following year, he prohibited construction of new Hindu temples as well as the repair of existing ones. In 1671 Aurangzeb issued an order that only Muslims could be landlords of crown lands. He ordered provincial Viceroys to dismiss all Hindu clerks. In 1674 certain lands owned by Hindus in Gujarat were confiscated. The customs duties levied on merchants was doubled for non-Muslims. In 1679, contrary to the advice of many of his court nobles and theologians, Aurangzeb reimposed the Jizya tax on all non-Muslims.

Speaking of the devastating persecution of the Hindu and his architectural symbols,V.S. Naipaul has written " This is such a big and bad event that people still have to find polite, destiny-defying ways of speaking about it"

Among those that Aurangzeb is said to have destroyed were two most sacred to Hindus, in Varanasi and Mathura. In both cases, he had large mosques built on the sites. Some historians opine that these temples were destroyed more for political reasons than religious, e.g. the Kesava Deo temple in Mathura, which marked the place believed to be the birth place of Shri Krishna, was destroyed as a reprisal for the peasant rebellions in the locality. The temple had large, gilded spires that could be seen from Agra. In 1661 Aurangzeb ordered the demolition of the temple, and constructed the Katra Masjid mosque. Traces of the ancient Hindu temple can be seen from the back of the mosque. Such claims have also been criticized by V.S. Naipaul when he wrote 'And indeed is the case, when it comes to the number of temples Aurangzeb demolished, the inclusion of the sentence: "...number of such desecrations is probably much exaggerated...", is an unwritten law among Indian historians.'

He deletes critical links:* From Akbar to Aurangzeb

Critical Views

He removes "latter-day", which is wrong: http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Aurangzeb&diff=prev&oldid=131441096

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Aurangzeb&diff=131446753&oldid=131194156, http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Aurangzeb&diff=prev&oldid=134262441 He deletes: The history of the Mughal reign under Aurangzeb was chronicled as the Maāsir-i-ʻālamgiri, which states that:

  1. Aurangzeb issued a general order to destroy all centers of Hindu learnings including Varnasi and destroyed the temple at Mathura and rename it as Islamabad
  2. In Khandela (Rajastan) he killed 300 Hindus in one day for they resisted the destruction of their temple.
  3. In Multan and Thatta in Sind, Aurangzeb ordered the governors to "demolish the schools and temples of the infidels and with utmost urgency put down the teachings and practices of these religious misbelievers "
  4. In Udaipur all Hindus of the town were killed as they vowed to defend the temple of Udaipur from destruction.172 temples were destroyed in Udaipur.
  5. 66 temples were pulled down in Amber. All Hindu clerks were dismissed from the office of the Imperial empire.
  6. In Pandhpur, Maharashtra, the Emperor ordered and executed the destruction of temple and butchering of cows within the temple.

From the beginning of his reign, Aurangzeb permitted and even encouraged the defacement and destruction of Hindu temples. Other edicts added to the impact. In 1665 he forbade Hindus to display illuminations at Diwali festivals. Hindu religious fairs were outlawed in 1668. The following year, he prohibited construction of new Hindu temples as well as the repair of existing ones. In 1671 Aurangzeb issued an order that only Muslims could be landlords of crown lands. He ordered provincial Viceroys to dismiss all Hindu clerks. In 1674 certain lands owned by Hindus in Gujarat were confiscated. The customs duties levied on merchants was doubled for non-Muslims. In 1679, contrary to the advice of many of his court nobles and theologians, Aurangzeb reimposed the Jizya tax on all non-Muslims. Speaking of the devastating persecution of the Hindu and his architectural symbols,V.S. Naipaul has written " This is such a big and bad event that people still have to find polite, destiny-defying ways of speaking about it" Among those that Aurangzeb is said to have destroyed were two most sacred to Hindus, in Varanasi and Mathura. The Sikh Guru was offered a choice between accepting Islam or death; and he willingly accepted the latter.His response led to his death. The Guru "laid down his life, but not the principles"

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Aurangzeb&diff=prev&oldid=134063371 deletions and this: changes : Soldiers and citizens were also given free rein to deface architectural images such as faces and any image representing a living being — to : Soldiers and citizens were also given free rein to deface architectural images such as faces, flowers and vines —

Deletions and Whitewashing of Muhammed bin Qasim http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Muhammad_bin_Qasim&diff=prev&oldid=157201530 The status of Dhimmi (protected people) was conferred upon Hindus and Buddhists Dhimmi communities were subjected to the payment of taxes in favor of Muslims — a requirement that was central to dhimma as a whole. Sura 9:29 stipulates that jizya be exacted from non-Muslims as a condition required for jihad to cease. Failure to pay the jizya could result in the pledge of protection of a dhimmi's life and property becoming void, with the dhimmi facing the alternatives of conversion, enslavement or death (or imprisonment, as advocated by Abu Yusuf, the chief qadi — religious judge — of Abbasid caliph Harun al-Rashid).

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Muhammad_bin_Qasim&diff=prev&oldid=155939107 Here a report tells of the capture of another of Dahir's wives, Ladi, whom Qasim later married, and of the two daughters of Dahir from a third wife, who were sent on to the Khalifa as war booty. According to Wink , "a considerable number of Jats was captured as prisoners of war and deported to Iraq and elsewhere as slaves." The plunder was also achieved by an ingenious system of leaving the prosperous population alone, so that they would continue to bring donations to the temples, and then the Muslims would loot these temples. In order to save their temple from destruction, many Hindu warriors refused to fight: According to Wink :
"An even greater part of the revenue of these rulers was derived from the gifts donated by pilgrims who came from all over Sind and Hind to the great idol (sanam) of the sun-temple at Multan… When Muhammad al-Qasim conquered Multan, he quickly discovered that it was this temple which was one of the main reasons for the great wealth of the town. He 'made captives of the custodians of the budd, numbering 6000' and confiscated its wealth, but not the idol itself – which was made of wood, covered with red leather and two red rubies for its eyes and wearing a crown of gold inlaid with gems --, 'thinking it best to leave the idol where it was,
but hanging a piece of cow's flesh on its neck by way of mockery". According to Wink AI-Qasim built his mosque in the same place, in the most crowded bazaar in the center of the town. The possession of the sun-temple -- rather than the mosque -- is what in later times the geographers see as the reason why the local governors or rulers could hold out against the neighboring Hindu powers. Whenever an 'infidel king' marched against Multan and the Muslims found it difficult to offer adequate resistance, they threatened to break the idol or mutilate it, and this, allegedly, made the enemy withdraw. In the late tenth century however the Isma'ilis who occupied Multan broke the idol into pieces and killed its priests. A new mosque was then erected on its site…" On the other hand in the matter of treatment of brahmins and enslavement of women and children Farishta the muslim historian records in Chapter IX of his chronicle
"In a few days after which the place fell. Mahomed Kasim levelled the temple and its walls with the ground, and circumcised the bramins. The infidels highly resented this treatment, by invectives against him and the true faith. On which Mahomed Kasim caused every bramin, from the age of seventeen and upwards, to be put to death: the young women and children of both sexes were retained in bondage; and the old women being released, were permitted to go whithersoever they chose. The narrative in the Chach Namah a persian book translated from an earlier arab book conveys that Chach humiliated the Jats and Lohanas .Ibbetson records on page 358 volume II that "Muhammad bin Qasim maintained these regulations , declaring that the jats resembled the savages of Persia " and destroyed an old and historic temple in Multan that bin Qasim had protected and built a mosque in its place.

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Muhammad_bin_Qasim&diff=prev&oldid=157763275 Practical, expedient considerations lead Muhammad to desist from carrying out the strict injunctions of Islamic Law . and the wishes of al—Hajjaj . by massacring the (pagan) infidel Hindus of Sindh. Instead, he imposed upon the vanquished Hindus the jizya and associated restrictive regulations of dhimmitude. As a result, the Chachnama records, 'some resolved to live in their native land, but others took flight in order to maintain the faith of their ancestors, and their horses, domestics, and other property' . Thusa lasting pattern was set that would persist, as noted by Majumdar, until the Mughal Empire collapsed at the end of Aurangzeb's reign (in 1707), . The imposition of dhimmitude upon the vanquished Hindu populations is also characterized, in brief. The Muslim chroniclers al—Baladhuri (in Kitab Futuh al—Buldan) and al—Kufi (in the Chachnama) include enough isolated details to establish the overall nature of the conquest of Sindh by Muhammad b. Qasim in 712 C.E. These narratives, and the processes they describe, make clear that the Arab invaders intended from the outset to Islamize Sindh by conquest, colonization, and local conversion. Baladhuri, for example, records that following the capture of Debal, Muhammad b. Qasim earmarked a section of the city exclusively for Muslims, constructed a mosque, and established four thousand colonists there. . The conquest of Debal had been a brutal affair, as summarized from the Muslim sources by Majumdar. Despite appeals for mercy from the besieged Indians (who opened their gates after the Muslims scaled the fort walls), Muhammad b. Qasim declared that he had no orders (i.e., from his superior al—Hajjaj, the Governor of Iraq) to spare the inhabitants, and thus for three days a ruthless and indiscriminate slaughter ensued. In the aftermath, the local temple was defiled, and '700 beautiful females who had sought for shelter there, were all captured'. The capture of Raor was accompanied by a similar tragic outcome. Muhammad massacred 6000 fighting men who were found in the fort, and their followers and dependents, as well as their women and children were taken prisoners. Sixty thousand slaves, including 30 young ladies of royal blood, were sent to Hajjaj, along with the head of Dahar [the Hindu ruler]. We can now well understand why the capture of a fort by the Muslim forces was followed by the terrible jauhar ceremony (in which females threw themselves in fire kindled by themselves), the earliest recorded instance of which is found in the Chachnama. The word Samání (originally Shráman) occurs several times, and we are told of Buddha temples, Buddha monas¬teries, and even of Buddha extremists, who considered it against their religion to take up arms in their own defence against the Mussalmans

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Persecution_of_Buddhists&diff=prev&oldid=155937610 Muslim conquerors also described Indian Pagans as But-parast, and idol-breakers as but-shikan. The word "but" is derived from the Persian word for Buddha, but was used by subsequent Muslims for "Indian paganism" in general. Therefore in Muslim chronicles it is not always evident if Buddhists, Hindus or other Indian religions are described by term. In the 7th century Muhammad bin Qasim conquered Sindh and though he incorporated Buddhists into the into his administration as governors and is seen as having been welcomed against an unpopular Hindu king, is also noted to have demolished and sacked temples and monasteries and established Muslim rule. Around 1000 CE, Turkic, Persian, and Afghan Muslims began major incursions into India through the traditional invasion routes of the northwest. Mahmud of Ghazni (979-1030) established a base in Punjab and raided nearby areas. Mahmud of Ghazni is said to have been an iconoclast. Hindu and Buddhist statues, shrines and temples were looted and destroyed, and many Buddhists had to take refuge in Tibet. He demolished numerous monasteries alongside temples during his raid across north-western India. In 1193, Qutb-ud-Din, a Turkish commander, seized control of Delhi, leaving defenseless the northeastern territories that were the heart of Buddhist India. The Mahabodhi Temple was almost completely destroyed by the invading muslim forces. One of Qutb-ud-Din's generals, Ikhtiar Uddin Muhammad Bin Bakhtiyar Khilji, invaded Magadha and destroyed the great Buddhist shrines at Nalanda. The Buddhism of Magadha suffered a tremendous decline under Khilji. Muhammad of Ghor attacked the North-Western regions of the Indian subcontinent many times. Gujarat later fell to Muhammad of Ghor's armies in 1197. Muhammad of Ghor's armies destroyed many Buddhist structures, including the great Buddhist university of Nalanda. In 1200 Muhammad Khilji, one of Qutb-ud-Din's generals destroyed monasteries fortified by the Sena armies, such as the one at Vikramshila. Many monuments of ancient Indian civilization were destroyed by the invading armies, including Buddhist sanctuaries near Benares. Buddhist monks who escaped the massacre fled to Nepal, Tibet and South India. In 1215, Genghis Khan conquered Gandhara. In 1227, after his death, his conquest was divided. Chagatai then established the Chagatai Khanate, where his son Arghun made Buddhism the state religion. At the same time, he came down harshly on Islam and demolished mosques to build many stupas. He was succeeded by his brother, and then his son Ghazan who converted to Islam and in 1295 changed the state religion. After his reign, and the splitting of the Chagatai Khanate, little mention of Buddhism or the stupas built by the Mongols can be found in Afghanistan and Central Asia. Timur was a 14th-century warlord of Turco-Mongol descent , conqueror of much of Western and central Asia, and founder of the Timurid Empire. Timur destroyed Buddhist establishments and raided areas in which Buddhism had flourished. Mughal rule also contributed to the decline of Buddhism. They are reported to have destroyed many Hindu temples and Buddhist shrines alike or converted many sacred Hindu places into Muslim shrines and mosques. Mughal rulers like Aurangzeb destroyed Buddhist temples and monasteries and replaced them with Islamic mosques.

Other censorship, deletions http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Caste_system_among_South_Asian_Muslims&diff=prev&oldid=155160718 deletes info about Ghazala Shaheen who was gang-raped in Pakistan, source is timesonline

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Indus_Valley_Civilization&diff=prev&oldid=155156048 (deletes reference, his explanation: http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Talk:Indus_Valley_Civilization&diff=prev&oldid=155156449, http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Talk:Indus_Valley_Civilization&diff=prev&oldid=154977868) This name diversity appears partly because the original association with "Indus valley" was tenuous: of the 1400 sites, only 44 are on the Indus river and its tributaries, while nearly 1000 lie along the Ghaggar-Hakra / Saraswati rivers.

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Hindu_Students_Council&diff=prev&oldid=154846295 He removes and deemphasizes some positive statments about this Hindu organisation by Warner and Kurian.

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Aurangzeb&diff=prev&oldid=154919712 His edits in this article, about one of the most intolerant and fanatic Muslim rulers, try to show Aurangzeb as a rather benevolent and tolerant ruler.

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Californian_Hindu_textbook_controversy&diff=prev&oldid=143923341 He deletes links (all of them pro-Hindu), and leaves the almost dozens of other links in the article. Some of the links are important for the Hindu-POV, such as *

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Delhi_Sultanate&diff=prev&oldid=155327361 *Memoir of the Emperor Timur (Malfuzat-i Timuri) Timur's memoirs on his invasion of India; describes in detail the massacre of Hindus, forced conversions to Islam and the plunder of the wealth of Hindustan (India). Compiled in the book: "The History of India, as Told by Its Own Historians. The Muhammadan Period", by Sir H. M. Elliot, Edited by John Dowson; London, Trubner Company; 1867–1877

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Uniform_civil_code&diff=prev&oldid=125756097 The secular Uniform Civil Code is opposed by Muslims, Christians and parties like the Indian National Congress and the Communist Party of India (Marxist). This is a contradiction to these parties' commitment to secularism, and has led to claims that they are pseudosecularist. Those in favour of a secular Uniform Civil Code are the Bharatiya Janata Party , the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh and the Vishwa Hindu Parishad. These are also referred to as "Communalists". Thus, in India, there exists a peculiar situation where the opponents of this law are called "Secularists" while those in favour of a secular law are termed "communalists" or "fascists".

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Anti-Hinduism&diff=prev&oldid=155668825 removes HAF report and other things

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Anti-Hinduism&diff=prev&oldid=155705895 removes source "clnup" http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Anti-Hinduism&diff=prev&oldid=156091892 In addition, H.D. Sharma points out that, contrary to the claims of other scholars such as Mohibbul Hasan, he did not carry out the conversions as a punitive measure for rebellion, but as part of a campaign to eradicate Hinduism from his kingdom. In addition, he cites examples such as Tippu's conquest of Malabar in 1788 CE, when he appointed a "Shaikh ul-Islam" in each village to carry out forced conversions in an organized manner. This was primarily done to the well-educated Nair Hindus in the region, including those in Coorg, as Tippu perceived their intellect to be a threat to his Islamic rule. C. K. Kareem also notes that Tippu Sultan issued an edict for the destruction of Hindu temples in Kerala.Cite error: A <ref> tag is missing the closing </ref> (see the help page)..

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Madhav_Sadashiv_Golwalkar&diff=125748972&oldid=124364779 "Note that Golwalkar's text mentions "racial purity" as Germany's concern but does not "make a plea" for it, and that he never described Hitler as "a source of inspiration.That alleged Golwalkar quotations turn out to be excerpted from the invective of his critics, is symptomatic of Hindutva-watching in general: first-hand information is spurned in favour of hostile second-hand claims made by unscrupled commentators. In most journalistic and academic publications on Hindutva, the number of direct quotations is tiny in comparison with quotations from secondary, hostile sources... If we do not just focus on the selected quotation (as we are led to do by those who made the selection in the first place), but read the whole book, we find that Golwalkar is definitely not asking the Hindus to emulate Nazi Germany." He further asserts that Hindutva groups have largely renounced the book where such quotes were made, including Golwalkar himself. It hasn't been published since 1948 and that basically, it is a tool to vilify/ harass those who subscribe to Hindutva. Elst further argues that the statement made was more a reactionary response to the ethnic separatism of the Muslim League made during that period when Muhammad Ali Jinnah wanted to segregate Muslims from Hindus on the basis of the Two Nation Theory.Cite error: A <ref> tag is missing the closing </ref> (see the help page). adds:It strong tradition existed, particularly in certain Hindu communities, that an ancient Ram Janmabhoomi temple was demolished and replaced with the Babri Mosque. It was in reference to this tradition that the 1986 edition Encyclopædia Britannica reported that ... a claim the editors later removed as 'misleading'.

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Indian_Rebellion_of_1857&diff=prev&oldid=9399974 adds . Other than Indian units of the Company's army, most of the resistance came from the old aristocracy, which feared that under British rule they would become irrelevant and replaced by a new comprador class.(pov without citation)

  • http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Anti-Hinduism&diff=124055978&oldid=124013670 deletes the ref:During the British rule of the Indian Subcontinent, several evangelical Christian missionaries spread anti-Hindu propaganda in India during the 19th century as a means to convert them to Christianity. Examples include missionaries like Abbe J.A. Dubois, who wrote that, in order to make a "New race of Hindus", the foundations of Hindu civilization have to be undermined, and they be turned into "Atheists and barbarians".

deletes:Lord Macaulay, who introduced English education into India, claimed: "I have never found one among them who could deny that a single shelf of a good European library was worth the whole native literature of India and Arabia." He wrote that Arabic and Sanskrit works on medicine contain "medical doctrines which would disgrace an English Farrier - Astronomy, which would move laughter in girls at an English boarding school - History, abounding with kings thirty feet high, and reigns thirty thousand years long - and Geography made up of seas of treacle and seas of butter". He advocated to create a middle Anglicised class that was "Indian in blood and colour, but English in taste, in opinions, in morals, and in intellect". This class of anglicized Indians would then in turn anglicize the Indian people.One of the most influential historians of India during the British Empire, James Mill was criticized for being prejudiced against Hindus. His work "History of British India" (1817) may be the "single most important source of British Indophobia and hostility to Orientalism". The Indologist H.H. Wilson wrote that the tendency of Mill's work is "evil". Mill claimed that both Indians and Chinese people are cowardly, unfeeling and mendacious. Both Mill and Grant attacked Orientalist scholarship that was too respectful of Indian culture: "It was unfortunate that a mind so pure, so warm in the pursuit of truth, and so devoted to oriental learning, as that of Sir William Jones, should have adopted the hypothesis of a high state of civilization in the principal countries of Asia". Karl Marx's writings were also prejudiced against Indians. In addition, RISA scholars are accused of holding the Hindu diaspora in the United States with contempt and making derogatory remarks about Hindus and Hinduism that are "patently false". RISA is also criticized by the same organisations and individuals for stressing on obscure practices within Hinduism that were never widely implemented (such as the Ashwamedha horse sacrifice) in what they portray as a 'deliberate' ploy to characterise Hinduism as a "repulsive religion" while almost completely ignoring normative Hindu scripture and normative Hindu practices. However, it has also been alleged that South Asian organizations in the US that defame Hinduism are funded and supported by several Islamist organizations prevalent in Pakistan, Afghanistan and Kashmir, as well as Christian Missionary organizations. These organizations have generally an anti-Indian, pro-Communist agenda.

  • http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Anti-Hinduism&diff=119321559&oldid=118945399
  • Biased interpretation of Indian history. For example James Mill's History of India downplays Indian history.
  • One-sided, unfair, exaggerated or exclusively negative presentation of some aspects of Hinduism or Indian culture. For example exaggerations or misrepresentations about Hindu theology, misrepresentations about the status of women in Hinduism, etc.
  • Claims that the Indological scholarship of Indians themselves is not scientific or that it is motivated by political motives, i.e. by Marxist, nationalist, Hindu, Muslim, Dravidian separatist or other motives.
  • Claims that India has not produced any worthwhile literature.
  • Pervasive influence of racialist ideas in western scholarship of Indian society .

Historians have noted that during the British Empire "evangelical influence drove British policy down a path that tended to minimize and denigrate the accomplishments of Indian civilization and to position itself as the negation of the earlier British Indomania that was nourished by belief in Indian wisdom". The contemporary academia in the United States has been criticized for portraying a biased interpretation of Hinduism and Hindus. According to Abhijit Bagal, Rajiv Malhotra has claimed that an unnamed United States congressman who is a member of the India Caucus has commented that several works published by the "Religions in South Asia" (RISA) subgroup of the "American Academy of Religion" have a systemic anti-Hindu prejudice that "borders on hate-speech". The influence of such scholarship in American schools has also been criticized, with studies showing systemic bias against Hindus in the social studies curricula of American schools. .A recent controversy regarding the Chittisinghpura massacre also earned far-left author Pankaj Mishra allegations of anti-Hindu prejudices when he persisted in the misinformation that the massacre was perpetrated by Hindus against Sikhs, despite the confession to the massacre by an Islamist militant who was part of the Lashkar-e-Toiba cadre that attacked the Sikh community. According to Yvette Rosser, the criticism of Hindutva often goes beyond the criticism of a political/religious movement and degenerates into anti-Hindu rhetoric and hatemongering. Publications such as Dalit Voice have routinely conflated Hinduism with Hindutva and have been criticized for anti-Hindu and anti-semitic attacks.

  • http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Indology&diff=118270627&oldid=117988437 Such real or perceived bias can imply:
  • Biased interpretation of Indian history. For example James Mill's History of India downplays Indian history.
  • One-sided, unfair, exaggerated or exclusively negative presentation of some aspects of Hinduism or Indian culture. For example exaggerations or misrepresentations about Hindu theology, misrepresentations about the status of women in Hinduism, etc.
  • Claims that the Indological scholarship of Indians themselves is not scientific or that it is motivated by political motives, i.e. by Marxist, nationalist, Hindu, Muslim, Dravidian separatist or other motives.
  • Claims that during the British Empire "evangelical influence drove British policy down a path that tended to minimize and denigrate the accomplishments of Indian civilization and to position itself as the negation of the earlier British Indomania that was nourished by belief in Indian wisdom."

In Charles Grant's highly influential "Observations on the ...Asiatic subjects of Great Britain" (1796), Grant criticized the Orientalists for being too respectful to Indian culture and religion. His work tried to determine the Hindu's "true place in the moral scale", and he alleged that the Hindus are "a people exceedingly depraved".

Lord Macaulay, who introduced English education into India, claimed: "I have never found one among them who could deny that a single shelf of a good European library was worth the whole native literature of India and Arabia." He wrote that Arabic and Sanskrit works on medecine contain "medical doctrines which would disgrace an English Farrier - Astronomy, which would move laughter in girls at an English boarding school - History, abounding with kings thirty feet high, and reigns thirty thousand years long - and Geography made up of seas of treacle and seas of butter". He advocated to create a middle Anglicised class that was "Indian in blood and colour, but English in taste, in opinions, in morals, and in intellect". This class of anglicized Indians would then in turn anglicize the Indian people.

One of the most influential historians of India during the British Empire, James Mill was criticized for being prejudiced against Hindus. His work "History of British India" (1817) may be the "single most important source of British Indophobia and hostility to Orientalism". The Indologist H.H. Wilson wrote that the tendency of Mill's work is "evil". Mill claimed that both Indians and Chinese people are cowardly, unfeeling and mendacious. Both Mill and Grant attacked Orientalist scholarship that was too respectful of Indian culture: "It was unfortunate that a mind so pure, so warm in the pursuit of truth, and so devoted to oriental learning, as that of Sir William Jones, should have adopted the hypothesis of a high state of civilization in the principal countries of Asia." Karl Marx's writings were also prejudiced against Indians.

He often deletes sourced material from articles with the pretext that it was inserted by banned user Hkelkar (Misplaced Pages:Requests_for_arbitration/Hkelkar) (Examples: http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Timeline_of_antisemitism&diff=prev&oldid=151639523, http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Hindu_nationalism&diff=prev&oldid=151466403, http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Homosexuality_and_Hinduism&diff=prev&oldid=151468093, http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Hinduism_in_the_West_Indies&diff=prev&oldid=134021192, http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Aurangzeb&diff=prev&oldid=131440891 ). It is true in some cases, but it is not true in all cases (Muslim conquest of India, Aurangzeb and other articles), and he never gives any proof. If he doesn't like a article, or part of a article, he only (and probably often wrongly) claims it is Hkelkar cruft, so he can delete everything. Some of his deletions are those that Hkelkar has inserted before he got banned (I'm almost sure, but have to find the diffs again).

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Abul_Kalam_Azad&diff=prev&oldid=126354601 deletes reference Azad has been criticised by Flemish Indologist Koenraad Elst who alleges Azad of insincerity and two-facedness in his dealings with Hindus; that is, underlying his call for Hindu-Muslim amity and opposition to partition was a desire for the eventual Islamisation of all of India, in line with the orthodox pan-Islamic Deobandi school. Elst considers this exemplified in Azad's equating of Hindu-Muslim cooperation to Muhammad's treaty with the Jews of Medina, however with Hindus unaware of the tale's closing: two of the three tribes were driven away, the other was massacred. Elst furthers cites Azad's proposal to stave off partition by giving the 24% Muslim minority 50% representation, as well as Azad's criticism of the tolerant Moghul Emperor Akbar, and praise for his hardline theologian Ahmad Sirhindi.

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Manabendra_Nath_Roy&diff=prev&oldid=126353394 deletes reference Roy has been criticized by Koenraad Elst for downplaying and distorting the negative effects of the Islamic conquest of India.

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Human_rights_in_India&diff=127491701&oldid=127488095 Yatindra Bhatnagar, chief editor of "International Opinion", has criticized Human Rights Watch representatives and those of related organizations of having an anti-India bias with regards to their reports of communal riots in India between Hindus and Muslims, particularly in reference to the 2002 Gujarat violence. He writes that, instead of trying to heal the wounds of such incidents, organizations like Human Rights Watch focus disproportionately on blaming Hindus exclusively for the incident and trying to deflect attention from the violence perpetrated by Islamists in the Godhra Train Burning that precipitated the riots. In particular, he criticizes Human Rights Watch representative Smita Narula and her colleagues for providing a "blatantly one-sided" account of events and dismissing his concerns to that effect.

In addition, the reports on the Gujarat riots compiled by Human Rights Watch have been criticized by Arvin Bahl, a guest contributor to the "South Asia Analysis Group", as "one-sided" and "biased". He claims that the reports generally "are based on half-truths, distortions and sometimes outright falsehoods". He points out that Human Rights Watch's claims about the Bharatiya Janata Party advocating a Hindu Nation as its core ideology are false. He further says that his analysis of the reports accuse the Gujarat government for planning the riots but do not provide any evidence to back those assertions. He also criticizes Human Rights Watch's labeling of the attacks on Hindus by Muslims during the riots as "retaliatory". In his analysis he states that while he does not deny that Hindu extremists were responsible for the riots, he "objectively analyze the complexity of communal conflict in India and avoid the generalizations associated with Human Rights Watch reports."

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Subhas_Chandra_Bose&diff=129975280&oldid=129969006 (deletes that he was a counterweight to European imperialism, like he also deleted the description of Savarkar as a freedom fighter) deletes books by Peter W. Fay and Donald Moore

BengalRen template

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=National_Liberation_Front_of_Tripura&diff=prev&oldid=136480860, http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=National_Liberation_Front_of_Tripura&diff=131481389&oldid=126456796 deletes a lot of text, and thees links: *South Asian Terrorism Portal: National Liberation Front of Tripura*Thirteen Years of Killings in Tripura by the NLFT*NLFT ultras rape six tribal girls*Christian Terrorism in Northeast India*Church backing Tripura rebels BBC 18 April, 2000.


Discussion

On the Censorship, I do not expect any answers. It is just too much, so it might be better if it is ignored. So I do not ask why. I only ask how: Misplaced Pages policy and the Arbcom say that removals must be explained, and for controversial deletions, this should be on the talkpage. There will always be Censorship and its supporters, but it should be done in an "ethical" honest way: it should be made clear on the talkpage of the article, stating a clear reason for the deletion.

The problem is also that the Hindus are either too lazy or cowardly, at least on wikipedia. Despite the bullying against Hindus by such editors, if the Hindus would make a minimal honest effort, the articles would be much better. As Andrew Bostom and others have observed, the average Hindu knows even less about history than Americans (!) .

I will not be taking the effort to revert all such deletions, which are also made by many other users, but I expect that they be at the very least explained on the talkpage. Librorum Prohibitorum (talk) 01:50, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

  1. K.S. Lal. In "Theory and Practice of Muslim State in India" (1999) ISBN 81-86471-72-3
  2. K.S. Lal. In "Theory and Practice of Muslim State in India" (1999) ISBN 81-86471-72-3
  3. K.S. Lal. In "Theory and Practice of Muslim State in India" (1999) ISBN 81-86471-72-3
  4. Ashoka and Pushyamitra, iconoclasts? by Koneraad Elst
  5. Elst 1999; Cf. Sir Monier-Williams: A Sanskrit-English Dictionary, entry tvac, Reference is to Rgveda 1:92:5 and 4:51:9.
  6. Ashoka and Pushyamitra, iconoclasts? by Koneraad Elst
  7. Elst, Koenraad (1999). Update on the Aryan Invasion Debate. Aditya Prakashan. ISBN 81-86471-77-4.; Sergent, Bernard: Genèse de l'Inde, 1997.
  8. Elst, Koenraad (1999). Update on the Aryan Invasion Debate. Aditya Prakashan. ISBN 81-86471-77-4.; Sergent, Bernard: Genèse de l'Inde, 1997.
  9. Elst, Koenraad (1999). Update on the Aryan Invasion Debate. Aditya Prakashan. ISBN 81-86471-77-4.; Frawley, David: Gods, Sages and Kings, 1991. Lotus Press, Twin Lakes, Wisconsin, p.224-225 and Frawley, David: Arise Arjuna, p.170-181
  10. Elst, Koenraad. Learning from Mahatma Gandhi’s mistakes.
  11. Elst, Koenraad. A Tale of Two Murders : Yitzhak Rabin and Mahatma Gandhi.
  12. ^ Puzzling Dimensions and Theoretical Knots in my Graduate School Research, Yvette Rosser
  13. Was Guru Golwalkar a Nazi? by Koenraad Elst
  14. Was Guru Golwalkar a Nazi? by Koenraad Elst
  17. Credentials of Yvette Rosser ,
  18. Christian Post
  20. Profile, Jyotirmaya Sharma
  21. Hindu Nationalist Politics,J. Sharma Times of India
  22. Cynthia Talbot. Inscribing the Other,Inscribing the Self:Hindu-Muslim Identities in Pre-Colonial India. Comparative Studies in Society and History, Vol.37,No.4 (Oct. 1995).
  23. Cynthia Talbot. Inscribing the Other,Inscribing the Self:Hindu-Muslim Identities in Pre-Colonial India. Comparative Studies in Society and History, Vol.37,No.4 (Oct. 1995).
  24. Was Veer Savarkar a Nazi?
  25. Frawley, DavidHow I became a Hindu: My discovery of Vedic Dharma
  26. ^ Goel, Sita Ram. Hindu Temples: What happened to Them: Islamic Evidence (Second Enlarged Edition). Volume II. Chapter 8: Summing Up. New Dehli: Voice of India.
  27. Goel, Sita Ram. Hindu Temples: What happened to Them: Islamic Evidence (Second Enlarged Edition). Volume II.Chapter 6: The Epigraphic Evidence. New Dehli: Voice of India.
  28. Puzzling Dimensions and Theoretical Knots in my Graduate School Research, Yvette Rosser
  29. Taslima Nasrin Retrieved 29 May 2006.
  30. Frawley, David. From the River of Heaven: Hindu and Vedic Knowledge for the Modern Age. Pg 27. Berkeley, California: Book Passage Press, 1990. ISBN 1878423010.
  31. York, Michael.Pagan Theology: Paganism as a World Religion. Pg 166. New York: NYU Press, 2005. ISBN 0814797083.
  32. ^ Human Rights Report from HAF
  33. ^ Second Annual Report On Hindu Human Rights Released, Pacific Magazine
  34. SAD-BJP Alliance helped bridge Hindu Sikh gap Indian Express
  35. See refs in Kashmiri Pandit
  36. see refs in Wandhama massacre
  37. by Robert Jenkins
  38. Let India develop FOI report supports IDRF activities; questions Sabrang/FOIL
  39. Shah Bano Case
  40. Pope stirs up India - Pope John Paul II calls for evangelization of Asia
  41. Puzzling Dimensions and Theoretical Knots in my Graduate School Research, Yvette Rosser
  42. eg. Partha Banergee, Romila Thapar, Himani Bannerji, Prabhat Patnaik
  43. "The Fascism of Our Times" Social Scientist VOl 21 No.3-4, 1993, p.69
  44. Christian Post
  46. Profile, Jyotirmaya Sharma
  47. Hindu Nationalist Politics,J. Sharma Times of India
  48. Mill 1858
  49. Macaulay, Thomas Babington, 1835:249, Minute on Indian education.
  50. Trautmann 1997:117
  51. http://www.jstor.org/view/00182745/ap020041/02a00040/6?
  52. ^ Wink, pg.187-188
  53. ^ Farishta, Chapter IX Cite error: The named reference "Farishta" was defined multiple times with different content (see the help page).
  54. F.B. Flood, "Between cult and culture: Bamiyan, Islamic iconoclasm, and the museum," The Art Bulletin 84 (2002), 650.
  55. Richards, John F. (1995). The Mughal Empire. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. 130, 177. ISBN 0-521-56603-7. Jujhar Singh's outright defiance of this order inflamed Shah Jahan. He sent another large army under the nominal command of the sixteen-year-old Prince Aurangzeb to invade Bundelkhand....When overtaken by Mughal troops, Jujhar Singh's principal queens were killed by their attendants, but the remaining royal women were sent to join the Mughal harem. Two very young sons and a grandson were converted to Islam. Another older son who refused to convert was killed outright.
  56. ^ Mukhia, Harbans,"The Mughals of India" P25,Blackwell Publishing,2004,ISBN 0631185550
  57. ^ Khan, Saqi Mustad (1986 (reprint)). "Maasir-i-' Alamgiri : a history of the emperor Aurangzib-'Alamgir, reign 1658-1707 A. D. / of Saqi Musta'ad Khan ; translated into English and annotated by Jadu-Nath Sarkar". Oriental books Reprint Corporation. ISBN 8170690013. {{cite book}}: Check date values in: |year= (help); Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help)CS1 maint: year (link)
  58. ^ Mehta, Jaswant Lal (1987). Advanced Study in the History of Medieval India P362. Stosius Inc/Advent Books Division; 2nd Rev edition. ISBN 8120705734.
  59. ^ Cite error: The named reference Gier was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  60. Lewis (1984), pp. 14–15
  61. Wink, pg.161
  62. Keay, pg 186-187
  63. From a translation of Ziauddin Barani's Fatawa—i Jahandari, circa, 1358—9 C.E., in Mohammad Habib. The political theory of the Delhi sultanate., Allahabad, Kitab Mahal, 1961, pp. 46—47.
  64. Chachnama, Elliot and Dowson, pp. 173—174
  65. Majumdar, The Classical Age, pp. 460
  66. Majumdar, The Classical Age, pp. 461—462
  67. Al—Baladhuri. The Origins of the Islamic State (Kitab Futuh Al—Buldan). Part II, Translated by F.C. Murgotten, New York, Columbia University, 1924, pp. 217—224; Al—Kufi. The Chachnama, excerpts translated in H.M. Elliot and J. Dowson. A History of India As Told By Its Own Historians—The Muhammadan Period, 1867—1877 (reprinted 2001, Delhi), Vol. 1, pp. 157—211
  68. Al—Baladhuri. The Origins of the Islamic State, Part II, p. 218
  69. R.C. Majumdar (editor). The History and Culture of the Indian People, Vol. 3, The Classical Age, Bombay, 1954, p. 458.
  70. Majumdar, The Classical Age, pp. 458—459
  71. Dayaram Gidumal the Introduction Chachnama,
  72. Elliot & Dowson: History of India, vol.1, p.119, 120. Koenraad Elst: Who is a Hindu. 2001
  73. Elliot & Dowson: History of India, vol.1, p.158
  74. Nicholas F. Gier, FROM MONGOLS TO MUGHALS: RELIGIOUS VIOLENCE IN INDIA 9TH-18TH CENTURIES, Presented at the Pacific Northwest Regional Meeting American Academy of Religion, Gonzaga University, May, 2006
  75. Elliot & Dowson: History of India, vol.1, p.158
  76. Notes on the Religious, Moral, and Political State of India Before the Mohammedan Invasion:... By Faxian, Sykes (William Henry) pg.??
  77. How to Prepare for the Sat II: World History By Marilynn Hitchens, Heidi Roupp, pg. ??
  78. The Maha-Bodhi By Maha Bodhi Society, Calcutta (page 205)
  79. The Maha-Bodhi By Maha Bodhi Society, Calcutta (page 8)
  80. The Maha-Bodhi By Maha Bodhi Society, Calcutta (page 205)
  81. Historia Religionum: Handbook for the History of Religions By C. J. Bleeker, G. Widengren page 381
  82. Islam at War: A History By Mark W. Walton, George F. Nafziger, Laurent W. Mbanda (page 226)
  83. The Ilkhanate
  84. B.F. Manz, "Tīmūr Lang", in Encyclopaedia of Islam, Online Edition, 2006
  85. The Columbia Electronic Encyclopedia, "Timur", 6th ed., Columbia University Press: "... Timur (timoor') or Tamerlane (tăm'urlān), c.1336–1405, Mongol conqueror, b. Kesh, near Samarkand. ...", (LINK)
  86. "Timur", in Encyclopaedia Britannica: "... was a member of the Turkic Barlas clan of Mongols..."
  87. "Baber", in Encyclopaedia Britannica: "... Baber first tried to recover Samarkand, the former capital of the empire founded by his Mongol ancestor Timur Lenk ..."
  88. Sir Aurel Stein: Archaeological Explorer By Jeannette Mirsky
  89. Ethnicity & Family Therapy edited by Nydia Garcia-Preto, Joe Giordano, Monica McGoldrick
  90. War at the Top of the World: The Struggle for Afghanistan, Kashmir, and Tibet By Eric S. Margolis page 165
  91. India By Sarina Singh
  92. Cite error: The named reference maisels was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  93. ^ Cite error: The named reference Realtipu was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  94. Cite error: The named reference Elst was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  97. Abbe J.A. Dubois, and Henry King Beauchamp, Hindu Manners, Customs and Ceremonies, Clarendon Press, 1897, P96, Google Books link
  98. First Indologists A Tribute to Hinduism
  99. ^ Macaulay, Thomas Babington, 1835:242-243, Minute on Indian education.
  100. Trautmann 1997:117
  101. H.H. Wilson 1858 in James Mill 1858, The history of British India, Preface of the editor
  102. Mill, James - 1858, 2:109, The history of British India
  103. Suniti Kumar Ghosh (1984). "Marx on India online". Monthly Review. {{cite journal}}: External link in |title= (help)
  104. ^ Biases in Hinduism Studies Pt6 by Abhijit Bagal
  105. Mill 1858
  106. Trautmann 1997:113
  107. ^ Biases in Hinduism Studies Pt1 by Abhijit Bagal
  108. Puzzling Dimensions and Theoretical Knots in my Graduate School Research by Yvette Claire Rosser, The Infinity Foundation
  109. Dalit Voice, vol.25, No.1
  110. Ayodhya and After, Koenraad Elst (Chpt 14)
  111. Heuzé, Gérard (1993). Où va l’Inde moderne? (p 87). L’Harmattan.
  112. Mill 1858
  113. Trautmann 1997:113
  114. Grant, Charles. (1796) Observations on the state of society among the Asiatic subjects of Great Britain, particularly with respect to morals; and on the means of improving it, written chiefly in the year 1792.
  115. http://www.atributetohinduism.com/FirstIndologists.htm
  116. Macaulay, Thomas Babington, 1835:242-243, Minute on Indian education.
  117. Macaulay, Thomas Babington, 1835:249, Minute on Indian education.
  118. Trautmann 1997:117
  119. H.H. Wilson 1858 in James Mill 1858, The history of British India, Preface of the editor
  120. Mill, James - 1858, 2:109, The history of British India.
  121. Koenraad Elst. "Chapter 2, Negationism in India" (HTML). Negationism in India. Retrieved 2007-02-05.
  122. Hours of Anti-India, Anti-Hindutva Rhetoric at “Indian” Muslim Meet, bu Yatindra Bhatnagar,International Opinion.
  123. Politics By Other Means: An Analysis of Human Rights Watch Reports on India,saag.org