 | Mahatma Gandhi received a peer review by Wikipedia editors, which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article. |
Template:Featured article is only for Wikipedia:Featured articles. Template:Mainpage date Template:FARCfailed Template:FAOL
Selected on Template:March 18 selected anniversaries
/summary -This is a barebones version for use in initiating translations to other languages. Please do not remove or expand . Feel free to enter essential only data but remember that too many details will exhaust and confuse the translation process.--Jondel 01:53, 28 October 2005 (UTC)
- Talk archives
- Talk:Mahatma Gandhi/Archive 1 This archive contains discussions upto February 2005. Some content has been moved to topic specific talk archives. (see below)
- Talk:Mahatma Gandhi/Archive 2 This archive contains discussions approximately dated from February 2005 to Novmber 2005. Some content moved to topic specific archives listed below.
- Talk:Mahatma Gandhi/Mahatma_vs._Mohandas Please refer this archive if you think the article should be moved to another name. It has been an issue of dispute as to how this article should be named. If you have any new comments, first check to see if a similar opinion has already been discussed in former discussions. Any new comments should go on on this main talk page, not the archive. Do not move the article to a new ___location without discussion, under any circumstances. The current name is a result of exhaustively discussed consensus among editors.
- Talk:Mahatma Gandhi/Gandhi and the Jews: Whether he was 'Racist' If you feel the article is not written from a neutral point of view, and have reasons to believe that Gandhi might have been a racist, and that this has been ignored, or not adequately mentioned in the article, consult this archive first.
- Talk:Mahatma Gandhi/Dying words controversy
A bit too much text
I'm doing a project on Gandhi and it seems I have to finish it all in one day. Could it be possible to compress the article. Gandhi in a nutshell would help. Thx
Hi, this is an encyclopedia for everybody! We can't just shorten for you. You don't have to use the English Wikipedia as your only source. You can go here or try other websites (search with Google). Also what is your project specifically on? Don't plagiarise. But what you really should do is to read the this page about three times, highlight in your head and then write the project. Template:DaGizza/Sg 07:38, 13 November 2005 (UTC)
This article is insanely long. I came to this page looking to make some suggestions as to which sections could have their own pages, but I'm not even sure I want to enter this debate. In any case, this article flaunts a number of wikipedia style guidelines aimed at making article more readable, including those concerning length, so maybe you should lay off the anonymous reader. Oh yeah, and it's a joke that this article is featured, informative as it may be. Nothing with this much ongoing NPOV debate should be featured. --djrobgordon 05:33, 14 November 2005 (UTC)
Sorry. I was just doing a very urgent 3 page essay (me slow at typing). I was a bit desperate. But still, heres so much text that it is hard to get an outline of the stuff and you end up getting too much text to read.
- Do you have suggestions on how to better summarize or section, organize, etc. the article? Are there any particular areas where you would recommend material be moved to a sub-article? El_C 04:31, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
The history section is quite large and the sub article is basically a copy and paste. We should first outline the main points then elaborate as that is how I do a lot of things but it is actually quite hard to do so in some areas due to the bulk of text. Transfering it into a microsoft Word document and using the summarise tool might not help either.
Proposed Solution to Fix Length Problem
Dear All,
I have a solution to propose to fix the problem of the huge length of this article.
- We could MOVE ITEMS 6-10, to a new article: The Leadership of Mahatma Gandhi
- We could UNITE the section concerning Gandhi's principles with Gandhism
This would be a big move, but would protect the RICHNESS and INTEGRITY of the size, content and diverse features of Wikipedia's coverage of Mahatma Gandhi.
Such a move was made about prophet Muhammad of Islam, creating separate articles to discuss specific subjects concerning his life and leadership.
I think this is a very good idea, so I'm putting it up for a debate.
Jai Sri Rama! - Rama's Arrow.
Leadership of Mahatma Gandhi
I've created the article that will be the best solution, so you can judge whether it is appropriate or not. I personally think its a great idea and got a bit restless, but we can always delete it if it is felt that its not a good idea.
- Rama's Arrow.
Sub-Article
From the debate before I proposed my solution, it seems there is no objection to a possible sub-article. Previously Gurubrahma and some others hinted to a sub-article as well.
I hope nobody considers this particularly arbitrary, but I will proceed to move sections 6-11 to the article: The Leadership of Mahatma Gandhi. Obviously if a consensus disagree, they may revert the changes. - Rama's Arrow
- I agree Rama/Nirav the article was overly long and needed to be split up. I am pleased you have kept the "Principles" section on the main page, as this gives readers a quick insight into his practices and beliefs. Just a word of warning, by pruning the article down this should not mean there is room to add more large sections of text, otherwise we will be back where we started. --nirvana2013 13:29, 22 November 2005 (UTC)
- Nirav, what happened to some of the sections? Modern criticism, for example. We don't want to go down the NPOV edit war route again. Also, if there is an article called Non-Cooperation Movement, then there should be little text on the main page, certainly no more than a couple of paragraphs. The text is only there to give readers an introduction to the sub-article. --nirvana2013 14:07, 22 November 2005 (UTC)
- Modern criticism is in the Leadership article. One can fine-tune the NCM section, but I think we need it proper on this article. - User:Rama's Arrow.
New additions
Hello All,
I'm sorry if my new additions are contrary to the desire to reduce the length of this article. I'm sure that we can re-organize further; a net drop of 10kbs has already been achieved.
I've made the additions because I feel that a clearer picture of Gandhi's personal life and post-Independence activities was necessary. There was an awkward gap between the partition of India and his assassination.
Jai Sri Rama! User:Rama's Arrow
Obscene Text
Hello everyone,
This is my first edit, first contribution, and first discussion, so I hope I did it right. Despite this being a featured article, I noticed some obscene text towards the beginning, so I felt it appropriate to remove it. User:JeremyS779
Oh Come on
'realized not only were Indians unprepared for mass scale resistance but the British rule in India was evil and inherently oppressive'
I've changed this to
'finally decided not only were Indians unprepared for mass scale resistance but the British rule in India was evil and inherently oppressive'
btw. this article is POV it is untrue, but I'll content myself with just this minor change 81.110.202.57 19:55, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
Changed my mind
"After lengthy deliberations with colleagues in the Congress, he declared that India could not be party to a war ostensibly being fought for democratic freedom while that freedom was denied in India herself"
The war was not fought for 'democratic freedom', onstensibly or otherwise, it was fought to resist the murderous forces of Japan and Germany.
Look, I can see why you're embaressed about Gandhi's reaction to WW2, he'd obviously lost it a bit by then, but I can't understand the dishonesty of the left in trying to censor their heroes when they simply got in wrong on a couple of issues. 81.110.202.57 20:09, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
- Its not the left, its just a cult-of-personality phenemenon, a minor deification. You find the same thing with Reagan. Anyways, I agree, Ghandi wasn't perfect, and your first change was a good one. But its not about left vs. right. --Brentt 02:48, 1 December 2005 (UTC)
Throughout his life?
I'm not sure the following statement in the opening paragraph is accurate:
- Throughout his life he opposed any form of terrorism or violence.
I seem to recall that he worked as a recruiter for the British Army in WWI. Albeit for the ambulance corps, but nonetheless he was helping the war effort. --Brentt 02:50, 1 December 2005 (UTC)
- I have re-worded that line. --nirvana2013 20:46, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
- Nirvana2013's wording simply introduces the wording adult as if Gandhi wasn't an adult till the end of WWI.
Secondly, the statement describes his personal opposition to war, not his views on the British effort in WWI. In his autobiography, he repeatedly talks of the terrible devastation of the war.
He only describes it as his duty to help in defence of the Empire, if he wanted equal citizenship in it.
I don't feel there need be any change. However I will wait before eliminating the word adult.
Jai Sri Rama! Rama's Arrow 16:09, 6 December 2005 (UTC)
Mahatma title
I've read many a place that Rabindranath Tagore conferred the title of Mahatma on Gandhiji while Gandhiji returned the compliment with the title Gurudev. The article mentions someone else giving the title of Mahatma. Can someone please check and make the necessary corrections, if any? --Gurubrahma 16:09, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
While Bourke-White was the last person to photograph Gandhi, it was not the one which shows him at the spinning wheel. There are plenty of references which indicate that this photo was taken in 1946. See [2], [3], [4], [5], [6] etc. I seem to remember that the last one was one that had Manu and Abha as well, but I am not at all sure about that. Tintin Talk 21:29, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
- Now, according to an NYT article, there is some doubt whether it was Bourke-White who took his last picture. I'll raise that in her article. Tintin Talk 21:54, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
Faith??
I'm not sure what this has to do with Gandhi's principle of faith. It needs to be changed, added to, or explained: Faith In spite of their deep reverence to each other, Gandhi and Rabindranath Tagore got involved in protracted debates more than once. These debates exemplify the philosophical differences between the two most famous Indians at the time. On January 15, 1934, an earthquake hit Bihar and caused extensive damage and loss of life. Gandhi maintained this was because of the sin committed by upper caste Hindus by not letting untouchables in their temples (Gandhi was committed to the cause of improving the fate of untouchables, referring to them as Harijans, people of Krishna). Tagore vehemently opposed Gandhi's stance, maintaining that an earthquake can only be caused by natural forces, not moral reasons, however repugnant the practice of untouchability may be. TheTruth12 03:21, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
Gandhiji
At present, the term Gandhiji is once used as a label under a picture. I don't think that name should be used in a caption if it's not explained in the text. As I understand it, the -ji in Gandhiji is some sort of respectful suffix. http://www.wsu.edu/~brians/errors/Ghandi.html points out that, since Mahatma is a honorific title too, Mahatma Gandhiji would be honorific overkill. Can someone confirm this? - Adhemar, January 23, 2006
- Yes, it is either Mahatma Gandhi or Gandhiji but never Mahatma Gandhiji. -ji is a commonly used suffix in Hindi language to show respect to elderly. The closest equivalent in English is probably "Sir." --Gurubrahma 13:06, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
- I don't think that "Gandhiji" is NPOV. — goethean ॐ 15:53, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
incident?
Which incident does this line refer to?: "This incident was a turning point in his life, often acknowledged in biographies, that would serve as the catalyst for his activism that occurred several days later when he began a journey to Pretoria." It's not at all clear, as the previous line mentions recurring incidences.
- South Africa changed him dramatically as he faced the humiliation and oppression that was commonly directed at Indians in that country. One day in court in the city of Durban, the magistrate asked him to remove his turban, which he refused to do, and Gandhi stormed out of the courtroom. He was also literally thrown off a train at Pietermaritzburg after refusing to move from first class to a third class compartment, normally used by coloured peoples, while travelling on a valid first class ticket. Later, travelling further on by stagecoach, he was beaten by a driver for refusing to travel on the footboard to make room for a European passenger. He suffered other hardships on the journey as well, including being barred from many hotels on account of his race. This incident was a turning point in his life, often acknowledged in biographies, that would serve as the catalyst for his activism that occurred several days later when he began a journey to Pretoria. This experience led him to more closely examine the hardships his people suffered in South Africa during his time in Pretoria.
- i believe it's a confusion due to several editors inserting sentences in between previously existing text: the incident is the one of getting thrown off train: deleting the line "suffered other hardships" or shifting it after the mentioned line wouldn't be ok: also unclear which biography/biographies identifies the incident as turning point. --Pournami 07:21, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
Assassination not death
Assassination is the appropriate term here, considering the nature of death and the stature of the person involved.
Pizzadeliveryboy 14:20, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
- To assassinate means to attack to kill by surprise, for instance, due to political reasons - Gandhi's case appeals to both criteria - ofcourse, it can apply to any person, though it is generally used for prominent political/social leaders.
you people have a lot of time on your hands. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 12.203.20.240 (talk • contribs) .
{{sprotect}} tags dont work
Apparently, the {{sprotect}} tags dont work!!!
Pizzadeliveryboy 23:34, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
- Obviously, the article first needs to be semi-protected or protected as the case may be, by an admin. Only then, the tags would be inserted and give an impression of the tags working. The insertion of tags does not help in protecting an article. --Gurubrahma 05:07, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
Source citation : regarding Patel a life
Patel A life is only a secondary/tertiary source of bio information on gandhi: biography of patel, is it not: when primary/better sources are available, is that necessary? CWMG and autobio by Gandhi himself, famous biographies of gandhi himself (not his associates and comrades like patel), writings of close assistants, like desai, etc, and then, writings on gandhi himself, --Pournami 10:42, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
What is "Patel A"? Is that the author/source? -- (posted on February 12, 2006 by 24.89.26.226 : Info added by User:Writtenonsand)
- Patel: A Life, by Rajmohan Gandhi
- Rajmohan Gandhi includes a lot of information about Gandhi and his philosophy as a way of explaining Patel's own life in the freedom struggle. This book is a very comprehensive one - I've got a lot of info on numerous historical events from this, including Political integration of India in it's entirety.
- If you are so concerned about a Patel bio being the primary reference, please obtain a good Gandhi bio and add cited material from it. As far as I'm concerned a resource is a resource. Rama's Arrow 20:01, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
- you're right about "a resource is a resource". since you added the cited info yourself and the book was your primary source, i thought it better to undo [7]a change i made to the source citation section. anyway, having a source is better than not having a source at all(-which is the case with most of the article, esp the priciples section which would be much better if inlinecited properly). i made a couple of changes in the references, wasn't sure if what i did was ok, which is why i posted above question. i'm not concerned about patel bio being a reference, sry if i gave that impression-Pournami 05:25, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
- I'm sorry if my tone was standoffish. Note - I plan on adding in-line citations this coming week for Gandhi's early life, principles and South Africa times from his autobio, which is a good primary source. Rama's Arrow 06:02, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
Fantastic article
I just wanted to congratulate all concerned on this great article. It's clear, well-written, and interesting throughout. I thought there was a great balance between putting material here and linking to other pages: there were several things I followed up on out of interest, but I never felt that I had to look up something just to understand this article. I'll certainly use it as inspiration in my more humble efforts. Thanks to the many editors who made this happen! -- William Pietri 14:57, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
religious agenda
did gandhi have any religious agenda or were his goals mainly political ? Hhnnrr 17:07, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
- No, Gandhi never advocated one religion over another, nor a religion as a solution to socio-political problems. His activities were for "Swaraj," for which he felt that combating untouchability, socio-religious discrimination, poverty and socio-economic ills was essential. Rama's Arrow 03:53, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
ghandi was a great man and is still remembered today because of his philosophy of non-violence.
I removed
I removed these two sentences:
- The wide acceptance of this title outside India may in part reflect the complexities of the relationship between India and Britain during Gandhi's lifetime. Such acceptance is consistent with the widespread perception of his deeply held religious beliefs and commitment to non-violence.
There is no source for these and they are most likely original research/speculation. "The complexities of the relationship between India and Britain during Gandhi's lifetime" is about as vague as one can get. The second sentence is more speculative than the first. The first setence in the Mahatma subsection states (with a source) that the use of the term internationally is due to the confusion that it is his first name. Therefore, its not really appropriate to say, as the second sentence implies, that it is due to the perception of his beliefs or non-violence. savidan(talk) (e@) 11:41, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
Criticism of Gandhi
Hi All,
Yesterday I added text under "Criticism", specifically right after this paragraph:
Gandhi has also been criticized by various historians and commentators for his attitudes regarding Hitler and Nazism. Gandhi apparently believed that Hitler's hatred could be transformed by the application of non-violent resistance. Gandhi has come under fire in particular for statements to the effect that the Jews would win God's love if they willingly went to their deaths as martyrs [22] [23].
This is the text I had added:
<start> Similarly, many have criticized Gandhi's anti-Zionism stance as political appeasement for India's Muslims. On November 26, 1938, he explained his opposition to Zionism in an article published in Harijan:
"Palestine belongs to the Arabs in the same sense that England belongs to the English or France to the French. It is wrong and inhuman to impose the Jews on the Arabs. What is going on in Palestine today cannot be justified by any moral code of conduct. The mandates have no sanction but that of the last war. Surely it would be a crime against humanity to reduce the proud Arabs so that Palestine can be restored to the Jews partly or wholly as their national home. [8]" </end>
Yet it was promptly removed by someone. It is a verifiable fact that Gandhi was an anti-Zionist and that many criticize him because of it, so why was my addition removed? Unless my actions were incorrect, I request that my addition be reinstated and protected from vandalism. If I was wrong to make that addition I request an explanation of why I was wrong, so that I can understand my mistake and refrain from making similar mistakes in the future. Thanks.
--Amirw 22:12, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
- See talk archive 4 above and raise the issue here if your concerns have not been adequately addressed there. btw, I doubt if it is a verifiable fact that Gandhi was an anti-Zionist - Albert Einstein was one of the strongest admirers of Gandhi. --Gurubrahma 13:33, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
- Thank you for your response Gurubrahma. I have just read talk archive 4, and it seems that someone accused Gandhi of being an anti-Semite and that the discussion was concluded by agreement that Gandhi was not anti-Semitic but rather ultra-pacifist and anti-zionist (for this opinion please read comment by treesmill 19:46, 4 January 2006 (UTC)).
- Also, if you follow the link I have provided and read the collection of articles, letters, speeches, and interviews by Gandhi on Jews and Palestine, his opinion regarding Zionism will become quite clear because he is very straight forward about it. In particular, you may want to read 'The Jews', by Gandhi - From Harijan, November 26, 1938 and also 'The Jew and the Arab: Discussion with Mr. Silverman and Mr. Honick', March 1946, report by Pyarelal - From Louis Fischer papers; however, if possible, I recommend that you read all of the pieces as he reiterates his position on Zionism on many other occasions as well. All these pieces have verfiably been written by Gandhi. Here is the link again: http://www.gandhiserve.org/information/writings_online/articles/gandhi_jews_palestine.html
- As for Albert Einstein; he was obviously a very intelligent man, so perhaps he was capable of not allowing his disagreement with Gandhi's position on Zionism to overcloud his admiration for Gandhi's many great achievements. Additionally, Albert Einstein probably understood that anti-Zionism does not necessarily equate anti-Semitism (something which the poster in talk archive 4 apparently did not), but these are simply my predictions and I not have any proof of why Einstein admired Gandhi in spite of Gandhi's opposition to Zionism.
- I understand that this is a touchy subject for some, but it is the truth, and to supress it would go against everything Gandhi stood for. In fact, Gandhi wrote a follow-up to his 'The Jews' article, which I had originally quoted above: "Nor did I write the article only for today. I flatter myself with the belief that some of my writings will survive me and will be of service to the causes for which they have been written. I have no sense of disappointment that my writing had not to my knowledge converted a single Jew." (you may find the complete article in the link I have provided).
I look forward to your response.--Amirw 17:52, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
His career as journalist?
As far as I can see, the article doesn't deal much with his career as journalist. Why is that? He wrote regularly for many news-papers, and the strong press ethics he followed makes this interesting. (I think he said that you shouldn't care about the consequences of what you're writing, and only focus on the truth - something that not many journalists can do today). Perhaps someone who has a bit more knowledge on the matter than I do should add something on this? - 81.236.224.54 23:37, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
- This is true - I don't see any mention of the "Indian Opinion." Rama's Arrow 04:12, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
- Probably, it is time to start articles on Indian Opinion, Navjivan and Harijan. Young India should probably re-direct to Harijan. --Gurubrahma 13:33, 19 March 2006 (UTC)