Talk:Kancha Ilaiah/Archive 2

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Archive 2

Question

"the movement that claims to be a movement for the empowerment of the Dalits"

Is there a name for this movement? — goethean ॐ 18:11, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Nope, unless "Tall Tales" counts as a name.Hkelkar 18:12, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Plus, I don;t believe Ilaiah is affiliated with the Dalit Bahujan thingie (which does have a name I guess).Hkelkar 18:13, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Disrespectful as alway User:Hkelkar, how sad. Actually in all his writing and associations he mentioned as affiliated with the Dalit Bahujan movement(not thingie User:Hkelkar) or with the Dalit rights movement, I'm adding a couple of external links: [1][2]--Kathanar 18:39, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Er these are partisan links and do not satisfy

WP:Reliable Sources unless states with qualification. Do that and I will report you.Hkelkar

18:41, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

All my edits werre sourced and from qualified links. Your edits are sourced from Bible-Thumpers and whack-job nihilists who can't be stated without appropriate qualification.Hkelkar 18:44, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

I don't know what you're talking about, one is from a actual periodical(it reveals your biases if you label them as"bible thumpers", which reveal your anti-christian prejudices), and the other from a human rights site, but you just vandalized the title of the article of the link, I will report you for that--Kathanar 18:49, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

I am not anti-Christian. I am anti-Bible Thumpers.I believe this is another personal attack and thus is grounds for reporting, since you have commented on me and not my edits.Hkelkar 18:50, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Bible-thumper is a anti-christian POV especially when refering to a respected periodical as Christianity Today. Its hard to believe you cannot understand that, no actually its not--Kathanar 19:12, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Christianity today is run by

Southern Baptists in the United States. Their rhetoric includes demands for the genocide of Hindus in India (google Pat Robertson anti-Hindu) and the bombing of Mecca (Which is deeply insulting to Islam). Look at their leaders Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson.Hkelkar

19:15, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Actually you are making a defamatory statement toward this periodical. Its leaders are not Jerry Falwell or Robertson and the magazine has nothing to do with the remarks you claim. You seem quite rabid in these anti-christian remarks, CT was started by Billy Graham, and encompansses all christian denominations. Wrong again

Actually I am not. Billy Graham was an acolyte of Falwell, and Falwell and Robertson donate large sums of money from their diamond smuggling gangs in Zimbabwe to Christianity Today. Robertson was responsible for installing a Christian dictatorship in Zimbabwe and Christianity Today uses dummy-corporations dealing in illegal conflict diamonds to fund their little propaganda complex.Hkelkar 20:02, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Falwell has asserted that when The Antichrist ("The Beast") comes, he "must be, of necessity, a Jewish male" . he is an

anti-Semite(look at the wikipedia article).Hkelkar

19:16, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

In fact, I can safely say that I am more well-read on Christian scripture than you. I just owned a Baptist missionary who tried to convert me yesterday. It was fun.Hkelkar 18:51, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Good for you, it seems people of your mindset like to "own" people anyway, and seem to have"fun" at it--Kathanar 19:12, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Yes, it's called "intelligence".19:30, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

In fact, if you look at my edits to Persecution of Christians you will see that I am not an anti-Christian at all, just anti-Fundamentalist-Christian.Hkelkar 20:16, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Please focus on improving the article. Off-topic chat can be removed from this talk page. — goethean ॐ 19:22, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for intervening. This little saber-rattling was getting old.I am, as always, focussed on improving the article only.Shalom.Hkelkar 19:30, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks goethean for fixing the edits and making 'em NPOV. I appreciate it.Hkelkar 18:48, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

User:Goethean Those aren't the actual titles to the article, as you cut out Kancha Ilaiah's name in the begining, but I will accept them, thanks--Kathanar 18:52, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Kancha IIaiah speaks bold truth.

It has to be accepted that Dr.IIaiah speaks bare truth, that is often undigested, and a frustrated response he is labeled biased and anti-hindu, if he was really anti-hindu, he would have targeted many things in Hinduism rather only focusing on the evil caste- system. —The preceding

unsigned comment was added by Sam sheyma (talk • contribs

) 12:21, 10 December 2006 (UTC).

The following quote:

Take a very simple thing—the Hindu namaste, folding your hands to greet someone—is a very powerful symbolic statement. It suggests that I recognise you but you should not touch me. In contrast, the custom that the Christians introduced of shaking of hands is a touching relationship, while the Muslims go even further and physically embrace you. Even today in the villages the Muslims are the only people who actually physically embrace the Dalit-Bahujans.

Is it still valid ? OR does it have to be modified to accommodate the Pandemic Swine Flu situation into consideration —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.164.77.28 (talk) 08:23, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

The Bitter Truth about Hinduism.

Hinduism is nothing but a covert mask of Casteism.

In

coerce other children as per the caste

hierarchies.

--m 16:52, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

This is a gross generalized allegation. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 123.252.181.55 (talk) 01:38, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Open challenge to Kancha Ilaiah : My only contention is( I have read all his vitriolic interviews against hinduism where he freely spews venom on brahminism which he mistakes for something as vast as hinduism )that if the very concept of hinduism is a blasphemy to him, why did he use the reservations that he was entitled to by virtue of being a OBC as part of the same hindu religion that he hates. Also, two things glaringly stand out from his contentious articles/interviews.

He confuses brahminism for hinduism and brands the whole religion as being like brahminism which is completely untrue and displays an immaturity that is hard to digest, which is surprising since no one pointed it out . I mean so many interviews were conducted and none of the respectable media houses countered him with this. Secondly, he uses the terms dalits and OBCs interchangeably , again confusing one for the other. In most areas of Northern and Southern India, expecially in AP from where he hails... there is constant tension between the so called OBCs and dalits over a lot of things, and especially over equality of rights. Hence the very basis on which he hates hinduism is flimsy and weak. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Indianonwarpath (talk • contribs) 01:59, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

your views or for debating purposes. Thanks. utcursch | talk

17:52, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Archiving

Most of the discussion here is more than a year old. I propose that they be archived. --ManasShaikh (talk) 18:15, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

Automatic archiving set up. --Joshua Issac (talk) 14:23, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

Sources

First off Jayjg: Threatening to use admin powers in a content dispute and then ignoring attempts at discussion is chilling. Now on to Kancha Ilaiah himself. He is a polemicist. His work (and his views to a degree) is revolutionary, and hence has brooked substantial criticism. His quotes are sensational. Here's a quote, a famous one, cited in academic literature and straight from his books:

"We must shout 'we hate Hinduism, we hate Brahminism, we love our culture and more than anything, we love ourselves'." (Why I am not a Hindu:

a Sudra critique of Hindutva, philosophy, culture, and political economy - Samya Publishers, 1996 p132) cited by (The Politics of Cultural Practice:Thinking Through Theatre in an Age of Globalization by Rustom Bharucha, Wesleyan University Press, 1991 p110) among multiple other sources - these are from a superficial google books search-. There has also been no sensible argument for how this link violates any part of

WP:BLP

. Its an interview in Indian mainstream media and it quotes him accurately. Ditto for the firstport article, which was an article I added far after the article was cleansed of blogspot links and Hindutva-cruft. Yet again, an article from a mainstream and reliable source, quoted accurately has been deleted with no real justification (Merely writing "

WP:BLP" surprisingly enough doesn't mean that one is actually following the policy).Pectore^talk

22:40, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

It's a

WP:PRIMARY sources are out - that would include interviews with him, unless reliable secondary sources have comment on it. The Politics of Cultural Practice:Thinking Through Theatre in an Age of Globalization is a book about theater by Rustom Bharucha, is that correct? What makes you think http://www.firstpost.com/politics/beef-festival-organisers-are-foolish-lambs-to-the-slaughter-278662.html is a reliable secondary source? It appears to be an editorial on a website. Jayjg ^(talk)

05:27, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

About firstpost.com [About Firstpost].इति इतिUAनेति नेति Humour Thisthat2011 19:54, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

verified. As for Bharucha, I mentioned it was a source I found in about five seconds in a google book search. Regardless, Bharucha is a well-known literary critic, and his book chronicles the impacts of Ilaiah's quotes throughout the humanities. Debjani Ganguly, also has a great treatment of his work discussing this quote. The firstpost piece is from a reliable source, the editor of firstpost is the former executive of DNA India, another mainstream newspaper.Pectore^talk

01:03, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

WP:BLPSPS allows for the use of non-controversial self-published material regarding a subject. BLP doesn't allow editors to cherry pick what they think are the most controversial statements of an individual, and include them in the article on that person. firstpost.com does not have a Wikipedia article, which suggests it's not notable. Please find the reliable secondary sources, and cite them here. Jayjg ^(talk)

00:37, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

Did you just use Wikipedia as a gauge of whether something is notable or not? Firstpost is an online digital media news source of

Network 18, which is one of India's biggest conglomerates, with executive editor R. Jagannathan who is an eminent journalist in India. I mentioned much of this before. Next, Kancha Ilaiah is notable for his extreme views, why else do you think hate hinduism Kancha gets 340k Google hits. I have cited multiple sources, including Debjani Ganguly and Rustom Bharucha, experts in subaltern expression who are among the multitudes commenting on his quote.Pectore^talk

22:46, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

Yes, I did use Wikipedia for that purpose. After 10 years and 3 million English articles, it has become a reasonably good first check of notability. I've been asking for actual quotes from highly reliable sources. Rather than arguing about websites, or providing various links, could you please do this? Thanks. Jayjg ^(talk) 21:21, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

(deindent)The reason we are on this talk page (apart from addressing your willingness to abuse admin powers in a content dispute) is because you have issues with the websites and various links cited throughout my edits. Hence why I spent time outlining why these sources are notable and reliable. From your post above it is immediately apparent you haven't even cursorily parsed through the material presented.

I provided an actual quote above (here is a diff for your reference) from a reliable source, and have consistently quoted sources on the article as well. This extremely prominent quote was also cited (as again I noted above) in Debjani Ganguly's "Caste, colonialism and counter-modernity" on page 239 as well as the article "Ideological Preferences Versus National Integration of India" in the Journal of Dharma's July-September 2009 issue on page 311. Given that Ilaiah is not a particularly notable figure in Indian politics apart from his polemics, even a handful of cites of this quote, in well-regarded academic works indicate that it is relevant to his notability.Pectore^talk 21:03, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

My actions here are as an administrator, enforcing

WP:BLP, and I won't be responding to comments claiming anything else (for example, that I've abused my administrative powers or that this is a content dispute). Jayjg ^(talk)

22:10, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Pseudohistory

I have absolutely no idea why this article is in Category:Pseudohistory, nor can I find any discussion in the talk archives. I am going to remove it because the category can have BLP implications and should thus be reliably sourced. - Sitush (talk) 14:59, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

Buddhist

I know that a fair few Dalit activists are Buddhists and I can see that Ilaiah has written a book titled Why I am not a Hindu but neither of these amount to the self-identification of religious belief that is required for biographies of living people. For that reason, I am removing

WP:BLPCAT. - Sitush (talk

) 15:04, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Kancha Ilaiah. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018.

regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check

}} (last update: 18 January 2022).