Jump to content

Talk:Bal Thackeray/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1
Bal Thackeray (born January 23, 1927) is the founder and supremo of the political party Shiv Sena in India.

Is this word supremo British political slang, or an official title, or something else? Michael Hardy 00:05, 14 Jun 2004 (UTC)

It's not a title. A supremo is a person whose word is final and there is no discussion about it, sort of like a dictator. --Hemanshu 10:38, 26 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Last Name

I am very interested to know about his last name... it's clearly British in origin, but I missed any mention in the article about his background.

Any info would be appreciated!

Mr. Thackeray is a member of the Chandraseniya Kayastha Prabhu (CKP) community. Thackeray is a family name in this community. No connection to William Thakeray. Rishab60 July 17, 2006
I have heard that his last name was originally spelled "Thakre" but then, for some reason, he changed the spelling to "Thackeray." (I don't know why. It seems counterintuitive, since it's a clearly British spelling and Bal "Thakre" despises the British.) Let's see if we can find a source on this information. --Hnsampat 13:40, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
Suketu Mehta in his book "Maximum City, Bambay Lost and Found" menthions that he was named after William Thackeray the auther of Vanity Fair, by his (Bal Thackeray's) father.

Any relation to William Thackeray, author of Vanity Fair? --Chris Lawson 07:56, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Possibly, William's father and grandfather were important members of the Indian civil service and his father, Richmond, had a child by an Indian woman before marrying William's mother. Not enough to make mention of it in the article. MeltBanana 15:57, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

Removed sentence "This would imply that he may not shave his beard until at least 2009 if he keeps his word.". It is speculative, subjective or biased.

Does he actually refer to himself as Hitler of India or is this what his political opponents refer to him as?

Nah! It's just more made-up leftist crap from the hideously messed-up Indian media and part of the stereotype of equating devout Hindus with Nazis. Nonetheless, it is an accusation and I have restated it as such.User:Subhash Bose
That wasn't from the Indian media. It was from Asiaweek, a well-respected magazine based in Hong Kong and published by Time, Inc., which also publishes Time.

--Hnsampat 21:47, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Run by whom? White people and their sock puppets? Heil to you too![[Netaji 01:02, 10 June 2006 (UTC)]]
[Mahesh] Those who are maharashtrians will understand that it is a TRUE maharashtrian surname. I was laughing when I read the comments that it is of british origin.

NPOV

This article seems a bit biased against Thackeray. I say "a bit" because I am truly a neutral observer who knows approximately zero about Indian politics or Mr. Thackeray, but I know enough to know that language like "He is one of india's worst religious fundamentalists and fanatics ever seen." isn't neutral. (I have removed this sentence.)

There were several anonymous edits between the last registered user reversion to remove POV language and the present, some of which are obviously neutral (and thus not the subject of this discussion) and some of which are possibly POV.

Does anyone particularly object to my adding the {NPOV} template to the top of the article until the article is cleaned up a bit?—chris.lawson (talk) 14:45, 23 September 2005 (UTC)

Cleanup

Regardless of NPOV issues, this article does need to be cleaned up. I'm adding the {cleanup} tag to it.—chris.lawson (talk) 14:46, 23 September 2005 (UTC)

this is a very biased version of mr bal thackrey in here

this is a very biased version of mr bal thackrey in here

The Sena's workings draw ready parallels with the Nazi storm-troopers of the 1920s and 1930s - I have removed this sentence as it is a vague and unjustified accusation. (Saurabhb 15:40, 24 December 2005 (UTC))

A very biased article.Balasaheb Thackray is a leader of 10 crore Maharashtrians and should be given respect and importance as any national leader.This article insults him.Please make it neutral.

Add my own 2 paisas. Thackeray is a bold visionary who has the courage and the werewithal to call a spade a spade, and expose and denounce grevious atrocities committed against Hindus by Christian Missionaries and Muslim terrorists that are largely unreported by the leftist Indian media. This biased article is just one of many racialist smear-campaigns by Hindu-haters and self-hating negationist Hindus as part of a deliberate attempt to delegitimize the Hindu way of life and anesthesize the world to massive ethnic cleansing against Hindus. People of goodwill who see the truth must tackle this problem now.User:Subhash Bose
First, let me say that I'm no fan of Bal Thackeray. I think that he is a fascist right-wing nutjob who brings a bad name to Hindus and Indians around the world. Nobody who calls himself the "Hitler of Mumbai" can be any good.
That being said, I have to agree that this article is pretty biased against him, particularly the "Controversy" section. I'm going to POV tag it and if editors could please work together to make it more netural, it would be helpful. --Hnsampat 13:34, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
I think we've managed to NPOV the section enough. I'm going to remove the POV tag. --Hnsampat 21:47, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Listen, User:Subhash Bose, I understand your point of view and all, but could you please act in the spirit of cooperation? Your remarks and name-calling ("sock puppets", "self-hating Hindus", etc.) are demeaning and not helpful. In fact, they border on out-and-out racism.

This article about Bal Thackeray needs to be neutral, but that does not mean that it needs to legitimize his actions. All it has to do is not take a position on his actions. Your most recent edit ("reclaiming Ramjanmanbhoomi") is a POV edit. You inserted your point of view into the article, which is just as unacceptable as calling Thackeray's supporters "right-wing cadres" (which I removed from the article).

Please work cooperatively on this. It is okay to maintain the point of view that you have. It is not okay to engage in name-calling and other such behavior. --Hnsampat 16:18, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

First off, the psychological basis of self-hatred is a reality, not "out-and-out" racism. Look at the Wikipedia article on it if you must (article mainly pertains to Jewish people, but there are far more self-hating Hindus in the world). Secondly, notice that I called the incident both the "reclamation of the Ramjanmabhoomi" as well as the "Babri Masjid incident", providing both the Hindu POV as well as that of the terrorist jehadis making it NPOV by cancellation. You are just another delusional liberal who wants to supress all POV's but your own. It's certainly okay to maintain the point of view that YOU have. It is NOT okay to suppress the right to free speech of Hindus.Sorry, but I'm reverting. I will, however, add that the "Ranjanmabhoomi reclamation" is a Hindu point of view.[[[User:Subhash bose|Netaji]] 03:49, 11 June 2006 (UTC)]

See, the edit you made right now was different from the edit you made before. This one is an important edit because, like you said, it shows the Hindu POV. However, it does not TAKE A POSITION on it. I agree that the article was incomplete without the Hindu rationale for demolishing the Babri Masjid. Before, though, you had written that the "Babri Masjid was demolished and the Ramjanmabhoomi 'reclaimed'." Even though you had quotes around "reclaimed," it still pushed a point of view, which is why I reverted it, not because I wanted to "suppress free speech" in any way. Right now, that section is more balanced.

You keep saying that the article is unbalanced. Fair enough. How about you keep on editing it to make it more balanced in your opinion, and I'll make additional changes, and that way, bit-by-bit, we'll come to a consensus? You and I represent different points of view on this matter, but I think we can work together to make this article more neutral. Please don't just keep complaining that it's a biased article. Do something about it.

One other thing. Please stop the name-calling. I don't appreciate it. You accuse me of suppressing any POV but my own, even though I have worked tirelessly to incorporate all points of view into the article. (I think my comments above speak for themselves.) You, on the other hand, have repeatedly accused those who disagree with you of being "self-hating Hindus," "terrorist jehadis," or "delusional liberals."

I disagree with you and think Bal Thackeray gives Hinduism a bad name. I don't think Lord Ram would ever have approved of his actions. I don't think that makes me a "self-hating Hindu." I'm a very proud Hindu, in fact. I'm proud of the universality of our faith and how it preaches tolerance and understanding. I'm proud of how our doctrine of karma explains why there is suffering in the world. I'm proud of how Lord Ram eventually forgave those who had wronged him. He killed Ravan, but in the end he did forgive him. He forgave Kaikeyi and he forgave Manthra, the hunchback that caused his exile in the first place.

How about you stop all the angry, hate-filled editing and commenting and instead work based on the spirit of cooperation? --Hnsampat 13:37, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

Fine, dandy. Don't get your underwear in knots. I'm all for representing every point of view, even the liberalist ones that I personally find repugnant and abhorrent. I'll cooperate with you in cleaning up this mess of an article if I must. The reason why I'm being so aggressive is that some Hindus should be more aggressive. It's important for people (including other Hindus) to realize that we will no longer remain soft targets for the enjoyment of the Abrahamics. Our way of life needs to be defended by force, even violent force, (verbal or physical) if necessary. Just like the Khatriyas, Rajputs and Maratha warriors like the Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaja did once (remember those guys?), or the Hindu race (and yes, Hindus are more than just a religion, WE ARE A RACE) will be completely eradicated in massive pogroms as the muslims plan and connive in their little hate-spewing madrassas and qutbas even as we speak. Thackeray realises this. He embodies the spirit of Maratha gallantry and patriotism for his nation and our race and culture and you hate him for it. How else to explain this rationally without self-hatred I wonder?[[[User:Subhash bose|Netaji]] 13:58, 11 June 2006 (UTC)]

Thank you very much for your remarks. Could you please explain which parts of the article you specifically have issues with? Please cite the exact sentences/paragraphs that you think need to be changed and please explain why. --Hnsampat 16:42, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

I have issues with the entire article. As such, it's tone is biased, derogatory, and completely unreasonable. All I want is to have the Hindu POV represented with the same respect as that of other religions. I mean, muslims blow up buildings with airplanes and decapitate journalists on television, and the wikipedia articles on Islam are full of fawning praise and subservient rubbish put there by Islamics. The wikipedia project on Judaism treats Israeli politicians with far more balance and objectivity than articles on a Hindu politicians (with similar POV's and responses to Islamic terrorism) written by HINDUS!!! What are we, blind, deaf and stupid like the Koran says about 'infidels'? What I ask that you (plural) read wikipedia articles on Ariel Sharon and George Bush and see how to write about politicians objectively, and reflect the same quality in the Thackeray article.[[[User:Subhash bose|Netaji]] 23:39, 11 June 2006 (UTC)]

There is some difference between Thackeray and some other leaders. No one else has speak about court of law with such contempt the way Thackeray does. Looking at the article if it has any bias its in favour of him.

With some justification. The Indian justice system is a sick joke. (Netaji 05:40, 11 July 2006 (UTC))

Thackeray has never been subtle in his political views. Even Bush and Sharon have been far more controlled in their vituperations. It is only natural that this fact is reflected in the wiki article. Netaji might add whatever he finds positive about Thackeray and the tag can be removed (Saraths 06:54, 13 July 2006 (UTC))

Hitler

I've added a specific citation of his quotes about supporting Hitler. It's quite clear that either he does or that Asia Week is lying. I personally tend to believe he actually does, because if he didn't, as some of his supporters claim, then there would have likely been slander/defamation suits filed against Asia Week and other publications, and we would have heard about that. ENpeeOHvee 20:42, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

To use a few isolated incidents quoted out of context in order to defame and denigrate a party with a (basically) sound foundational ideology is being terribly biased in my opinion.Plus, what's the deal with emphasizing his alleged admiration for Hitler? What's with this Godwin's law crap? Hitlerian! Last time I checked, there were no concentration camps in Maharashtra. so he said that he admires Hitler. So does Arnold Schwartzenegger, governor of California and of Austrian birth. What's your point anyway? Don't make hyperbolic statements. I'm modifying the whole "I admire Hitler" stuff and relegating it to a sentence at the end of the article. To put it in the beginning of an article on balasaheb is horribly POV Netaji 00:06, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
Again, I personally totally disagree with your support for Bal Thackeray, but I agree with your point here. The Hitler comment needs to remain on the page, but is better suited in the Controversy section. (On an unrelated matter, I don't think I've ever heard Arnie say that he admires the Fuhrer.) --Hnsampat 02:20, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
Apparently he did, in an old onterview here. Also here. So there... Netaji 02:25, 20 July 2006 (UTC)


i find the whole page rather biased TOWARDS Thackeray. The violence and bloodshed that results due to his views(and there is a lot of that) has been largely ignored. If the violence is not what Thackeray advocates (his apology that women were beaten up in Mumbai) then he should have better control over his bunch of hooligans (they ARE hooligans). Spewing hatred is easy enough, and there is always a bunch of people who will support such hatred. But things can get out of hand easily. you can never "clean out" any place. Check history if you dont believe me. the netaji dude says that Muslims are out to finish all Hindus. You cannot generalize like that. there are Muslims who hate Hindus and there are Hindus who hate Muslims (of which you are one) but the entire community is not obssesed with hatred. The Babri Masjid incident is a shameful blot in Indian history. As for the Hitler bit, believe it or not, I was reading Mein Kampf sometime back and i was reminded strongly of Thackeray, his opinions, and his policies, so i can readily believe that he does admire Hitler. besides ENpeeOHvee is right. Thackeray or one of his followers would have sued Asia Week. Afterall, they want to close Orkut because it has communities that speak up against Thackeray and his RSS. What happened to freedom of expression?? Do we have to watch silently as uncaring leaders tear our nation apart with hatred? Logicthis 11:49, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Last Name

I am very interested to know about his last name... it's clearly British in origin, but I missed any mention in the article about his background.

Any info would be appreciated!

I have heard that his last name was originally spelled "Thakre" but then, for some reason, he changed the spelling to "Thackeray." (I don't know why. It seems counterintuitive, since it's a clearly British spelling and Bal "Thakre" despises the British.) Let's see if we can find a source on this information. --Hnsampat 13:40, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
Suketu Mehta in his book "Maximum City, Bambay Lost and Found" menthions that he was named after William Thackeray the auther of Vanity Fair, by his (Bal Thackeray's) father.

Cancer quote

Show me the edition from India Today that cites this cancer quote. Sounds like another one of those falsifications like that done to Baruch Goldstein.Hkelkar 00:44, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
Try using google before abandoning WP:NPA. the first result for the phrase is [1]. Hornplease 00:47, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
Thanks Hornplease. BhaiSaab talk 00:50, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
There werent any personal attacks. Try looking at WP:NPA before fantasizing about WP policy.Bakaman Bakatalk 00:58, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
The user above accused another user of deliberate falsification. I thought I said WP:AGF. I suppose asking you to not lose your shirt over every comment I make is pointless? Hornplease 01:18, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
Well we both know you spy my contribs, I spy yours, Hkelkar and BhaiSaab spy each others. Bakaman Bakatalk 01:38, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
LOL! :) BhaiSaab talk 02:17, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
No problem, just tone down the anger. And believe me, I look at the contribs for Kelkar and BhaiSaab as well every now and then. At least Holywarrior isnt around still. Hornplease 02:06, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
Damn, I just realised he is. Hornplease 02:11, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
Holywarrior is now User:Ikonoblast . Bakaman Bakatalk 02:13, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Derogatory statements for any community cannot be considered civilized and Mr. Thackeray by that classification falls way below even the basic level of civilization, when he uses words like cancer for Muslims he is just showing his utmost disregard for humanity and showcasing aspects of his insane mindAsimkidwai 11:11, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Poor shape

This article is not in very good shape.While it discusses the sources from the mainstream media well enough, neutrality needs to be acheived very quickly, particularly in light of WP:BLP. Thus, I suggest that we try to bite the bullet regarding any views that we may have in support of or against Thackeray and try to represent his point of view in a neutral narrative. To that end, I think it should be acceptable to source Shiv Sena sources like saamna. In spite of their extreme partisanship, I posit that they are reliable so as to illustrate Thackeray's viewpoint and can be used as primary sources. I am posting a biography notice so that people may contribute well to this article.Hkelkar 00:12, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Thousand Thackereys

The pages of Indian history from 711 CE are drenched in the blood of millions of Hindus who were slaughtered mercilessly. There were scores of holocausts in India compared to a handful in other parts of the world. Hindus themselves negate their own history because of distorted versions written by the likes of Romilla Thapar. We need thousands of Thackereys to propagate the real truth and exhort Hindus to act in self-defence so that they do not disappear from the sub-continent.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 59.165.151.178 (talk • contribs) 06:10, 2 February 2007.

Wonderfully put! Bal Thackeray is indeed a visionary when it comes to defending India's and Hindus' interests. The stupid Congress government endlessly appeases minorities neglecting the needs or calls of the Hindu majority. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.180.39.64 (talk) 18:33, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Views on hitler

Why is the sentence about Jews in India watching the rise of Hindutva as being good for Zionism in the Hitler paragraph? It just contradicts itself. (Jvalant 17:24, 2 February 2007 (UTC))

Presumably, it's there to provide balance, to show that Thackeray, despite his admiration of Hitler, is not an anti-Semite. However, it needs to be reworded if not removed entirely. --Hnsampat 20:31, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
That's what the paper cited says. What is the problem? India Rising 14:54, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
Several problems. First, as written, that sentence seems to just appear out of nowhere. It's natural to wonder what it's doing there. If we choose to keep the sentence, then it needs to be reworded so that it better explains itself. (Also, that sentence is an almost exact copy of the source, so it must be reworded to avoid copyvio.) More than that, though, the source simply represents one person's opinion. Just because one person said it doesn't make it true. Furthermore, that source is from 1987, long before Thackeray made any of his comments in admiration of Hitler. Do Indian Jews still support Thackeray in spite of this? We need several recent sources to confirm this. As written, this sentence makes a broad generalization about a large group of people. --Hnsampat 15:03, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
I thought that we were not required to engage in Original Research on Wikipedia and simply report what are the facts as reliable sources tell us? You have offerred an opinion on the research material and used that as an excuse to engage in wiki-censorship.Wikipedia policies must not be selectively interpreted to not apply to people like Thackeray (whom we all presumably don't like, I certainly don't). One research paper by notable scholars is surely worthy of inclusion unless you plan on McCarthyism. I think it is best to reword, how to go about it? India Rising 17:42, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
That's my point. I question the reliability of the source in this context. The source is outdated (it's from 1987, long before any of Thackeray's comments in admiration of Hitler were made) and is the analysis of just two scholars. Just because they say that Jews in India see a possible supporter of Zionism in Thackery does not make it so. I'm not saying that they're lying; what they say is simply their opinion. Their opinion is not necessarily "fact". Now, if several prominent scholars have said that, then it makes it something more concrete. However, we can't just take the opinions expressed in one article and automatically treat them as fact.
Still, we don't need to remove the sentence entirely. However, if we choose to keep the sentence, we do need to reword it to avoid giving it undue weight. (This is what I had tried to do here, but you reverted that for some reason.)
The rules for original research mean that we are not allowed to include our own analyses in the article and must instead report on reliable published sources. However, this does not forbid us from using discretion in determining which sources are reliable and which aren't. Otherwise, anybody who said anything anywhere could be included in Wikipedia, which clearly is inappropriate.
Please assume good faith. I have done nothing to merit you accusing me of "wiki-censoring" and "McCarthyism" and it was inappropriate for you to make those remarks. --Hnsampat 18:26, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
Yes. You are right. I am sorry to have hurt your feelings.I think now that your sentence is the best way to present the material so I have put it back in. I think we can agree on this. India Rising 20:32, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
I think the sentence should be deleted. The content is original research in the sense that the sentence is implying that Jews somehow see past Thackeray's admiration of Hitler, and feel he still serves their cause. This is not the argument that the source used ever made, so using it to this end is dishonest. Since the case that Baal hates Jews was never made to begin with, this retort is also unwarranted. The sentence reads as strange to the reader because its altogether irrelevant to the section, which is not about antisemitism at all, but Thackeray's admiration of a brutal dictator. MinaretDk 18:57, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
But it is not original research because it is exactly what the paper says. The implications are drawn by some of the readers and it is not our purpose to infer others' implications, right? India Rising 20:25, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
I'd still like to keep the NPOV signboard in the page. I think that most of the sources come from Thackeray's opponents and do not reflect the POV of his supporters. India Rising 20:29, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
Fair enough. I just wanted to be sure there's an ongoing difference of opinion on the neutrality of the article.MinaretDk 20:51, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
I think that is a very good thing right now . India Rising 20:58, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Anyway, I added one more opinion from one of Thackeray's chelis. I really don't like these people, but I think that they viewpoint needs to be shown in a neutral article and let's trust that the reader is intelligent enough to sort out the biases of the commentators, what? India Rising 20:58, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

I wholeheartedly agree. --Hnsampat 21:36, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
Err, I don't know how many of you have interacted with Bombay-based Jews. I certainly have. Most have last names ending with "kar" and their language of interaction and indeed their first language is Marathi, not Hebrew. They tend to support the Sena. (Jvalant 04:14, 4 February 2007 (UTC))

Being fascinated by Hitler is not unheard off for young impressionable minds in India, but the with maturity and learning every ‘sane’ individual loathes the deeds of the sick man that Hitler was. When Thackeray says I love him (Hitler), he helps us see his immaturity, his view would be supported by Neo-Nazis and sick people around the world Asimkidwai 11:09, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Or Pakistan, for that matter. There were pickets in Islamabad praising hitler. See [2]. These people know full well what Hitler did. India Rising 16:40, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Suicide squads

Recently, User:TomCat111 added some quotes about Thackeray calling for the formation of "suicide squads." This has led to a mini revert war between TomCat111 and several other users. I don't have a particular stance on whether these quotes should be included in the article or not, but I figured that all parties should discuss the matter here and then, based on the consensus, the quotes should be kept or removed. Specifically, if TomCat11 could please discuss the rationale for keeping the quotes and if User:Bakasuprman, User:Goldstein Orwell, and User:Hornplease could elaborate on their concerns of WP:BLP violations, WP:UNDUE, and on the suspicion that TomCat111 is the sockpuppet of a banned user, it would be most helpful. Thanks! --Hnsampat 12:29, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Thank you hnsampat. These quotes are cherry picked in order to give off the impression that Thackeray is some sort of Hamas style facilitator of terrorism. It violates WP:UNDUE precisely for this reason.Bakaman 16:02, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
Thanks Hnsampat. First of all, why are certain people bent on unethically removing (no matter how reliable, authentic, factual, and verifiable) any information that dares to show Thakaeray anything but a Pope/Saint? That is what I call cherry picking. In the interest of presenting a balanced view, every single piece of information I have contributed comes from highly reputable and verifiable sources. In fact, this information can be cross-referenced and corroborated by multiple authentic sources. It is not a WP:BLP violation, because it is a NPOV, verifiable, and it's not original research. In fact, these are words (that were reported by virtually every single mainstream Indian newspaper) of the person who is subject of this page. It is not a WP:UNDUE violation, because taking these quotes out would make this article biased. Additionally, these are not views of a minority. These are widely reported (by highly reliable sources) quotes of a person who is the subject of this article. Finally, these quotes balance the article which otherwise gives undue weight to depicting Thakaeray as a Pope/Saint. It is in the general public’s interest to learn all aspects of Thakaeray’s life and not only the cherry picked ones. -- TomCat111 10:17, 28 August 2007
My participation was limited to undoing the edits of Goldstein Orwell, a suspected sockpuppet of the banned Hkelkar.
On the issues themselves, I think that the suicide squad remarks received a lot of coverage at the time, and are mentioned every now and then in general articles on Mr. Thackeray. The article should not give undue weight to the remarks or the reaction to them (he has, after all, made so many others of similar outrageousness), but excluding them completely seems unjustified. A paragraph with a couple of references seems adequate. Hornplease 17:32, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

More recent picture of Bal Thackeray is needed

A more recent picture of Bal Thackeray is needed to replace the current picture. Bal Thackeray has grown a beard now. A new picture will further the objective of accuracy. --TomCat111 17:55, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Whitewashing?

Since 4th July this article has been steadily whittled down by a few IPs, eg 202.122.20.254, 125.22.243.174 , and many well-sourced but contentious sections have been removed. The article was much better before, so I've reverted back to before this happened. If those removing info have concerns they should note them here on the talk page. Thanks --78.86.25.78 (talk) 03:58, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Deleted irrelevant talk


This page is for discussion about the article, not personal opinions Gobade.abhay1 (talk) 13:30, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Mr Thakeray is upposedly a Bharati(Indian)nationalist who, and whose party, promotes Bharati identity and religious growth to the exclusion of all foreign influences. I f that's the case then why allow non-Bharati linguistic elements in his name, his party title and his use of official national language: Saheb is a word of Arabic origin and Urdu usage; Thacheray is English spelling and a famous UK surname:Hindu is Arabic/Farsi name of people of Sindh valley derives from Sindhu; Hindi is old word derived from Hindavi (initial term for Urdu/Hindustani; Hindustan is name given to north India by Muslim rulers from Central Asia, Persia and Afghanistan - Hind has been used by Arabs. My point is made.Moarrikh (talk) 23:18, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Not moved. Jafeluv (talk) 10:16, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

cdvsgsgehthrry5ju---- Bal Thackeray → Balasaheb Thackeray – Move to a much popular and commonly recognised and referred name. -Animeshkulkarni (talk) 07:25, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Bal Thackeray at 70th Master Dinanath Mangeshkar Awards (1) (cropped).jpg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Bal Thackeray at 70th Master Dinanath Mangeshkar Awards (1) (cropped).jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests April 2012
What should I do?

Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.

To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:Bal Thackeray at 70th Master Dinanath Mangeshkar Awards (1) (cropped).jpg)

This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 14:10, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

Bihar connection

I saw this: Thackeray family itself belonged to Bihar and had settled in Dhar in western Madhya Pradesh from where they migrated to Mumbai. I am not sure if this information is correct. In case, it is correct, it may be incorporated in the article at an appropriate place so as to value add to the content of this article. Comments are invited. --Bhadani (talk) 03:09, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

You can read the writings of Keshav Thackeray online. Digvijay Singh refers to Prabodhanakara Thakare Samagra Vanmaya (Volume 5, Page 45). The Volume 5 contains 3 books, and the text referred by Digvijay Singh is part of the book Gramanyachya Sadhyant Itihas Arthat Nokarashiche Banda ("A Comprehensive History of Rebellion or the Revolt of the Bureaucrats"). It talks about the Chandraseniya Kayastha Prabhu (CKP) caste, to which the family belongs. Page 45 mentions that the CKPs were originally from Magadha; to escape from the misrule of the king Mahapadma Nanda, they migrated to Nepal, Kashmir and "Talbhopal" (I doubt this is same as Bhopal in Madhya Pradesh). It goes on to say that a CKP member with the surname "Thakre" established a small estate near Chittod.
This text doesn't say anything about the present-day Thackeray family, which is mentioned in the autobiography Mazhi Jeevangatha (Volume 1). The earliest ancestor that this autobiography talks about was apparently a kiladar of the Dhodap fort. As for Prabodhankar Thackrey's connections outside Maharashtra, it states that he studied in Dewas (in present-day Madhya Pradesh) and Kolkata.
To summarize, Digvijay is right only if by "Thackrey family" he means their ancestors who lived more than two thousand years ago during the reign of the Nanda dynasty.
utcursch | talk 22:31, 7 September 2012 (UTC)
Thank you for the clarifications. In that case, Digvijay is talking of ancestors who lived 100 generations before. I apprehend, if Digvijay stretches human ancestors too far, he may find that we all were apes :) --Bhadani (talk) 14:08, 8 September 2012 (UTC)
User:Kumarila seems to have an agenda posting the allegations against Thackeray's. He/She has reverted this page and has indulged in edit warring on Raj Thackeray wikipage too. WBRSin (talk) 14:43, 8 September 2012 (UTC)
I have similar apprehensions as pointed by WBRSin. --Bhadani (talk) 18:09, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

Fascist

Change the lead from nationalist to fascist. Because he was aggressive and did not bother about protocols. So, he correctly fits the definition of a fascist. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:4C28:194:520:5E26:AFF:FEFE:8C40 (talk) 05:29, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Erm no.
"Fascist" is just your view. Wikipedia maintains neutrality. WP:NPV

--Tovojolo (talk) 11:57, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 17 November 2012

Death 59.94.107.86 (talk) 11:37, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Confirmed per this and other sources. Update pending. Rivertorch (talk) 11:58, 17 November 2012 (UTC)
Already done Rivertorch (talk) 12:01, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 18 November 2012

Bal Thackray died on 17th November 2012 at his recedence (MATOSHREE) in East Bandra - Mumbai - India at 3.33PM due to a cardiac arrest. The team of doctors looking after his health tried to revieve but finally declaired him dead. His body will be placed in Shivaji Park on 17th November 2012 for his huge fan follower (Shiv Sainik) before cremation. 86.51.170.146 (talk) 05:42, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

Not done: Sorry, no. I can correct your many spelling and grammatical errors, but the style, tone, and level of detail are inappropriate for an encyclopedia article. Reliable sourcing is also a prerequisite. Rivertorch (talk) 06:12, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 19 November 2012

The Birth year is 1927 not 1926, please make the correction on Wiki.

Digamber.tawde (talk) 11:20, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. - the reference currently in the article says: "Born on January 23, 1926, Bal Keshav Thackeray, popularly called Balasaheb, started out as a cartoonist for the Free Press Journal.". This is sourced to dnaindia.com. Do you have a better source that leads you to request this change, or a reason to believe the existing one is inaccurate? Begoon talk 12:18, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Edit request (2) on 19 November 2012

On 19 November 2012 the Times of India reported of a 21 year old woman being arrested for questioning the appropriatness of the shutting down of the Mumbai city centre for the funeral of Bal Thackeray. The news artical commented on the recent sensitivity in India about criticism of politicians and suggested that the arrest of the woman was a way of suppressing freedom of speech in India. http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/21-year-old-girl-held-for-Facebook-post-questioning-Mumbais-Bal-Thackeray-shutdown/articleshow/17276979.cms — Preceding unsigned comment added by 110.174.26.187 (talk) 11:45, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Not done: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit semi-protected}} template. - also, a side note, on your interpretation of that source - it doesn't "suggest that the arrest of the woman was a way of suppressing freedom of speech in India", it refers to recent events "sparking criticism in turn from freedom of speech campaigners.", so the source does not give this opinion, it reports that some campaigners were critical.

Regardless of that, I think there would need to be consensus for this edit, even if altered to properly reflect the source, so we should wait for any other editor comments. Thanks. Begoon talk 13:04, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Cultural Reference

In the cultural reference section there is a line referring that the Sarkar movie is based on the Thackeray family. However from an interview from the Director of the movie (Ram Gopal Varma) to rediff, he calims it is not. The link to the page.

 Done(Lihaas (talk) 05:41, 20 November 2012 (UTC)).

Bias?

Obviously this could be very contentious, but the newer updates to this article appear very biased to me.

The section on responses to his death only has responses that are positive. Meanwhile, there are many people here who are very upset by the continuing illegal bandh, and some are arrested for espousing such views (eg. http://www.business-standard.com/generalnews/news/two-held-for-fb-post-questioning-bandh-for-thackerays-funeral/80893/). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 110.172.182.27 (talk) 13:50, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

To editor Begoon, what do you mean by consensus. There is a statement of fact that the Mumbai police arrested a young woman for posting a criticism of the funeral shutting down Mumbai on her facebook page. This fact has been reported on a number of reputable news sites. I did not say the Times of indida said that this was an exacple of suppression of freedom of speech I said it suggested this may be the case. I do not think this is misrepresenting what the Times of India wrote. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 164.97.245.84 (talk) 03:35, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

I simply mean that there needs to be agreement amongst editors here that addition of this content will improve the article. With current events rapidly unfolding we need to be sure that what we add to an article has lasting notability. I can't add it for you until such consensus exists (and the wording of the addition is agreed). I'm certainly not saying nothing can be added, that will depend on consensus - the word consensus is a blue link, and is explained in terms of how it is used here at the linked page.
I realise it can be frustrating when you are a new editor, but this is an encyclopedia, not a newspaper, so there is no deadline, and we can comfortably wait until there is agreement on the right course of action. Your edit has in no way been rejected, just opened up for discussion by other regular editors to this article. Begoon talk 03:51, 20 November 2012 (UTC)
Just an addendum about the Times of India: It does not "suggest" that anything "may be the case" - it reports that there has been "criticism" from "freedom of speech campaigners". That's all it says about that, and we need to be accurate in how we report what sources have said. We cannot include our opinion of what we think they meant. Begoon talk

Update:If you read the "Criticisms" section now - you will see that another editor has added some details which I copyedited for grammar and flow. If you want to propose a change to that text, please do so. Thanks. Begoon talk 04:21, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

I merged that in, though i still doubt its notablte enugh to post here. Perhaps its more fr the censorship in indi a page than this, but the article about the individual is well out of scope for a minor incident as this. (i left it in for now, however)
Also, pe r the OP, there was no bandh called, legal or illegal. No one forced closed or taxis of the road (theyre private), the trains./buses were running(Lihaas (talk) 05:45, 20 November 2012 (UTC)).
It's certainly lengthy content for what is, as you say, probably going to be viewed as minor with a little bit of hindsight. When events are current like this, this is the way of it - I suspect it will 'evolve' into suitable content as the article is edited, but we should make sure it doesn't become very WP:UNDUE. And, to the original poster - this process of discussion and consensus building, happening here, is what I meant by consensus. It's how this encyclopedia is built. Begoon talk 06:02, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

To Bigoon. What you have reported as a minor incident (the arrest of 2 women for critcising the funeral) has started what may be a major debate about the power of Shiv Sena. For example, on 21/11/2012 the Australian newspapre Sydney Morning Herald wrote:

"Analysts and the media are slamming the Maharashtra state government for what they said was a flagrant misuse of the law and an attempt to curb freedom of expression. The arrests were seen as a move by police to prevent any outbreak of violence by supporters of Bal Thackeray, a powerful Hindu fundamentalist politician who died Saturday.

"We are living in a democracy, not a fascist dictatorship," Markandey Katju, a former Supreme Court justice who now heads the Press Council of India, wrote in a protest letter to the chief minister of Maharashtra. Katju demanded that the state government suspend the police officers who had ordered the arrests and prosecute them...

Analysts say it was as sense of fear that kept millions of people off the streets of the bustling city on Sunday. Nearly 20,000 policemen patrolled the deserted streets, mainly because of the violent history of the Shiv Sena...

But the thuggish behavior was in evidence Monday when a mob of Thackeray's supporters stormed the orthopedic clinic, destroying its operating rooms and much of its equipment. Nurses and patients fled but no one was hurt.

The Mumbai arrests came barely two months after the Maharashtra police arrested a political cartoonist on sedition charges for drawings that mocked corruption in the Indian government. The charges were dropped and the cartoonist is out on bail. Earlier this year, a university professor was arrested in the state of West Bengal for forwarding an email cartoon that caricatured the chief minister there."

Analysts say it was as sense of fear that kept millions of people off the streets of the bustling city on Sunday. Nearly 20,000 policemen patrolled the deserted streets, mainly because of the violent history of the Shiv Sena."

http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-technology/outrage-in-india-over-arrests-for-facebook-post-20121120-29o68.html

You culd find numeous reputable international and Indian media outlets saying the same. Bigoon, your opinion about this being a minor matter is oviously not shared by the mainstream media or the Press Council of India. In the interests of balanced editing on this point I suggest you rethink your position — Preceding unsigned comment added by 110.174.26.187 (talk • contribs)

Please don't remove the comments of other users from talk pages. I have restored them. Thank you for the information and the suggestion. I'm afraid I don't have a "position" to rethink. I have no interest in a long circular debate on this subject, having initially visited the page simply to attempt to help with an edit request. I'm sorry if you have not found my input helpful. I hope you can achieve an acceptable consensus in whatever discussion may develop here with other editors. Good luck. Begoon talk 10:44, 20 November 2012 (UTC)
Are you watching the indian media (IP)? The issue is not bradened to a wide debate on the matter. That said, mention of the PTI/jusitice dude could be included as a eaction here since hes a notable person.Also an article on the side of the international news in an ausie paper is not exectly notable for this issue on WP.(Lihaas (talk) 08:42, 21 November 2012 (UTC)).

Recentism?

A casual glance at the article shows that most dates are in the 2000s or at most the 90s. I feel that the article does have sufficient content about his career and activities in the early period, the 60s, 70s and 80s. In particular, we need lot more details about things like the anti-south India movement, the mill workers issues and the Sena govt. in the 90s. I might try doing some of this myself, if I can find time, but I would appreciate if someone else lends a hand. Thanks, SPat talk 16:53, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

I agree, particularl with the south indian issue. Though the other arguement would be isnt that more for the SHiv Sena article than him personally? In the days before he died there was a lot more POV and criticism. I cleaned some of that up, but your right that his early political activity needs mre (even the hournalistic bits)(Lihaas (talk) 08:44, 21 November 2012 (UTC)).

Edit request on 30 November 2012

In 5.3 Funeral, please change "...People like Thackeray are born and die daily, and one should not observe a bandh for that on Facebook." to the following comment: “With all respect, every day, thousands of people die, but still the world moves on,”read the message posted by 21-year old Shaheen Dhada and ‘liked’ by 20-year old Renu Srinivasan from Palghar in the neighbouring Thane district, her lawyer Sudheer Gupta told The Hindu. The post continued: “Just due to one politician died a natural death, everyone just goes bonkers. They should know, we are resilient by force, not by choice. When was the last time, did anyone showed some respect or even a two-minute silence for Shaheed Bhagat Singh, Azad, Sukhdev or any of the people because of whom we are free-living Indians? Respect is earned, given, and definitely not forced. Today, Mumbai shuts down due to fear, not due to respect.” [1] 'Mumbai shuts down due to fear, not respect', The Hindu, November 19, 2012

Justification for Edit: The present comment is untrue and a summary of what maybe meant and not verbatim, as there were no names mentioned in the Facebook post of the Palghar girl, as stated in The Hindu article from where the above-mentioned quotation is given. Prikor123 (talk) 11:51, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Some sources do mention the name. Yogesh Khandke (talk) 12:24, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
The content in question appears to have been moved to Death of Bal Thackeray. I see no mention of names of living persons in conjunction with this quote on that article, so I see no action required. —KuyaBriBriTalk 15:34, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 23 November 2012

Add the following to the xenophobia section.

On March 6, 2008, Bal Thackeray issued an editorial titled 'Ek Bihari, Sau Bimari' (One Bihari, Hundred illnesses) in Saamna, Shiv Sena's political mouthpiece, saying Biharis were 'an unwanted lot' in Maharashtra. Sources: [3][4] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 123.231.80.21 (talk • contribs) 23 November 2012

Protection of this article has expired. —KuyaBriBriTalk 15:43, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

Article protected

This article has been protected from editing for three days to try to generate talk page discussion of the disputed content. Please follow the WP:BRD guideline. You may also wish to consider dispute resolution (WP:DR). Mark Arsten (talk) 00:49, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

Bigot?

@Mar4d:, why do you think that personal opinion of one person expressed on OPED of Pakistani Newspaper should be added in this article? There are various OPEDs in which people call him by very insane names, we can't add those. It is Wikipedia article, not OPED. You must take consensus of community before adding anything controversial in article. Thank you. --Human3015 Say Hey!! • 07:11, 30 May 2015 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Bal Thackeray. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than 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: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 15:11, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 6 external links on Bal Thackeray. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than 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: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 07:30, 5 February 2016 (UTC)

FB comments and arrest

The incident about FB comments and arrest is not directly related to Bal Thackeray. IMO, it is an WP:UNDUE in the funeral because it is not related to it too. Wikipedia is WP:NOTNEWS. So removing. --Redtigerxyz Talk 16:28, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

I think a slight mention of it, maybe a single sentence is warranted. After all these years, it still seems a little relevant. This Washington Post article also gives some weight to it. Ugog Nizdast (talk) 06:44, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Bal Thackeray. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than 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: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:11, 11 September 2016 (UTC)

Neutrality

There should be neutrality on lead, thus I have partially restored earlier version. He criticized Muslims but also said he is not against all Muslims, he praised somethings about Hitler but denied praising him. Later sections are better for that. Capitals00 (talk) 08:20, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

Capitals00, the version of the lede you do not like is a good summary of the body, and is based on solid sources; whereas you are adding back material simply listing the terms used by his supporters (of which there are likely to be many), based on a Gyan source that does not appear to be very reliable. Indeed Gyan as a publisher has enough problems that we have removed their sources wholesale from articles before: @Sitush: knows more about this. Also, what evidence do you have that the current version does not reflect the sources? Vanamonde (talk) 09:14, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

Don't use Gyan/Kalpaz/ISHA stuff anywhere. See User:Sitush/Common#Gyan. There has been another thread about their uselessness at WT:INB in the last few months - same outcome. - Sitush (talk) 09:31, 23 July 2017 (UTC)
While the terms can be removed, a more neutral language had to be used for Muslims, Hitler and Bombay Riots. I have made some changes. D4iNa4 (talk) 09:40, 23 July 2017 (UTC)
Yes no problem with the lead now, I will find a better source to add the nickname as it still remains on section. Capitals00 (talk) 09:59, 23 July 2017 (UTC)


As mentioned in our talk, I am perfectly Ok with your removal of my edits from http://www.hindustantimes.com/india/lessons-not-learnt/story-mGDIEnl6zyzIvRAN1RUFGO.html
So either way - whether the info remains or not - it does not matter to me.-Acharya63 (talk) 02:37, 31 October 2017 (UTC)
I just listened to his interview on YouTube. He says clearly that he was not against muslims - he was only against Indian muslims who are anti-Indian.-Acharya63 (talk) 04:22, 31 October 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Bal Thackeray. 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. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than 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: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:12, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

reverted edits

Hi Vanamonde93,

I don't have strong political opinions but I did not understand your reversal of some of my edits(see below) but agree with some reverts you made. Please see below. Basically only one of the comments was from a political associate. In any case, I am OK whether my edits are accepted or not but was surprised with the entire revert. Please could you respond below?. Thanks Acharya63 (talk) 10:00, 19 March 2018 (UTC)

In 2012, he clarified his position by saying "I was never against Muslims. We protected them. Women Sainiks fought to save Muslim colonies. We fought only against those Muslims who came against us.."[2]

This is his direct quote. Just like his other quotes already mentioned on the page. So not sure why this was deleted.-Acharya63 (talk) 10:14, 19 March 2018 (UTC)
The issue is that every politician denies virtually every allegation made about themselves. Direct quotes are only useful, if at all, when the quotes themselves have been subjected to heavy analysis. Vanamonde (talk) 10:26, 19 March 2018 (UTC)

In 2017, Haji Mohammed Halim Khan, a Muslim candidate of the Sena, dismissed the anti-muslim charge against the Sena and Thackerey and even praised Thackeray for helping them build a prominent Mosque. Khan said, “Saying that Sena is anti-Muslim is nothing but crap and 'Sena’s projection of Muslims in a bad light' is a handiwork of certain sections of the society. Rather, Sena has always been helpful in sorting out our problems. They are our true well-wisher. I can recollect that one of our prominent mosques came up only when Balasaheb Thackerayji helped. The Congress considers Muslim as merely a vote-bank and nothing more than that, while Shiv Sena encourages every Muslim to be faithful towards the country. Balasaheb always praised ‘sachche musalman’ [true Muslims]".[3]

I agree with you that this could be a biased comment since Khan is his party member. But there are other comments on the page that are from opposing parties. So what is the harm in keeping this as long as we indicate that Khan is a party member?Acharya63 (talk) 09:53, 19 March 2018 (UTC)
As you say, Khan is a member of the Sena; his views aren't worthy of much weight here. The views of political opponents aren't particularly worthy of weight either, unless they are scholars or commentators who are independent of the Sena but happen to disagree with them. Vanamonde (talk) 10:26, 19 March 2018 (UTC)

Maulana Mehmood Dariyabadi, general secretary of the All India Ulema Council, a body of Muslim scholars, also said that Muslims preferred Sena's Hindutva ideology as compared to the Bhartiya Janata Party's fascist ideology of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh. Polls showed that the Muslims sided with the Sena.[4]

I agree this comment is for the Sena not for him - so should be deleted. In any case, it is based on a poll and not a biased opinion by any party member. It does not say that Maulana is associated with Shiv Sena Thanks.Acharya63 (talk) 09:53, 19 March 2018 (UTC)
As you said; I should have been more specific with my edit summary here. Dariyabadi isn't a reliable source by himself, but if his comments are taken by reliable sources to represent the views of a significant number of Muslims, it may be worth including in the main article. Vanamonde (talk) 10:26, 19 March 2018 (UTC)

Thackeray was emotionally very close and had full faith in his Muslim doctor Dr.Jalil Parkar during the last four years of his life. After his death, reports say that the doctor visibly 'had moist eyes and was choked up'. Dr.Jalil Parkar said he never experienced any religious bias and instead described the Sena chief as one of the 'kindest souls he had interacted with'.[5]

This is from a US based doctor who was close to his family.So you are right - it might be a biased comment but at the same time we have a comment by a communist party member on the page(a direct enemy of Shiv Sena). Acharya63 (talk) 09:53, 19 March 2018 (UTC)
Comments by the doctor are not useful, as they come from a non-independent person. If reliable sources are commenting on the relationship, that might be worth including, though as an argument against prejudice it's pretty weak. Which comment by his "enemy" are you referring to? Vanamonde (talk) 10:26, 19 March 2018 (UTC)
Hi Vanamonde, Not his personal enemy but a member of the communist party of India (Somnath Chatterjee) - an enemy of shiv Sena. If I read correctly there was never any love lost between Sena and CPI. Shivsainik thugs actually beat up some communist party members. His 2012 comment might be a self defense comment but it is just like the other comments (provocative as well as in self defense) that we have posted earlier so I added it as his final comment before death. By reliable sources, do you mean non-newspaper sources? In any case, I don't have strong feelings about political issues- just thought the article was a bit one sided and mostly based on one-sided news articles based on watching couple of his interviews in Hindi over the weekend. Hence I edited to try to balance it. His nephew Raj Thackeray is definitely very "pro muslim" and not a 'staunch hindu' (which is good imho as politicians should not have religious bias) - so he has many muslim supporters. Bal Thackeray did not seem anti-muslim in general based on his interviews. But he was a staunch Hindu. But we can leave it there and keep the article as it is.Thanks-Acharya63 (talk) 10:55, 19 March 2018 (UTC)
I wouldn't ordinarily include that quote, but if we are to mention that incident at all, Chatterjee as the speaker of the Lok Sabha is probably the best person to quote, because that bit refers to allegations Thackeray made about that body. I'm open to discussing the inclusion of that particular incident. Vanamonde (talk) 11:02, 19 March 2018 (UTC)
Frankly, I don't remember the exact source of the beating incident - it just stayed in my mind - my guess is that it is in Vaibhav Purandare's book( or some discussion thread on Quora) - but I will certainly post it here on the talk page if I find it. In any case, most shivsainiks were unemployed and mostly illiterate(or less educated) folks prone to violence that Thackeray exploited for his own gains and himself became a very rich man. It is interesting that neither he nor any of his direct family members/friends or high level Sena leaders like Joshi etc. directly participated in any violence - they only acted as remote controls. So the incident is definitely not unique and the wiki page makes a general mention of violence anyway. Fortunately, his son Udhav and grandson Aditya seem to be quite soft spoken, open minded and much more polite than Bal. But only time will tell. Acharya63 (talk) 11:46, 19 March 2018 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ http://www.thehindu.com/news/states/other-states/mumbai-shuts-down-due-to-fear-not-respect/article4111814.ece
  2. ^ "we protected muslims says Bal Thackarey". Indian Express. In a diversion from the party's apparent anti-Muslim stand, Thackeray said: "I was never against Muslims. We protected them. Women Sainiks fought to save Muslim colonies. We fought only against those Muslims who came against us..
  3. ^ "Winning Muslim candidates say Shiv Sena our true well-wisher". 2017.
  4. ^ "BMC polls: Muslims side with Shiv Sena, ignore BJP"".
  5. ^ "Bal Thackeray shared strong bond with his Muslim physician".

their is big huge mistake in the name of balasaheb thackery. the name that comes a title is totally wrong ie. the name on the title comes as "Bal Thackeray" but in whole region of maharashtra he is been called as "balasaheb thackeray" not only in maharashtra but also people leaving in other states call him balasaheb thackeray. so according to me the name on the title must be changed from "Bal Thackeray" to "Balasaheb Thackeray". if anyone hold this right to change the title name then please do it, as i m not able to do that because i am not getting that option to change that title name. Vikramsawant20022002 (talk) 14:26, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

Merge Marmik here

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
To not merge, on the grounds of independent notability of both the publication and the founder. Klbrain (talk) 10:27, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

Marmik is small article and does not exist anymore. So it should be merged as there is little scope of expansion. Capankajsmilyo(Talk | Infobox assistance) 19:06, 27 May 2019 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Bal_Thackeray/Archive_1&oldid=1146402532"