Talk:Gandhi Under Cross Examination

What's the objection to notability

An editor has tagged the article as not-notable but has not given views on the discussion page as to why the editor feels that. Please put reason here so that we can discuss. If the editor does not prove his point here in a few days; I'll have to remove the "not-notable" tag. --Roadahead (talk) 21:06, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

I don't know who tagged the article as non-notable, but this book seems to fail Wikipedia:Notability (books). To begin with, it is published by a non-notable publisher ("Sovereign Star Publishing, Inc."), and is publisher's first (and the only) book.

The only non-trivial mention I could find was "[http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=63906 Gandhi was anti-black, charges new biography]" at wnd.com. Many sites have mirrored New Book Shreds Fabrications of Indian Civil Rights Icon, but this is just a press releaseand hence not a third-party reference.

Most of the other mentions are from little-known pro-Khalistan websites (Panthic Weekly, World Sikh News, Sikh Spectrum), which are opposed to Gandhi and India, in general. Other mentions include websites like Conspiracy Culture, forums and blogs.

While I am myself not a great admirer of Gandhi, I must say that this book clearly fails Wikipedia:Notability (books) in absence of substantial coverage from the mainstream media (unlike the other book by the same author). Unless somebody adds a few solid references from reliable sources, this article should be merged with and redirected to Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi in South Africa. Otherwise, it'll inevitably land up at WP:AfD. utcursch | talk 09:50, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Hello Utcursch, SikhSpectrum and World Net daily are critical of India's repression on Sikhs and other non-Hindu minorities in India. That doesn't mean they support the State of Khalistan. In fact, many of their authors such as Baldev Singh consider Khalistan bogey created by the Indian government in 1970s in order to justify repression against Sikhs. Well, the point I am trying to raise is to re-analyze their criticism that is directed against India for participating massacres of non-Hindus.I don't think our conscience should overlook the actions of Indian Government for the face saving of India by raising the Khalistan bogey. How do you regard WND as non-notable? regards, Princhest | talk 17:26, 21 September 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.173.143.56 (talk)

I just stumbled upon the comments made by editor Utcursch and got surprised how ignorant and assumption laden they are. Utcursch here alleges that "World Sikh News" and "Sikh Spectrum" are "pro-Khalistan" with no logical backup of claim what-so-ever. Could I request Utcursch to first let us know what he means by "Khalistan" and help us understand with substantiation what kind of this Khalistan are "World Sikh News" and "Sikh Spectrum" pro about? I eagerly await Utcursch's response on these 2 queries. --Roadahead (talk) 01:49, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Alternate merge

The book is notable for its explosive comments and merits mention in an encyclopedia as an alternate theory but there is a big doubt whether it needs a standalone page, what i suggest is that this article may be merged with Gandhi Behind the Mask of Divinity as both essentialy put forward the same theory. LegalEagle (talk) 03:34, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

LegalEagle, "big doubt" in whose mind? ..yours? Unfortunately wikipedia does not work that way. What kind of reason are you giving here? Merge 2 books together because you don't like'em? Could you be clear what is the "same theory" in your comment that both the books cover? --Roadahead ★ 13:50, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Thank you, Roadahead, for your rather late reply. Unfortunately wikipedia does consider every opinion no matter in "whose mind" it arises. The view postulated in both books 'Gandhi Behind the Mask of Divinity' and 'Gandhi Under Cross Examination' fall within fringe theories (to buttress my case I would point out that 'Gandhi Under Cross Examination' has been given prominent treatment in the ConspiracyCulture website [1] which generally acts as a repository for fringe and conspiracy theories and if this is not enough projectw.org a respectable web database marks down both books under conspiracy section) and if someone chooses to believe that earth is flat one does not necessarily make an wiki article on all the books that try to prove that earth is flat indeed! Both the books refer time and again to a core concept that MK Gandhi was essentially not the saintly man most people tend to believe him to be, but rather a calculated racist who exploited hate etc. to gain his divine stature, here I must emhasise on the fact that both the books are on the same lines and some passage quoted from Gandhi's biography and letter are exactly similar in both books, thus both the books thematically as well as treatment-wise overlap to a great extent and hence the proposal for a merge. Therefore irrespective of my belief on Gandhi's stature it would be an overkill of fringe and conspiracy theories to have seperate articles on each and every book which air alternate but similar views on Gandhi's life. And finally it seems that whether or not I dislike the book but surely you like them very much. LegalEagle (talk) 13:55, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

LegalEagle, Wikipedia does consider opinions through its WP:CON policy that you are pointing to, but not vague comments like you left. Please see main bullet point 4 here. May I recommend that you be specific and clear outright as compared to first leaving a vague comment and then expecting wp-editors to somehow guess what your "big doubt" really is, and what it based on, and why? Your latest comment above makes me feel that you were looking for my reply only and kept waiting for it. For future, I suggest that if you are looking for my views on anything leave me a note on my talkpage - that will help a comparatively faster response than waiting here. Coming to your logic of merging the books, I do not agree with your unnecessary bundling of books together. The 2nd book has nothing to do with racism (while the first book does). This second book covers Gandhi's lies on the infamous train incident(s) allegedly taken place in 1893 in South Africa. Gandhi Under Cross-examination catalogues this incident(s) and attempts to prove that the train incident(s) never occurred and claims that Gandhi lied. Are you suggesting to put all other books on Gandhi under the same section because their core concept (based on your reasoning) is that Gandhi is the "saintly man most people tend to believe"? You seem to generate the argument from your POV on Gandhi and then call other views as "fringe" as saying "earth is flat". These books are not "fringe theory" type novels as you are trying to tag them - they are very specific in presenting the data and citing information. Your latest comments make me feel that either you have not read the 2nd book or you do not want to see beyond your POV on Gandhi. --Roadahead ★ 16:05, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Roadahead, I propose the merge of two books on the following counts -

1. Fringe theory - I do not claim that Gandhi is a saintly man, this is the popular (by popular I mean majority) belief (I hope I dont need to ref this claim). The books in question seek to propound otherwise through supposed contradictions in versions of event (the train incident), a rather liberal interpretation of Gandhi's letters and autobiography etc. Wikipedia describes fringe theories in a broad sense as ideas that depart significantly from the prevailing or mainstream view in its particular field of study. [2], thus if we summarily look at 'Gandhi Behind the Mask of Divinity' and 'Gandhi Under Cross Examination' we find that they seem to establish an idea which runs contrary to the prevailing or mainstream view. It is a policy in wikipedia that unwarranted promotion of fringe theories should be discouraged [3].

2. Thematic overlap - Both the books overlap thematically and particularly the article on 'Gandhi Under Cross Examination' is quite short thus merge is a viable option [4].

What I understand from your reply is that you have given more importance to my earlier comment rather than my later reply, and there by have not commented to the issue of listing of the book under conspiracy categoryin ConspiracyCulture and projectw websites (they are surely not tainted by any of my alleged povs). Also it may be interesting to note that 'Gandhi Under Cross Examination' is the only product of Sovereign Star publishing [5]. LegalEagle (talk) 07:09, 11 June 2009 (UTC)