This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Warning: active arbitration remedies The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. This article is related to India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan, which is a contentious topic. Furthermore, the following rules apply when editing this article:
Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. |
This section is pinned and will not be automatically archived. |
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Request to edit is being submitted in order to substantiate on the characters portrayed in the film and their real-life counterparts. As it has been mentioned in the film's disclaimer, the film does not want to bear resemblance to any living person. However, to make it easier for people who did not comprehend the movie, to understand it, the edits need to be made. Xyznwa ( talk) 19:16, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
the comment about movie being in favor of the ruling party needs to be moved to reviews section. This is nothing but narrative mounding. Wikipedia is better than this. Please update it 73.189.128.83 ( talk) 18:31, 15 March 2024 (UTC)
Capitals00, I had added some text which I copied from the source with
this edit but you have removed it. Please explain why you did so.-
Haani40 (
talk)
17:05, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Souniel Yadav
is not mentioned in the references cited for it (reference nos. 13&14), you must remove it (that text) - it is not a neutral statement.- Haani40 ( talk) 20:07, 25 March 2024 (UTC).....but criticised the film for its distortion of facts and promotion of the agenda of the ruling government of the Bharatiya Janata Party
Indian express said the film "serves its politics unabashedly as it mixes facts with fiction". [1] Koimoi also noted that the movie promotes propaganda. I did little modification to reflect that. Capitals00 ( talk) 02:45, 26 March 2024 (UTC)
Mixing facts with fiction, and some convenient untruths, dipping into the right-wing narrative of Jawaharlal Nehru’s “blunders” in Kashmir and Maharaja Hari Singh’s “inclination” towards India,
Pakistan's assessment that the maharaja would accede to India was correct. [1]
India had clearly misjudged the politics of the U.N.and came under intense criticism for its obduracy. The delegtates of Syria, the U.S., Britain and Colombia poured scorn on India. [3]
Nevertheless, it was a "dangerous political miscalculation" on India's part to hope that the Security Council would condemn Pakistan as the aggressor and authorise India to send her troops into Pakistan. [4]
[5]India did not bring the issue under Chapter 7 of the Charter because in Indian view nothing could have been gained by exacerbating the issue by asking the UN to condemn Pakistan as an aggressor. The main interest of India was to seek the withdrawal of invaders from Kashmir as soon as possible. [...] On 13 August 1948, the Security Council passed a three-part resolution which called for a ceasefire and asked Pakistan, as aggressor, to withdraw all its forces from those parts of Kashmir which they had occupied while accepting that India could retain part of her troops in Kashmir.
[7]A natural explanation is that Pakistan feared an attack by India and was not willing to accept the UN resolution which gave India the sole right to maintain troops in Kashmir. Pakistan therefore created a puppet army which could remain in Kashmir after Pakistani regulars had withdrawn.
While Modi and right-wing supporters of his ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) have endorsed the film, critics, especially those from Kashmir, have called it “propaganda” and a “distortion” of historical facts.[9]
movie is nothing short of thriller disguised as propaganda, fiction mixed with reality, provides a biased take on a complex issue, lays ground for 2024 general elections..."[10]
When you look at it from the perspectives of balance and accuracy, it disappoints. Arguments to preserve the article are given no attention." [11]
The word ‘stone-pelter’ is frequently thrown around and accusations of them being ‘paid’ come soon after. But this is, after all, a fictional film as the disclaimer tells you. That is probably why a journalist can fearlessly question the ruling party without any fear of repercussions (India ranked 161 of 180 in 2023 in the Press Freedom Index)." [12]
Right. I notice that you have backtracked from "distortion of facts" to "mixing facts with fiction" (whatever that is supposed to mean). Make a section in the body on Factual accuracy and let us see what you can produce. Avoid claims like X said so and Y said so. Most of these Xs and Ys don't know their head from their tail. And notice that the Sabrang reviewrs actually said, this movie stays clear of overtly false facts or hate speech.
."False facts" is an interesting language. Nevertheless, we get what they mean. So, let us see what you can come up with. --
Kautilya3 (
talk)
21:18, 26 March 2024 (UTC)
I also met Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru, the Prime Minister of India, and I told him the terms on which the Maharaja wanted me to negotiate with India. The Maharaja was willing to accede to India and also to introduce necessary reforms in the administration of of the State. He, however, wanted the question of administrative reforms to be taken up later on. Panditji wanted an immediate change in the internal administration of the State and he felt somewhat annoyed when I conveyed to him the Maharaja's views. Pandit Nehru also asked me to see that Sheikh Abdulla was set free. [13]
Facing annihilation at the hands of the raiders, the Maharaja signed the Letter of Accession.
Dasgupta's book is apparently not available online. So, here are the relevant extracts:
p.36: The Maharaja appears initially to have toyed with the notion of an independent Kashmir but he soon realised the impracticability of this ambition. By mid-September, he had decided to offer accession to India on condition that he would not be asked to institute immediate reforms or, in other words to hand over power to Sheikh Abdullah. He appointed a new Dewan, Justice Mehr Chand Mahajan, and instructed him to secure an agreement with New Delhi on these lines.[4]
p.36-37: Nehru, however, insisted that Abdullah should be immediately released from prison and be associated with the governance of the state. The Prime Minister anticipated that Pakistan would attempt to seize Kashmir by force and was convinced that the Maharaja's forces would be unable to stop the invaders unless a popular resistance were organised. In a letter to Patel on 27 September, he offered the following perceptive assessment:...
The full letter can be found here. -- Kautilya3 ( talk) 20:29, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
It was a pro-Pakistan Musim tribal rebellion against Hari Singh in Poonch in late August and September 1947 that led him to sign the treaty of accession with India. [...] On 22 October, they reached Muzaffarabad and began moving towards Uri and Baramula, thirty five miles from Srinagar. With local troops unable to halt the advance, Hari Singh panicked and sought Indian arms and ammunition to pretent being overthrown. Jawaharlal Nehru agreed to do so, but only if Hari Singh formally opted for India. As a result, four days later (on 26 October) Hari Singh signed the Instrument of Accession...
On October 15, 1947, nearly 5000 raiders began the siege of Fort Owen inside Kashmir and by October 22, infiltration and raids were transformed into full scale military upon Kashmir. [...] On 26 October 1947, he signed the Instrument of Accession and made Kashmir a part of India.
On October 22, 1947 a tribal levy of nearly 5,000 men recruited from the frontier tracts seized key towns in the Kashmir Valley and surged toward Srinagar. Two days later, a beleaguered maharaja formally offered to accede to India and asked Delhi for military assistance.
This letter is a frank statement of Maharaja of Hari Singh's distress and helplessness at that critical moment. He makes it abundantly clear that his intention was for J&K to remain independent, but that circumstances did not permit the realisation of this ambition and that he was being forced to accede to India given the Pakistani violation of the Standstill Agreement and the illegal invasion of his state." [7] Full stop. Abhishek0831996 ( talk) 04:33, 28 March 2024 (UTC)
References
Syama Prasad Mookerjee endorsed Article 370 when he was a member of the Union Cabinet.
This is contrary to the fact that Kashmir ruler Hari Singh had aligned himself with the Indian government only after his kingdom was attacked by the Pakistanis. [1] [2]
References
- ^ Setlur, Mukund (2024-02-24). ""Article 370" Movie Review: A Look at Kashmir and Its Controversial Past, Article 370 Twitter, X reviews and ratings, Yami Gautam starring Article 370 Film News". Deccan Herald.
- ^ Misra, A. (2010). India-Pakistan: Coming to Terms. Palgrave Series in Asian Governance. Palgrave Macmillan US. p. 126. ISBN 978-0-230-10978-0.
Facing annihilation at the hands of the raiders, the Maharaja signed the Letter of Accession.
The first source, Mukund Setlur's review, has these lines:
History has it that Maharajah Harisingh was reluctant to join India or Pakistan. He aligned himself with India only after he was attacked by the Pakistanis. But the makers of '370' want you to believe Nehru delayed the accession until his friend Sheikh Abdullah was allowed power.
There is no mention of which "history" has this. Neither are any qualifications of the reviewer mentioned in the newspaper. There is a claim of "my reivew" on LinkedIn, its author's profile, matching "Mukund Setlur", indicates a specialism in "B2B marketing" (no joke).
After I challenged this source as unreliable, the second source got added which has a one-liner displayed in the quotation. While it is a well-known fact that the Maharaja signed the accession after the invasion, this sentence in no way validates the claims that the Maharaja "aligned" himself with the Indian government "only after" the invasion.
On the contrary, well-established and reputable scholars that studied the history do in fact support what is said to be claimed by the film, viz., that the Maharaja was wanting to accede to India for at least a month before the actual event, and the Indian government rejected the approaches saying that Sheikh Abdullah should be installed in the Kashmir government first.
p.31: By the end of August 1947 the Pakistanis feared Kashmir might join India. To pre-empt this possibility they decided to wrest Kashmir—by force if required.
p.106: Pakistan's assessment that the maharaja would accede to India was correct. By mid-September 1947 the maharaja had fired his prime minister, Ram Chandra Kak, who had wanted Kashmir to remain equidistant from India and Pakistan. The new appointee, a judge from the east Punjab high court (later chief justice of India), M.C. Mahajan, met Patel and Nehru, and informed them that the maharaja was willing to accede but wanted political reforms to be deferred. Nehru insisted that Sheikh Abdullah, who was incarcerated by the Kashmir authorities, should be released and that a popular government be immediately installed; only then should Kashmir declare accession to India. On 29 September Sheikh Abdullah was set free.
p.106-107: Jinnah's private secretary reported from Srinagar that these developments unmistakably pointed towards accession to India. "Muslim Conference is now practically a dead organization." Consequently, Pakistan must resort to force.
p.36: The Maharaja appears initially to have toyed with the notion of an independent Kashmir but he soon realised the impracticability of this ambition. By mid-September, he had decided to offer accession to India on condition that he would not be asked to institute immediate reforms or, in other words to hand over power to Sheikh Abdullah. He appointed a new Dewan, Justice Mehr Chand Mahajan, and instructed him to secure an agreement with New Delhi on these lines.
p.36-37: Nehru, however, insisted that Abdullah should be immediately released from prison and be associated with the governance of the state. The Prime Minister anticipated that Pakistan would attempt to seize Kashmir by force and was convinced that the Maharaja's forces would be unable to stop the invaders unless a popular resistance were organised. In a letter to Patel on 27 September, he offered the following perceptive assessment...
p.36: iv) There is conclusive evidence that, far from anyone in India having plotted to seize Kashmir, it was the Maharaja who first decided, on his own, sometime in September, that he had no option but to accede to India, and Nehru who rebuffed him.
p.58: Therefore by the end of August he [the Maharaja] decided upon the second best option. Kak [the previous prime minister] had been pushed out a few days earlier so the way was open to start building links with India, on the one hand, and to pave the way an alliance with the National Conference, on the other. On 10 September, Sheikh Abdullah was moved from jail into comfortable house arrest. On 28 September, the Maharaja sent Sheikh Abdullah's letter of rapprochement to Nehru as a token of his good intentions, and on the 29th he set Sheikh Abdullah free, to fly to Delhi a few days later. Far from being a weakling and a dilettante who could not make up his mind... Hari Singh played the only game that was open to a weak ruler when confronted by immeasurably more powerful forces over which he had no control.
Consequently, I claim that this sentence fails WP:NPOV. -- Kautilya3 ( talk) 23:34, 28 March 2024 (UTC)
The main reason why he had delayed so long (and continued to delay till he changed the history of the entire subcontinent) was his aversion to both Nehru and Sheikh Abdullah."
Pakistan's assessment that the maharaja would accede to India was correct. By mid-September..." (Raghavan), "
By mid-September, he had decided to offer accession to India on condition that he would not be asked to institute immediate reforms..." (Dasgupta), "
it was the Maharaja who first decided, on his own, sometime in September, that he had no option but to accede to India..." (Jha). That was a month before the invasion. If Nehru didn't block it by putting the condition of prior political reforms, accession could have happened immediately. Either you are unable to read what the scholars write, or you think the IT professional with the "B2B marketing" expertise is the best authority on the Kashmir dispute. So, which is it?
Please spare me the lectures, Capitals00. This section has been created to discuss the POV claims made in the section, in particular the faulty historical claim which I have copied above in red. Also shown in green are three scholars that directly contradict what the red sentence says. Are you willing to withdraw the red sentence? If not, are you willing to go for WP:DR? Once this issue is settled, other issues can be resolved easily. -- Kautilya3 ( talk) 19:17, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
Based on true story?? 2409:40D1:1001:3C7E:215D:2993:C565:364B ( talk) 13:55, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
The movie is seen as a "thinly veiled propaganda film" that favors India's ruling Bharatiya Janta Party in order to bring political mileage for it during the upcoming 2024 Indian general elections.[33][34]
It should say
The movie is seen by some as a "thinly veiled propaganda film" that favors India's ruling Bharatiya Janta Party in order to bring political mileage for it during the upcoming 2024 Indian general elections.[33][34]
Considering one of the two sources is the state run newspaper of a Muslim Emirate, it should probably mention that the view held is nowhere near universal. TrebuchetChauvanist ( talk) 10:27, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
In the aftermath of the 2016 Kashmir unrest in India, a young local field agent, Zooni Haksar, is picked out by Rajeshwari Swaminathan from the Prime Minister’s Office for a top- secret mission - Cracking down on terrorism and putting an end to the billion dollar conflict economy in the valley, by doing the absolute impossible – Rendering Article 370 inoperative. B62 STUDIOS ( talk) 08:45, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
The article promotes fake news. It needs to be revised ti reflect reality.
Nehru did delay the accession of Kashmir into India due to his relations with the King of Kashmir. Which resulted in the death and persecution of thousands of kashmiris (both indigenous kashmiri hindus and the converted muslim population).
I will not donate any money to Wikipedia until this is fixed. 47.185.168.5 ( talk) 16:54, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Warning: active arbitration remedies The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. This article is related to India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan, which is a contentious topic. Furthermore, the following rules apply when editing this article:
Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. |
This section is pinned and will not be automatically archived. |
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Request to edit is being submitted in order to substantiate on the characters portrayed in the film and their real-life counterparts. As it has been mentioned in the film's disclaimer, the film does not want to bear resemblance to any living person. However, to make it easier for people who did not comprehend the movie, to understand it, the edits need to be made. Xyznwa ( talk) 19:16, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
the comment about movie being in favor of the ruling party needs to be moved to reviews section. This is nothing but narrative mounding. Wikipedia is better than this. Please update it 73.189.128.83 ( talk) 18:31, 15 March 2024 (UTC)
Capitals00, I had added some text which I copied from the source with
this edit but you have removed it. Please explain why you did so.-
Haani40 (
talk)
17:05, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Souniel Yadav
is not mentioned in the references cited for it (reference nos. 13&14), you must remove it (that text) - it is not a neutral statement.- Haani40 ( talk) 20:07, 25 March 2024 (UTC).....but criticised the film for its distortion of facts and promotion of the agenda of the ruling government of the Bharatiya Janata Party
Indian express said the film "serves its politics unabashedly as it mixes facts with fiction". [1] Koimoi also noted that the movie promotes propaganda. I did little modification to reflect that. Capitals00 ( talk) 02:45, 26 March 2024 (UTC)
Mixing facts with fiction, and some convenient untruths, dipping into the right-wing narrative of Jawaharlal Nehru’s “blunders” in Kashmir and Maharaja Hari Singh’s “inclination” towards India,
Pakistan's assessment that the maharaja would accede to India was correct. [1]
India had clearly misjudged the politics of the U.N.and came under intense criticism for its obduracy. The delegtates of Syria, the U.S., Britain and Colombia poured scorn on India. [3]
Nevertheless, it was a "dangerous political miscalculation" on India's part to hope that the Security Council would condemn Pakistan as the aggressor and authorise India to send her troops into Pakistan. [4]
[5]India did not bring the issue under Chapter 7 of the Charter because in Indian view nothing could have been gained by exacerbating the issue by asking the UN to condemn Pakistan as an aggressor. The main interest of India was to seek the withdrawal of invaders from Kashmir as soon as possible. [...] On 13 August 1948, the Security Council passed a three-part resolution which called for a ceasefire and asked Pakistan, as aggressor, to withdraw all its forces from those parts of Kashmir which they had occupied while accepting that India could retain part of her troops in Kashmir.
[7]A natural explanation is that Pakistan feared an attack by India and was not willing to accept the UN resolution which gave India the sole right to maintain troops in Kashmir. Pakistan therefore created a puppet army which could remain in Kashmir after Pakistani regulars had withdrawn.
While Modi and right-wing supporters of his ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) have endorsed the film, critics, especially those from Kashmir, have called it “propaganda” and a “distortion” of historical facts.[9]
movie is nothing short of thriller disguised as propaganda, fiction mixed with reality, provides a biased take on a complex issue, lays ground for 2024 general elections..."[10]
When you look at it from the perspectives of balance and accuracy, it disappoints. Arguments to preserve the article are given no attention." [11]
The word ‘stone-pelter’ is frequently thrown around and accusations of them being ‘paid’ come soon after. But this is, after all, a fictional film as the disclaimer tells you. That is probably why a journalist can fearlessly question the ruling party without any fear of repercussions (India ranked 161 of 180 in 2023 in the Press Freedom Index)." [12]
Right. I notice that you have backtracked from "distortion of facts" to "mixing facts with fiction" (whatever that is supposed to mean). Make a section in the body on Factual accuracy and let us see what you can produce. Avoid claims like X said so and Y said so. Most of these Xs and Ys don't know their head from their tail. And notice that the Sabrang reviewrs actually said, this movie stays clear of overtly false facts or hate speech.
."False facts" is an interesting language. Nevertheless, we get what they mean. So, let us see what you can come up with. --
Kautilya3 (
talk)
21:18, 26 March 2024 (UTC)
I also met Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru, the Prime Minister of India, and I told him the terms on which the Maharaja wanted me to negotiate with India. The Maharaja was willing to accede to India and also to introduce necessary reforms in the administration of of the State. He, however, wanted the question of administrative reforms to be taken up later on. Panditji wanted an immediate change in the internal administration of the State and he felt somewhat annoyed when I conveyed to him the Maharaja's views. Pandit Nehru also asked me to see that Sheikh Abdulla was set free. [13]
Facing annihilation at the hands of the raiders, the Maharaja signed the Letter of Accession.
Dasgupta's book is apparently not available online. So, here are the relevant extracts:
p.36: The Maharaja appears initially to have toyed with the notion of an independent Kashmir but he soon realised the impracticability of this ambition. By mid-September, he had decided to offer accession to India on condition that he would not be asked to institute immediate reforms or, in other words to hand over power to Sheikh Abdullah. He appointed a new Dewan, Justice Mehr Chand Mahajan, and instructed him to secure an agreement with New Delhi on these lines.[4]
p.36-37: Nehru, however, insisted that Abdullah should be immediately released from prison and be associated with the governance of the state. The Prime Minister anticipated that Pakistan would attempt to seize Kashmir by force and was convinced that the Maharaja's forces would be unable to stop the invaders unless a popular resistance were organised. In a letter to Patel on 27 September, he offered the following perceptive assessment:...
The full letter can be found here. -- Kautilya3 ( talk) 20:29, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
It was a pro-Pakistan Musim tribal rebellion against Hari Singh in Poonch in late August and September 1947 that led him to sign the treaty of accession with India. [...] On 22 October, they reached Muzaffarabad and began moving towards Uri and Baramula, thirty five miles from Srinagar. With local troops unable to halt the advance, Hari Singh panicked and sought Indian arms and ammunition to pretent being overthrown. Jawaharlal Nehru agreed to do so, but only if Hari Singh formally opted for India. As a result, four days later (on 26 October) Hari Singh signed the Instrument of Accession...
On October 15, 1947, nearly 5000 raiders began the siege of Fort Owen inside Kashmir and by October 22, infiltration and raids were transformed into full scale military upon Kashmir. [...] On 26 October 1947, he signed the Instrument of Accession and made Kashmir a part of India.
On October 22, 1947 a tribal levy of nearly 5,000 men recruited from the frontier tracts seized key towns in the Kashmir Valley and surged toward Srinagar. Two days later, a beleaguered maharaja formally offered to accede to India and asked Delhi for military assistance.
This letter is a frank statement of Maharaja of Hari Singh's distress and helplessness at that critical moment. He makes it abundantly clear that his intention was for J&K to remain independent, but that circumstances did not permit the realisation of this ambition and that he was being forced to accede to India given the Pakistani violation of the Standstill Agreement and the illegal invasion of his state." [7] Full stop. Abhishek0831996 ( talk) 04:33, 28 March 2024 (UTC)
References
Syama Prasad Mookerjee endorsed Article 370 when he was a member of the Union Cabinet.
This is contrary to the fact that Kashmir ruler Hari Singh had aligned himself with the Indian government only after his kingdom was attacked by the Pakistanis. [1] [2]
References
- ^ Setlur, Mukund (2024-02-24). ""Article 370" Movie Review: A Look at Kashmir and Its Controversial Past, Article 370 Twitter, X reviews and ratings, Yami Gautam starring Article 370 Film News". Deccan Herald.
- ^ Misra, A. (2010). India-Pakistan: Coming to Terms. Palgrave Series in Asian Governance. Palgrave Macmillan US. p. 126. ISBN 978-0-230-10978-0.
Facing annihilation at the hands of the raiders, the Maharaja signed the Letter of Accession.
The first source, Mukund Setlur's review, has these lines:
History has it that Maharajah Harisingh was reluctant to join India or Pakistan. He aligned himself with India only after he was attacked by the Pakistanis. But the makers of '370' want you to believe Nehru delayed the accession until his friend Sheikh Abdullah was allowed power.
There is no mention of which "history" has this. Neither are any qualifications of the reviewer mentioned in the newspaper. There is a claim of "my reivew" on LinkedIn, its author's profile, matching "Mukund Setlur", indicates a specialism in "B2B marketing" (no joke).
After I challenged this source as unreliable, the second source got added which has a one-liner displayed in the quotation. While it is a well-known fact that the Maharaja signed the accession after the invasion, this sentence in no way validates the claims that the Maharaja "aligned" himself with the Indian government "only after" the invasion.
On the contrary, well-established and reputable scholars that studied the history do in fact support what is said to be claimed by the film, viz., that the Maharaja was wanting to accede to India for at least a month before the actual event, and the Indian government rejected the approaches saying that Sheikh Abdullah should be installed in the Kashmir government first.
p.31: By the end of August 1947 the Pakistanis feared Kashmir might join India. To pre-empt this possibility they decided to wrest Kashmir—by force if required.
p.106: Pakistan's assessment that the maharaja would accede to India was correct. By mid-September 1947 the maharaja had fired his prime minister, Ram Chandra Kak, who had wanted Kashmir to remain equidistant from India and Pakistan. The new appointee, a judge from the east Punjab high court (later chief justice of India), M.C. Mahajan, met Patel and Nehru, and informed them that the maharaja was willing to accede but wanted political reforms to be deferred. Nehru insisted that Sheikh Abdullah, who was incarcerated by the Kashmir authorities, should be released and that a popular government be immediately installed; only then should Kashmir declare accession to India. On 29 September Sheikh Abdullah was set free.
p.106-107: Jinnah's private secretary reported from Srinagar that these developments unmistakably pointed towards accession to India. "Muslim Conference is now practically a dead organization." Consequently, Pakistan must resort to force.
p.36: The Maharaja appears initially to have toyed with the notion of an independent Kashmir but he soon realised the impracticability of this ambition. By mid-September, he had decided to offer accession to India on condition that he would not be asked to institute immediate reforms or, in other words to hand over power to Sheikh Abdullah. He appointed a new Dewan, Justice Mehr Chand Mahajan, and instructed him to secure an agreement with New Delhi on these lines.
p.36-37: Nehru, however, insisted that Abdullah should be immediately released from prison and be associated with the governance of the state. The Prime Minister anticipated that Pakistan would attempt to seize Kashmir by force and was convinced that the Maharaja's forces would be unable to stop the invaders unless a popular resistance were organised. In a letter to Patel on 27 September, he offered the following perceptive assessment...
p.36: iv) There is conclusive evidence that, far from anyone in India having plotted to seize Kashmir, it was the Maharaja who first decided, on his own, sometime in September, that he had no option but to accede to India, and Nehru who rebuffed him.
p.58: Therefore by the end of August he [the Maharaja] decided upon the second best option. Kak [the previous prime minister] had been pushed out a few days earlier so the way was open to start building links with India, on the one hand, and to pave the way an alliance with the National Conference, on the other. On 10 September, Sheikh Abdullah was moved from jail into comfortable house arrest. On 28 September, the Maharaja sent Sheikh Abdullah's letter of rapprochement to Nehru as a token of his good intentions, and on the 29th he set Sheikh Abdullah free, to fly to Delhi a few days later. Far from being a weakling and a dilettante who could not make up his mind... Hari Singh played the only game that was open to a weak ruler when confronted by immeasurably more powerful forces over which he had no control.
Consequently, I claim that this sentence fails WP:NPOV. -- Kautilya3 ( talk) 23:34, 28 March 2024 (UTC)
The main reason why he had delayed so long (and continued to delay till he changed the history of the entire subcontinent) was his aversion to both Nehru and Sheikh Abdullah."
Pakistan's assessment that the maharaja would accede to India was correct. By mid-September..." (Raghavan), "
By mid-September, he had decided to offer accession to India on condition that he would not be asked to institute immediate reforms..." (Dasgupta), "
it was the Maharaja who first decided, on his own, sometime in September, that he had no option but to accede to India..." (Jha). That was a month before the invasion. If Nehru didn't block it by putting the condition of prior political reforms, accession could have happened immediately. Either you are unable to read what the scholars write, or you think the IT professional with the "B2B marketing" expertise is the best authority on the Kashmir dispute. So, which is it?
Please spare me the lectures, Capitals00. This section has been created to discuss the POV claims made in the section, in particular the faulty historical claim which I have copied above in red. Also shown in green are three scholars that directly contradict what the red sentence says. Are you willing to withdraw the red sentence? If not, are you willing to go for WP:DR? Once this issue is settled, other issues can be resolved easily. -- Kautilya3 ( talk) 19:17, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
Based on true story?? 2409:40D1:1001:3C7E:215D:2993:C565:364B ( talk) 13:55, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
The movie is seen as a "thinly veiled propaganda film" that favors India's ruling Bharatiya Janta Party in order to bring political mileage for it during the upcoming 2024 Indian general elections.[33][34]
It should say
The movie is seen by some as a "thinly veiled propaganda film" that favors India's ruling Bharatiya Janta Party in order to bring political mileage for it during the upcoming 2024 Indian general elections.[33][34]
Considering one of the two sources is the state run newspaper of a Muslim Emirate, it should probably mention that the view held is nowhere near universal. TrebuchetChauvanist ( talk) 10:27, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
In the aftermath of the 2016 Kashmir unrest in India, a young local field agent, Zooni Haksar, is picked out by Rajeshwari Swaminathan from the Prime Minister’s Office for a top- secret mission - Cracking down on terrorism and putting an end to the billion dollar conflict economy in the valley, by doing the absolute impossible – Rendering Article 370 inoperative. B62 STUDIOS ( talk) 08:45, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
The article promotes fake news. It needs to be revised ti reflect reality.
Nehru did delay the accession of Kashmir into India due to his relations with the King of Kashmir. Which resulted in the death and persecution of thousands of kashmiris (both indigenous kashmiri hindus and the converted muslim population).
I will not donate any money to Wikipedia until this is fixed. 47.185.168.5 ( talk) 16:54, 19 June 2024 (UTC)