Talk:Sambhaji Brigade

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Dispute on neutrality of this article[edit]

Though the contains of this article look like they are written against Sambhaji Brigade, the members of Sambhaji Brigade have actually done all these things. So looking at the truth the work of Sambhaji Brigade has made them look bad. If this article is written by neutral mind one would doubt about neutrality of this article.

Unfortunate[edit]

It is highly unfortunate that the wikepedia has called Sambhaji Brigade as Fasist Maratha Organization. Infact it has nothing to do with Maratha Pride as such. The Sambhaji Brigade is actually a puppet Islamofascist organization who wants to disintegrate the Hindu Society on the basis of hatred. Moreover, it has nothing to do with the Glory of Maratha Empire. Prevention of Cow Slaughter, Protection of Hindu Dharma in India from the Islamic Invaders, Liberation of Indian (Hindu Shrines) Shrines from the Foreign Yoke of Islamic Fanatics was the corner stone of Maratha Empire.

For More Information, see:

None of these issues are on the manifesto of this fascist organization. Infact, this organization is working exactly opposite to the philosophy of Maratha Empire by glorifying the Islamic Invaders.

  • None of these sources are reliable. Drmies (talk) 03:27, 13 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please provide reliable sources and citations[edit]

The edits to this page lack citations based on reliable sources. It is not enough to have an opinion, even one you have carefully considered and validated to your own satisfaction. Please respect Wikipedia's guidelines and standards for editing. Understand that any / all statements which lack reliable sources may be deleted. Fconaway (talk) 23:25, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sambhaji Brigade the Facist Nazi organisation as it needs to be presented as reported in newspapers[edit]

How does one write a article for JeM, LeT, PWG or Hizbul? does one have an article on wikipedia which puts their side, propoganda and ideology with all the support and glorification of violence? Well these organisations need to be portryed what people think of them and not the alleged supporters and members wish to write about them. So one sided article will mean that you have people writing in favor of them, and you call vandalism if anyone tries to put an article on its observation of activities of these organisations??? —Preceding unsigned comment added by BostonPunekar (talk • contribs) 16:29, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The article is about only one group, whether we like them or not. It is not about JeM, LeT, PWG or Hizbul, and what we think of them is not relevant. We cannot have an article which simply presents propaganda for or against Sambhaji Brigade or any other group. Instead of casting epithets, describe their activities, what they say and what they do. Denouncing them or adoring them is not what Wikipedia is about. We are an encyclopedia: instead of opinion, we aim to present information in an even-handed way. Every editor is required to support his edits by identifying a reliable source (WP:RS) for an edit, with a citation which others can see and verify. That is, present unbiased evidence. You must meet that test when you edit for Wikipedia. Fconaway (talk) 19:07, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Informal Mediation from WP:MEDCAB[edit]

Maratha Reservation[edit]

Sambhaji brigade has raised the issue of maratha reservation from time to time,sambhaji brigade maharashtra head pravindada gaikwad has argued that maratha Should get Reservation . Mahesh chavan An activist belonging to the Sambhaji Brigade attempted to set himself ablaze during a speech by medical education and power minister Dilip Walse-Patil at a local college in Kolhar on Saturday afternoon.The suicide attempt was apparently over the party's demand for extending the benefits of reservations in education and jobs for the Maratha community.

Purushottam Khedekar[edit]

There was an article at Purushottam Khedekar that was redirected here in January 2012. It wasn't up to much, but there may be something useful in the last diff FlagSteward (talk) 18:00, 19 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Extremist right-wing description[edit]

@Human3015: This edit [1] is not proper. There is no Wikipedia policy that recognizes any Government as a special source for anything. You can't delete it without discussion, and the discussion needs to be policy-based. Kautilya3 (talk) 18:36, 16 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

One can't declare some group as "extremist"(unless recognised by UN or government but it can be part of criticism), "right wing" is ok. But calling it as anti-Brahman is just can be part of criticism, does that organization declared in their manifesto that they are anti-Brahman? But people may call them anti-Brahamn so it is part of "criticism" not part of intro line. even in lead itself one can say that "organization is criticised for anti-Brahamn stand".--Human3015 knock knock • 18:46, 16 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
How the organisations self-describe themselves makes no difference to how Wikipedia is written. We go by what the reliable sources say. We also don't care whether some Government recognizes the description or not. Show us a policy that says otherwise. Cheers, Kautilya3 (talk) 18:58, 16 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
If you are talking only on the basis of sources and not about governments stand, then first line of many article should contain word "extremist". For example, you and me were involved in Popular Front of India, even after my so many edits on that article still intro line don't say its "militant or terrorist or extremist" organization. We have to go by Wikipedia policy, we should able decide what should be the intro line. Same way we can find tons of sources calling Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh as "extremist" ot even "terrorist" oranization, even RSS has been banned several times in history, but still intro line starts as "RSS is charitable oragnization.." So we should know that intro line doesn't starts with "criticism". --Human3015 knock knock • 19:01, 16 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
After so much glorification of RSS in first 2 paras, third para do says "RSS is criticised for being extremist..". We writing it here in same way. We don't start fist line with "criticism" or "allegations". You can read changed lead, I have written in lead about criticism on anti-Brahamn stand. --Human3015 knock knock • 19:06, 16 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
You are arguing on the basis of WP:OSE. That is no good either. If you have a problem with the descriptions of other organisations, please bring it up on the relevant talk pages. As far as this page is concerned, you have deleted a clearly sourced description that has been there for a long time. You need to check the sources and see what they say. I don't see you doing that. Cheers, Kautilya3 (talk) 19:21, 16 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
These are all articles about "Indian social organizations", we can get sources calling all of these organization as "extremist", but none of it is recognised as "extremist" or "terrorist" organization by Home ministry or UN. You can see banned terrorist organizations by ministry of home affairs, India here. We can start intro line of those organizations as "XYZ is banned terrorist organization...", but using same wording for other organization is not sign of good editing, that is just criticism should be written properly. I see you have edited RSS article quite often but you never tried to change its intro line but here you are insisting for the same. You are not new user, you know policies very well. We are writing about "extremism" in lead but in proper way. This is not issue of debate. --Human3015 knock knock • 19:36, 16 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Rather you tell me which wikipedia policy says to start a intro line with criticism? Specially when we are already metioning it in lead. --Human3015 knock knock • 19:39, 16 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, you have a fundamental misunderstanding. We don't make up our own mind how to describe organisations. We look at all the available sources and pick the most apt description. When there are multiple viewpoints, we describe all of them duly weighted as per WP:DUE. So, to contest the descriptions "extremist", "right wing" and "anti-Brahmin", you need to find sources that contradict those descriptions and bring them to the table. So far you haven't brought a single source. Without sources, this argument is going nowhere. You should also stop discussing other pages here. As I have said already, you should discuss them on their talk pages. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 20:48, 16 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
You are talking like I'm against using those terms in article. I'm in complete favour of using those terms in article and I myself added those terms in lead. --Human3015 knock knock • 21:44, 16 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Moreover, your argument that "don't discuss about style of writing on other articles here" is completely irrelevant here, all these groups comes under Wikipedia:WikiProject Indian politics and they can't have different kind of style of writing for different subjects. You can see Talk:Mumbai where they are discussing style of writing on New York City, Tokyo etc to adjust content on Mumbai city. RSS is largest Indian organization and currently most powerful, obviously everybody will consider style of writing on RSS as one of ideal. So don't argue much on this issue. I'm not against writing criticism but there should be some uniformity in Wikipedia:WikiProject Indian politics. --Human3015 knock knock • 22:06, 16 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
There is no particular "style" used in any of the articles. All of them are based on the descriptions predominantly found in reliable sources. If they are wrong or if they do not follow WP:DUE then you need to challenge them on their relevant talk pages. If you want to argue that organisations X and Y should be described in the same way, again, you need to find reliable sources that equate them in that way. I don't believe you will find any reliable sources that equate the RSS and the Sambhaji Brigade or describe them in similar terms. So you are bringing in a false dichotomy that doesn't exist. - Kautilya3 (talk) 22:37, 16 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Upcoming BMC election 2022[edit]

SAMBHAJI BRIGADE is likely to contest upcoming BMC Election of 2022, this will be the first time party will fight election. Suhas Rane ( President of Mumbai) have clearly stated in a media Interview of fighting the BMC Upcoming Election. Brigade is now in full mood to catch the attention of Mumbaikars. New team of SAMBHAJI BRIGADE Mumbai is effective & strong which Includes Sudam Sahil Renowned RTI Activist from Kurla, Holding post of President from Mumbai North Central District & another Bold Face is Famous Social Activist, RTI Activist Moin Qureshi Social Activist Kalina 29 from Kalina, Santacruz East is holding post of Secretary of Mumbai North Central District. Along with Moin Qureshi Social Activist Kalina 29, Sudam Sahil have successfully created a new youth team for the upcoming BMC Election of Year 2022. Moin313 (talk) 23:08, 22 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Stop with the self-promotion. It is pointless on Wikipedia; go peddle it on Facebook. GreaterPonce665 (TALK) 02:27, 23 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Sambhaji_Brigade&oldid=1210190949"