Talk:1946 Indian provincial elections

Franchise

What was the composition of the electorate for these elections ?

• Was it universal suffrage ?
• Were women allowed to vote ?
• Were there other eligibility criteria ?
• Were there reseved seats for communities like the Dalits or the muslims ?Jonathansammy (talk) 22:43, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

After three years of waiting,I have to answer my own questions.

• Voting in the provincial elections was based on restricted franchise.Property and education were some of the criteria used for eligibility
• Some Women did get to vote in the 1937 and 1946 provincial elections.
• The voting right according the Government of India Act 1935 was restricted to 15 per cent of the total population and only 39 per cent of the adult population.
• There were separate electorate for muslims,sikhs, christian, anglo-indians and europeans
• The elections were restricted to british controlled provinces.The princely states were not required to hold elections.Let us include this information in the article.Thanks. Jonathansammy (talk) 18:21, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

References

Lead

The article was writtem with extreme bias. The division of India including the partition of Punjab officially took effect on August 15, 1947 as stated in the Indian Independence Act of 1947 passed by the Parliament of the UK. Furthermore, the breakdown of a coalition government in the Punjab in 1946 had nothing to do with the eventual division of India and was not evidence that a united India could not be stable. Coalitions can be formed and broken...they are not evidence of anything. In a parliamentary form of government, this was to be expected. The Congress Party won the NWFP in 1937 and in 1946 and had plenty of support from the Khan brothers for a United India. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Westwoodwizard (talk • contribs) 17:20, 15 January 2018 (UTC)

I don't know about biased, but the lead certainly looks like an instance of WP:COATRACK. It is talking more about Pakistan than the elections themselves. I will add a banner template. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 08:40, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

Punjab election

I think it would be a good idea to split the very large section on the Punjab assembly election into another article. The election in Punjab contained many significant local factors such as the Unionist Party, and thus really should be split, with a concise summary and wikilink to the new article here. --RaviC (talk) 21:16, 18 January 2018 (UTC)

• Support - I agree that the Punjab election is too specialised to be covered in this article satisfactorily. A separate article is better. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 23:23, 18 January 2018 (UTC)

Unhelpful vile edits?

Kautilya2018, you write Unhelpful vile edits removed. Hindu Mahasabha believed in a unified Hindu Rashtra and so did Muslim league believed in a separate Muslim state! Why this fact, known by the whole world, is being removed from this page again and again? On the contrary, Hindu Mahasabha is being described as a party that fought on "militant" Hindu platform! When sharing facts, personal adjectives should be avoided that clearly shows the editors hidden vile intent!

Which edits are you referring to? The "militant Hindu platform" description appears in a sourced statement. Have you checked the source? Do you have any alternative sources that contest such a description? -- Kautilya3 (talk) 12:00, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

Show me the source that describes Hindu Mahasabha fought elections on "militant Hindu platform". The wiki page dedicated to it also does not have these adjectives. Thats your figament of imagination dear! Stop bullying new editors with my way or highway! -- Kautilya2018 (talk) 18:04, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

What do you mean by "show me the source"? Have you noticed that a citation has been given in the article? Have you read it? I see clearly:

The Hindu Mahasabha Party, whose platform is one of militant Hinduism, was completely annihilated, losing all the 18 seats which it contested.

This is WP:Disruptive editing. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 13:12, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

@Samee: I was surprised to see you support these POV edits. The "united and self-governing nation" is from 1919. Nobody knows if that is what campaigned for in 1946. In fact, Prabhu Bapu says:

In this period, the Mahasabha broadly represented the politics of moderate Indian nationalism and shadowed the Congress by adopting the goal of achieving India's freedom...

and the book covers only up to 1930. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 15:03, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

I thought my first edit inadvertently restored the disputed version [partly due to confusion caused by strikingly similar usernames], so I 'undid' a part of it. Thank you for correcting it Kautilya3.  samee  converse  15:41, 25 April 2018 (UTC)