Talk:Nakusha

Vague defintion

I changed the vague definition of the term Nakusha but was reverted by User:Alf.laylah.wa.laylah.

Here i am citing the sources and reason for the change.

1 - Source : http://zeenews.india.com/news/maharashtra/end-nakusha-campaign-girls-no-more-unwanted_737916.html In some parts of rural Maharashtra, if a girl is born when the parents wanted a boy, she is named 'Nakusha'. "Typically, if a rural couple has one or two girls, they dislike it when their third child also turns out to be a girl. They then name her 'Nakusha'.

As the such naming of girl child is unique to rural parts of Maharashtra state and it should be stated so.

2. I dont understand why User:Alf.laylah.wa.laylah removed the "goverment campaign" word which i well supported by the reference. In your opinion who runs the campaign? It better to clarify rather than keep reverting.--Neelkamala (talk) 13:17, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

You're right about the government campaign part; I fixed that and I'm sorry I was hasty. The sources disagree on whether it's only rural. One says "rural" while others do not. There is no support in any of these sources for your changing "some" to "few" and "unwanted female children" to "female children."— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 13:24, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

If you look closely at the articles, you will see this is confined to some rural parts of Maharastra state and particularly the Satara district.

All the three news source support the rural claim. Listing them below with the selected parts.

1- BBC: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-south-asia-15414796 Hundreds of people committed to fighting gender discrimination attended the ceremony in rural Satara district.

2- IndianExpress : http://www.indianexpress.com/news/a-new-name-for-nakushi/864079/0 In her concrete home in Khodshi village, barely 4 km from Chief Minister Prithviraj Chavan’s hometown of Karad in Satara district, Nakushi scampers around, playing with her younger sister Mona and unaware of the attention she is drawing. In a few days, she will get a new name—Bhagyashree.

It is our traditional belief and it will come true,” says Savitri, resting on her bed in the three-room house at Charegaon in Karad taluka. Note, Charegaon is a village. source : http://www.onefivenine.com/india/villages/Satara/Karad/Charegaon

3 - ZeeNews: http://zeenews.india.com/news/maharashtra/end-nakusha-campaign-girls-no-more-unwanted_737916.html "Zilla Parishad officials had surveyed the district and decided on the renaming after speaking to the parents. The officials felt this was a small step towards changing the mindset in the rural areas," another official said.

• 2nd main correction, the children are not "unwanted" as pointed out in the article. http://www.indianexpress.com/news/a-new-name-for-nakushi/864079/0 Through all the turmoil over the last six years, Vrushali says that the thought of aborting her babies never occurred to her. “The thought of taking a pill or aborting the child never crossed my mind. It’s a living being after all and I would never think of killing my child because it’s a girl,” she says. Its incorrect to add that term.

• 3rd correction, Nakusha is not a Indian name, the word is only used in Marathi language. The current definition of the term is vague. That's the reason the corrections i made should be reinstated or you can make suggestions to properly define the word. --Neelkamala (talk) 14:04, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

OK on rural. Not so OK on unwanted. See, e.g. "It’s very simple, we didn’t want this girl child so we called her Nakushi." Also not so OK on Indian. Maharashtra is an Indian state, so stuff that is from there is properly referred to as Indian.— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 14:17, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

1 - That is one opinion of the parent, not supported by other parents as i have pointed out earlier. Differing opinions should be well represented instead of pointing out only one point of view.

2- India is large nation with many states, how can you use a term which is used in only one state and dub it Indian. It's blatantly incorrect. --Neelkamala (talk) 14:35, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

1 - as you used the opinion of one parent to show that the children are not unwanted. Your argument is less convincing since the mother only said that she did not want to abort the child. That is not the same as the child not being unwanted.

2 - It says right in the article that "Indian name" points to that they vary from region to region. Many countries are large with many states and yet the adjective formed from the country is used. What is Brasilian music, e.g., or American cooking, or Mexican food? All three of these are large countries with many and various states.— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 14:46, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

1 - Unwanted children are aborted. If the parents felt the girl child was unwanted they would have taken resort to abortion and not naming them Nakusha.

2 - Nakusha is not a Indian name, it's a uniquely Marathi language name. There are over 22 official Indian languages, other than marathi no other language uses this term in it's vocabulary, its totally wrong to call it Indian. Such vague definitions should be avoided. --Neelkamala (talk) 15:14, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

1 - No, aborted children are unwanted. The converse is not true.

2 - 69 official Languages of Mexico, for instance, and yet the word "Mexican" can be used to describe anything related to any of them. Your point is not valid. It's correct to call it Indian. From the OED: 5b. Any of the indigenous languages used in India or (formerly) the East Indies. Why does it matter?— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 16:31, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

1- You fail to prove your point and talk in riddles. Not all parents who name their kids Nakusha deem them unwanted as proven by the selected quotes from the news reports. So kindly either prove your contention or stop talking in one liners.

2 - You fail to get the gist of my argument, let me try once again. Nakusha is not a Indian given name, its a Marathi given name. If you have sources to back your claim of it being Indian then add it or change it to the correct version since no other Indian languages uses the word.--Neelkamala (talk) 06:21, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

India?

Surely somewhere the article should say that this is a word in an Indian language and that it is happening in India? Perhaps my latest change is acceptable? Also, did you notice that it's in the category of Indian given names? So this is not just my quirk.— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 12:11, 7 January 2013 (UTC)