Talk:Sonia Gandhi/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

→

Archive 5

POV Issues

I just edited a sentence which read "Currently, Sonia Gandhi is campaigning for her son, Rahul Gandhi for a successful campaign to be the next European Prime Minister of India." This article is used to air petty conspiracy theories.

Education

Would somebody write about Sonias education qualilification? The article does not give all information about her. 128.233.109.182

• This link[2] is loksabha's official page. The information is official and authentic. Her educational qualifications are : Certificate course in English Language from Cambridge (U.K.). P.S Lalu yadav is a graduate[3].Kaushal mehta 08:15, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Devnagari

Maybe it's the way it renders on Mozilla that's the problem. However, I get, roughly transliterated, s-o-n-yi-a, which, needless to say, is not correct. Should be s-o-ni-y-a, with the ि on the न, correct? Graft 19:02, 2 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Fixed this, as you suggested. User:Venkatr_n

First thing first, its Devanagari not Devnagari (I make this mistake too.) Now about Soniya Gandhi. I use Yudit for writing Devanagari and in the transliteration scheme I use this is what is written:

soniyaa gaa.Ndhii (or soniyA gA.NdhI)

It render's as this:सोनिया गाँधी and looks absolutely fine. The result is what is expected. Now I don't know how this: सोिनया गान्धी can be generated in my transliteration scheme but it creates the problem of separating the ि and the न. Now about what you see I suggest you go to BBC Hindi and if you see the same rendering with the ि after the न then I think it has nothing to do with your browser but its your Operating System. If you are using Linux get the latest version, if you are using Windows 2000/XP install support for Indic fonts from your Windows CD and if you are using something else - I don't know what can be done. Hope that helps. -Ankur 04:21, 26 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Hmm... the BBC also renders wrong for me. I'm using Firefox on Linux with current revisions, so I guess there's some error here (or at least an inconsistency between Firefox and IE). I'm inclined to believe that Firefox conforms to standards, but I guess time will resolve this on its own. (also, incidentally, Devnagari is fine as a transliteration) Graft 04:58, 26 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I am sure it is not a browser problem. I think it is the responsibility of your Desktop environment to render fonts properly. Its more likely that you did not install support for Indic languages. KDE supported Hindi last year in version 3.2, here is a screenshot from trolltech website [4]. Gnome supports it too. --Ankur 15:24, 26 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Wrong year of birth for Priyanka?

This article says that Priyanka was born in 1972. The article about Priyanka herself says 1971.

Removal

Articles on this site should be from neutral point of view, not BJP Propaganda, Entire article is written with negative slur. Even the comment above (the first one) reflects that... As of now I am deleting this line "But Sonia remains at the post of the Leader of the Majority, which she has kept to herself for controlling the Prime minister(?????), and the Chairperson of the Congress Parliamentary Party (all Congress MPs)." Would like it if someone would flag this as non neutral and completely rewrite this article

John

Yohajohn 04:54, 19 October 2005 (UTC)

I agree completely. The old article was ludicrous and quite shockingly anti-Sonia. The new one is much better.

=> Yohajohn, Please be aware that statements may be anti-Sonia; that does not make them false or incorrect. (Statements about Adolf Hitler nowadays are generally 'Anti-Hitler' - that does not make false. Or are you questioning the gas-chamber atrocities??).

"Sonja Gandhi... GAS CHAMBER ATROCITIES!!!" Hilarious!! I love it! You BJP types are so damn funny. And so semi-literate. Sometimes I almost wish you'd get back into government, just for the sheer hilarity of it all. Ah, but you won't.

POV

John Yohajohn 05:15, 19 October 2005 (UTC) I am a fool and Sonia is a traitor.

Hmm... a statement almost as suspicious as the December 13 2001 "terrorist attacks".

Volker report Removal

The para on the volker report is factually incorrect. I original allegation in the volker report is Natwar Singh/Congress. Which is interpreted as Natwr Singh of the congress. There is no allegation on Soni Gandhi or Congress, even by the BJP. This para doesnot belong. Its should at best be added on page of Natwar Sing or Indian National Congress (INC)

I will be removing this para after waiting for time period for comments

You are a cheat and seem to be a paid servant of Sonia Maino. There are reports that she wrote a letter to Saddam Hussein and it names her party as the beneficiary at a time when she was the President.

Please try to discuss instead of flaring up. The 'reports' on Volker report only mentions Natwar Singh and Congress. Therefore it should be placed rightly on Natwar Sing or Congress page. If u look at the article on Indian National Congress. U will see that the article is already there. On ur point that she was president of Congress...Does that mean theat we have to put Tehlka scam and all other scam that tool place when A.B. Vajpayee was in government on the Vajpayee page. Definitely no. I believe only the ones on which the person has been directly been accused of should be put up. In fact bofors allegation is a more appropriate article to be put under title 'Political Accusation'.

I think it was a great idea, that the Volcker Report para was removed altogether. I saw it mentioning Sonia Gandhi, and immediately edited it, removing her name. I am glad the para is not mentioned at all now. And please ignore this person who seems to be from the RSS. Even POV is ok,but factually unproved stuff such as "Natwar Singh is the foot soldier for the Congress" should not be included in a Wikipedia entry. The post below has noted this, and I too had noted the use of term "freedom fighters", among those who opposed her prime-ministership. Who were these so called "freedom fighters"? I am glad that is gone too. The new article is much more balanced and fair.

Some idiot said "And please ignore this person who seems to be from the RSS.". I would like to tell that the Wikipedia is as much of the RSS as much it is yours. Why do you mean by "ignoring"? Is this Yahoo! chat? UPA-led government may not allow free speech but Jimmy Wales-led Wikimedia project DOES. Should I make some comments on your race, complexion and religion? Should I prophecy that you are a black Christian from the southern India? Please refrain from making such gross statements. RSS is a patriotic organisation for a majority of Indians. No fact would be concealed. Lastly, learn to sign talk pages after defacing them (just like I do...LOL). ;) ♔BADMIN♛ (आओ✍) 09:07, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Removed line on supporter of Benito Mussolini

I looked over some references on her father being mussolini supporter. It may be true, it may not be true. Rigjt now I don't have any authentic references for that point. So it will remaim deleted till it can be removed

Here is an authentic reference: /*Quote*/ I ask him about Eugenio Maino's alleged Fascist sympathies. "That shouldn't surprise you. He came from Asiago not far from Vicenza in the Veneto region where nationalism was strong. He fought in the Russian campaign alongside the Germans and remained true to Fascist Nationalist ideology all his life. I have even heard it said that he belonged to the Salo Republic that Mussolini set up in 1943 after he was ousted by his son-in-law. That is what people say but I have no confirmation of it. He even gave his three daughters Russian names in honour of the campaign in which he fought. He venerated the Duce. Many still do," says Giovanni, referring to Italy's war-time Fascist dictator Benito Mussolini. /*Unquote*/ from

http://www.frontlineonnet.com/fl1509/15090140.htm Authentic enough?

The author of the Hindu Times article (see link) made a mistake: "for to go to Orbassano one has to get off the motorway and drive a good 20 km or so up the road to Vicenza", Vicenza is to the East of Milan unlike Turin which is to the West. Article seems v.biased; the author found no evidence and few people willing to talk. He (journo) was left with a relative who didn't own up to being a relative and was rude to him, hardly damming stuff. Can you imagine how much media they have had snooping around? Yitzak99 02:51, 27 February 2007 (UTC) Yitzak99

Biased writing/editing

I have made the three changes to this article on Mrs. Sonia Gandhi which I think are very essential in order to maintain the character and value of Wikipedia as a forum with impartial and correct (or atleast close to it) information. People should desist from colouring the infomration here with their own affinities and prejudices.

The opposition to Sonia Gandhi's candidature as Prime Minister was on account of her foreign origins and on account of the fact that she retained her Italian citizenship for 15 years and took Indian citizenship only in 1982. This opposition was not only from the right wing BJP, but also from a section of the common populace. Besides, there was opposition within the coalition and within the congress party itself, on account of which three senior leaders split the congree to form the "Nationalist Congress Party".

Moreover, this issues was there right from the point she stepped in the political arena and being well of this she contested the parliamentary elections from two constituencies, just in case she looses from one. Both these consituencies were Congress strongholds and elected only Congress candidates for decades i.e. Amethi and Bellary constituencies and was elected from both. She subsequently gave up the Bellary seat as required by law.

Besides, Mrs. Sonia Gandhi studied at some language school in Cambridge, not in Cambridge University as is sought to be portrayed.

Please desist from vandalising the material here to suit your own interests and image.

Yes but u dont need to character assasinate the person just because u fon't like. here is point by point rebuttal

a) On the point of mentioning her citizenship...the original post contained that she took citizenship onlt after 1983 after rajiv gandhi became prime minister (because it was felt to be only a formality). You don't have to additinally mention 15 years its irrevelant (anyone can see that from fates)

b) Only language school in cambridge...The article did not say she did a language school in canbridge university It just said she studied in cambridge, if u misread it as cambridge university thats ur own fault...and i don't think u need to emphasis its cambridge ...when i say i studied in kanpur it doesnot mean i studied in IIT kanpur noe do i have to add to my biodata that i didn't study in kanpur IIIT I hope u see the difference.

c) On ur point there is not much refernce to her 'candidature as Prime Minister was on account of her foreign origins' in fact the entire article only talks about that in fact the article should be renamed as "Reasons why sonia should not be Prime Minister" rather than a profile of Sonia Gandhi. The main opposition was from right wing bjp and to a degree sharad pawar and company both were mentioned.

d) On ur contention is contested from two seats safe seats ...I don't see how that is revelant. In India almost all important leaders sometimes contest from two seats even Advani does so...i don't see what point u r trying to make from this. Infact she won with record margin from both the seats

More Biased Writing

This article also makes claims that Indians are so gullible that "that they think any person who puts Gandhi in his/her name is a saint" and that "worshiping foreigners comes easily to Indians." Warzonewes 20:51, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Photo

Please post an real not-doctored photo of sonia. current photo with a doctored back-ground of indian tri-color (colors of indian national flag) is disturbing! for example look at the pages of USA presidents and their photos!

POV again

Much of the BJP propaganda has been filtered, but now the article seems haphazard, perhaps biased the othe way around.

First, the Congress party did not win any surprise victory. The BJP, even after losing the strength to form Government, still has only a few members less than the Congress. The UPA coalition is a Post-poll alliance stiched together with support from the Communist-bloc of parties. So it is essentially a bipolar government with the centrist Congress and the Left. This arrangement is one of the reasons that there are fire-fights in the UPA. Credit to Ms Gandhi should instead be given for revitalizing a party that many had written off.

As for being a political novice, well, even four years as a Cabinet minister are not at all sufficient for a Prime-Ministerial chair. So, for all intents and purposes, she was a novice when compared with some of the other senior leaders in her own party. It should instead be credited to her political acumen that she not only outmanoeuvered the NDA, but also reliquished the Prime Minister's chair for the reasons mentioned.

Finally, the defeat of the NDA was due to a large number of other factors, independent of the Congress party. They were widely criticised for corruption (although none of the charges have been proven), and were generally seen as inept administrators who failed to deliver on their election promises. So, the Aam Aadmi bit shopuld be put into perspective.

'First, the Congress party did not win any surprise victory'. It was a susprise victory even the bjp accepts that. From all accounts it looked like BJP led NDA alliance would comfortably win absolute majority

'Finally, the defeat of the NDA was due to a large number of other factors.' Agreed that is so in all elections, there is no single factor which constitutes victory and analysis of reason why NDA failed in election is not purpose of this article. What is revelant here is that being leader of opossition party she and the slogan it was symbolic of bjps defeat (something like saying that Winston churchil withstood the germans in second world was though he never fought the battle himself and there were man other factors involved, He was symbolic of the sucess of britian)

Removal

Have removed removed the following as it is factually in correct.

[removed as per WP:BLP] See diff

Plaese read the link i have added as the Supreme Court of India has dismissed two PILs filed in this regard. I believe the Supreme Court of India is the competent authority on the constitution of India.

Citations Needed

There are a ton of statements in the main article on controversial subjects that havent yet been cited. I'm leaving them in for the moment, but I would like to see some references soon. Hornplease 23:31, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Cite properly please

The allegations that are conitunally put in the article as "persistent" are not some that have been aired in the press as often as the article makes it sound. The reference provided is from a single article, and that too written by a BJP MP. If you can find a report or citation that indicates that this is a "commonly-held" belief, please cite it and only then reinstate the reference. I certainly have not heard it, unlike the often-expressed concern that she took 15-16 years to gain Indian citizenship. Hornplease 21:16, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Where was Ms Maino born?

The Wiki article and the official website of Ms Maino contradict each other. Is it Lusiana or Luciana. Compare the results: http://www.google.co.in/search?hs=7yr&hl=en&client=firefox&rls=org.mozilla%3Aen-US%3Aunofficial&q=lusiana+italy&btnG=Search&meta= http://www.google.co.in/search?hs=1yr&hl=en&client=firefox&rls=org.mozilla%3Aen-US%3Aunofficial&q=luciana+italy&btnG=Search&meta= ♔BADMIN♛ (आओ✍) 09:13, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

She was born in LuSiana. There's no commune in Italy called "LuCiana". The results you got are "poluted" by the female given name "Luciana". Dantadd 19:08, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Bribed by KGB?

I just found an interesting article [5]. Author make a reference to another source (Evgenia Albats) who had an access to KGB documents and says: KGB chief Victor Chebrikov in December 1985 had sought in writing from the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (CPSU), "authorization to make payments in US dollars to the family members of Mr. Rajiv Gandhi, namely Sonia Gandhi, Rahul Gandhi and Ms Paola Maino, mother of Sonia Gandhi." CPSU payments were authorized by a resolution, CPSU/CC/No 11228/3 dated 20/12/1985; and endorsed by the USSR Council of Ministers in Directive No 2633/Rs dated 20/12/1985. These payments had been coming since 1971, as payments received by Sonia Gandhi's family and "have been audited in CPSU/CC resolution No 11187/22 OP dated 10/12/1984.” I also found very similar information in the book The World Was Going Our Way: The KGB and the Battle for the Third World by Mitrokhin (see Mitrokhin Archive). Mitrokhin described in great detail how suitcases with KGB money traveled to Indira Gandhi office. Is that something that deserves attention and should be mentioned in this Wikipedia article? Biophys 03:04, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Transliteration

I doubt that the transliteration provided is the correct one. The Italian name "Sonia" is usually pronounced [sonja] and not [soːnɪja]. The latter is a correct transliteration of the Hindi/Punjabi word सोनिया, which again is not her name, but the closest Indian approximation. For that matter, should the Devanagri name be included at all, given how her name is an Italian one. Gamesmaster G-9 19:13, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Too Little

This is a very very brief article for one of India's most prominent political leaders. Does anyone have any information about Sonia' role as wife of the Prime Minister. I know she used to campaign for him during elections. More on the Sitaram Kesri controversy, the Mamta, Madhav Rao, Sangma resignations on her taking over and the "renouncement" effect would be useful.

I am trying to add more substance and could do with help Rohitde 19:37, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

What is encyclopaedic after all?

Can any one clarify as to why following passage isn't encyclopaedic , a reason for which it has been removed by Aksi?After all, great leaders like Sonia ji have great personal qualities about them that can't be ignored.

"Sonia ji has immense firm faith in Almighty. She listens only to her INNER VOICE.Thats why she gave up lucrative post of Prime Ministership of India! She is a determined lady with grit. Swami Apratimanand Ji had predicted on 14th May, 2006 that she would be "...defeated in Raibarelly election by Uma Bharati’s lady candidate. This shall be one of the most spectacular political upsets witnessed in the year 2006."Political situation indeed was against her in UP then.But, she proved Swami Ji's prediction wrong through her grit, determination and blessings of Lord Hanumana whose blessings she had sought by visiting Lord Hanumana's temple before contesting the election.She has blended herself perfectly with Indian spiritual milieu. She is a lady with a golden heart who cares tenderly for ordinary Indians. She has carved out a special niche on her own in Indian history."

Kushwah 10:02, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

References

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Kushwah (talk • contribs) 10:07, 11 February 2007 (UTC).

fact template

Overuse of the fact template is strongly discouraged. This page is an example of that overuse; I encourage someone to prune them down to a more relevant level. Hornplease 20:39, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Weasel Words

I want to tag the "Early Life" section with the weasel word template because of the sentence "avoided all contact with publicity." I'm not confident enough myself to entirely change the sentence, but it seems like a possible overstatement to me. 158.143.169.130 08:37, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

POV

There seems to be some kind of subtle POV in the sentence about Mussolini's link to Sonia's father. What's the point of saying that Sonia Gandhi's father was a one time supporter of Mussolini. Lots of Italians of that time were ultra nationalists and in that vein they may all be fascists. --Shahab 06:39, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Agree. Also POV in "she was a very sincere student and studied hard" Amit@Talk 15:11, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Padre Fascista

Scusate se nn scrivo in Inglese ma spero che qualcuno potrà tradurre.... il fatto che suo padre fosse un appartenente al partito fascista nn indica che egli fosse fascista .... durante il "Ventennio" per trovare il lavoro bisognava iscriversi al Fascio e prendere la tessera fascista ... chi nn la prendeva veniva allontanato da molte attività pubbliche ( come l'insegnamento) e fatto oggetto di varie pressioni.... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.101.126.228 (talk) 02:08, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Hello, hello! Englisho languago, understando? Amit@Talk 15:12, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

OK here's the translation:

Excused if nn I write in English but I hope that someone will be able translate…. the fact that its father was a pertaining to the fascist party nn indicates that it was fascist…. during the “Ventennio” in order to find the job it had to enroll itself to Fascio and to take to the fascist ticket… who nn took it came removed from many public activities (like the instruction) and made object of several pressures

I think the point he's trying to make is that during fascism years many people were under pressure to register with the fascist apparatus. Very valid. So I'm removing the "was supporter of fascist party" statement until a source proving active involvement is found. Amit@Talk

What the hell is this ...

"They had a lot of flirting and finally Rajiv had to marry her and ..." Amit@Talk 15:10, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Removed it. Amit@Talk 15:29, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

I agree with Amit. This is a completely wrong to mention such sensitive information (even though it might be true) without any references. Some facts are known to everyone but still should not be made public in such a way where the world has access to it. It was shocking for everyone in India about the quick wedding of Sonia and Rajiv. It was very unplanned and secret ceremony. People anticipated a big function as it was wedding of the Prime minister in house's son. Now everyone can sense what could be the reason (They got married in end 1969 and Rahul was born in June 1970.

Anyways, now it is known that Rahul Gandhi's girlfriend is Spanish but does that mean it should be put in wikipedia? Never. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mimic2 (talk • contribs) 02:38, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

WAY too much anti-Sonia POV in this article, esp. regarding 2004 election

I just cleaned up the 2004 election section because there was a ridiculous amount of anti-Sonia POV in this article. Saying Manmohan Singh was the "dummy" prime minister was just stupid. Let's really try to keep to the Wikipedia standards and keep this professional. This is NOT a place for your anti-Sonia xenophobic rantings. If hate her, that's fine, but keep it out of Wikipedia please. Thanks --Mezaco 17:02, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

This looks like a article maintained by Congress leaders in India

This looks like a article edited by Indian Congress leaders. Any statement which is anti Sonia (even if it is true) is removed immediately. e.g her study thing, her desparation of becoming Prime Minister in 2002, her comedy "inner voice" which appeared immediately after president visit. Also the controversy section like her presence in United Nations without holding any Indian post, her nationality accceptance after 18 years, her suuden entry into politics was also removed by some strong congress supporters. This is not a neutral article at all. Also, I have received some threats for updating facts on this website which is again ridiculous. Needless to say, I really do not care about such threats. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nkulkarn (talk • contribs) 03:32, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

I don't think you understand. You can't put your OPINIONS in Wikipedia. You actually put the following quote into the article:

"People think that Sonia Gandhi did a lot of sacrifice for the country. But her opponets say that if she had been in Italy she could not have afforded a one bed room flat. Here in India she is enjoying all benefits with the closeness of many men. What sacrifice she has done? "

Don't you understand? You can't say that in Wikipedia!! When you say those kinds of things, you are giving your opinion! Please let's keep Wikipedia to be a professional article. This article is not pro-Sonia. It does not say that she is a "good leader" or that she did the right things. This article should only list her birthplace, her marriage, and the events of her political career. I respect your opinion but maybe you don't understand what Wikipedia is. This is NOT a place to issue opinions without fact. When you make opinions that she was a "naughty student" and that she and Rajiv were "on the verge of divorce" you MUST put a reference. --Mezaco 22:26, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Dear Mezaco, Even facts put by me were removed. Please do a open discussion I am ready

1. She tried her best to become PM in 2002. This is a fact. 2. Her Hindi is average and she can not speak without a piece of paper. This is a fact. 3. She met Indian Idol finalists. This is a fact. 4. Her "inner voice" suddenly appeared. This is a FACT.

Don't you understand?

Hi. This article does already mention that one of the main criticisms her critics have against her is that she is not proficient in Hindi. That's how you word things in a Wikipedia article. You cannot say that "she has no right to lead the country because she can't speak Hindi". Also, many Indian people can't speak Hindi. The last time I checked English was an official language and it was one of the most common languages used in parliament, in government and in the press. Secondly, she met Indian Idol finalists??? What does that have to do with anything?? Is that really important? And thirdly, this article already does mention many critics criticized her renunciation decision as a "political stunt". It says very clearly that while some people praised her decisions, others said it was a political stunt. If you have written PROOF that she said she wanted to be prime minister, please reference it. You can add any FACTS you want to in this article, but you have to put a REFERENCE. If you put a reference it will probably not be deleted.

But there are many cases in this article of things that are not pro-Sonia. It mentions her failure to secure 272 votes, it mentions the revolt of Sharad Pawar, it mentions her lack of Hindi, it mentions the Office of Profit scandal, it mentions Quattrocchi, it mentions the United Nations Speech row, etc. etc. It does not hide facts that put her in a bad light. But you CAN'T put your opinions such as "what sacrifice has she done?". Also, I even added a "Controversy" section to show that many people have strong criticisms about her. I don't think that this article makes her look too good at all. Thank you!--Mezaco 21:36, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism

Editors are hereby warned that edits of the kind cited above ("what sacrifice has she done ..." amount to vandalism, and users inserting that kind of content are liable to be blocked from Wikipedia. Please refrain from making such unconstructive edits. Also please sign your comments on the talk page. Amit@Talk 06:21, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Why genuine sections are being removed?

Section "Dispute with Left Parties" was removed by user Blnguyen. Can we please know why such an informative section was removed? It contained a lot of references to genuine websites and hence can not be treated as somebody's personal opinions. This section was not abusive, was not having Vandalism and more importantly was NOT anti Sonia.

Please refrain from removing informative sections just because you do not agree with them. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Aslam1234 (talk • contribs) 02:01, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

I have removed the section again as it was totally out of place in this article. The relevant details of the Nuclear deal are present in the United States-India Peaceful Atomic Energy Cooperation Act article. Please don't add it again. Thanks. Amit@Talk 08:37, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Hi Amit, it is you that may think that is out of place. As someone said in this discussion, you should not use your opinions. That is a very genuine section. Also, as per my knowledge wikipedia is open to all for edits unless it is abusive or promotes vandalism. How can you say that "Please don't add it again"? Please do not start bossing here. Nkulkarn 13:22, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

I'm not "bossing here", I removed it because a portion of one of Sonia Gandhi's speech doesn't constitute a signficant enough detail to be included here. I'm sure you could add plenty of trivia about her, but this is not the place for it. I think I have adequately explained the reasoning. There's no question of bias here as the portion in question was neither pro or anti-sonia, it was just superflous. As I said, the positions of various parties involved in the nuclear deal are mentioned in the relevent article. Cheers! Amit@Talk 13:44, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Also I find it very interesting that it is you who is speaking against vandalism, since you have made edits like "she enjoys the company of many men ..." before in this article. Amit@Talk 14:06, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Hi Amit, I would like to know your role in wikipedia. Are you one of the owners or group of admins? Please let me know. If I have inserted some comments which you did not like in past, that does not mean you remove the genuine sections inserted by me.

I am waiting for your answer after which I will take this entire matter to the concerned people in wikipedia. Not just because you are deleting the information unnecessarily, but also because of the "no respect for others view" you have.

It would be nice to have an open discussion with a fair view people unlike you. Nkulkarn 14:44, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Well it's good to see you admit to making edits that are not "genuine". The paragraph you added was unnecessary and of poor grammatical quality, and you are welcome to "take this entire matter to the concerned people in wikipedia", though I seriously doubt you would do that with your kind of edit-history. Amit@Talk 15:05, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Hold on guys. What is the issue here? Is the section abusive or poorly grammered? I am little confused. ReluctantPhilosopher or nukulkarn or anybody else can help? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mimic2 (talk • contribs) 16:05, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Hi guys. If I could just add my two cents. People seem to think that this article is a place to debate politics. This article is not a place to discuss every event of the UPA government! This article is a biography article on Sonia Gandhi. Some people seem to want to make this article a long and passionate debate on Congress Party politics. This is a BIOGRAPHY. It should only discuss very specific events relating to the life of Sonia Gandhi. If you wish to discuss other things, it should be put in a different article. There has been far far too much vandalism to this article and because some of the Sonia haters have made such ridiculous comments in the past (like the "what sacrifice has she done" comment), of course people are going to be very very watchful of what is added to this website. If you wish to debate Indian politics, please go to a different website or please create your own blog, because Wikipedia is an encyclopedia only and if we add every political event that has happened in the last 8 years during Sonia's time in politics, this article will become far far too long. If you wish to discuss the Left Parties and the Nuclear issue, there is a whole article created just for that topic! I think that's why it was probably cut out. It was not specifically relevant to Sonia Gandhi's life. Thank you. --Mezaco 17:58, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks a lot, Mezaco for clearing the issue. The portion in question here was not abusive but unnecessary detail, besides being poorly structured; that's why I removed it, but some people seem to have made it a prestige issue to have it in the article. That's all. Thanks again. Amit@Talk 03:56, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Hi guys, it that was poorly structured then a good idea would be to structure it rather than removing it. What say? Mimic2 16:54, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

I am undoing the removal of this section and making it open to other users to purify it grammcatically. I agree Amit that it is poorly grammered.Mimic2 19:23, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Are these things true

I have found following information on one of the websites. Are these points or some of the points true?

<rm per WP:BLP and discussion at WP:ANI.>

No newspaper has taken up the issue, no political party is opposing this,people are falling in line as if this is nothing unusual. Have we forgotten history, it was this Indian passiveness that led to India becoming a British slave. A Nuclear Weapons state, the biggest democracy on planet and a foreigner will walk in to the highest office without having contested an election, without having ever talked to the media on any issue as if it were a piece of cake. Are we going to witness this mockery of Indian State,are we really a bunch of such slaves who, despite freedom of speech will not speak out.

Do we need another round of 'Civilizing'. Any Basu, any Mulayam, born in the heat and dust of India preferable to the 'Senora' as our leader It is said that former prime minister HD Deve Gowda acted as if he was prime minister of Karnataka while another P.M. I.K. Gujral acted like a foreign minister. Now Congress is busy promoting a former au-pair maid and a house wife for Prime-ministership only on the basis of her last name.

"""

No Jokes Please

Someone had added an image of Reese Witherspoon with the caption "Sonia Gandhi in her early days". Please let's not do this. Amit@Talk 10:50, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

I agree with Amit completely. No one has right to spoil the image of Reese Witherspoon by naming her photograph as Sonia Gandhi. Completely unacceptable.65.242.175.35 02:23, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Har har :-/ Amit@Talk 04:43, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Any reference for this?

<rm per WP:BLP and discussion at WP:ANI.>

Stop bullshiting and vandalising the article, or you will be liable to be blocked Amit@Talk 03:53, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Hi Amit, I am equally angry as of you but mind one thing. This gentlemen has put this in "discussion page" and not in main article. He is opening a discussion forum for this. If you do not agree, say so. But for god sake, stop threatening people. As per my knowledge, wikipedia can block an user, but definitely you CAN NOT. So stop giving such threats. I have seen your messages couple of other times also. I am relatively new to wikipedia as an editor but have gone thru the policies. Please stop this. I request you. Inder315 15:43, 21 October 2007 (UTC)