![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 |
Much of this talk page has been [removed as per WP:BLP] See diff Hornplease 06:03, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
Someone as high profile in politics as Rajiv Gandhi should not be ashamed to declare his own religion so that people can understand his motivation for his statement and policies.
Can someone upload the photo from the CiC-Indian Government website? Its in the public domain according to Indian copyright law. Tri400 03:22, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
Where are the media enquiries that say Rahul Gandhi studied as Raul Vinci? I could only stumble upon blogs which claim so. Couldn't find any media references. Until someone comes up with a verifiable source proving the claim, let the section be marked as disputed. Can the statement be deleted upon failure to bring up verifiable source? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Emperornutz (talk • contribs) 21:09, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
Its true he holds Italian Visa Is Rahul Gandhi an Indian Citizen ? If Yes, then please attach a scan copy of His Indian passport, His name on Passport and Italian Visa.
— Preceding unsigned comment added by 123.236.165.73 (talk) 19:13, 11 June 2011 (UTC)
I have added the two tags- in particular, the article really needs a fairly extensive rewrite in order to improve the English and get the meaning across more appropriately. There are some instances of weasels in there also- particularly edits like 'For reasons that are open to speculation, there have never been an effort to refute this from the Congress Party or from his family.'; speculation by whom? What kind of speculation? I don't know nearly enough about the subject to resolve these issues. Badgerpatrol 17:16, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
Okay, I don't really give much credit to the allegations, but now that Rahul Gandhi has responded with a libel case and HU forums has been shut down, this whole affair deserves some mention. --SohanDsouza 11:37, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
I think that while there has been much notable criticism of this particular individual and his prominence in Indian politics, the particular insertion of a single isolated quote from a non-notable individual is clear POV-pushing, in an attempt to link the subject of this article with the linkfarm that is the Anti-Hindu article. If other individuals can be found repeating the allegation - which is really has no informative content, and is merely an expression of contempt - I will of course revise my suspicions. Till then, it seems undue weight given to a minortity opinion. Hornplease 04:51, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
I propose improvement of lead section as it had only few lines and articles is very looking quite nuteral so we must increase the content in lead section with nuteral refrences sources. I had removed an unsourced claim from lead section. If some one have some source if will request him to restore it with that source. Regards(Sandeep 09:04, 30 April 2010 (UTC))
No mention at all of his time at St. Stephen's (he left after a year)? Also the link to the article purportedly about his graduating from Rollins doesn't work, and the claim that his move was due to security concerns seemingly needs a citation as well. 140.247.5.185 (talk) 06:13, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
"but his academic records show that he attempted to obtain the said degree in 2004-2005, and failed to secure passing grades in National Economic Planning and Policy." why is Bold being used? It reeks of political propoganda. Is this information even accurate? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.42.157.70 (talk) 14:58, 12 July 2011 (UTC)
He is not a trinity college almam matter, so please stop refering him as one. check reference in the relevant section. --Krishna Kumar 00:30, 9 July 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ksquarekumar (talk • contribs)
Rollins College is not part of University of Florida — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ashwinpremraj (talk • contribs) 23:25, 13 July 2011 (UTC)
Not done
The information on his college degrees are false, please edit that information from the wikipedia source. Rahul gandhi never graduated from cambridge university, this information is misguiding, you can confirm this information from the cambridge university.
Without any concrete evidence about this person's qualification should not be mentioned on the page.
Rahul gandhi was terminated from Harvard University due to lack of IQ.Apatroticindian (talk) 10:18, 5 April 2013 (UTC)--Apatroticindian (talk) 10:18, 5 April 2013 (UTC)
{{editsemiprotected}}
THE FOLLOWING NEEDS TO BE DELETED IMMEDIATELY. THERE IS NO PROOF
Swiss Bank Accounts Swiss magazine Schweizer Illustrierte [2] in 11 November 1991 revealed that Rahul was the beneficiary of accounts worth $2 billion dollars controlled by his mother Sonia Gandhi.[37][38] Harvard scholar Yevgenia Albats cited KGB correspondence about payments to Rajiv Gandhi and his family, which had been arranged by Viktor Chebrikov,[39][40] which shows that KGB chief Viktor Chebrikov sought in writing an "authorization to make payments in US dollars to the family members of Rajiv Gandhi, namely Sonia Gandhi, Rahul Gandhi and Paola Maino, mother of Sonia Gandhi" from the CPSU in December 1985. 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.[39] In 1992 the media confronted the Russian government with the Albats disclosure. The Russian government confirmed the veracity of the disclosure and defended it as necessary for "Soviet ideological interest."[40] On 14 June 2002, the Delhi High Court peremptorily dismissed a Writ Petition (WP(C) 3856/2002)[41][verification needed] filed by Janata Party President, former Union minister and frivolous litigator Dr. Subramanian Swamy[42][verification needed] seeking CBI inquiry into allegations by a Russian journalist Dr. Albats that KGB funds were paid to members of the Gandhi family.[citation needed] Boston Airport In 2005 Four lawyers including Prem Chandra Sharma filed a public litigation petition in the High Court. They requested that information be made available to the public in regards to an incident on September 21, 2001 at Boston Airport where Rahul Gandhi and his Spanish girlfriend Veronique[43] were detained by the FBI for questioning, and verification if Mr. Gandhi was carrying $200,000 in cash which he was unable to explain to the airport authorities.[44][45] The lawyers provided further evidence that Mr. Gandhi's release may have been secured by Brajesh Misra the then principal secretary to the Prime Minister. The petition sought a writ of mandamus to the Indian ambassador to the US and the Union Home Secretary to make a disclosure about the episode.[44] However previously, The Hindu newspaper had reported that according to "a senior" Indian diplomat there had been no involvement by the Indian envoy to the US in the matter.[45]
Drroadies (talk) 13:22, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
Not done: Welcome and thanks for wanting to improve the accuracy of this article. The section you copied appears to have many inline citations to reliable sources. Those sources appear to support the content. Please provide any conflicting sources you have and suggest how to change the content to include the existing sources and your conflicting sources. Thanks, Celestra (talk) 15:55, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
He hasnt done Masters in Economics from Harvard latter he was forced to remove it from his bio data — Preceding unsigned comment added by 123.236.165.73 (talk) 03:17, 12 June 2011 (UTC)
This article is one of a number (about 100) selected for the early stage of the trial of the Wikipedia:Pending Changes system on the English language Wikipedia. All the articles listed at Wikipedia:Pending changes/Queue are being considered for level 1 pending changes protection.
The following request appears on that page:
![]() | Many of the articles were selected semi-automatically from a list of indefinitely semi-protected articles. Please confirm that the protection level appears to be still warranted, and consider unprotecting instead, before applying pending changes protection to the article. |
Comments on the suitability of this page for "Pending changes" would be appreciated.
Please update the Queue page as appropriate.
Note that I am not involved in this project any much more than any other editor, just posting these notes since it is quite a big change, potentially
Regards, Rich Farmbrough, 23:39, 16 June 2010 (UTC).
One user keeps adding "one of" to "the most prominent political family", thereby repeatedly introducing a grammar error. Even if it weren't for the grammar error, it is questionable how this edit improves the article. It may make sense when the status of most prominent family is contentious, but that doesn't seem to be the case in India. It raises the obvious question: Who are the other most prominent political families? If we can't point to at least some contenders, then I feel the addition is Weasel language that we better do without. I posted that question at Talk:Nehru–Gandhi family first and I would ask to keep the discussion there since it is about the family, not about Rahul. — Sebastian 04:16, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
{{editsemiprotected}}
THE FOLLOWING SECTION ON NIIRA RADIA NEEDS TO BE DELETED IMMEDIATELY. Reason being: Gross misrepresentation of facts.
The entire section is based on the story carried in outlook which has been quoted selectively to portray that Rahul Gandhi is somehow linked to the controversy. There is a single mention of "Rahul", but no further mention of Rahul Gandhi. How can one be so sure that the Rahul being spoken about here is indeed Rahul Gandhi?
At the very least we should look for more sources to corroborate that Rahul being talked about is indeed Rahul Gandhi. --Ashlonerider (talk) 15:20, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
The section on "Comparison between RSS and SIMI", the OP had made a very biased entry, right down to accusing the concerned individual of loosing his mental balance! The reference given is a link to an article in the Pioneer, a news outlet run by Chandan Mitra, a BJP MP. That orig post read as follows.
Orig entry:
During a visit to Madhya Pradesh in October 2010, he compared the RSS with the banned terrorist organization SIMI saying RSS is also fanatical and fundamental like SIMI. These statements of his, got huge criticism from different quarters of the country. The BJP reaction was - "Only a sick mind can do it (compare RSS to SIMI). He seems to have lost his mental balance." [1]
I edited this to a more neutral POV with appropriate links to reference from generally neutral sources like Outlook and the Times.
New post:
Mr.Rahul Gandhi has been consistent in his criticism of right-wing groups like the RSS and SIMI throughout his career, a view that has bought him accolades as well as criticism. On 6th October 2010, while on a tour of Madhya Pradesh, he clearly outlined that according to him, the RSS and the SIMI were the same and that both held fundamentalist views[2]. This has clearly been a long held belief with Gandhi Jr. since he is alleged to have repeated the same point of view in conversations with the US officials as was revealed by WikiLeaks cables[3].
The reaction from the BJP was predictably bitter. "Only a sick mind can do it (compare RSS to SIMI). He seems to have lost his mental balance." [4]
Leaders from other parties however have defended the statements made by Rahul Gandhi pointing out to the involvement of the RSS related groups in recent incidents in Malegaon and Ajmer[5].
This entry was deleted and the original biased entry was restored by someone. can someone please intervene to ensure that the neutrality of the page is maintained and biased POV's like the original Post are neutralised? Ashlonerider (talk) 10:45, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
the section in the way it was originally written out should never have been there as it was a tu-tu main-main rendition.
I edited the entry to reflect a broader picture of what Rahul has been consistently saying, one of his pet-themes if you will, of domestic right-wing terror being a greater threat to India than external terror. Hope this edit reflects this.
Ashlonerider (talk) 16:40, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
The article is biased in referring to the "right-wing RSS" -- why is this descriptor automatically attached to the RSS, but "left-wing" is not automatically attached to other groups or parties? The selective prefacing of such descriptors serves to project some organizations as "deviants" while the omission of comparable descriptors for others then makes them seem "normal" by comparison. The article should not seek to legitimize or de-legitimize rival opinions or political views through such embellishments. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.254.141.37 (talk) 01:33, 17 August 2011 (UTC)
This section, starting from its title is pure POV pushing. The wikileaks "expose" being referred to here talks about how Rahul Gandhi talked to US officials highlighting the involvement of right-wing hindu groups like the RSS in terrorist activities but the poster clearly makes a biased POV push by labelling the wikileaks expose as evidence of Rahul Gandhi being "anti-Hindu".I dont think it is correct to arrive at a conclusion of pro or anti anything based on wikileaks expose. This angle of Rahuls comments on RSS links to terror is amply covered in the previous section "Comparison of RSS and SIMI". Suggest deletion of entire section. --Ashlonerider (talk) 08:25, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
Ok, I tried to tag this with {{Article issues}} but the pending revisions gets in the way. I have little patience right now, so my quick notes will have to be here: citecheck; reason=poor use of sources which may or may not be reliable: uploaded certificate scan? Poor citation style. -84user (talk) 11:52, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
The article, even though informative, is unbalanced. Look at the controversy section. This is larger than the entire article itself(minus the section). It seems this man goes creating controversy, but in truth, he creates less controversy than many of the main Indian politicians. For instance what does these two paragraphs have to do with Rahul Gandhi? And why it is mentioned "Rahul Gandhi's party appointed". Was he part of the decision?
"In 2004, Rahul Gandhi's party appointed Manmohan Singh as the Prime Minister. Manmohan Singh was the only international leader to initially refuse to receive black money data provided by the German authorities during 2008 Liechtenstein tax affair.[42][43] Under pressure from the main opposition party, the Bharatiya Janata Party, the Manmohan Singh government later reluctantly agreed to accept a part of the data but stoutly refused to make it public.
In 2010, a group of concerned eminent Indian citizens consisting of KPS Gill, Ram Jethmalani and Subhash Kashyap amongst others petitioned the Supreme Court to ask the Manmohan Singh government to make the list of names of Indian citizens with black money in Liechtenstein Bank public. The Manmohan Singh government in response refused to make the names of Indian account holders in Liechtenstein bank public. Following which the Supreme Court questioned the government’s reluctance to disclose the names of Indian nationals who have stashed black money largely earned through illegitimate means in foreign banks, asking “what is the big deal about it?” [44] In 2011, the Supreme court again lashed out at the government for inaction in the Swiss Bank matter. [45]
This controversy had risen in the wake of the 2006 Swiss Banking Association report." Mathew Joy (talk) 11:05, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
ADDED THIS ON CONTROVERSY SECTION
Sukanya singh missing case.
On March 1st 2011 an Indian high court sent a notice to Rahul about the whereabouts of a young girl, Sukanya Singh aka Sukanya Devi who went missing after meeting Rahul. [6][7][8]. Kishore Samrite, a former party legislator, accused Rahul and his foreigner friends of allegedly assaulting Sukanya Singh.[9][10]. The petition alleged that Sukanya and her parents are in illegal detention of Rahul since 2007. [11][12] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Userkevin (talk • contribs) 04:04, 2 March 2011 (UTC)
Wikipedia is not accepting the Sukanya Singh alleged gang rape section.
I edited the controversy section with many reference to the Sukanya singh case but Wiki is not accepting the edits. Is it ruled by the congress party too.
Suppression and clear violation of Free press and Freedom of speech
On March 1st 2011 an Indian high court sent a notice to Rahul about the whereabouts of a young girl, Sukanya Singh aka Sukanya Devi who went missing after meeting Rahul. [13][14][15]. Kishore Samrite, a former party legislator, accused Rahul and his foreigner friends of allegedly assaulting Sukanya Singh.[16][17]. The petition alleged that Sukanya and her parents are in illegal detention of Rahul since 2007. [18][19]
The section is being deleted because the court has thrown out the case against rahul gandhi saying there was never any proof or cmplaint filed. As such until some modicum of proof emerges that can reliably link Rahul gandhi to the crime it would be irresposible to add it to the article. check [20] for further dtails
Tca achintya (talk) 20:21, 2 April 2011 (UTC)
The sources used for many points in this article are of a very poor quality, or openly biased. For example, one source about the alleged black money is an opinion piece by a BJP (the opposition party) appointee. In another case, Rahul Gandhi's detention at Boston airport with $200,000 is presented as fact whereas the original news sources themselves have no confirmation of this. Finally, some sources here are unreachable or unverifiable. In particular, the black money issue relies heavily on "KGB: The Sate within a State" which makes absurd claims like Sonia Gandhi being a KGB agent. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bhagwad (talk • contribs) 15:57, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
The criticism section on the auditorium was removed because:
Yes Michael? •Talk 10:54, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
This section is being intentionally deleted by some editors even though his interview leaked by wiki-leaks is a fact and reported by almost all newspaper in India. His remarks caused a major uproar and controversy and the necessary citation of newspaper are given. Then why User:MikeLynch has deleted whole section???? This is pure vandalism.
While one can remove or modify the sentence * His image has been tarnished but the word He informed American ambassador that Hindu extremist groups could pose a greater threat to his country than Muslim militants. is taken from the cited sources published in Indian newspaper. Till date there is no denial from Rahul neither he has asked for an apology from newspapers or sued them for making such comment on him. And it was the biggest recent controversy surrounding him, so you cannot delete such an important information from this page, that is what I think.Jethwarp (talk) 18:21, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
I have changed the lead and as per me the fact that he has neither accepted or denied his statements as mentioned by Wikileaks, amounts to a controversyJethwarp (talk) 18:36, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
I think a lot of unneccessary moderation is being used by some senior editors in this article, heavy bias is evident in this article.--Krishna Kumar 04:15, 8 July 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ksquarekumar (talk • contribs)
I think that I am correct in assuming that only those paras or text can be entered which have a relevant and legitimate reference available on the Internet.
In the case of reference No 33, there is no link available on the Internet. In the absence of this link being available this would need to be removed.
Reference No. 34 clearly contradicts the earlier missing reference No. 33 and also states that the so-called incident has been denied by both the US and the Indian Authorities.
There is a whole para of text relating to Subramaniam Swamy which reads as under “ Subramaniam Swamy filed a Freedom of Information Act application with the Federal Bureau of Investigation for investigation of records. FBI told Swamy that they would hand over the investigation records if he got a “no objection certificate” from Rahul Gandhi. In request of the same, Swamy wrote a letter to Rahul Gandhi saying if he had nothing to hide then give him the permission for investigation. Rahul Gandhi received the mail but never replied to him.” There is no Reference given for this entire para.
In the absence of Reference No. 33, the contradiction clearly stated in Reference No. 34 and no Reference given for the Swamy para, the entire sub-section would need to be removed.
The Article would require to be amended accordingly.
Vishvjit (talk) 08:08, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
May I point out that the lnk for Reference 33 is still not working.
I may also point out that the Times of India in an article on the 9th of May clearly states that the petition filed in the High Court regarding the Boston Incident has been dismissed by the Court
The text of the article reads as under:
PIL against Rahul Gandhi rejected PTI, Mar 9, 2005, 10.04pm IST LUCKNOW: Lucknow bench of the Allahabad High Court on Wednesday rejected a PIL on Congress MP Rahul Gandhi's alleged detention in Boston airport in the US in 2001.
The division bench comprising justice Jagdish Bhalla and Justice M A Khan rejected the petition filed by four secretaries of the Rashtra Raksha Manch.
In the light of the above some further action needs to be taken Vishvjit (talk) 14:49, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
REQUEST FOR EDIT
Regarding Section Controversies Sub-section Boston Airport detainment
This reads as under:-
In 2005, four lawyers including Prem Chandra Sharma filed a public litigation petition in the High Court. They requested that information be made available to the public in regard to an alleged incident on September 21, 2001 at Boston Airport where Rahul Gandhi was detained by the FBI for 9 hours for questioning, and verification if Mr. Gandhi was carrying $200,000 in cash which he was unable to explain to the airport authorities.[32][33]
The lawyers provided further evidence that Mr. Gandhi's release may have been secured by Brijesh Mishra the then principal secretary to the Prime Minister. The petition sought a writ of mandamus to the Indian ambassador to the US and the Union Home Secretary to make a disclosure about the episode.[32] However previously, The Hindu newspaper had reported that according to "a senior" Indian diplomat there had been no involvement by the Indian envoy to the US in the matter.[33]
Reference No. 32 is from The Times of India dated 8th March,2005. This reference is not available on the internet. Reference No. 33 is from The Hindu dated 29th September, 2001. This clearly states that both the Indian Authorities as well as the United States Authorities have denied the incident.
The Times of India in an article dated 3rd September, 2005 clearly states that the Public Interest Litigation filed against Mr. Rahul Gandhi has been rejected by the Lucknow High Court. The text of the article is as under:-
'PIL against Rahul Gandhi rejected PTI, Mar 9, 2005, 10.04pm IST LUCKNOW: Lucknow bench of the Allahabad High Court on Wednesday rejected a PIL on Congress MP Rahul Gandhi's alleged detention in Boston airport in the US in 2001.
The division bench comprising justice Jagdish Bhalla and Justice M A Khan rejected the petition filed by four secretaries of the Rashtra Raksha Manch.
The link for this article is http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2005-03-09/india/27857680_1_pil-rashtra-raksha-manch-petition
It is obvious that the so called incident was denied by the authorities in 2001 itself as reported in The Hindu. Relying on a subsequent Times of India report of 8th March, 2005 does not make any sense especially in the light of The Times of India report of 9th March, 2005 which shows that the case has been rejected by the High Court.
I propose that, in the light of the above discussion, the entire sub-section should be immediately removed. Vishvjit (talk) 10:54, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
I've removed the section. The Hindu article makes no mention of money and the Times of India article is unverifiable. Since this is a BLP, allegations of a negative nature need a high level of sourcing for inclusion. --rgpk (comment) 18:55, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
The Reference is still missing and the logic for removal remains as explained above but it seems to have been put back. Haw can one deal with this situation? Vishvjit (talk) 18:24, 7 May 2011 (UTC)
![]() | This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or|ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Rahul Gandhi was arrested/detained with his Columbian girlfriend Veronique Cartelli, ALLEGEDLY, the Daughter of Drug Mafia with $160000 by FBI at Boston Airport in september 2001 .
Ankush.sak (talk) 22:28, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
Article of Rahul Gandhi is highly biased - Missing details of his girlfriend, FBI and other allegations. Everyone should post their matter on Rahul Gandhi wiki page and NOT on talk page. If it is deleted by any means - you can write to wikipedia in making this page protected. Please post all your content in wiki. Deepeshdeomurari (talk) 04:26, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
The page has been edited against the conclusions in many of the above discussions. can any editor explain the reasons for these edits, and why the entire controversies sub-section has been deleted..??? Please Answer..--Krishna Kumar 04:23, 8 July 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ksquarekumar (talk • contribs)
![]() | This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or|ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
1. Rahul Gandhi's name on His Italian Passport is Raul Vinci. He did not take up this name for Secrect Purposeses. 2. Rahul Gandhi did not complete his B.A. infact he has gone to all colleges but failed every where. 3. Rahul Gandhi is a Catholic Christian. 4. His girlfriend, Veronique is daughter of Colombian Mafia Drug Lord.
Nvltec (talk) 05:20, 15 July 2011 (UTC)
```` Edit request Pushie K August 25 2011 Factual error regarding his educational background"
Find below the link that verifies that he received the M.phil degree from Cambridge. I hate when particularly politically motivated people post barf about someone. Not an Indian citizen myself but this caught my eye when some idiot posted this as a link on face book.
Please change accordingly. I am pretty sure Rahul Gandhi doesn't care but this bugged me for some reason.
Done Will change in a bit. Lynch7 04:54, 24 August 2011 (UTC)
![]() | This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or|ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Rahul Gandhi's Nationality: Italian
122.102.124.143 (talk) 23:28, 28 August 2011 (UTC)
![]() | This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or|ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Nationality Of Rahul Gandhi: Italian
122.102.126.176 (talk) 19:47, 30 August 2011 (UTC)
![]() | This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or|ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Information provided is WRONG. consider http://www.facebook.com/notes/amogha-abbur/a-daring-letter-by-an-iitan-to-rahul-gandhi-plz-read-and-repost/238535999520991 a letter by IIT student from India. Kumarpchandran (talk) 05:40, 5 September 2011 (UTC)
Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. —C.Fred (talk) 05:48, 5 September 2011 (UTC)
![]() | This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or|ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
I want to know the educational qualification of Mr.Rahul Gandhi which he had earned from Harward??
Jangamsourabh (talk) 13:37, 13 September 2011 (UTC)
Not done. This is not the place for content related enquiries. Lynch7 13:47, 13 September 2011 (UTC)
![]() | This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or|ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
rahul gandhi is not an indian
113.193.151.89 (talk) 17:48, 21 September 2011 (UTC)
Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Lynch7 17:50, 21 September 2011 (UTC)
![]() | This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or|ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Hello Sir/Madam Recently Mr. Subramanian Swamy a proffessor at Havard and President of Janata Party has made some revealations about Rahul Gandhi, especially his education. Keeping in mind that whenever he has gone to court he has been able to convince the judges especially in India. I would like to have your permisssion to edit this page. Rather I would suggest you to edit the page keeping in mind. Also as Mr. Subramaniam Swamy has pointed out that he has beeen arrested by FBI at nework airport for illlegal posssesion of currency exceeding the limit by 16 times. Thus, I request you to kindly edit this page to ensure that people get access to true and correct information.
Thanking You ( To whomsoever it may concern) A true Indian who stands for truth on net
Donttrytoguessmyname (talk) 01:36, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
![]() | This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or|ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Rahul Gandhi Harvard Truth [22]
150.210.231.20 (talk) 18:57, 20 October 2011 (UTC)
Add |partner = Veronique in the infobox. Sources already given in the article.(#17, #18) 117.204.81.37 (talk) 22:43, 30 October 2011 (UTC)
done.Beefcake6412 (talk) 23:01, 30 October 2011 (UTC)
![]() |
An image used in this article, File:Rahul Gandhi with Manmohan Singh.png, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests December 2011
Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.
This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 12:27, 1 December 2011 (UTC) |
![]() | This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or|ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please Update Sukanya Devi(Political and legal issues) as Petitioner moved to supreme court
petitioner moved to supreme court and has challenged it saying it was illegal and arbitrary and issued without application of mind.
Reference News paper links - http://www.rediff.com/news/report/sc-notice-to-rahul-up-govt-on-ex-mlas-plea/20110406.htm
http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2011-08-26/india/29931360_1_kishore-samrite-hc-order-petition
Mukesh patel12 (talk) 20:52, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
Not done: Please express your request in a 'please change X to Y' degree of detail. Thanks, Celestra (talk) 03:15, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
I would like to edit the page with the details of the 2012 UP assembly elections. The following is a brief gist of what I intend to update - (The source for all of what I want to add below are observations, editorials and articles by reputed media houses like NDTV, TOI, Deccan Herald, DNA , CNN-IBN etc.)
1) The fact that Rahul Gandhi wanted to up his party's seats in that particular election. He had invested time and energy for the past seven years.
2) He had carried the image of a "tough and angry young man" during his election campaign.
3) His sister Priyanka Vadra, husband Robert Vadra too helped in his campaign
4) He came under a bit of flak for his remark that UP people were "begging for a living" in Mumbai etc.
5) The "media" touted this election to be a stepping stone for him to take national responsibility and the build up was a sort of a test bed for him.
6) The results came and Rahul's party was relegated to fourth place after SP, BSP and BJP. And Rahul accepted it as a defeat and that he shall take it in his stride.(He had held a press conference to confirm the same)
Please let know is it fine to add the above piece as a sub-section "2012 UP Assembly elections" in his section "Political Career". And, if it is fine, how do I go about adding it, since it is locked ?
98.180.212.101 (talk) 20:42, 11 March 2012 (UTC)joy
Kindly note the number of seats won by the Congress party in 2012 UP assembly elections alone is 28, an increase of 6 seats from the 2007 of 22 seats. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Combatshadowz (talk • contribs) 12:50, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
Reminder II refer my email of last week
Dear Sir I have a plan to salve the burning problem of corruption in India without spending even a penny from public revenue. It will create twenty lacks entrepreneurs within a month and salve problem of unemployment also. Some points of the plan are also discussed with 20 groups of different fields ninety percent of those are agree with the above facts and appreciated. If this plan is executed all over India, the Executer (A young person like you or any other upto gain become realty) will become a very strong person who can kept India corruption free and the damages created by Shree Anna and Kejariwal, is not only recovered but also become big gain for executer. Kindly fix a meeting for 10 to 20 minutes to discuss the plan of real implementation for taking all the gains of the plan Date 27/11/12
Savita mishra
Secretary women congress ALLAHABAD CITY — Preceding unsigned comment added by 180.215.153.95 (talk) 03:28, 15 December 2012 (UTC)
Rahul gandhi was detained by FBI at Boston airport, I am not sure under which section should I add this because he was not into politics at that time. Here are the sources, this one is from Mid-day and this one from the frontline/ The Hindu. --sarvajna (talk) 15:48, 15 March 2013 (UTC)
SECOND PARAGRAPH, FIRST LINE "His parents, Rajiv and Sonia Gandhi, have served as the Prime Minister of India and the President of the Congress respectively".
THIS SENTENCE MISLEAD THAT BOTH OF HIS PARENTS SERVED AS PRIME MINISTERS. PLEASE NOTE THAT SONIA GNADHI NEVER SERVED AS THE PM OF INDIA. BOTH OF THEM SERVED AS THE PRESIDENT OF THE CONGRESS. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.50.249.75 (talk) 18:48, 5 April 2013 (UTC)
Degree from harward is given wrong http://expressindia.indianexpress.com/latest-news/rahul-was-awarded-m-phil-degree-in-1995-cambridge/452535/
He was awarded the M.Phil in Development Studies in 1995
It is covered widely in media and I have given sources. Rahul Gandhi is commonly referred as 'Pappu' (naive) by his critics in social media like twitter.[4][5][6]. If 'Yamraj' can be included in Narendra Modi, why not Pappu in this article? neo (talk) 09:21, 20 June 2013 (UTC)
Because Wikipedia is not news? Also, Tit for Tat editing is inappropriate. I can't speak for other articles, but why is his nickname on social media relevant to an enclycopediac entry? I think a public image section might be useful considering the issue of Rahul Gandhi's percieved inexperience according to the BJP. But, randomly throwing in the fact that some people decided to nickname him 'Pappu' yesterday is hardly relevant is it? Cliniic (talk) 09:45, 20 June 2013 (UTC)
Also WP is not a battlefield. We may disagree regarding content, but can we maintain civility? Accusing me of censorship is not going to solve disputes. I have called on Sitush to arbitrate the dispute, not to "push censorship."Cliniic (talk) 09:49, 20 June 2013 (UTC)
@Dharmadhyaksha: Sorry, it seems I had opened edit box before your comment. neo (talk) 10:56, 20 June 2013 (UTC)
So, this is all some tit-for-tat retaliation for the content dispute on the Narendra Modi page? Can somebody actually explain why the page should include some trivia (Pappu) of the day material? Wikipedia is not news. Pappu is not criticism either. It is a childish and degratory playground insult. Anyway, I plan on substantially rewriting some of the political articles including this one before the general elections. Then, I plan to add a public image section ala Manmohan Singh and Narendra Modi. I get the general gist of the criticism re his perceived inexperience according to the BJP and other critics. I plan to include that. Cliniic (talk) 11:17, 20 June 2013 (UTC)
@Sitush: I have included another criticism. I know, you and Clinic will come up with some reason to remove it. Remember wikipedia is not censored, so pls stop reverting sourced criticism. neo (talk) 12:18, 20 June 2013 (UTC)
(just in case my edit box needs this)
So, we are going to pick and choose tidbits from hearsay now?
btw The same reference: http://m.outlookindia.com/story.aspx?sid=4&aid=271019
[quote]
The Hindu placed two Wikileak cables on Mr Gandhi came into public domain yesterday, one of 2005 which inter alia states the following:
...He claims that the word among Congress insiders, including those in the coterie surrounding Sonia Gandhi, is that Rahul will never become Prime Minister for several reasons. ...claimed that it is increasingly common knowledge that Rahul suffers from ""personality problems"" of an emotional or psychological nature that are severe enough to prevent him from functioning as PM...
....claimed that Gandhi dynastic politics had no future, as the family has run out of prime ministerial candidates with appropriate charisma. Indira Gandhi was the last member of the dynasty capable of being an effective PM and Rajiv would never have won re-election had he not been assassinated. ...implied that the common impression among Congress insiders is that Rahul is far below even his father in political ability.
and one of 2009 which concluded thus:
Gandhi came off as a practiced politician who knew how to get his message across and was comfortable with the nuts and bolts of party organization and vote counting. He was precise and articulate and demonstrated a mastery that belied the image some have of Gandhi as a dilettante. Given his commitment to party building, it seems unlikely he would seek a Cabinet position anytime soon. While his party work will professionalize and democratize Congress, it will also create a cadre of party loyalists which will be useful as Gandhi moves into a position where he can be a credible candidate for Prime Minister. [/quote]
pick and choose or what?
Cliniic (talk) 12:21, 20 June 2013 (UTC)
If wikileaks reports are to be included, then it should be sourced directly and made it known that wikileaks has been used as a primary source. Instead, it appears as of now as if the content has been sourced from a reliable secondary source. This is actually the conclusion of the article: "It is very difficult to give a comprehensive answer to this question because there is very little known about him" Cliniic (talk) 12:25, 20 June 2013 (UTC)
apologies, just seen that the text does make it clear that it has been sourced from the wikileak cables. However, not stating the conclusion of the reference seems to be an oversight. I am making a few additions. Cliniic (talk) 12:32, 20 June 2013 (UTC)
I think from the first report we can include the part about the criticism of his political ability. But the claims of "personality problems" is highly contentious. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:BLP#Misuse_of_primary_sources http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:BLP#Avoid_gossip_and_feedback_loops Cliniic (talk) 12:51, 20 June 2013 (UTC)
I am sorry but are we serious? It is not even the "assessment" by the US diplomatic staff? But, quoting a man who is roughly quoting another man claiming to have "heard" stuff from Congress insiders? Cliniic (talk) 20:37, 20 June 2013 (UTC)
This is now WP:Synthesis and WP:OR research on your part.
This is the entire ref:[quote] Rahul a 'lacklustre leader'
Mulford had in March 2005 sent a cable titled, "Rahul Gandhi: Lacklustre Leader".
"Naqvi stated that the Gandhi family always preferred that Rahul's sister, Priyanka, enter politics, as she was judged to be more intelligent and savvy. Arguing that Sonia Gandhi has a protective feeling regarding her son, Naqvi speculated that Sonia apparently went against her better judgment and selected Rahul over his sister as heir apparent," the cable reads.
"The common impression among Congress insiders is that Rahul is far below even his father in political ability. He (Naqvi) claims that the word among Congress insiders, including those in the coterie surrounding Sonia Gandhi, is that Rahul will never become Prime Minister for several reasons."
However, in its own assessment, the embassy says: "We, unlike Naqvi, are not yet prepared to write him off just yet."[/quote]
You are choosing tidbits hear and there to support assertions. Cliniic (talk) 20:47, 20 June 2013 (UTC)
The wikileaks documens dont support the claim that the conversion was a report from a conversation the US ambassador Mulford had in India. See here, http://www.thehindu.com/news/the-india-cables/the-cables/article1556773.ece This is from Naqvi's conversation with some staff named Poloff. The full text "In a March 1 conversation with Poloff, influential columnist and political insider Saeed Naqvi commented on Rahul Gandhi at some length. Naqvi prefaced his remarks by noting that he was a personal friend of Rahul's father, Rajiv Gandhi, and a well-wisher of the Gandhi family. Naqvi was initially delighted when Sonia Gandhi projected Rahul as the heir apparent, but has since lost faith. He claims that the word among Congress insiders, including those in the coterie surrounding Sonia Gandhi, is that Rahul will never become Prime Minister for several reasons. Saying that he ""refused to indulge in gossip,"" Naqvi claimed that it is increasingly common knowledge that Rahul suffers from ""personality problems"" of an emotional or psychological nature that are severe enough to prevent him from functioning as PM. "
Even the embassy text has quote marks to the part where Naqvi he "refuses to indulge in gossip. First the text stated it was the assesment of the US ambassador first, then it has been edited to look like a report from a US ambassador. What is going on? Cliniic (talk) 20:55, 20 June 2013 (UTC)
If multiple reliable sources cover remarks of a beggar then it has importance. They decided its importance. Only because you think that it is not important doesn't make it worthless. By this or that reason you are trying to remove criticism. neo (talk) 05:37, 21 June 2013 (UTC)
@Clinic: US envoy in India considered that assessment of Rahul Gandhi by Naqvi deserve importance. That is why he sent cable to US Government. Not only that, multiple reputed media houses also thought it is important to report this cable to 1.2 billion people of India. And finding refs does not constitue OR. Also I have mentioned exactly what is reported in media. If they chose to mention just certain part of cable then you can't blame me. Show them wikipedia policy, not to me. neo (talk) 07:03, 21 June 2013 (UTC)
"This applies whether the material is negative, positive, neutral, or just questionable, and whether it is in a biography or in some other article. Material should not be added to an article when the only sourcing is tabloid journalism." No matter if Naqvi is a political columnist. What he is doing here amounts to tabaloid journalism. Cliniic (talk) 10:04, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
Naqvi claims that he "refuses to indulge in gossip," but "that it is increasingly common knowledge" that Gandhi suffers from some sort of emotional trauma. How is it not gossip and libel? And common knowledge to whom? Congress insiders? Are they all hiding Gandhi's "problem" in some sort of big conspiracy? Cliniic (talk) 10:18, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
(due to edit box limit) @Clinic: (1) You left out following sentence from this policy you cited:
This policy extends that principle, adding that contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced should be removed immediately and without discussion.
If you think that India Today and Outlook (magazine) are tabloid news media, you can go to WP:RSN. (2) I have sourced my edits from India Today and Outlook. But you are quoting original cable text and asking me "hey! Naqvi said that he do not indulge in gossiping. But it looks gossiping!" Am I supposed comment or chat over things which are not in source at all? neo (talk) 12:16, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
I think we should go for an rfc since both of us are entrenched in our positions. Cliniic (talk) 12:56, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
In December 2010 during the United States diplomatic cables leak, WikiLeaks leaked a cable dated 3 August 2009, where the Prime Minister of India, Dr Manmohan Singh had hosted a lunch on 20 July 2009 for the then General Secretary of the AICC, Rahul Gandhi. One of the guests who was invited for the lunch was the then United States Ambassador to India, Timothy J. Roemer. In a "candid conversation" with Roemer, he said that he believes Hindu extremists pose a greater threat to his country than Muslim militants. Rahul Gandhi referred specifically to more-polarising figures in the Bharatiya Janata Party. Also responding to the ambassador's query about the activities in the region by the Islamist militant organisation Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT), Rahul Gandhi said there was evidence of some support for the group among certain elements in India's indigenous Muslim population.
This whole text is included in article on the basis of same single primary source. But you never had any problem on its inclusion. I don't have any problem with Rfc. neo (talk) 15:05, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
That text is not making contentious and libelous claims against named living persons. I don't see how it is related except also being part of the wikileaks cables. Anyway, let's go ahead with the rfc. Will you make the request or should I? Cliniic (talk) 15:41, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
Sorry, I have been away for a while now. Getting to the rfc right away Cliniic (talk) 08:24, 6 July 2013 (UTC)
Does the personality and image section violate the WP:BLP policies? There is a disagreement regarding the content of the section. The current revision reads like tabloid journalism verging on the libelous in context of claims that it is "increasingly common knowledge that Rahul suffers from ""personality problems"" of an emotional or psychological nature that are severe enough to prevent him from functioning as PM." Cliniic (talk) 08:44, 6 July 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for the reply. I will get to work right away unless anyone has more to add. Cliniic (talk) 17:03, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
Done. Cliniic (talk) 15:46, 10 August 2013 (UTC)
![]() | This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or|ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
His/Her I don't know, According to profile, I would like to say "His Mother Sonia Gandhi did not work as Prime minister" 182.73.235.1 (talk) 12:35, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
Rajiv Gandhi and his family including Sonia Gandhi and Rahul Gandhi received money from KGB.[23][24][25] The payments were authorised by a resolution and endorsed by the USSR Council of Ministers, and had been coming since 1971.[24] In December 2001, Subramanian Swamy filed a writ petition in the Delhi High Court, acting on which the court ordered CBI to ascertain the truth of the allegations in May 2002. After two years, the CBI told the Court that Russia would not entertain such queries without a registered FIR.[24]
Since the Rajiv Gandhi (former PM of India) page mentions the above, this should be mentioned on Rahul's page too. This guy is being projected as the next Prime Minister of India. A fact like this cannot be suppressed, considering that the Russians confirm that KGB paid Rajiv Gandhi, Sonia Gandhi and Rahul Gandhi. --70.76.85.36 (talk) 09:56, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
News Clipping from Times of India 27.6.92 and Hindu dt. July 4, 92 regarding receipt of payment by Rajiv Gandhi & family from KGB.
Wats wrong with this in intro.
Rahul Gandhi has been nick-named as PappubyNetizens of india.[1]
--Cowboy forth worth (talk) 20:09, 24 August 2013 (UTC)
India time and economics times are not poorly sourced, there many references from these news sites all over WP--Cowboy forth worth (talk) 20:17, 24 August 2013 (UTC)
There are plenty of more sources if these two does not satisfy, here are some more [2][3][4] This is an identification for RG as given by Netizens. --Cowboy forth worth (talk) 20:23, 24 August 2013 (UTC)
Look at the line ".... Gandhi is a Brahmin[1][2] and has served as a General Secretary in the All India Congress Committee and represents Amethi as its Member of Parliament (MP)......." in the lead section.
Mention of cast of Rahul does not fit the rest of the facts in the sentence. Cast of a person should belong to the "Personal Life". So I moved it there.
''Prabhakar Sarma Neog'' (talk) 20:37, 2 October 2013 (UTC)
"Gandhi is a Brahmin by caste" :- I have removed this well sourced statement, for following reasons, which other editors kindly discuss:
However, "Gandhi is a Brahmin by caste" would surely need to be rephrased. Maybe as: "Gandhi considers himself a Brahmin / Gandhi sees himself as a Brahmin". "Gandhi believes in Brahminism" can also be a choice, as You say that his father and mother are Parsi and Christian, respectively. Our last choice could be: "Gandhi once said, I am a Brahmin and general secretary in the party."[9] Please comment on the suggestions, which one should it be ?! ← Abstruce 11:19, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
Irevise My comments and suggest that we should add it in a way describing them as comments from Rahul Gandhi as the general secretary of the Ruling party which drew controversy from the Opposition party. And, I suggest We add a new sub-Section titled "Controversies" in the Political career. I don't see any policy violation with that, and that would be in accordance with WP:NPOV.
Anyways, Rayabhari, did You found any news report (if any) in which Rahul Gandi have himself issued a clarification (if any) for the comments, in response to the critical criticism by Bharatiya Janata Party. Thanks !! ← Abstruce 14:09, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
May be: 'Gandhi once said "I am a Brahmin" during the Indian National Congress' assessment meeting, held following the loss in the 2012 legislative assembly elections of Uttar Pradesh, which the Press Trust of India saw as an attempt to appease a section of society, and this comment was severely critisised by the Bharatiya Janata Party also.' ← Abstruce 10:41, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
If some academic work were to refer to the issue then the emphasis might be justified but unless/until then it seems trivial. - Sitush (talk) 11:14, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
Also, since BJP is the leading party in National Democratic Alliance (India) (opposition coalition of United Progressive Alliance (India)), it holds notability, and it has been the subject of significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources.
And, since the issue of caste is involved here, which is a significant subject of political debates in India, this criticism by BJP is not just like any another case of criticism but a very notable one. Dear Friend, if You are still against the inclusion of the sentence (whether rephrased or not), We may have to go for a WP:Dispute resolution ?! Would You like to suggest a rephrasing to the sentence suggested in My last post ?! Sincerely, ← Abstruce 19:07, 26 October 2013 (UTC)
Abstruce asked me to comment here. First, an easy point--we can't include the point about the "wooing the upper castes" because the article does not say that that is what Gandhi's statement was intended to do. That "wooing claim" is placed "near" the Gandhi statement, but it's not directly commenting on it. As such, connecting them together would be original research. The harder point is whether to include any of this at all. We certainly can't make OR analyses about who his parents were and thus deduce that he was or wasn't in a certain caste; we could quote a reliable source that does that, but we can't do it ourselves. But if we want to include the statement at face value, the question is whether either it or the BJP response is WP:DUE. I'm inclined to say that, for certain, the BJP response is not (as someone else pointed out, that's just regular political banter). As for the original statement, I'm not sure, though I'd personally lean against. I'm not familiar enough with the subject to know if the statement plays an important part in his overall life story; has he done work directly related to caste? Is he famous for affirming or denying caste relationships? If it's not really important to his life, and if no sources are discussing his caste outside of this one comment, then it seems like something we should probably avoid including. Qwyrxian (talk) 15:04, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
It's like.... We did not want to add that Gandhi is a Brahmin, but have a controversy section and describe Gandhi's comments as controversial comments attracting criticism. We do not want to let the readers of this WP Article to have a belief/confirmation that WP is convinced that Gandhi is a Brahmin, but adding it like that Gandhi said some comments which attracted criticism from political opposition. I hope I was able to explain ?! Sincerely, ← Abstruce 19:36, 9 November 2013 (UTC)I revise My comments and suggest that we should add it in a way describing them as comments from Rahul Gandhi as the general secretary of the Ruling party which drew controversy from the Opposition party. And, I suggest We add a new sub-Section titled "Controversies" in the Political career. I don't see any policy violation with that, and that would be in accordance with WP:NPOV.
And, since the issue of caste is involved here, which is a significant subject of political debates in India, this criticism by BJP is not just like any another case of criticism but a very notable one. But, I think You are also saying that the magnitude of this controversy is not notable, and this consensus also seems have gone parallel to Your point of view, and You can be sure that I do respect WP:CONSENSUS, but this one has actually surprised Me ([18] [19] [20]). I think, We should have initiated the discussion in a better way (Wikipedia:Requests for comment) ← Abstruce 16:47, 10 November 2013 (UTC)
Dr. Swarupananda Patra (President of Odisha Minority Forum) had reacted strongly Gandhi's remarks. A sentence from the article: "Gandhi after extensive stock-taking of the Congress party's electoral loss in Uttar Pradesh has probably felt that minorities are not a trustworthy community for votes, which is completely untrue." Patra even used the words "minority shunning attitude" for the INC. ← Abstruce 06:40, 12 November 2013 (UTC)
I have reverted this as Wikipedia is not the news. Politicians are always saying something that is taken as controversial to someone. Time is needed to tell if the incident is biographically significant. --NeilN talk to me 18:36, 31 October 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for semi-protecting this page. Lots of vandalism is happening on this page. People should understand that it's encyclopedia not some news website or social networking site or blog. User needs to understand. Thanks --25 CENTS VICTORIOUS ☣ 15:13, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
![]() | This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or|ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
I still think there should be some mention of this, even if it is small because a court case is opened against Rahul. It is an actual legal case in which Rahul is indicted. It has gone beyond simple allegations to the judicial system. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.14.184.132 (talk) 16:12, 1 February 2014 (UTC)
"Metropolitan Magistrate Gomti Minocha of Patiala House Courts, New Delhi took cognisance of the complaint on Friday and directed the Janata Party supremo to testify in the case on Jul 9, 2013. The complaint was first heard by link magistrate Ambika Singh on Feb 14." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.14.184.132 (talk) 16:29, 1 February 2014 (UTC)
![]() | This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or|ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Could you add his relgious information, is he a athiest,hindu,buddhist,catholic?
Noticed that he is the only indian politian without any information on relgion,if he is a athiest please write itin this page82.38.160.153 (talk) 06:55, 2 February 2014 (UTC)ved
Are any of these points noteworthy for the article? --Calypsomusic (talk) 18:39, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
I reverted the addition of Sharad Pawar's comments under WP:NOTNEWS. MS, you might believe they are significant because they come from "the third most important person," but the source you have given portrays it as news. You need something better to establish notability over and above every statement that is printed in the paper. Also, now that it's been reverted, you need to discuss it here first. Vanamonde93 (talk) 20:09, 30 April 2014 (UTC)
To understand people's difficulties easily he started open manifesto. This helps people to express their problems and difficulties. Also this helps the government to make their policies worthy. He got good response for this program all over the country. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Prajakt Rane (talk • contribs) 16:56, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
it looks like anything negative about Rahul Gandhi is deleted and the page is lacking neutrality and maintained by those who appear to be close to Rahul Gandhi. During the LokSabha elections, Rahul Gandhi simply managed to be heard in the media because of his funny speeches and my section was deleted. I propose including this section to the wikipedia section of Rahul Gandhi
Several speeches delivered by Rahul Gandhi during the 2014 LokSabha elections turned out to be funny because of incorrect usage of language and it did not reflect a coherent thought process. Some of them evoked funny responses from the social media[5]. [6]. Below, we mention the most popular ones:
1. "In Gujarat, two out of one (not one out of two) person is malnourished"[7]. In response to this funny speech, Narendra Modi, Rahul Gandhi's rival in the 2014 LokSabha elections remarked "The way Rahul Baba is making statements with a dash of comedy in them, I think the TV show of Kapil Sharma may soon have to shut shop". [8].
2. When asked a question by Arnab Goswami on whether he thinks if Narendra Modi was responsible for Gujarat riots, Rahul Gandhi replied "Women should be in power" which was totally out of context[8].
3. "This morning, I got up at night" [7].
But then, some Indians (and often those who edit Wikipedia articles in particular) tend to be touchy about making fun about gaffes by their politicians (however idiotic they might be) unlike Bushisms and Clintonisms which Americans do not mind having chuckles due to (though one would need to check where on wikipedia the two have been tabulated)
This is a hagiography not a biography. It looks like anything controversial about him has been deleted from the article and there is no criticism at all of a major public figure. Is it possible for someone to be a leading politician and there is absolutely no controversies or criticisms? Plenty abound of course, but it looks like they have all been deleted. The talk page has listed a whole section of deletions with referenced sources. Unless some of these are reinstated the NPOV tag should remain.
![]() | This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or|ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Puck42 (talk) 11:15, 18 March 2014 (UTC)
This is hardly something new; every prominent politician does things that appear in the newspaper. Therefore, a single news item is not sufficient to show notability in such an article. It needs sustained coverage in the media, or else coverage in academia, something to show it is more than news. Vanamonde93 (talk) 17:46, 30 May 2014 (UTC)
![]() | This edit requesttoRahul Gandhi has been answered. Set the |answered= or|ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please change Nehru-Gandhi family reference to Nehru only as they are not the descendants of Gandhi Vappana (talk) 19:57, 6 June 2014 (UTC)
Throughout the article, Rahul Gandhi is being referred to by the name "Gandhi", right from the first paragraph, this is incorrect and out of context too. Either use Rahul Gandhi or Rahul, because Gandhi in no way can refer solely to he him. Wiki for a link that distinguishes first and family names. If someone is kind enough, kindly state one valid reason. Check other personality articles and either change all of them or do it here. 122.178.205.102 (talk) 10:04, 7 June 2014 (UTC)clark
This article seems to be copied straight from some Congress mouhtpiece describing its leader. No mention of his goof ups during speeches[9], his controversial statement regarding inclusion of some Congress leaders in Sikh massacre'84[10], National Herald case, where even court has issued hima summon[11],[12] , pathetic condition of his Loksabha constituency Amethi[13], his entering inside poll booths during Loksabha elections [14]. Everything just seems to vanish as this person is Rahul Gandhi and not some 'right gringe', who otherwise would have a negative point after every two sentences. 2001:4490:D660:0:0:0:0:B20 (talk) 10:31, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
![]() | This edit requesttoRahul Gandhi has been answered. Set the |answered= or|ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
The external links on this page needs to be modified. The link that is listed as his official website opens a random broken webpage. This is clearly not the website of the leader of the largest and oldest political party in India hence we should delete that reference. In addition as a reliable reference to a website we can add the link to the Congress party website where his profile if given. I have provided the link also (refer: http://inc.in/LeaderProfile.aspx?Id=997&&Org=Profile). We can also add the profile link to the Government of India's website for Members of Parliament (refer: http://164.100.47.132/LssNew/Members/Biography.aspx?mpsno=4074). This needs to be corrected.
Shashank.S.Shukla (talk) 23:31, 5 October 2014 (UTC)
![]() | This edit requesttoRahul Gandhi has been answered. Set the |answered= or|ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Jeetpalyadavg (talk) 13:19, 2 January 2015 (UTC) i edit rahul gandhi account
![]() | This edit requesttoRahul Gandhi has been answered. Set the |answered= or|ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
1.38.19.245 (talk) 05:41, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
![]() | This edit requesttoRahul Gandhi has been answered. Set the |answered= or|ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
93.169.26.32 (talk) 10:45, 16 January 2015 (UTC) Mr. Rahuji BJP Ambassador Shashi Tharoorine partyil Ninnum Purathaku, Congressine Rakshiku, allenkil Congress Janagalal Ottapedum
![]() | This edit requesttoRahul Gandhi has been answered. Set the |answered= or|ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
"Rahul portrayed himself as a uniter of the country" = "Gandhi portrayed himself as a unifier of the country"
66.74.176.59 (talk) 01:15, 17 February 2015 (UTC)
"Uniter" seems to be attached predominately to slogans/campaigns. If the text is a quote then it should be uniter but if it is what is written about the person then it should be unifier. Also, it is more difficult and time consuming to determine of "unite'r'" (23,000 hits; unifier, 35,000 hits) is a typo of "unite'd'".66.74.176.59 (talk) 07:44, 17 February 2015 (UTC)
![]() | This edit requesttoRahul Gandhi has been answered. Set the |answered= or|ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Rahul Gandhi never graduated from Harvard University, as he dropped out after 1st semester. So how can Harvard University be listed under Alma Mater?
Thames79 (talk) 11:39, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
![]() | This edit requesttoRahul Gandhi has been answered. Set the |answered= or|ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Also known in media as pappu BJP leader Subramanian Swamy on 16-11-2015 alleged that Congress Vice President Rahul Gandhi has claimed himself to be a British national before the authorities there and has demanded that he be stripped of Indian citizenship and Lok Sabha membership. Subramanian Swamy. PTI Subramanian Swamy. PTI Circulating copies of documents extracted purportedly from the company law authorities of Britain, he told a press conference here that Gandhi had declared himself as a British national in the documents related to a now-dissolved. he said in a letter to Prime Minister Narendra Modi, is a violation of constitutional provisions and demanded that action be taken against Gandhi.
Gogo-crime-master (talk) 19:18, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
![]() | This edit requesttoRahul Gandhi has been answered. Set the |answered= or|ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
122.160.17.103 (talk) 11:53, 8 September 2015 (UTC)