Talk:K. Kamaraj

Biography B‑class

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles B This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

India: Politics Unassessed

This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia articles ??? This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by the Indian politics workgroup.

There's a great deal of unsubstantiated rumour on this page. If nobody cites any sources for the CR or Indira stories, I will have to remove them. Ditto the Shastri nonsense. Hornplease 07:36, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As threatened, so done. Hornplease

Kindly put back the changes that you removed in this article. If you wish to engage in a civilized discussion, we can meet and verify, one way or another. Incidentally, I live in the NE too.

Regards HornStopPlease20:30, 29 June 2006 (UTC)—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 192.233.129.250 (talk • contribs) 20:30, 29 Jun 2006 (UTC)

I am afraid I must ask you for references for your statements, otherwise, as I suggested above, they have no place in the article. Hornplease 22:59, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

=> Be reasonable. The issue in question is whether the comments you removed has any place in the article. Put it back and we can go discuss each item individually.

HornStopPlease. 16:55, 30 June 2006 (UTC)~

The issue is whether (a) any given comments have a place in the article and (b) if you can cite your sources. See WP:CITE, which is policy that must be followed. Hornplease 17:08, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well if you insist on Rules... Therefore, unless you provide evidence, I will remove any/all comments about his education, since Kamaraj was essentially illiterate. The comments about the progress made in the state undership, will also go, since Tamilnadu essentially stagnated under Congress rule. The claim that he was humble etc, will also be deleted. Other miscellaneous coments about the caste etc will also go.

And have a nice day!

17:45, 30 June 2006 (UTC)~~

Please note: several editors have collaborated to create the material you are removing wholesale. If you have a different perspective, in the absence of sources the accepted thing to do is to indicate that opinions differ. Unless your edits reflect an attempt to introduce new, cited, material or are objectively a good faith effort to make the article more neutral, they will be reverted. Please note that I have no position on Kamaraj, and am completely unbiased about the points you are contesting. Hornplease 21:08, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

HornPlease, As you seem sincere in your beliefs and in your stand of unbiased neutrality put back the comments. We will try to go over the issues and resolve them. It would be best if the comments and views of others are not regarded as 'nonsense' or 'rubbish' simply because they are different.

HornStopPlease

Can some one write about Kamaraj's role in syndicate? --Vyzasatya 15:14, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please note that the Indian Naming conventions are different. The son's name is written first and then only the father's name (or surname) is written. Hence the Correct name will be Kamaraj Kumaraswami and not the opposite. In fact the correct way would be K.Kamaraj only.

Initials in Tamil naming conventions mean the father's name and not the son's name. For example brothers Robert Smith and William Smith are written as R.Smith and W.Smith. But brothers Lavan and Kusan are written as R.Lavan and R.Kusan in Tamil Nadu. Tell me how this should be expanded so as to give the westerners a correct interpretation. WIll you write it as Raman Lavan or Lavan Raman. WHat will be the impression that will be generated in the global community when it is written as Raman Lavan. Who will be considered as the father and who will be considered as the son. If you are going to name them as per western conventions it is K.Raman and L.Raman which is never done in Tamil Nadu. Similarly the smith brothers will be called as S.Robert and S.Williams. I can't comment upon this system, but please expand R.Lavan as Lavan Raman and not Raman Lavan

For communities using double initial (the first is the name of the Town/village and the second the name of the father) it is appropriate for the naming conventions used for Thiru.Vi.Ka. That is called as vilasam. Hope you all have heard about அய்யம்பேட்டை அறிவுடைநம்பி கலியம்பெரும்மாள் இந்திரன் and அய்யம்பேட்டை அறிவுடைநம்பி கலியம்பெரும்மாள் சந்திரன்

However the use of initial is different in South Indian context and western context. Rajaji, Viswanathan Anand, Dr.A.Ramadoss, Palaniappan Chidambaram are classic examples of how North Indian Media and Western Media have misintepreted the South Indian naming conventions. The glaring example of wrong naming conventions is referring Anbumani as Dr.Ramadoss. Ramadoss is his father's name and not surname. (If it is a surname, Dr.Ramadoss can refer to either the father and son, but since it is his father's name, the english media are committing a blunder when they say that Dr.Ramadoss is the Health Minister) Just because such errors have been committed by those who are not well versed in Tamil Naming Conventions, it does not mean that it should be continued. (Inspite of the fact that the bharat ratna citation - In Hindi - probably written by some one without any knowledge about Tamil Naming Convention - gives his name in the wrong way)

Yet another example of how Western Media misinterpret Indian Naming conventions and use the father's name instead of the subject's name can be seen from the BBC Report which says Soundararajan is refusing to comment. (Common Guys... Soundarajan is her father) But atleast BCC mentioned S.Shanthi as Santhi Soundararajan, and not Soundarajan Santhi !!!!

If some one cannot still understand the naming conventions, please ask yourself as to how you will expand J.Jayalalithaa ??

For more details please see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:M._Karunanidhi  Doctor Bruno  20:18, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]