Talk:Subramanian Swamy

User:Akhiljaxxn deletions

Akhiljaxxn has deleted these quotes

• This family is totally anti-national as far as India is concerned. (but) I must tell you this much: Rajiv Gandhi and I were very, very close friends, extremely close friends. In Parliament when Indira Gandhi was the Prime Minister, he used to sit next to me along the aisle. After he lost office, he and I used to meet at 2 am everyday for two hours. So I know almost everything about the circumstances in which he got married, and what the relationship between the two (Rajiv and Sonia) was... I thought well of Rajiv. He was a great patriot, thought he would make a great Prime Minister if he came back for the second time around, and I supported him. Openly, on the floor of Parliament, (I said) he didn’t get the Bofors money, (Ottavio) Quattrocchi (Sonia’s close friend) got it, and these were proved quite later, too late.
• I cannot say I am anti-Nehru-Gandhi family per se, but I certainly was, from Day 1 (anti-Nehru). Even when I was a school student, I took an intuitive dislike for Jawaharlal Nehru. There was no explanation. I just had it! The dislike was continuous as I learnt more and more about him.... Therefore, to say that I have a pathological hatred for the Nehru-Gandhi family is not correct. Yes, I never liked Nehru, but that was pure policy. And, of course, I later on came to know that he gave up the offer of the UN Security Council, and then what he did on Kashmir, and the files I saw when I was one of the senior-most ministers in the Chandrashekhar government. All this only bolstered that view.
  • Subramanian Swamy: This Nehru-Gandhi Family Is Totally Anti-National. Surajit Dasgupta- Dec 13, 2015, [1]

As was explained to Akhiljaxxn, many times already, it is not blacklisted on this website (wikiquote), otherwise it would not have been possible to post the link. The quote is from an interview with Subramanian Swamy and as such are very relevant to this article.

An interview with Subramanian Swamy at a major magazine is a reliable source. If you can show that this interview is not reliable then it would be a missattribution and could still be quoted. If it is a misattribution, the quote should not be removed, instead being moved to a "Misattributed" section, where explanation of the misattribution can be made in a subbullet. --დამოკიდებულება (talk) 10:02, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

There has been no reply from Akhiljaxxn for 5 days. While Akhiljaxxn has been claiming that quotes on Swamy is biased, Akhiljaxxn has been writing that Modi is a fascist Nazi. When he such "spreads their hatred" for the Indian Prime Minister, he cannot complain about Swamy quotes.

The quote are Subramanian Swamy own words from an interview with Subramanian Swamy himself, as such they are very pertinent quotes on this page. What matters is that the quotes are from the subject Subramanian Swamy and have been reported as such. We are reporting quotes that have been published elsewhere. Wikiquote is less concerned where these quotes were reported, only that they were reported, as wikiquote is about quotes not about how facts. But if there is a misattributionn, the it must be moved to the misattributionn sectionn. There is no consensus to remove the quote, also not from admins. But on admin has said that quotes from interviews or news articles should be placed on pages for their subject.

Where there is a dispute, and there is no consensus , the status quo ante (the state before the edit war) must be restored. The edit war started with Akhiljaxxn's removal. That is how a consensus-based process works. --დამოკიდებულება (talk) 09:20, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

Removal suggestion

In 2015-2017 section, there is quote with "Foreword by Subramanian Swamy in Atri, N., & Sagar, M. A. (2017). Brainwashed republic."

Someone has put the whole page of Foreword in this. I don't think it is required. Dshrm (talk) 18:38, 8 January 2022 (UTC)

It was an extract, not the whole foreword, and is about the subject's opinion on a topic of high revelance. I'm ok with trimming the quote a bit as was done.

Quotes that are removed should be moved or copied to the talkpage:

• The Indian State instead of the encouraging objective rendering of the history have encouraged few vested interests to hijack the historical narrative. This has resulted in present situation where the history, which is taught in our schools and colleges, is the British imperialist-sponsored one, with the intent to destroy our history...
  An accurate history should not only record the periods of glory but the moments of degeneration, of the missed opportunities, and of the failure to forge national unity at crucial junctures in time. It should draw lessons for the future generations from costly errors in the past...
  It is disturbing to read the amount of intellectual investment that has been made by the forces that are inimical to our country. These forces have penetrated into our democratic institutions to hollow them from inside...
  The present work brings to fore the impunity with which NCERT was compromised during UPA regime. During both the terms of the ousted alliance, history has been totally rewritten to serve the purpose of divisive forces, which are trying to uproot Hindu ethos of the country. Young and impressionable minds of the children are being hijacked to be more prone to accept the narrative of breaking India forces. It is high time the history text books are rewritten with clear directions to the historians that the narrative of our country should be depicted with honesty. Our nation’s past is full of cultural, social, economic and scientific achievements. The current history text books not only undermine the achievements but instead burden the country’s children with inferiority complex and hatred for each other. The social dissonance that these books create should be rectified.