Talk:Great Soul: Mahatma Gandhi and His Struggle with India

Correct title includes lowercase "And"
Some sources such as the WSJ article incorrectly report the book's title with an uppercase "And". It is correctly listed in Google Books and Amazon with the lowercase "and". twilsonb (talk) 07:18, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Move proposal
I suggest moving this article to Great Soul: Mahatma Gandhi and his struggle with India (book).

The article title should not follow tricks of design on the cover of the book, though if there seems to be authorial intention for capitals I think that would be a different thing. See for example Good-bye to All That. Articles, conjunctions and prepositions are usually lower case, and I think a subtitle is better lower case throughout, so I'd use 'struggle' here, though I'd represent Mein Kampf as My Struggle. I haven't yet found proper guidance on WP for what to do; the best I've found is here, and the section below, saying caps shouldn't be used for emphasis. The World Cat, much used on WP, keeps all but proper nouns lower case, e.g. here. Spicemix (talk) 08:28, 28 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Oppose - standard capitalization practices for American books dictate that all of the words in this title except "and" should be capitalized. Harley Hudson (talk) 18:26, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Andrew Roberts as a reviewer
Hello, I've made rather substantial editorial changes to this article with respect to British historian Andrew Roberts. Roberts has made controversial statements, which he would later clarify, that, according to British journalist Johann Hari, effectively serve to rationalize the Amritsar Massacre. Whatever may be the "substance" of such a characterization, the deeply cynical characterization Roberts makes of Mahatma Gandhi included and quoted in this article, warrants the citation I've added to the article which brings to the attention of readers unfamiliar with Roberts his own self-confessed "extremely right-wing" political orientation. These revisions, it is hoped, will in no way alter the neutrality of this article. I hope some consensus can be reached in this respect. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.171.24.127 (talk) 22:01, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

== The previous comment on substantial editorial changes to the article re: Andrew Roberts is sourced only to something by "Johann Hari": an unreliable source who admits making up his interviews: http://www.economist.com/blogs/bagehot/2011/09/unethical-journalism — Preceding unsigned comment added by 101.174.12.53 (talk) 22:05, 11 December 2015 (UTC)