Talk:Hum Dekhenge

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Hum Dekhenge. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130317050254/http://himalmag.com/component/content/article/3566-listening-to-faiz-is-a-subversive-act.html to http://www.himalmag.com/component/content/article/3566-listening-to-faiz-is-a-subversive-act.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 11:53, 8 November 2017 (UTC)

Please
see WP:BURDEN, WP:CIRCULAR and WP:RS. Stop restoring un-sourced and ill-sourced content. &#x222F; WBG converse 14:45, 26 December 2019 (UTC)

MRDA
does not apply since the defending body ain't the one being accused of, at the first place and that the campus is polarized along the issue, the student media body does not automatically gain anything by adopting an anti-faculty stance. Also, the defense has been well covered across a variety of reliable sources, in intricate details. &#x222F; WBG converse 09:50, 2 January 2020 (UTC)
 * , fair points but what about this interview in which head clearly denies if he’ll examine poem is “anti-hindu”? This should be covered. — Harshil want to talk? 10:29, 2 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Swarajya (as usual) doing dubious journalism--relaying Twitter feeds, while staying clear of making any bright-line observation. This quote applies.
 * Manindra was being evasive for a long while, taking much umbrage with the headline but was finally compelled into admitting (by another Twitter user) that the committee will indeed probe all complaints, including about the poem. Now that we know about Vashi's complaint about the poem, what does that tell you? Over here, he is more clear and explicitly mentions about probing whether the poem hurt religious sentiments. &#x222F; WBG converse 12:28, 2 January 2020 (UTC)
 * , makes sense.  Harshil want to talk? 18:14, 2 January 2020 (UTC)
 * , now you should cover that committee will not decide whether poem is anti-Hindu or not. Just see this report by The Hindu.  Harshil want to talk? 06:26, 3 January 2020 (UTC)
 * I will wait until there's more transparency around the locus. Just a few days back, he had told LiveMint about how insensitive it was to read Faiz's poetry and how all accusations of inciting communal disharmony must be probed . &#x222F; WBG converse 06:46, 3 January 2020 (UTC)
 * , noted. Till then, I expect that we should remove details about checking from here as it is completely doubtful. Director has denies to do so in new committee. This is purely misleading for encyclopaedia.  Harshil want to talk? 08:55, 3 January 2020 (UTC)
 * , noted. Till then, I expect that we should remove details about checking from here as it is completely doubtful. Director has denies to do so in new committee. This is purely misleading for encyclopaedia.  <i style="color:orange; font-family:Brush Script MT">Harshil </i>want to talk? 08:55, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

Reverts

 * An INSPIRE Faculty is neither a PhD fellow nor a professor (and changing from a sourced wrong to an un-sourced wrong is weird) and I have been seeking ways to resolve the dispute w/o using niche jargon.
 * Under Pakistan IP laws, Faiz has his copyright at-least until 2035 (1985 + 50 y). Whilst copyright is seldom respected in case of acclaimed poets, that's not a reason for us to violate relevant laws; a news-piece over The Hindu has specifically covered the grievances of Faiz's heirs around this locus. The entire poem along with all existing translations and transliterations thereof are copyrighted and hence might not be used over this article.
 * might have missed the conversation bbetween me and Harshil169 in the above section.
 * might not be aware that the figure 50,000 is an urban legend, as is the hallowed part about wearing a black saree, with an intention to defy a ban. See this and this. &#x222F; <b style="color:#070">WBG</b> converse 06:13, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

I accept that the 50000 figure may be an urban legend but Iqbal Bano did turn up in an saree. Whether this was done with an intention to defy the ban or not is irrelevant, it did defy the ban. I think this is an important detail. And I'm failing to understand how one, while wearing an attire that is banned, did not intend to defy the ban. Obviously she knew the saree was banned and still wore it. MassDestroyer (talk) 06:29, 3 January 2020 (UTC)
 * WBG, noted. Thanks. DTM (talk) 07:48, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 5 January 2020
== Meaning and Interpretation ==

The title of the song "Hum Dekhenge" or "We will see is a promise. The promise of the poem is a promise that we will see a day where "mountains of injustice are "blown away like cotton." The poem goes on to describe that day, where the land rumbles like a heartbeat under the feet of the oppressed and lightning crackles over the heads of those in power. The poem's beginning deals with conventional themes such as injustice and oppression, then gives way to more overtly religious symbolism. Faiz writes that the idols will be lifted from the Kaaba - the Kaaba being the holiest site in Islam, located in Mecca. The poem goes on to describe a revolutionary inversion of power, where the pure hearted who were outlawed, or cast out, will be honoured and "seated on cushions." The crowns of those in power) will be thrown up in the air (alluding to a celebration) and their thrones will be cast low. The final stanza of the poem is the most religious in tone, declaring that the only name (essentially on people's lips) will that be of Allah and a great revolutionary cry of "I am Truth" will go up and people of faith will rule again. Faiz's description of the idols being lifted from the Kaaba echoes the coming of Muhammad and Islam, where Muhammad said to have personally destroyed all the idols in the Kaaba, returning it to the worship of the monotheism of Abraham and the prophets before him, In Islam the prophethood of Muhammad signals the end of the age of "jahiliyyah" or "barbarism," a period considered by Muslims to be one marked by darkness, brutality, injustice and ignorance.

Faiz's imagery draws from the rich descriptions in the Qur'an describing Qiyamah, the final Day of Reckoning (or Judgement), when, among other things, even seemingly insurmountable icons of intimidating strength such as mountains will vaporize and be exposed as impermanent and insignificant before Divine Justice. The day of revolution may represent a critical commentary on the nature of Zia ul Haq's regime. The poem ends on the promise of the day when people of faith rule, suggesting that people of faith are not currently ruling but idolatry rule. Faiz is, in effect, calling Zia ul Haq, a man who proudly rules in the name of Islam, a non-Muslim, and an idolator - a worshipper of power and not Allah. In Islam, the greatest sin that one can commit is to make associations with Allah (this interpretation of Hallaj's statement that resulted in his execution), and idol worship falls into this greatest of sins. From an Islamic point of view, there can be no greater judgment or insult to a ruler. The poem could therefore be considered a call to the faithful to overthrow Zia for this gravest of sins. Mukundmittal (talk) 06:46, 5 January 2020 (UTC)


 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Majavah (t/c) 10:59, 5 January 2020 (UTC)

Revdelete request
You mean a poem by Faiz Ahmad Faiz is subject to such strict copyrights that it cannot appear on Wikipedia? I find that hard to believe. El_C 16:52, 15 January 2020 (UTC)
 * , FYI, the song has been sung by many many artists and many versions released. Take a look here 6 renditions. IMHO we should have a lenient approach. What was the ask here ?  D Big X ray ᗙ  17:01, 15 January 2020 (UTC)
 * To revdelete all revisions in the article. El_C 17:08, 15 January 2020 (UTC)
 * , I see that already some versions are hidden. I don't think we need more revdels. I am sure the 1K content Harshil removed can't be the "entire" poem. So I am not sure if hiding that part was necessary. User:Ymblanter Can you clarify what exactly that 1K content, hidden recently was ? I think our article needs some popular phrase/ stanzas of the poem as quotes to be able to discuss the poem in a useful way. RS discussing the poem are also using the quotes of the poem.  D Big X ray ᗙ  17:49, 15 January 2020 (UTC)
 * I can not now find what I have hidden but if I remember correctly this was a full text of a poem which I believe was beyond fair use. Reasonable length quotes should be fine.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:25, 15 January 2020 (UTC)
 * , Indeed. Thanks for the kind reply. I will also copy this thread to the article talk page for future reference.  D Big X ray ᗙ  19:06, 15 January 2020 (UTC)