Talk:Indira Gandhi/Archive 2

Removed Legacy section
Until this day, Indira's legacy as Prime Minister remains mixed. She was a strong, forceful personality and her reign was popular with some segments of India's population, especially the left. Her phrase "poverty is the greatest pollutor" in her remarkable speech at the first UN World Environmental Conference in Stockholm in 1972 set her (and India at the time) apart in attempting to harmonise environmental and developmental concerns in developing countries. In her early struggles to gain control of the Congress party, she transformed Indian politics by appealing directly to the people and subverting the established structure of Congress. The inadvertent result of this was fragmentation of the political hierarchy, resulting in the later rise of parties such as the BSP and the Samajwadi Party, allowing previously marginalised communities to gain political representation.

Some suggest that Indira, despite her heavy-handed tactics and mistakes, was vital for India's democracy and unity, citing the faith in democracy of hundreds of millions of people united only in poverty and ignorance depended upon iconic leaders and guardians. It is suggested that the only viable alternative for India was to trade democracy for a dictatorship in view of the national insecurity and economic deprivation that defined the 1960s for India. Unfortunately, Indira's hard-nosed, zero-tolerance approach left serious divisions in India.


 * ''I removed this section due to its complete lack of sourcing. As such it is original research.  Editors, please reinsert any portion of it that you can find a reputable source for.  Thanks.  -Kasreyn 03:34, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

Comments by Navdeep Singh
Indira Gandhi was a failure both professionally and personally. She demonstrated extremely poor leadership and stood for nothing more than subjugation and oppression of the weak and the poor. She used an infinite number of heavy handed actions to suppress any voices of dissent under the guise of democratic reform. She desecrated the holiest Sikh shrine- -the Golden temple- - by ordering military action when further dialogue or other military tactics(perhaps laying siege)could have resolved the issues at hand. She was single handedly responsibly for the genocide of thousands of Sikhs as well as anyone who opposed her policies and she will forever go down in history as an incompetent and inept self serving politician whos lack of vision and foresight ultimately cost her her own life!

Navdeep Singh Randhawa navdesy@hotmail.com
 * The talk page isn't the appropriate place to push an agenda. Please note that all information in a Wikipedia article needs to present a neutral point of view.  Keep this in mind while editing.  Kasreyn 20:21, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

=> Kasreyn, though Navdeep's comments may sound harsh, they may not be far off the mark. The failure of leadership is shown by the splitting of the Congress in 1969. Her heavy handedness is shown by the appointment of leftist judges to the Supreme Court. Mr.Bhindranwale was not liked even in his own community. Many Sikh leaders and elders were weary of Bhindranwale - she caused a split in that community by openly backing him. In a sense, she got what she justly deserved. The tragedy is that on her death, many Sikhs died. THAT was pre-planned, because senior Congress members (e.g. Jadgish Tytler) were seen in the riot scenes.

There is another notorious case (the Nagarwala case) early on in her career, which rocked the nation. In all fairness, these should be included.


 * Neutrality should not mean filtering of unpleasant material.

HornStopPleaseHornStopPlease 20:21, 1 July 2006 (UTC)


 * I am wondering where Navdeep Singh Randhawa got the authority to judge Indira Gandhi to have "stood for nothing more than subjugation and oppression of the weak and the poor". I have no problem with including factual information about Prime Minister Gandhi's actions, but comments like those above seem to result from a personal grudge against Gandhi rather than factual research. If you have sources and are willing to neutralize your language, then this is certainly worthy of being included. 75.189.132.215 (talk) 23:42, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Green Revolution and "White Revolution"
The material regarding a so-called "White Revolution" in the section on the Green Revolution is misplaced. The Green Revolution was a major structural transformation of Indian agriculture that allowed India to transform itself from a net food importer to a producer of food surpluses and that drastically altered the rural class structure in favor of large-scale producers. In contrast, the "White Revolution" was a gimmicky program to increase the milk intake of school children. While the latter may have produced substantial increases in the health of India's children, it is not of comparable social significance to the Green Revolution.
 * If it did produce health increases, then that should be cited and included. Though as of now, I certainly dont think it merits inclusion. I apologise for reverting the removal of the entire paragraph. It was laziness, I should have reverted the removal and then edited away the milk thing myself. Hornplease 01:54, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Personal Life
The entire "personal life" section is susceptible to charges of bias and, indeed, outright falsehoods because it fails to cite any sources. I suggest that sources either be provided immediately or the entire section be removed.

Jkp1187 14:51, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

I fully agree with Jkp1187. Section contains very strong statements without ciations. It should be removed immediately or reliable citations should be provided.

pruthvi 16:37, 31 October 2006 (UTC)


 * I have removed the entire 'personal life' section, but copy it again here for reference. If anyone can provide good, supporting citations (i.e., not just someone's website somewhere,) please feel free to return part or all of this section:

==Personal life==

Indira Gandhi was now more emotionally isolated than ever. The instability of her childhood had prevented her from developing her own independent personal interests and lifestyle. It had been her sense of duty and pride in her father and family legacy that had brought her into politics, but she had never been given the space to develop as a person. Through the 1950s and 1960s, she had corresponded with Dorothy Norman, a New York-based journalist, who became a very close friend via correspondence. But apart from political associates, she had no personal friends. Her sons were 'studying in England' (neither obtained any formal degrees from any university). She grew ever more close to her younger son, Sanjay, who is accused by many historians of misusing his mother's emotional dependence.

Gandhi may have seen traits of Feroze in Sanjay and was ever-anxious to please him, as she perceived that Sanjay blamed her for his father's death. While Rajiv developed as an independent young man free from politics, Sanjay's reckless youth induced a need in his mother to take care of her son under all circumstances. The outcome was a political partnership that eventually resulted in abrogation of democracy, corruption and abuse of power on a previously unwitnessed scale. Rajiv Gandhi is believed to have said that he would never forgive his brother for what he had done to their mother at a time when she was isolated, depressed and humiliated after her defeat in the 1977 elections.

Jkp1187 13:25, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

Picture of Indira Gandhi
I think more appropriate picture for infobox would be the picture of her taken during later age (could be seen in most government offices). Current infobox picture can be put into early life section. pruthvi 22:39, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

The name above her picture is prefixed with Sareyaan di SAALI. This is NOT part of her name. SAALI is a Hindi word meaning wife's sister but is also used as a pejorative or abuse word. It seems like somebody has purposely changed her name. - Vedabit (talk) 14:55, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Soviet Union Alligience Under Ghandi
There isn't any section dealing with the Soviet/Indian nexus under Ghandi's tenure. A discussion of India as a Soviet-aligned State during this period should be created. - MSTCrow 05:10, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

without beards
"up to now most of the sikhs are living without beards." clarfication is needed. does this intend to say "even now," perhaps. or perhaps "until recently"? 219.110.247.233 00:38, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Spelling of Gandhi's name
Please don't change the spelling of Indira Gandhi's name - there is a well-known widely-accepted spelling of her name in English, and it does not include macrons or acute accents. Her name is Indira Priyadarshini Gandhi, and isn't up for us to decide if it should be respelled. --SameerKhan 06:18, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Agreed, even though some schools in both India and Pakistan also use "Indra." They say that this spelling does "true justice to the meaning (in Hindi) of her name." --bandishhh

Contradiction w/ Another Article
This article states that the Emergency lasted for 19 months. The Emergency article states that it lasted for 21 months. Anybody know which is the right time it lasted? Maybe I'm missing something in the articles, but if I am, it still is very confusing. Hadoren 18:13, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Extraordinary claims, no reference? POV?
The following paragraph is a POV, extraordinary claims have been made but no citation provided, neutrality is lacking: - ''Gandhi's later years were bedevilled with problems in Punjab. In September 1981, Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale, the leader of a extremistundefined separatistundefinedSikh religious group and his well-armedundefinedfollowers took up positions within the precincts of the Golden Temple, Sikhism's holiest shrine and conducted numerous violent operationsundefined from the safety of the shrine.[13] Gandhi ordered the Army, whose task force notably consisted of a large[ number of Sikh officers and soldiers and was led by Kuldeep Singh Brar, a Sikh himself, to engage Operation Blue Star to remove Bhindranwale and his followers on June 3, 1984. In the operation, hundreds of innocent Sikhs taken hostageundefined were killed in the resultant gunfire.''

Please explain and justify the use of: -
 * "extremist" word.
 * the use of link separatist, please provide direct quotes from the person alleged that he demanded Khalistan.
 * "well-armed" ...what does the contributor of these words want to say? well armed with what weapons? What is the definition of well armed according to the author? Who did this research and found them well armed?
 * use of phrase "conducted numerous violent operations from the safety of the shrine" is totally POV.
 * The line "In the operation, hundreds of innocent Sikhs taken hostage were killed in the resultant gunfire" is not only factually incorrect but also is part of propaganda. The contributor of these lines is trying to confuse the reader that there were hostages inside the Golden Temple. Please justify your claim. Remember "Extraordinary claims need extraordinary evidence" A. S. Aulakh Talk 07:38, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Alternative view
I'm moving these lines here to discuss:
 * An alternative theory of Prime Minister Gandhi's assassination suggests that the CIA provided support for Sikh extremists to weaken Mrs.Gandhi who had signed a friendship and cooperation treaty with the Soviet Union. She was known as being the most Pro-Soviet leader in East Asia.Mrs.Gandhi was interested in establishing a democratic socialist system in India which threatened the access of United States markets into India.Yajee, Sheel Bhadra. CIA Operations Against the Third World New Delhi: Criterion. Publications, 1985. Andrew and Mitrokhin, The World was going our way: The KGB and the Third World. Basic Books,2005.

The contributer is requested to provide the citations in wikipedia format (keeping in mind reliability of sources) and also provide clear indications to the pages in the above sources from which the above lines are being cited. Thanks! A. S. Aulakh Talk 19:23, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Confused about relationship to Mahatma Gandhi
I'm not clear if Indira Gandhi and Mahatma Gandhi were related. Did they come from the same family? Cousins? Uncle/Niece? Could somebody help me understand? --207.215.78.126 (talk) 05:56, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
 * No, she was not related to Mahatma Gandhi. Indira Gandhi was the daughter of Jawaharlal Nehru. A man named "Feroze Khan" wanted to marry Indira, but Nehru objected, since it was a inter-caste marriage. Mahatma Gandhi then adopted Feroze Khan, and had his name changed to "Feroze Gandhi". Feroze Gandhi then married Indira, and she took on that last name. I hope that clarifies things. Nishkid64 (talk) 06:52, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Nonsense. Relata refero (talk) 07:50, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Could you please explain why its nonsense? --Darth Borehd (talk) 05:32, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Because that's a politically motivated rumour that people shouldn't be repeating as fact on talkpages. Relata refero (talk) 06:04, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

why this part is not mentioned in any of wiki pages about Indira Gandhi,Feroz Gandhi or Jawaharlal Nehru ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Busypeople (talk • contribs) 06:25, 14 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Because its untrue. Relata refero (talk) 07:50, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
 * What is the truth then? --Darth Borehd (talk) 05:32, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Read the article. Relata refero (talk) 06:04, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Feroze Gandhi was not born "Feroze Khan." That was his real name. Indira Gandhi is in no way related to Mahatma Gandhi other than the fact that her father (Jawaharlal Nehru) was one of Gandhi's closest allies. --Hnsampat (talk) 19:22, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

As an American reader mostly unfamiliar with Indian history, I came to this article specifically to find out her relationship to Mahatma Gandhi, and it was very frustrating that this wasn't clarified anywhere. I still don't fully understand it from this Talk page. Some series of marriages and adoptions? It sounds like there's some controversy about this, but surely a basic summary belongs in the body of the article. What's the edit history here? Did there used to be a summary? Oconnor663 (talk) 00:12, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

The Photo with Mahatma Gandhi
The photo with Gandhi looks doctored, and poorly so.--152.83.44.93 (talk) 11:13, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

One of them does look a tad artificial but, more to the point, what purpose do these photos serve? The only mention of Mahatma Gandhi in the entire article is to explain that she isn't related to him. But despite this, two photos show up in the article right next to a few other, unrelated photos, cluttering it. As far as I can tell these photos do nothing to illustrate the article, as the accompanying text has nothing to do with Mahatma Gandhi. Would it be unreasonable to remove them or am I missing something? Nivenus (talk) 19:41, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

Financial capacity then
I have been told by many persons who read vernacular newspapers that Indira Gandhi's grand father Motilal Nehru asked the British if he could buy India from them. The people believe that the Nehru family was so much rich. I think there was a mention somewhere that Indira Gandhi, when she was studying in Europe did face pecuniary (financial difficulties). Could anyone give any more information about this. Another thing is that What about the Nagarwala Case, where this man was murdered. [] --Ved from Victoria Institutions (talk) 17:01, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

KGB links and allegations of bribery
We know her party was funded in part by the former Soviet Union http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/article567444.ece yet there is still nothing on this. This source claims Prime Minister Gandhi had no knowledge of the Russian funds but I find this very unlikely. I'm going to see if I can find anymore reliable sources and post a draft for a new segment regarding her role in India-Russia relations.

Satyer (talk) 12:25, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Neutrality/ of Blue Star/assassination section
I'm not going to claim to be a worldwide expert on Indian politics, but you don't need to be to spot the lack of neutrality in the Operation Blue Star and assassination section. Firstly, by assigning direct agency to Gandhi - i.e. "Gandhi mercilessly opened fire..." - it sacrifices both accuracy and neutrality by suggesting that Gandhi was the one holding the guns. Secondly, the use of language throughout the section is obviously inappropriate and reflects an emotive response rather than an encyclopaedic one. Thirdly, the complete lack of citations through the vast majority of the section is another deficit which further undermines the integrity of the section. I have attached the appropriate templates to the section. Cyril Washbrook (talk) 13:56, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

I second the above comment. I also wanted to specify that referring to the assassins with the honorific "the great" exemplifies the bias in this section. 208.97.254.16 (talk) 15:11, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Should the assassination section be re-written? It uses the term "execution" - I think "assassination" would be more correct in this context. Wanyonyi (talk) 05:18, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

Not To Add Fuel to the Fire, But....
Was Indira Gandhi a staunch advocate of both physical eugenics as well as intellectual eugenics? Given the controversies section of the article, it would appear that she was definitely pro-population control for the purposes of mitigating human suffering and ensuring that her future successors who would inherit her state would have decent survival prospects through good breeding (that this is true is self-evident, but could use more in the way of citations).

"The destruction of our kindred means the destruction of the traditions of our ancient lineage, and when these are lost, irreligion will overrun our homes.

When irreligion spreads, the women of the house begin to stray; when they lose their purity, adulteration of the stock follows.

Promiscuity ruins both the family and those who defile it; while the souls of our ancestors droop, through lack of the funeral cakes and ablutions.

By the destruction of our lineage and the pollution of blood, ancient class traditions and family purity alike perish.

The wise say, my Lord, that they are forever lost, whose ancient traditions are lost."

--Bhagavad Gita.

AmIYourEnemyAsITellYouTheTruth? (talk) 08:19, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

A note on the structure of the article
Section Devaluation of the rupee should be included in section Domestic Policy (or placed) right after the nationalization of banks is mentioned. The two events (devaluationa and nationalization) take place end of 1960's before the war with Pakistan. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ilghiz (talk • contribs) 14:16, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

disputed addition

 * - Amending the Fundamental Rights given by the Constitution of India - Golak Nath case, Kesavananda Bharati case & the Twenty-fourth and Twenty-fifth Amendment Bills

Hi, I would like to say that the section tells how precisely the Govt. of Indira Gandhi subverted constitution, in steps, with the help of other politicians and against Judges. The section points to the Govt. of Indira Gandhi as such and should be included in this article. Thisthat2011 (talk) 08:42, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
 * The version you included mentioned Gandhi only in its last paragraph. This is a biography article, not an article on the Indian government. Materialscientist (talk) 08:47, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Sorry, but it's probably too much detail for an individual's biography. If we covered every event in a life like this we'd have articles ten times as long as they need to be. It could probably find a home in an article on political history in India but you'd have to watch WP:SOAP. Britmax (talk) 08:53, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
 * As far as WP:SOAP is considered, the contents itself prove the nature of what went during those times and reflects on nature of proceedings that were bad enough to be thought of as violating WP:SOAP.
 * The writer is a journalist of a high order and I do not doubt his neutrality, credentials nor tone. Although as suggested, I may put the material at some place apt. Thisthat2011 (talk) 19:37, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

What is it with such long title headers, awful - just like the addition - I almost removed it myself on sight but thought, hey let the local users work it all - a huge coat-racking content closely paraphrased, some of it exactly cut and copied from a single citation of low quality indeed. Off2riorob (talk) 09:08, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
 * To say that an article from Inder Malhotra is of low quality is as far from reality as it could be I would say. Thisthat2011 (talk) 17:34, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, I take that back, thanks for the correction, he does seem to be a very respected political writer. Off2riorob (talk) 20:50, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

Operation Blue Star - clarity
This part of the article is unclear - what does the following mean? "Indira Gandhi ordered the Indian army to attack the Bhindrawale"

I can't see that this refers to a place, person or group of people.

Dochero (talk) 12:02, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Alma mater
I've changed the panel to reflect more accurately her actual education. In particular, since Indira Gandhi never graduated from Oxford, Somerville College could not be her alma mater. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.31.227.46 (talk) 04:36, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Depressingly, the false claim that Somerville College, Oxford is her alma mater has crept back in. Gandhi did not graduate from Oxford so she cannot be an alumnus of the university, much less be considered to have an Oxford college as her alma mater. This is the case for all Oxbridge colleges.

Unfortunately, the page is protected. Can somebody change it please?

No mention about her married life
The article does not mention anything about the married life of Indira Gandhi. The fact that she married Feroze Gandhi, a Muslim against the wish of her father, Jawaharlal Nehru and the subsequent change of her surname to Gandhi, born a Nehru is missing, thus rendering the article to be incomplete. This information needs to be added in the article alongwith full details. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.212.144.133 (talk) 05:31, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Indira Gandhi (Peace) Prize should be mentioned at least in the references/links
Here the wikipedia site about this prize: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indira_Gandhi_Prize --188.194.231.116 (talk) 14:26, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

Khuswant Singh
The "uncomfortable around educated people" bit is hilarious. Khuswant Singh did not personally know Indira Gandhi and anybody familiar with his articles would know he is not anywhere near being a neutral observer when it comes to her. furthermore, the statement seems out of place. its the opinion of one man. I have read many other articles which praise Gandhi for her intellectual accumen. Who is right then? clear case of NPOV dispute. This is nothing but a editer trying to advance his agenda here. Cliniic (talk) 12:45, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

Spelling Change - Ghandhy/Ghandy to Gandhi
It is important to note that Feroze's surname was spelled as Ghandhy, indicating his Persian Parsi (Zoroastrian) background. However, for political gains Indira changed that to a Hindu-sounding surname 'Gandhi'. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tathya The (talk • contribs) 20:06, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Why is it important to note this? Are there any better sources for the claim? --John (talk) 21:23, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Also, the name controversy is WP:FRINGE with no reliable source presented for anything but the name they are known by while fringe theories abound on everything from Khan to Ghandy that have never [at least insofar as they've been added here] been supplemented with scholarly literature. In addition, it should be noted that anglicization of spellings in that era were not as simple. &mdash; Spaceman  Spiff  03:40, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

As a scientist, I think one should be objective. I still do not understand your strong affinity to Congress Party's version. Here are other references:

Alternative Views (1992). A CONVERSATION WITH ARUN GANDHI. Retrieved from: http://archive.org/details/AV_479-A_CONVERSATION_WITH_ARUN_GANDHI

Sau, Ranjit. (1999). From Sanskritisation to Hindi-Isation and Hindu-Isation: The 13th Lok Sabha. Economic and Political Weekly, Vol. 34, No. 42/43 (Oct. 16-29, 1999), pp. 2979-2983. (see Note# 8)

Tinker, Hugh. (1985). Can the new Indian pilot weather the storm? The Round Table: The Commonwealth Journal of International Affairs. 74(293), 16-20.

Please verify these references before sending me notices.

Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tathya The (talk • contribs) 00:06, 14 July 2012 (UTC) Tathya The (talk) 23:57, 13 July 2012

it funny you accuse SpacemanSpiff or John of "strong affinity" to the Congress party while you are presenting us with what is essentially a BJP propoganda piece!

look at the statements made in your references

"the bjp as part of the sangh parivar touches all aspects of our lives. its model of the nation is at variance with the true principles of vedas."

"not too long ago you heard a choros of lambs: Indira is India. Expect soon a kirtan of Hanumans: India is Hindia."

and referring to gandhi ji

"He condemned Hindu-Muslim inter-marriage as incest." Cliniic (talk) 03:01, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

These are not my views, but that of the author of that particular piece. And I do not think Economic and Political Weekly is a propaganda journal as you suggest. Nonetheless, please stay on course to the present debate, which is about the surname "Gandhi" or "Ghandhy"/ "Ghandy". You should also look into other references. I'm sure we all will agree that Arun Gandhi is not part of BJP-propaganda.

If you still have reservations of including two sentences that I suggested earlier, we can include a section at bottom of the article regarding this "surname controversy" citing all references available and let the readers decide. I welcome your suggestions. - Thanks. Tathya The (talk) 15:20, 15 July 2012

Here's another reference: Meghnad Desai. Gandhi & Gandhi. India International Centre Quarterly, Vol. 34, No. 2 (AUTUMN 2007), pp. 46-61

I think spaceman has already dealt with this! I am just telling you dont accuse others of being biased when your own POV can be called into question with such questionable material. Cliniic (talk) 01:38, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

Cliniic, please stop misinterpreting my suggestions. I wanted to present all references available. You are picking on one reference, while ignoring all others - it's highly regrettable. And how has Spaceman dealt with it? I do not see any mention of this 'surname change' controversy. Let's put this section and describe all available references. By not doing so, you are withholding flow of verifiable knowledge which is anti-wiki stand. Tathya The (talk) 15:13, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
 * There is no controversy within peer reviewed or scholarly literature. When you find something that meets that criteria we can discuss, until then, your posts are not going to elicit any reply. &mdash; Spaceman  Spiff  19:20, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

Spaceman - Do you mean "The Round Table" or "India International Centre Quarterly" are not scholarly literature? Wow!!! Also, Arun Manilal Gandhi and Meghnad Desai should be considered neutral opinion makers by all measures. I hope you would integrate these references sincerely. Tathya The (talk) 09:49, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion: You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 21:05, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Flag of the Indian National Congress.svg