Talk:We or Our Nationhood Defined

Dubious claim from book Division of Labour book
The material is not present on page 21 of year 2000 edition. I could not ascertain the existence of 2008 edition as mentioned in the reference. Reports are from 2002 and 2006 so it could not have been discussed in a 2000 book. --G (talk) 11:11, 5 January 2018 (UTC)
 * You can just search in the Google Books version available online. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 14:50, 5 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Thank you, I had tried without success and mentioned that it was not present on the said page and there is no 2008 edition. You have update the reference. How could something mentioned in 2002 or 2006 be denied in a 2000 book? --G (talk) 06:25, 8 January 2018 (UTC)
 * I don't understand what has been "denied". Please state clearly what the problem is. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 10:24, 8 January 2018 (UTC)
 * I have one more observation to make: Most of his books including this one is published by leftword who state about themselves "publishing house that seeks to reflect the views of the left in India". Their logo is hammer and a sickle. It is impossible to verify his claims because the internet is riddled with circular reference all pointing back to this book, there is no existence of the "1978 application" used by Noorani. He has been know to call Patel a Hindu Nationalist, K.M.Munshi a Hindu Communalist, to conduct workshop in Islamabad speaking against the Indian administration in Kashmir. I would take his assertions with caution unless vetted in other reputed publications independently. A self stated political publishing house founded by the communist Leader Prakash Karat does not come as a neutral reliable source for comments on groups they see as their opponent. --G (talk) 07:17, 8 January 2018 (UTC)
 * The statement has been attributed. Noorani is a well-known political commentator, and his views are admissible for Wikipedia to document. See also WP:BIASED. We don't censor information based on our likes/dislikes. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 10:25, 8 January 2018 (UTC)
 * I agree that sometimes it is plausible to use reliable biased source depending on context according to WP:BIASED. I am doubting the reliability (editorial control and a reputation for fact-checking) because of the publisher and lack of editorial control. The "1978 application" seems to be a fabrication of Noorani to advance his biased views unreliably. There is no context to it, why would two people from rss suddenly give commentary in written to a judge? --G (talk) 12:30, 8 January 2018 (UTC)
 * You are not going to get anywhere by calling a reliable source a "fabrication". You better drop this, or you will get sanctioned. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 18:32, 8 January 2018 (UTC)
 * I gave my reasons, and put a concise question, about specific topic, is there a source that can support the "1978 application"? A political founder, openly declared agenda of the publishing house as advancing left ideology does not give me confidence of a good editorial control or fact-checking. --G (talk) 05:37, 9 January 2018 (UTC)
 * What gives you confidence or not doesn't concern Wikipedia. Please WP:DROPTHESTICK. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 07:04, 9 January 2018 (UTC)
 * I am looking for reliable source, I explained my reasons for it. Do you have some special privileges to 'sanction me'? Is my question unclear? Or do you consider that it does not matter? --G (talk) 08:41, 9 January 2018 (UTC)