 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Untitled
editDeleted some names from the list of those who contributed to the growth of Deshabhimani. I dare to delete because, am sure there are more important persons who contributed much. Deleted names include those who left the Paper seeking newer greeneries. Names of very junior journalists,who are at present with the paper also is deleted. I don't think it is good to use Wiki as a place for self procclamation.Sajeevdbi 21:17, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
- Agree with the above comment. It is a shame this is done using the name of "Deshabhimani" which is started by great visionaries and with the toil, sweat and blood of thousands including Palora Mata. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.92.181.147 (talk) 09:20, August 27, 2007 (UTC)
- Instead of making allegations, it is necessary to give supporting evidence. No one has ever alleged that Deshabhimani accepted a bribe. It is true that an individual who was working with Deshabhimani allegedly accepted a bribe. Perhaps there could be some truth that some other political leaders also may have involved in that (which is not yet proved). But how Deshabhimani as a newspaper involved in that? Why shyamsunder is putting back info without any supporting fact? I am not hear to justify Deshabhimani and its current leaders. If a journalist working in New York Times gets involved in a murder case, should we write that as part of the description about NewYork Times? (as long as the Newyorktimes has no role in tha murder)
The second allegation is about CPIM accepting advertising charge against its party's stated policies. All the major newspapers in Malayalam accepted advertisement charges from the same advertisers (in fact more money). If this statement should not be included in other newspapers, how can it be part of only one newspaper?
How ever I fully agree, that it is a deviation from CPIM's principles. And it can be included as part of a write up about CPIM (not as a corruption charge, but as an example of deviaion from its principle. If that is included part of CPIM's page, I would endorse it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.92.167.246 (talk) 19:06, August 28, 2007 (UTC)
Added content
editEdited this article on January 26, 2009. Removed some uncertain, irrelevant allegations. Editors are requested to add only facts but not personal opinions to the article. Added Subtitles 'History', 'Supplements' and 'Publications' Aravind V R (talk) 15:55, 26 January 2009 (UTC)