Talk:Leela Samson

Neutrality

Looks like someone with hard core Hinduist ideology vandalized this page. Some of the recent edits are either vandalism or unverified. References cited are of websites promoting a specific pov and/or opinion and not bonafide fact. For instance: "Her stint at the censor board was equally controversial, with allegations that she deliberately passed movies designed to hurt Hindu sentiments, while demanding cuts or blocking the release of movies that affected Muslim or Christian audiences"

The subject is currently at loggerheads with the government and curiously enough, the recent edits are from the National Informatics Centre (Hyderabad) which is a government agency.

Disagree. I can see that the references are of reputed top-circulation mainstream newspapers like The Times of India, Indian Express, India Today, The Hindu, etc, and one even from the official website of the Madras High Court. Also, I think there is nothing wrong in the statement you quoted as well. It merely states that "there is a controversy" and "there are allegations", which is exactly what you admit in your last sentence. There might have been a problem if the quoted statement made the conclusive claim as to the Hinduphobia of Leela Samson. But it merely alludes to the current controversy surrounding that subject (something one can verify with a mere Google search). Removing that statement would in fact be an illegitimate WP:POV edit because then you are even denying the existence of the controversy/allegation, which is factually false. 202.3.77.183 (talk) 02:13, 18 January 2015 (UTC)

Disagree My statement points to the references cited on the quoted statement. The mainstream news sources in the cited references say nothing of the sort and must be removed. Also, the tone of the statement belies a lack of neutrality. An appropriate statement would be "...with Hindutva groups alleging that she deliberately passed movies that hurt Hindu Sentiments, while demanding...".

Secondly, "... widespread corruption and rampant financial irregularities at Kalakshetra...". The adjectives need toning down. The mainstream media articles use words like "scam whiff" not "rampant" and "brazen"

Thirdly, the summary has all the controversies. Per the Wikipedia Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Lead section, this should be in a separate section. The fact that only the controversies are in the lead section and none of her achievement are, is indicative of bias

Lastly, the the reference articles from the mainstream press, such as '"The Dance of Controversy". India Today. 4 May 2012' present both sides. The article itself lacks any of it and also refrains from mentioning the support she has received from other prominent exponents of art.

Based on all of these points it is evidently not a neutral article.

Vpt101 (talk) 19:00, 18 January 2015 (UTC)

Agree. I see many weasel words added and selective quoting f sources. For example it is of limited importance to highlight that Priyanka Vadra was a student of hers, and the article that is linked to that fact is a glowing tribute to her. WP:POV 122.174.105.228 (talk) 17:18, 18 January 2015 (UTC)

Precisely, Several of those articles, in fact, show her in a rather positive light. Some even so far as to indicate that the controversies were manufactured. Thanks.

Vpt101 (talk) 19:03, 18 January 2015 (UTC)

Expatiating her anti-Hindu bias

I am not a seasoned Wiki editor. But, Leela Samson has a number of skeletons in her closet. Case in point "secularizing bharatnatyam". Here is the blogspot link copied from the book "Breaking India" - https://skanda987.wordpress.com/2011/06/25/christianizing-hindu-popular-culture-the-leela-samson-scandal/. Please be mindful of putting the facts and not opinions from the author. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.52.13.132 (talk) 08:33, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Leela Samson. 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/20120217185616/http://www.sangeetnatak.org/sna/awardeeslist.htm to http://www.sangeetnatak.org/sna/awardeeslist.htm

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:55, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Leela Samson. 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/20080312002731/http://www.hinduismtoday.com/archives/1993/11/1993-11-02.shtml to http://www.hinduismtoday.com/archives/1993/11/1993-11-02.shtml
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110710033820/http://ccrtindia.gov.in/leela-samson.htm to http://www.ccrtindia.gov.in/leela-samson.htm

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:19, 19 December 2017 (UTC)