Talk:Quit India Movement

Untitled

Despite this, Gandhi went on protest 21-day fasts and maintained a superhuman resolve to continous resistance. How much is that? POV-warning, as I see it. -FredrikM

I am removing the NPOV tag in Contributions to India's Independence heading since no argument is made here in favour of why it is thought that it not NPOV. Referenced sources used for the factual depiction of erstwhile and present day conclusions of the movement's success or failure.Ranam 16:37, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Citations needed.

This article needs to be completely rewritten - otherwise, it's a poem for Indian nationalism. It's obvious that the British saw this campaign as an attempt to stab them in the back while fighting for national survival against the worse tyrannies in history. Idiotic pronouncements of Gandhi notwithstanding, it would be interesting to imagine the prospect of India under the "benevolent" rule of the Japanese. I wonder how successful civil disobedience would be then.

Will a knowledgeable person please provide sources for the following paragraph? Otherwise, it will have to be removed or substantially shortened.

The British swiftly responded by mass detentions. A total over 100,000 arrests were made nationwide, mass fines were levied, bombs were air-dropped and demonstrators were subjected to public flogging[citation needed]. Hundreds of resisters and innocent people were killed in police and army firings. Many national leaders went underground and continued their struggle by broadcasting messages over clandestine radio stations, distributing pamphlets, and establishing parallel governments. The British sense of crisis was strong enough that a battleship was specifically set aside to take Gandhi and the Congress leaders out of India, possibly to South Africa or Yemen, but such a step was ultimately not taken out of fear of intensifying the revolt[citation needed].

Sincerely, 20:09, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

See James L citation in the reference section.Rueben lys 23:04, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Many things about this seem shaky, especially the claim that 'innocent' people were killed in 'firings.' I would think that a better word should be substituted for 'firings.' Also, I would think that persons in the immediate area of a riot are not really innocent, they would have been trying to leave otherwise. Protestors, on the other hand, even if breaking an unjust law, are still not 'innocent.'TaylorSAllen 21:49, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

What's up with reference #7? It's supposed to be historians' views on why the movement failed, instead it's spam, or something. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Remus.suciu (talk • contribs) 17:47, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Neutral Point of View?

I was just reading through this article and it felt as if I were reading a piece of propaganda. It seems to portray the INA as if they were innocent children betrayed by the Japanese. Can someone more objective and less involved than myself please rewrite this with NPOV. sheep21 10:30, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

I just read through your edits, first of all, the INA is not the topic of this article, Quit India movement is. Secondly, your edits are extremely PoV and perhaps you need to balance that yourself, surely if you've taken the effort to write in the article, you can set aside views in favour of facts. rueben_lys (talk · contribs) 23:58, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

INA references were in here when I arrived, I mearly pointed out that they were traitors for fighting against the Crown hand in hand with the Japanese, hell Bosse even went to Germany at one point... The article was heavily PoV in the opposite direction before I put anything in, I just wanted to give another perspective. TBH i cant see what the INA has to do with Gandhi's Quit India movement anyway. EDIT: Regarding the message you left me, I have removed no citations, this entire article was the same large block of text before I arrived aswell. I admit my edits are PoV but the rest of what you wrote on my wall is false Sheep21 05:43, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

I am not going to go into the entire patriots and traitors argument here. You have admitted your edits are PoV, that'll do. FYI, edits should abide by WP:NPOV. rueben_lys (talk · contribs) 12:12, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

So will you admit I did nothing to the structure of this article or too the references, I admit POV violation but will you now also admit I did nothing to the rest of the article. I do not like being made out to being a vandal. Of course they should abide by WP:NPOV but did you care to see how baiased this article i was when i found it. Also,in my entire editing of this article I changrd one too two sentances. Regardless of your views the INA were traitors to the Crown & the Indian Empire and fought against those who remained loyal on many occasions. This is fact.

sheep2 01:56, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

I think you;ve misunderstood the purpose of my message and reversion. I am by no means saying you're a vandal, and in all honesty, I am very happy to presume that you're acting in Good faith. What I am saying is that your edits should be neutral.I have seen the previous version, and in fact some of the changes were made by myself in my early days in wikipedia, and I will admit that it maybe biased, because nobody helped NPOV it, and I am still struggling to NPOV it and other articles. The thing is INA is a very emotive issue which is a subject of considerable historical scholarly work even today and its role and views on it and its founder has changed considerably over the last fifty years. Hving said that, INA is not the topic, Quit India is, but the common theme is the Indian independence movement. I think if you focus on that side, instead of ascertaining who was traitor and who was a patriot, that'll help the article. If you want help, there's a number of excellent editors in WP:INDIA, most notably User:Fowler&fowler (who I believe may have views similar to yours, but is a great editor and thorough knowledge bank), and User:RegentsPark who I dont really know that much. Good luck, and please do not think I am trying to put you off, patronise you, or bully you. If you wish to discuss anything leave me a message. :) rueben_lys (talk · contribs) 23:09, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

"prudence of humanity"

What is this phrase supposed to mean? Could someone rework the concluding paragraph?

- A reference for that statement would be useful Sheep21 28th October 2009 19:33 GMT —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sheep21 (talk • contribs) 19:33, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Agreed. That last para, besides not making much sense, seems NPOV. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.33.158.121 (talk) 21:43, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

File:QuitIndiaMovement.jpg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:QuitIndiaMovement.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests April 2012 What should I do? Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:QuitIndiaMovement.jpg) This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 20:59, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Another NPOV article On India

None of these statements written as fact have citations, British rule of India had never been described as 'tyranny' yet these articles are not challenged or if they are challenged someone comes along and removes the tag without addressing the most blatant NPOV statements. Until all the highly charged, negative statements as fact have citations the article should keep the tag. Twobells (talk) 08:02, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

NPOV means neutral point of view, lol. Also "British rule of India had never been described as 'tyranny'"? Huh? Aryamanarora^{talk, contribs} 22:04, 25 November 2017 (UTC)

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Quit India Movement/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

I think the goverment should make some activities, to realize our people how is our freedom got and in what cost, people don't know the meaning of freedom..

Last edited at 08:56, 19 August 2009 (UTC). Substituted at 03:43, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Quit India Movement. 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 http://web.archive.org/web/20061005002204/http://www.aicc.org.in:80/the_congress_and_the_freedom_movement.htm to http://www.aicc.org.in/the_congress_and_the_freedom_movement.htm#the.

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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) 15:53, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Gandhi

Did Gandhi really say he supported the UK during the Battle of Britain? (2A00:23C4:638A:5000:847A:1847:3221:E76E (talk) 15:20, 21 June 2017 (UTC))

No sources quoted for section "Factors contributing to the movement's launch".. need in line citations and more references (45.248.92.96 (talk) 08:28, 29 January 2018 (UTC))

The claim in this "The Communist Party of India was banned at that time by the British government. In order to get the ban lifted, as well as to assist the Soviet Union in its war against Nazi Germany, it supported the British war effort, despite support for Quit India by many industrial workers. In response the British lifted the ban on the party.[15]

is not verifiable. there is no document of that particular book available in internet. Is it a mere claim to defame or stating facts of history (45.248.92.96 (talk) 08:43, 29 January 2018 (UTC))

Quit India Movement

On 09 August, 1942 protest was made at historic place outside Katra Neel, Chandni Chowk, Delhi by Sh. Nanak Chand Mishra S/o. Sh. Hanuman Parshad Mishra alongwith his associates.

During the course of firing, Sh. Nanak Chand Mishra sustained "Bullet Injuries".

On 15 August, 1972, Hon'ble Prime Minister Smt. Indira Gandhi honoured Sh. Nanak Chand Mishra with "Tamrapatra" being Freedom Fighter. Mishra Ramesh (talk) 05:55, 2 September 2018 (UTC)

Effect of racism in Retreat from Burma?

In *Inglorious Empire*, Shashi Tharoor states that the separate treatment of white British and Indian troops during the retreat from Burma in August 1942 was a major factor in causing Gandhi to launch his Quit India movement that month. Yet there is no mention of that here. Should it not be added? Tharoor gives no more details so I would not be able to.LastDodo (talk) 17:13, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

Reference 5 is useless and should be removed

Looks like someone has stuck their own private youtube video as a Reference 5. This should be removed since it adds nothing informative to this page.

5. Ramesh Mishra R.C.Mishra (1 October 2017), Quit India Movement 09 August 1942, 107.137.64.180 (talk) 05:56, 22 June 2023 (UTC)

 Done. Editorkamran (talk) 07:52, 22 June 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia quit is related 27.56.204.111 (talk) 11:43, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

Quit India Movement's deleted stuff on My Gandhi's Original 1942 Quit India Movement Draft

My all 4 citations are well documented and based on British government declassified files. In British Prime Minister Cabinet, there used to be a Secretary of State For India since British Rule in India and he used to produce documents/books for entire Cabinet on important issues. After Gandhi's 1942 Quit India Draft were seized, Secretary of State For India produced those 2 documents/books (cited by me in deleted stuff and in those one can clearly verify whatever I have written. Please stop using using Dympies own definition of WP:OR. to delete my stuff. Sxk125125 (talk) 16:38, 30 September 2024 (UTC)

Dympies is NOT DOING work for an editor at all because work of an editor is to go through the citations and see if the text written is from the citations. Work of an editor is not to insist that text should be verified from a book. He is using his own definition of WP:OR. to delete my stuff. Sxk125125 (talk) 16:40, 30 September 2024 (UTC)

Here is my added text which Dympies deleted as per his own definition of WP:OR.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Quit_India_Movement&diff=prev&oldid=1248090631 Sxk125125 (talk) 16:42, 30 September 2024 (UTC)

Two other citations, namely August 5 1942 Indian Express (from Google newspaper archive) and August 5 1942 New York Times, confirms the text whatever I have written.

I am not being about to "undo" the deletion made by Dympies my stuff. Can some one "undo" his deletion of my stuff of this section. Sxk125125 (talk) 18:33, 30 September 2024 (UTC)