Jump to content

Talk:Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Paramilitary?

[edit]

By Wikipedia's own definition "A paramilitary is a military that is not part of a country's official or legitimate armed forces." RSS is not a social and cultural organization, it's not an armed paramilitary organization. This is totally bizarre and misleading characterization. It is a legal organization within India and they're not armed or trained like soldiers. Yasarhossain07 (talk) 16:56, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. If no objections, I'd like to remove this by end of week.
In general, this article is full of NPOV violations even if yes the characterizations are sourced by some book I can't readily access. Calling the RSS a "far-right" group is also quite questionable (the BJP typically wins over a third of the vote in India - it's solidly in the mainstream), and I can only find rather left-wing sources making that claim. Usaar33 (talk) 21:22, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, please omit the word paramilitary for describing the RSS Deepti du 27 (talk) 20:16, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
the use of the word "paramilitary" is backed by several well known sources and any removal in the introductory part of the article should only be done through a vote. DataCrusade1999 (talk) 13:28, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Majority is not always right. Freedom of speech and bill of rights are there to protect (minority's) truth. 139.5.26.66 (talk) 05:45, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Please familiarize yourself with how Wikipedia works. Wikipedia is not the place to WP:RIGHTGREATWRONGS. We report what the WP:RELIABLESOURCES say, that's it. Brusquedandelion (talk) 12:13, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia is not decided via a WP:VOTE, but otherwise I agree with you. Brusquedandelion (talk) 12:22, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Paramilitary word is gross mischaracterization of the organisation and has to be removed. 139.5.26.66 (talk) 05:41, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, but the WP:RELIABLESOURCES disagree. Brusquedandelion (talk) 12:13, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, but Wikipedia is not written based on your personal opinions. It is based on what the reliable sources say. And, need I remind you, the Brownshirts was a perfectly legal organization. Brusquedandelion (talk) 12:21, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 25 August 2024

[edit]
2409:40D4:404C:E9BE:9CB2:DDE5:D527:7E58 (talk) 05:54, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propagators remove

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. MadGuy7023 (talk) 14:40, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rss is not involved in anti muslim activity

[edit]

Remove this 2409:40C2:1158:5967:8000:0:0:0 (talk) 03:30, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please fill out an edit request so your request can be denied through the proper channels. Brusquedandelion (talk) 12:22, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ambedkar's view on need of exclusive Hindu organisations

[edit]

B.R Ambedkar , the Father of Indian constitution ,in his book Pakistan or Partition of India, raised concerns about the potential for Muslim aspirations to transform India into a Muslim state, which the author views as a threat to internal peace and stability in a future self-governing India. He suggested the necessity of a strong, exclusive Hindu organizations like Hindu Mahasabha , RSS to safeguard Hindu interests against islamists.

“The Hindus and the Moslems as we find them, their relations a bit bettered, perhaps a bit worsened. No realist can be blind to the probability that the extra-territorial designs and the secret urge goading on the Moslems to transform India into a Moslem state may at any time confront the Hindustani state even under self-government either with a Civil War or treacherous overtures to alien invaders by the Moslems. Then again there is every likelihood that there will ever continue at least for a century to come a danger of fanatical riots, the scramble for services, legislative seats, weight- ages out of proportion to their population on the part of the Moslem minority and consequently a constant danger threatening internal peace. To checkmate this probability which if we are wise we must always keep in view even after Hindustan attains the status of a self-governing country, a powerful and exclusive organization of Hindudom like the Hindu Maha Sabha will always prove a sure and devoted source of strength, a reserve force for the Hindus to fall back upon to voice their grievances more effectively than the joint Parliament can do, to scent danger ahead, to warn the Hindus in time against it and to fight out if need be any treacherous design to which the joint state itself may unwittingly fall a victim.” - Pakistan or Partition of India (Page 123) - BR Ambedkar

Aravind Sivaprasad (talk) 18:12, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Given that your source is BJP.org, part of the RSS sangh parivar, the content you want to add will get swiftly deleted. I recommend you find a third party independent source for Ambedkar's views on this matter if you want this to be added to the article.Thanks. Jonathansammy (talk) 20:05, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.275465/page/n147/mode/1up?view=theater
Fixed the source Aravind Sivaprasad (talk) 03:03, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am copying the following from a previous post I made here that got archived, since the issue has not been addressed. In the original post, I noted some changes I was going to make but have only had the time to make a few of them, nor has anyone else addressed this issue; it remains a problem: Do not remove the neutrality template from the Mission section without addressing this issue, as some have tried to do. The original post:

The Mission section is currently written against Wikipedia guidelines. I am going to rename this section "Ideology" and rewrite it, incorporating some of the discussion above re: the organization's relation to Fascism, but of course also incorporating discussion of other topics related to their ideology and goals in secondary (and tertiary) sources, while trimming the obviously self-promotional, primary source content that presently forms the basis of this section. If people want to contribute to this, feel free to reply below with suggestions (for sources, wording, etc.).

Brusquedandelion (talk) 12:20, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 14 November 2024

[edit]

change number of shakhas mentioned approx 60,000 as per the old data to 1,57,001 Shakhas/Mandalis/Milans/Sthans Refer - https://www.rss.org/pdf/Sarkaryawah%20Prativedan%202024.pdf Pratik.S2005 (talk) 06:15, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not done for now: Can you provide the page number—where the data has been mentioned? The AP (talk) 15:01, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Page 4th of above pdf where comparison chart of total numbers are mentioned. Pratik.S2005 (talk) 06:17, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@TheAstorPastor Please look into the page number provided, ask if any other details needed. Pratik.S2005 (talk) 04:28, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Done Sorry for the late response. The AP (talk) 06:10, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@TheAstorPastor you forgot to edit year of latest total number of shakhas, it should be 2024 instead of 2016. pls check Pratik.S2005 (talk) 12:44, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Also with 73117 Shakhas, you can mention 45600 Sthans, 27717 Milans, 10567 Mandalis & In all total please mention total Point of work as 157001 places. All are mentioned in the above pdf. Pratik.S2005 (talk) 12:51, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I’ve updated the year, but I don’t think it’s necessary to include milans or similar details in the infobox. Feel free to open another request if you’d like, and another editor can make changes if they see fit. The AP (talk) 13:13, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]