This article is written in Indian English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, analysed, defence) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Higher education, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of higher education, universities, and colleges on Wikipedia. Please visit the project page to join the discussion, and see the project's article guideline for useful advice.Higher educationWikipedia:WikiProject Higher educationTemplate:WikiProject Higher educationHigher education
Hi @Fowler&fowler, I see that you have been repeatedly adding in the lede of the article the role that Besant played and how she was marginalised. Besant founded the Hindu College, which was incorporated into Banaras Hindu University established by Madan Mohan Malaviya. Even if Besant was promised administrative control of the University and later marginalised away, it needs to be included in the history section, and not the lede itself.
Further, all WP:RS point to Madan Mohan Malviya as the founder of the university and his brainchild, still, if one has personal interest in publishing a view based on few WP:RS that Besant was a victim and was marginalised, it should be done after consulting on the talk page. Questions like why she left Hindu College to Malviya, or why she left Hindu Univ later need to be based on her own writings or statements rather than interpretations of a select few compared to numerous RS otherwise.
Therefore, please discuss it here with the other editors involved and those concerned. Thanks, Please feel free to ping/mention -- User4edits (T) 05:59, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There is a reason I have added scholarly sources. They all make the point that the idea of the university was Besant's. Malviya was a fund-raiser who appeared much later. I have merely paraphrased the sources. The citations have long quotes. You can read them. Fowler&fowler«Talk»14:01, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That is separate from my point that it should not be in the lede, which you have again done without seeking comments from other editors. Thanks, Please feel free to ping/mention -- User4edits (T) 15:09, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Without knowing much about the subject, this edit seems excessive for a lead. The full discussion belongs in the history section. The lead does not need more than one sentence about it. Muhandes (talk) 16:08, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
This is not a neutral RfC statement. "Detailed, complicated" are not NPOV terms. Please don't be so trigger happy in starting an RfC. There has not been enough talk page discussion to require an RfC. Please close and allow the talk page discussion to reach a critical mass. Fowler&fowler«Talk»15:29, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Shorten The history section in the lead is currently too long. My wish is that the lead of the article talk about the university today, not 100 years ago. There is a style recommendation for universities at Wikipedia:College_and_university_article_advice#Article_structure, but BHU is unusual for having a famous history which journalists continuously repeat even today. My first feeling is that Besant should be mentioned because so many sources mention here, but more than a sentence is too much for the lead. I would rather several sentences about contemporary university programs and research than several sentences about one figure in its history. Bluerasberry (talk)15:46, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Per WP:ALUMNI, Alumni sections do not include photos of alumni. The last edit before the images were introduced is from 2021. I as in mind of reverting to that version when I realised the sources will be lost. This is beside the fact that the entire article suffers from excessive imagery syndrome. Muhandes (talk) 08:00, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
.svg)
