Talk:N. Chandrababu Naidu

message: I've added the Covid section (Special:Diff/1024060044/1024851939) in late-May. The case has been dormant and probably forgotten by the media. I propose its removal citing comments by a politician, and that they comment on whole lot of things, most of which are simply politics and non-notable. -- DaxServer (talk) 16:07, 16 July 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Better to remove as it broadly falls under WP:NOTNEWS. In the Indian legal system, anyone can file an FIR on anyone, so it doesn't amount to much. Only when the court accepts that these charges are valid, it's worth noting. -- Ab207 (talk) 16:26, 16 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Consensus for removal of COVID-19 section 

message: Is it significant because of the massacre of TDP members? Should it be expanded? Or be removed as politicians agitate and are arrested all the time? Unlike Jagan, CBN was never in jail, wasn't he? -- DaxServer (talk) 17:13, 19 July 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Moved to Leader of the Opposition (2019-present) section to be in sync with chronological biography as per Wikipedia:Criticism -- DaxServer (talk) 11:55, 20 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Arrest in 2019 section 

message: This section is to discuss content that could be sourced from the book . -- DaxServer (talk) 18:04, 30 July 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: , Nara Ramamurthy Naidu is notable, so it can be added. Names of the sisters are up to discretion per WP:BLPNAME. -- Ab207 (talk) 19:43, 30 July 2021 (UTC)
replies: text:  I skipped the non-notable siblings' names, up to you or others if you want to add. I hope the citation style is correct, this would be my first time citing a book! -- DaxServer (talk) 14:12, 1 August 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Using Template:sfn, you can use the source multiple times by changing the relevant page number. -- Ab207 (talk) 14:55, 1 August 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks! I was wondering what to do with normal Cite book template as it would generate different citations for each time we used a different page! -- DaxServer (talk) 14:58, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

text: I would just use it, with Rediff to source year. -- DaxServer (talk) 15:01, 1 August 2021 (UTC)
replies: text:  -- DaxServer (talk) 18:24, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

text: A reading before deciding on this: Wikipedia talk:Noticeboard for India-related topics/Archive 49#Mentioning caste of Individuals -- DaxServer (talk) 18:57, 7 August 2021 (UTC)

text: Or do we need other source that [explicitly] said he joined Congress (I)? -- DaxServer (talk) 14:21, 1 August 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sourcing from India's Glocal Leader 

message: Page #4  This seems to be okay to source. Should we add names, or simply say a younger brother and two younger sisters him being the eldest? -- DaxServer (talk) 18:10, 30 July 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: , Nara Ramamurthy Naidu is notable, so it can be added. Names of the sisters are up to discretion per WP:BLPNAME. -- Ab207 (talk) 19:43, 30 July 2021 (UTC)
replies: text:  I skipped the non-notable siblings' names, up to you or others if you want to add. I hope the citation style is correct, this would be my first time citing a book! -- DaxServer (talk) 14:12, 1 August 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Using Template:sfn, you can use the source multiple times by changing the relevant page number. -- Ab207 (talk) 14:55, 1 August 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks! I was wondering what to do with normal Cite book template as it would generate different citations for each time we used a different page! -- DaxServer (talk) 14:58, 1 August 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Siblings 

message: Page #4  I think the note in the article stating a spelling variant could be dropped. Do we want to cite this book along with Rediff? -- DaxServer (talk) 14:18, 1 August 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mother's name 

message: Page #7  Could this be sourced as "During his childhood, along with his friends, he sold jaggery for income."? -- DaxServer (talk) 20:00, 30 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jaggery production 

message: BA from Sri Venkateswara Arts College. Page #7  Looks okay to me. Year 1972 is sourced from Rediff. -- DaxServer (talk) 20:00, 30 July 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I would just use it, with Rediff to source year. -- DaxServer (talk) 15:01, 1 August 2021 (UTC)
replies: text:  -- DaxServer (talk) 18:24, 1 August 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  BA 

message: Reason for dropping of PhD. Page #8  Could this be sourced as "(from article:) ... but did not complete his PhD because of his interests in politics."? -- DaxServer (talk) 20:00, 30 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  PhD 

message: Chairman of SVU Economics department while he was a student. Page #8-9  Could this be sourced as "During his education at SBU, he was elected as the chairman of the Economics department, in which he is a student of."? -- DaxServer (talk) 20:00, 30 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  SVU Economics department 

message: Collecting donations for 1977 Andhra Pradesh cyclone. Page #9  Could this be sourced in Early political career, or an appropriate chronological biographical order? -- DaxServer (talk) 20:00, 30 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  1977 AP cyclone 

message: Being offered a lectureship at SVU. Page #9-10  Could this be sourced as "After he left his Alma Mater at SVU, he was offered a lectureship at the university, which he did not take upon."? The Economic Times source says that he dropped PhD after he become a minister. Perhaps he was offered after his Masters?
-- DaxServer (talk) 20:00, 30 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lectureship at SVU 

message: Wanted to contest in MLC elections. Psge #10  This would go into Early political career if sourced, in an appropriate wording. -- DaxServer (talk) 20:00, 30 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  MLC elections (1) 

message: 1976 MLC election nomination. Page #10  To source: that he filed nomination for MLC election, but did not contest? Could "..., but did not contest upon an intimation from Janardhan Reddy", this seems a bit murky. How could it be structured? -- DaxServer (talk) 20:00, 30 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  MLC elections (2) 

message: Jalagam Vengala Rao's suggestion to support Zilla Parishad elections. Page #10  Do we source the interaction with Vengala Rao? The details seem not so strong as the others. -- DaxServer (talk) 20:00, 30 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jalagam Vengala Rao 

message: 1978 ticket because of belonging to Kamma (caste). Page #11  -- DaxServer (talk) 20:00, 30 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  1978 election: Caste 

message: Page #11 See above for quote. Could this be sourced as "He belongs to/born in a Kamma family."? -- DaxServer (talk) 11:51, 31 July 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: A reading before deciding on this: Wikipedia talk:Noticeboard for India-related topics/Archive 49#Mentioning caste of Individuals -- DaxServer (talk) 18:57, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Caste 

message: Page #11 See above for quote. Could this be sourced for him belonging to/born in a Telugu family? Looks like synthesis to me? -- DaxServer (talk) 11:51, 31 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Telugu family 

message: Page #11 See above for quote. This would clear that he joined Congress (I) (Indira Gandhi's), one of the todos in the section above. -- DaxServer (talk) 20:00, 30 July 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Or do we need other source that [explicitly] said he joined Congress (I)? -- DaxServer (talk) 14:21, 1 August 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Congress (I) 

message: Family help for 1978 campaign. Page #11  Could this be sourced as "He won the 1978 election, with the support during campaigning  from his family."? Or "His family supported and campaigned for him." in the 1978 section? -- DaxServer (talk) 20:00, 30 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  1978 election: Family 

message: Bill Clinton. Page #11  Please put this on-hold until I could gather further details about Clinton in the book. -- DaxServer (talk) 20:00, 30 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bill Clinton 

message: Page #11-12  Could this be sourced, minus the author's expression of his admiration? -- DaxServer (talk) 20:00, 30 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Admirer of NTR 

message: Marriage day. Page #12  I see four items that could be sourced: Marriage day. Marriage place. MGR and Anjaiah being one of the guests. NTR and MGR being [close] friends on their articles, if not sourced already, but this is secondary. -- DaxServer (talk) 20:00, 30 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Marriage 

message: Naidu expressing interest in working with NTR before TDP is formed. Page #13  Could this be sourced? -- DaxServer (talk) 20:00, 30 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Interest to work with NTR 

message: Viewed as untrustworthy candidate within the Congress party. Page #13  Could this be sourced? -- DaxServer (talk) 20:00, 30 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Untrustworthy views within Congress 

message: Return to Tirupati as 1983 defeat. Page #14  Could this be sourced? Details about business were not said. -- DaxServer (talk) 20:00, 30 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Post 1983 defeat 

message: Joining TDP. Page #14  Is that 1983 or 1984? The India Today source infers 1983.
-- DaxServer (talk) 20:00, 30 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Joining TDP 

message: @Chinnusaikrish Why did you revert my edits as well as that of the other editor? I did not remove any incidents or present anything in a substantively different way. Those were simple incremental edits meant to improve structure. Very very little was removed by myself, such as the word "miserably" which is unencyclopedic WP:TONE. Please restore all those edits of mine which you don't actually object to, and we will discuss those that you do object to. Regards —Alalch E. 18:33, 24 December 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: By WP:BOLDly proceeding with your idea about what should be removed, I now understand what you talked about, with regard to describing actions of entities who are not exactly Naidu individually. However, I don't agree with you that this should be removed. It's relevant because he was the party leader. I prefer that the removed content be restored first, but we can still discuss it. —Alalch E. 19:36, 24 December 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Alalch E., Yes we must discuss before performing any actions, but to explain further the user already disrupted multiple pages with a negative tone and also has been warned by another user. He already is having a biased nature of editing (refer to his edit history, that I have observed today of his past edits), In this case I don't think we need to restore the content this user added. Or are you referring to the previous content that this user removed? 456legend(talk) 19:50, 24 December 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Also to mention as you said you can mention about other enties but is it really required to glorify the foreign entities that do not belong to this subject. I also don't mean that we need to glorify this subject. I just wanted to say that we must ensure neutrality. The words like complete, entire, overall is subject to question of the neutrality. This page was already effected with a fan point of view template earlier but that also dosent mean we need to defame the subject in a way so that we can remove the template, that is what exactly this user did here. Lastly I want to say that we need to discuss the facts before restoring the content that this user added because it is very much questionable in the initial instance itself since he added titles with a negative tone, not one or two but all of them...I suppose you were the one who rectified it, so we must discuss before restoring these kind of edits. And to mention this user removed/replaced the sourced content of this subject (check the edit history) does that not say these are clearly disruptive edits? (Still pending to be added them too....are we actually not supposed to restore that part first?) Alaach E. 456legend(talk) 19:57, 24 December 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: [ec] I'm talking about these removals diff, which you made. I don't agree with most of them. Most of that content is relevant in this article but the language needs to be more neutral. We do not need to discuss everything before performing actions. /this is a reply to your first comment, as you made two; I can't reply in more detail now/ —Alalch E. 20:02, 24 December 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: The words like "complete useless" is not something neutral. Padayatra of a opponent should be clearly placed on the respective page or okay it's fine to discuss about it. And lastly to the third one was not sources that said "given advantage" and "sympathy" (not sourced) 456legend(talk) 20:14, 24 December 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: You are correct that attributing to Naidu a statement that power subsidies to farmers are "completely useless" is unacceptable, based on current sourcing; these words are not in the cited source, and using them to describe his position is not neutral. However, he did oppose the power subsidies; his government raised electricity prices -- that is in the source. So that needs to be said. While Naidu raised prices, the opposition promised free power; this influenced voters, which was a factor in his electoral loss. The source explains this. If we include this information, we are not taking a side; maybe Naidu was right to raise the prices, while the promise of free power by the opposition was a hollow one -- it doesn't matter when we are describing a concrete election cycle. I know that you understand that this is how politics works :) About Reddy's padayatra -- ths is very relevant in the article. It's information necessary to understand how Naidu fell from power. Context is important. This is also in the source. This is an example representing other content which you object to, that needs to be rewritten, not removed. However, regarding this sentence:  -- I completely agree with your removal. That is an example of the prohibited practice of original synthesis. —Alalch E. 17:50, 25 December 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, I understood, this is what we must do and reach to concensus before adding it. That is what I have suggested the other user to discuss it first. Thank you for understanding the intention. And to mention please see this revision history where the content was blanked without even providing any summary by the same user and he has not yet provided the reason for it. [] 456legend(talk) 18:22, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

text: @Alalch E., I am still in the process of segregation of the content and I will add them accordingly. Since majority of the content was previously removed unexplained. 456legend(talk) 13:05, 5 February 2023 (UTC)

text: @Alalch E.You should revert it again by checking the previous edits and add the criticism by yourself instead of removing the sourced content that was previously removed (mass removal) by another user. Please check the edit history. 456legend(talk) 13:06, 5 February 2023 (UTC)

text: @Alalch E. sir, I have now added the criticism part too, I think this is enough or are we left with anything else? 456legend(talk) 13:35, 5 February 2023 (UTC)

text: @Alalch E.I have now added the criticism part in a different section. 456legend(talk) 13:36, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I will need to take a closer look. A "criticism section" is something that should be avoided whenever it can. You restored certain points of criticism that you had removed but grouped them all under the criticism heading. That is usually seen as a step back. —Alalch E. 16:55, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mass revert 

message: Your major rewrite of the whole article, while probably good in various parts seems to have removed all criticism of Naidu which is against WP:NPOV; please remake this change in a series of incremental edits (section by section) so it's easier to review; some references were removed too such as https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/andhra-pradesh/chandrababu-naidus-son-nara-lokesh-takes-oath-as-minister/article17762250.eceSincerely. —Alalch E. 12:59, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: @Alalch E., I am still in the process of segregation of the content and I will add them accordingly. Since majority of the content was previously removed unexplained. 456legend(talk) 13:05, 5 February 2023 (UTC)

text: @Alalch E.You should revert it again by checking the previous edits and add the criticism by yourself instead of removing the sourced content that was previously removed (mass removal) by another user. Please check the edit history. 456legend(talk) 13:06, 5 February 2023 (UTC)

text: @Alalch E. sir, I have now added the criticism part too, I think this is enough or are we left with anything else? 456legend(talk) 13:35, 5 February 2023 (UTC)

text: @Alalch E.I have now added the criticism part in a different section. 456legend(talk) 13:36, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I will need to take a closer look. A "criticism section" is something that should be avoided whenever it can. You restored certain points of criticism that you had removed but grouped them all under the criticism heading. That is usually seen as a step back. —Alalch E. 16:55, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: February 2023

message: Page is full of misleads and previous pages are removed  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Singhal.sasthry (talk • contribs) 06:01, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Untitled 

message: === Role in National Politics ===
Chandrababu Naidu's involvement in national politics during an era dominated by non-Congress coalition politics in Delhi is notable. In the aftermath of the 1996 parliamentary elections, he assumed the role of convenor for the United Front, a coalition comprising 13 political parties that secured power at the Centre. The coalition government was headed by H.D. Deve Gowda and later I.K. Gujral between 1996 and 1998. The United Front had its headquarters at Andhra Pradesh Bhavan in New Delhi.
Subsequently, Chandrababu Naidu's significance in national affairs amplified after the 1999 Lok Sabha elections.The TDP and the BJP, which had a pre-poll understanding in the state, together won 36 MPs out of 42. The BJP emerged as the largest single party in the Lok Sabha. The TDP extended the support of 29 of its MPs to the National Democratic Alliance government headed by A.B.Vajpayee. TDP did not join the government, extending only ‘issue-based support’. Naidu claimed that though Vajpayee offered eight cabinet berths to his party, the TDP stayed away from the union cabinet and offered external support. Salivahana (talk) 16:44, 18 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  National Role 

message: Chandrababu Naidu's involvement in national politics during an era dominated by non-Congress coalition politics in Delhi is notable. In the aftermath of the 1996 parliamentary elections, he assumed the role of convenor for the United Front, a coalition comprising 13 political parties that secured power at the Centre. The coalition government was headed by H.D. Deve Gowda and later I.K. Gujral between 1996 and 1998. The United Front had its headquarters at Andhra Pradesh Bhavan in New Delhi.
Subsequently, Chandrababu Naidu's significance in national affairs amplified after the 1999 Lok Sabha elections.The TDP and the BJP, which had a pre-poll understanding in the state, together won 36 MPs out of 42. The BJP emerged as the largest single party in the Lok Sabha. The TDP extended the support of 29 of its MPs to the National Democratic Alliance government headed by A.B.Vajpayee. TDP did not join the government, extending only ‘issue-based support’. Naidu claimed that though Vajpayee offered eight cabinet berths to his party, the TDP stayed away from the union cabinet and offered external support. Salivahana (talk) 16:44, 18 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Role in National Politics