Talk:Karnataka Rakshana Vedike

message: It seems this article was created more with an intent to spread the "ideology" of KRV than as an honest, neutral encyclopaedic article. I tried to restore it to a factual version but apparently some people weren't too happy with that. While I appreciate the addition of new information to the article by the same user, there are some NPOV issues that I find stick out like a sore thumb. Let me list them out line-by-line as my good friend here asked me to do:
*The aim of KRV is to protect the interests of Kannada, Kannadigas and Karnataka. - This sentence seems to propose this statement as a fact. Would be better to write this as According to the organization, its aim is to protect.. etc.?
*Gowda is known as the "magician uniting Kannadigas" all over Karnataka and outside Karnataka - Blatant PoV/original research. Do we have any reliable, third-party sources for this statement?
*A household name (section): This section heading needs to change. In fact, this whole section is expendable. Who says KRV became a household name after the blackening incident? Verifiability, please. Plus the whole section seems to be geared towards giving some sort of legitimacy to KRV's criminal actions (e.g. ...resorted to this (and later surrendered to the police)... makes it sound like they were forced to blacken his face and then surrendered peacefully like heroes). This section can be removed and a mention of this incident can probably be moved to a section called Activities or something similar.
*Upholding the cause of Kannada, Kannadiga and Karnataka (section) - Completely unacceptable, non-NPoV title. Needs to be changed to Activities (as mentioned above).
*The Vedike has constantly upheld the cause of ensuring jobs for Kannadigas in both private and public firms - Again, non-NPoV assertion. Needs to be rephrased or better, done away with completely.
*Kannada's supremacy in Karnataka (section) - Almost all of the stuff in this section is unsupported by third-party, reliable sources except for the last line about blackening of signboards. It reads more like an attempt to propagandize KRV's stance than a dispassionate representation of facts.
Let's remember that Wikipedia is not a soapbox and avoid inserting unnecessary bias into articles. Thanks, Max  - You were saying? 16:26, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Some issues

message: :Image:KRV logo.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot 21:42, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:KRV logo.jpg

message: This article is the same propaganda stinkfest that it was months ago when I posted by first objections. Tried to clean it but apparently it has touched some nerves again amongst KRV enthusiasts. Alright, tags will have to do for now, until someone comes to their senses and decides to clean up the mess. - Max  - You were saying? 18:36, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Have removed some unreferenced and out-of-place statements. Hope the fans won't mind. - Max  - You were saying? 18:45, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  I came across this article today. Except the last paragraph, it seems to be written in NPOV way now, I think. 1 typo: bundh. Bengalooru or Bengaluru? Anyway, should be interlinked. #districts: 29 or 28? In one sentence I see 'people from all 28 districts...'. It should be either '29 districts' or like 'all 28 districts outside Bengaluru'. Sarojini Mahishi Report: there is a reference in Kannadigas page I guess; it should be referenced in this article also, in the appropriate place. In last paragraph, the sentence with 'aim of the conference was to discuss' should be modified so that it does not sound like an insider/supporter writing this: it should look like neutral reporting. BTW, how come there is no mention of Mr. Nagaraj?GDibyendu (talk) 19:43, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Still no better 

message: Comment from Halli.haida 
There is no evidence where you can call Karnataka Rakshana Vedike a militant organization. Don't try to push your opinion down everyones throat. Has any competant authority declared Karnataka Rakshana Vedike as a militant organization. Here competant authority means 
1. Government of Karnataka
2. High court of Karnataka
3. Government of India
4. Supreme court of India
5. United Nations Organization
Show us proof where any or all of these bodies declaring Karnataka Rakshana Vedike as a militant organization.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Halli.haida (talk • contribs) 05:07, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Militant 

message: Article has been tagged with POV since March 2010, but there seems to be no reason provided in the Talk page as mentioned. Also, much contents have been cleaned up. So I'll remove the tag in 7 days from now. - Niri / ನಿರಿ 09:19, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: POV

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Karnataka Rakshana Vedike. 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/20120912201954/http://www.frontlineonnet.com/fl2225/stories/20051216007912400.htm to http://www.frontlineonnet.com/fl2225/stories/20051216007912400.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:08, 2 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: We have seen people editing this article by using words like "Linguistic chauvinistic". We request not to use such terms about a profound organisation. We request wikipedia to take necessary actions against such accounts by blocking them permanently who are using wikipedia to degrade an organization like Karnataka Rakshana vedike. Wikipedia cannot be a platform to spread hatred and prejudge.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jaygnr1985 (talk • contribs) 12:55, 21 February 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  We have seen people editing this article by using words like "Linguistic chauvinistic". We request not to use such terms about the organisation