Talk:David Frawley

The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan, which has been designated as a contentious topic.

Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the David Frawley article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1: 90 days

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.

If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

India Low‑importance

	India portal 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 articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Biography: Arts and Entertainment

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
	This article is supported by the arts and entertainment work group (assessed as Low-importance).

Astrology Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Astrology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Astrology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AstrologyWikipedia:WikiProject AstrologyTemplate:WikiProject Astrologyastrology articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Hinduism Low‑importance

	Hinduism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Hinduism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Hinduism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.HinduismWikipedia:WikiProject HinduismTemplate:WikiProject HinduismHinduism articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Critic's accusations and hatemongering[edit]

Critic's accusations and hatemongering has no place in wiki, any accusations David Frawley has faced should go into a subsection of controversy. GhostIn$hell (talk) 04:39, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

We tend to avoid criticism sections of WP:BLP. The criticisms are well referenced, what specifically do you object to and why? disagreeing is not enough. GimliDotNet (talk) 14:12, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Obviously, this part. See WP:CENSOR. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 14:51, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

is this response aimed at me, if so I’m not sure why? GimliDotNet (talk) 16:09, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but the censor-part at GhostIn$hell. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 16:44, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Guy Beck[edit]

Guy Beck is RS, see [1][2], but I removed the word "glowingly" and a nowiki tag from the paragraph which shouldn't have been there. 122.161.190.122 (talk) 18:47, 5 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Beck has his PhD in religion and his scholarship centers on Hindu music; he has nil academic expertise to review a book that debates AIM. And, Yoga Journal is a pop-magazine. When all critics who have published in academic journals are so harsh, we cannot choose to introduce false balance using shabby publications. TrangaBellam (talk) 19:39, 5 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If you had said this on your initial edit then I wouldn't be reverting you. 122.161.190.122 (talk) 20:40, 5 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Biased review and inaccurate labeling.[edit]

I think the overall article is biased towards David Frawley for his more right leaning view. He did after all give evidence to his claims for indigenous versus invasionist claims and provided valid criticism towards the theory. While he may have been more selective and not done a full analysis regarding what he wrote I don't think that condones him being a pseudo-historian as people tend to call him. 108.39.84.90 (talk) 19:01, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]