Talk:Ambedkar Jayanti#c-Ratnahastin-20250203052700-Callmehelper-20250202233900

The Introduction of this page goes like -

{{Quote|Ambedkar Jayanti or Bhim Jayanti is observed on 14 April to commemorate the memory of Dr. B. R. Ambedkar, an Indian jurist, economist, social reformer and the principal architect of constitution of India.[1][2] The observance marks the birthday of Ambedkar, who was born on 14 April 1891.[3][4] His birthday is also referred to as 'Equality Day' by many in India.[5][6][7] In 2016, The Government of India declared 14 April as Rashtriya Samarasata Diwas to honor Ambedkar's legacy and contributions.}}

So here some people have probelms regarding the discriptions like Jurist, Economist or principal architect of constitution of India. but why ? Don't you know that ?

I Even cited reliable references, people here don't read citations, they just revert it by saying baseless things. may be they are so biased towards their own limited knowledge.

Let me tell you

why this introduction is perfectly okay and very very normal. There are many articles supporting the claim like Ambedkar was known as the principal architect of constitution of India. Here it is -

• Reputable Websites

1. [https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/karnataka/ambedkar-sent-a-message-to-the-world-about-creating-an-equal-society-through-the-constitution/article68065581.ece The Hindu 1st] [https://www.thehindu.com/opinion/open-page/lets-help-realise-the-vision-of-ambedkar-for-dalits/article4614717.ece 2nd] [https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/andhra-pradesh/tributes-to-ambedkar/article7103191.ece/amp/ 3rd]
2. [https://m.economictimes.com/news/politics-and-nation/ambedkar-jayanti-remembering-the-architect-of-indian-constitution-on-his-128th-birth-anniversary/architect-of-indian-constitution/slideshow/68874092.cms The Economics Times 1st] [https://m.economictimes.com/news/india/explained-what-it-took-to-frame-indias-constitution/articleshow/115692495.cms 2nd] [https://m.economictimes.com/news/india/constitution-day-who-were-members-of-drafting-committee-of-indias-constitution/articleshow/115690631.cms 3rd] [https://m.economictimes.com/news/politics-and-nation/ambedkar-jayanti-remembering-the-architect-of-indian-constitution-on-his-128th-birth-anniversary/babasaheb-ambedkar/slideshow/68874095.cms 4th]
3. [https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-65175711 BBC]
4. [https://indianexpress.com/article/india/ambedkar-jayanti-2018-all-you-need-to-know-about-architect-of-indian-constitution-5136111/ TheIndianExpress] [https://indianexpress.com/article/cities/chandigarh/remembering-babasaheb-ambedkar-9296242/ 2nd] [https://indianexpress.com/article/india/ambedkar-jayanti-live-updates-security-beefed-up-in-up-centre-asks-mp-govt-to-protect-statues-5136790/ 3rd]
5. [https://thewire.in/history/reacknowledging-role-ambedkar-architect-india-constitution TheWire 1st] 2nd
6. [https://www.thequint.com/news/world/in-a-first-un-observes-br-ambedkars-birth-anniversary TheQuint 1st] [https://www.thequint.com/videos/babasaheb-ambedkar-fought-for-equality-and-dignity-says-pm-modi 2nd]
7. [https://www.hindustantimes.com/lifestyle/festivals/ambedkar-jayanti-2023-inspiring-quotes-by-father-of-indian-constitution-dr-babasaheb-br-ambedkar-101681287583368.html HindustanTimes 1st] [https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/ambedkar-jayanti-2020-remembering-br-ambedkar-on-his-129th-birth-anniversary/story-6SgcGVejKfpQjs1QaytFJP.html 2nd] [https://www.hindustantimes.com/opinion/brambedkars-pioneering-role-in-water-management-101650116475636.html 3rd] [https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/congress-launches-website-on-works-life-of-dr-ambedkar/story-gbbZJPFBrys0nmupcxarYJ.html 4th]
8. [https://www.indiatoday.in/education-today/gk-current-affairs/story/b-r-ambedkar-facts-1100782-2017-12-05 IndiaToday 1st] [https://www.indiatoday.in/education-today/news/story/oxford-university-press-to-release-five-volume-set-of-abedkar-s-work-soon-1667146-2020-04-15 2nd]
9. [https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/constitution-day-who-were-members-of-drafting-committee-of-indias-constitution/articleshow/115690497.cms TimesofIndia 1st] [https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/delhi/festival-of-democracy-on-parliament-street-hails-architect-of-constitution/articleshow/109295979.cms 2nd]

• JOURNALS

[https://www.worldwidejournals.com/indian-journal-of-applied-research-(IJAR)/article/dr-ambedkar-an-architect-of-the-indian-constitution/ODU2OA==/?is=1#:~:text=Due%20to%20his%20seminal%20role,Architects%20of%20the%20Indian%20Constitution. 1st] [https://www.allresearchjournal.com/archives/?year=2022&vol=8&issue=9&part=A&ArticleId=10108 2nd] [https://www.researchgate.net/publication/340483267_Dr_Ambedkar_Architect_of_the_Indian_Constitution 3rd] [https://www.scribd.com/document/577827240/42-44 4th] [https://www.jstor.org/stable/48771787 5th] [https://www.journalofpoliticalscience.com/archives/2024.v6.i2.D.404 6th]

• Govt officials

[https://www.mea.gov.in/about-amb.htm 1st]. [https://eoi.gov.in/eoisearch/MyPrint.php?4645?000/0001 2nd] [https://pib.gov.in/FeaturesDeatils.aspx?NoteId=153482&ModuleId%20=%202 3rd] [https://mib.gov.in/biography 4th] [https://mod.gov.in/node/93134 5th]

Stategovt [https://prharyana.gov.in/en/commemorating-the-death-anniversary-of-the-principal-architect-of-our-constitution-and-bharat-ratna 1st] [https://sjsa.maharashtra.gov.in/en/dr-babasaheb-ambedkar-16 2nd]

many books written on contribute him by title Chief architect of Indian Constitution by author like Eleanor Zelliot

Firstly please Read articles to Articles then come to any conclusion.

Do you still think these all are articles, journals , even GOVT. Bodies and their author's are living in HOAX ?? Common buddies, make a valuable argument against all this.

Nevertheless ,

if you still don't believe by these references and sources then bring some Journals or Reputable sites that make a conclusion that why ambedkar is not Chief architect of Indian constitution? or you should debunk all articles then it would be become a healthy conversation.

till then,

Signing off

Much Regards. Callmehelper (talk) 20:49, 25 December 2024 (UTC)

:You can also find many sources to claim that India is a 5000 year old country but still we won't accept it as a fact. Same way, your exceptionally misleading claims that were already addressed [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:B._R._Ambedkar#Misleading_Introduction_of_Dr._B.R._Ambedkar_%E2%80%93_Urgent_Revision_Needed here] cannot be added here. You must self-revert now and see WP:BRD. - Ratnahastin (talk) 02:06, 26 December 2024 (UTC)

::Dear @Ratnahastin

::Instead of academically challenging the reliable sources I have provided, you are dismissing them without counter-evidence.
Wikipedia follow WP:RS , WP:Verifiability and just any personal random analogy.(WP:NOR)
If you believe my references are not fall under RS then challenge them with equal credible sources as per WP: BURDEN.
Otherwise reverting without counter evidence would be a WP policy violation.
Pls engage with the sources, instead of using logical fallacy or any WP:OR.

:: Much Regards. Callmehelper (talk) 16:38, 2 February 2025 (UTC)

:::A ton of dubious reliable newspaper sources, predatory journals and government websites with no editorial transparency are not enough for the puffery you want to add to the lede. Regarding WP:BURDEN, the burden to achieve consensus for these edits is on you , see WP:ONUS. I am reminding you again that you are just rehashing the misleading information which was already debunked on the main article. - Ratnahastin (talk) 18:22, 2 February 2025 (UTC)

::::@Ratnahastin You are unbelievable man. You have so much gut to reject everything which go against your WP:OR opinion.
You say all the news outlet dubious ? even govt sites.
All news articles are considered a WP:RS in Wikipedia, but according to you all the articles like the Hindu , BBC, indian Express, economic times etc along with govt website are dubious, not reliable on the same topic? It's really unbelievable.
Still I give you some of the reputable writer's books references below. Although i know now for sure that it won't change your personal opinions.

::::So now i guess , i should look for other options.

::::Thanks.

::::{{talk quote|page 04: This scenario unfolded in India after independence. Democracy was immediately captured by the dominant classes. {{highlight|Bhimrao Ambedkar, the chief architect of the Indian Constitution,}} in his capacity as the chairman of the Drafting Committee, highlighted this contradiction in a famous speech to the Constituent Assembly in 1949, a relevant portion of which has been cited as an epigraph to this introduction.
-[http://cup.columbia.edu/book/indias-silent-revolution/9780231127868 India's Silent Revolution (2003) ]
by Christophe Jaffrelot}}

::::{{talk quote| Page 110 : Many credit him as the father of the Constitution, hailing him as the modern Manu who gave India a new and democratic regime. Some of these go further to argue that any changes in the Constitution would be an affront to Ambedkar. (... ) Perhaps the most intelligent and balanced view is that of Nehru’s biographer Michael Brecher, who described Ambedkar as the chief architect, or more correctly, the field general of the campaign for a new Constitution.
- [https://archive.org/details/ambedkar-towards-an-enlightened-india Ambedkar: Towards an Enlightened India (2017 , Penguin UK)]
by Gail Omvedt}}

::::{{talk quote|Page 288 : Apart from piloting the Constitution of India through a sometimes fractious Assembly, Ambedkar made one other important contribution as law minister. This was to oversee the drafting of a new law that would, for the first time, allow Hindu women to choose their marriage partners, to divorce them if necessary, and to inherit a fair share of ancestral property. These reforms only came into effect after Ambedkar resigned from the Cabinet in 1951. But he was their principal architect, as he was of the Constitution itself.
- [https://archive.org/details/makersofmodernin0000unse_d4g0 Makers of the Modern India (2013) - Harvard University Press ]
by Ramchandra Guha}} Callmehelper (talk) 23:39, 2 February 2025 (UTC)

:::::Just because the information is verifiable does not mean it is liable for inclusion. see WP:VNOT, WP:SEALIONING "Adding information that is (at best) peripherally relevant on the grounds that "it is verifiable, so it should be in"." This "principal architect of the constitution" is puffery and has been thoroughly debunked on the talkpage of the main article. You are merely continuing that dispute here because you failed to push it there.

:::::Enough sources have disputed your claim. Some include:

:::::dispute your claim:

:::::*{{cite web | last=Kulkarni | first=Sudheendra | title=Who Contributed More to the Constitution and Its Preamble? Nehru, Not Ambedkar | website=TheQuint | date=2024-01-26 | url=https://www.thequint.com/opinion/republic-day-who-contributed-more-constitution-preamble-nehru-ambedkar}}

:::::*

:::::*{{cite book | last=Sondhi | first=M.L. | title=Towards a New Era: Economic, Social and Political Reforms | publisher=Har-Anand Publications | year=2001 | isbn=978-81-241-0800-0 | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=5-CavJF-EVEC&pg=PA161 | quote=Kanshiram, another Dalit leader held Constitution as "Ambedkar heritage". However, by 1953 Dr. Ambedkar himself was already disillusioned with the way in which constitution was working. He said in Rajya Sabha during the discussion on Andhra State bill: "People always keep saying to me, 'Oh, you are the maker of the Constitution.' My answer is, "I was a hack, what I was asked to do, I did much against my will." | page=161}}

:::::*{{cite book | last=Johari | first=J.C. | title=Indian Government and Politics: Basic Framework and State Structure | publisher=Vishal Publications | series=Vishal political science series | year=1974 | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=9JolAAAAMAAJ | quote= Thus, after a careful examination of the situation, a leading writer like Rao endorses his judgment in these words: "My reading of the Constitution makes me feel that it is inappropriate to call Dr. Ambedkar the "Father of the Constitution". If any people are entitled to be called so, they are Nehru and Patel, but I would like to call them the Presiding Deities, the sources of the ideas of the Constitution, the real makers of the Constitution."| page=19}}

:::::*{{cite book | last=Rao | first=K.V. | title=Parliamentary Democracy of India: A Critical Commentary | publisher=World Press Private | year=1961 | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=O1M5AQAAIAAJ | quote= My reading of the Constitution makes me feel that it is inappropriate to call Dr. Ambedkar the "Father of the Constitution". If any people are entitled to be called so, they are Nehru and Patel, but I would like to call them the Presiding Deities, the sources of the ideas of the Constitution, the real makers of the Constitution.| page=11}}

:::::You should not only read WP:ONUS but also read WP:CONTEXTMATTERS . Sources simply making a claim are not enough, but addressing its validity are the better ones. - Ratnahastin (talk) 05:27, 3 February 2025 (UTC)

::::::Nehru ji about Ambedkar;

::::::* {{talk quote|P:13: The fine obituary speech for Dr Ambedkar that the then prime minister Jawaharlal Nehru delivered in the Lok Sabha on 6 December 1956 further reinforced the widespread designation of Dr Ambedkar as chief architect. Nehru had said, 'He is often spoken of as one of the architects of our Constitution. There is no doubt that no one took greater care and trouble over Constitution-making than Dr Ambedkar." Critics, however, are quick to point out that in his own 25 November 1949 concluding remarks regarding the Constitution-making process, Dr Ambedkar liberally portioned out the credit that the Assembly was bestowing upon him to many others, both inside and outside of the Drafting Committee. Of course, the simple exercise of common sense would indicate that for Dr Ambedkar not to spread credit would have been megalomaniacal, which by all accounts was alien to his nature.
- {{cite|title= Ambedkar's Preamble: A Secret History of the Constitution of India|url=https://books.google.co.in/books?id=AGnLDwAAQBAJ&lpg=PT8&pg=PT8#v=onepage&q&f=false}}
by Aakash Singh Rathore (2020)}}
Here, Christophe Jeffrelot, Omvedt and Guha honor this title not by just making claim. In books they talk about whole his contribution then honor by that title. I can't Quote all of his book here to prove that they don't Just making any baseless claim.

::::::{{highlight|This "principal architect of the constitution" is puffery and has been thoroughly debunked on the talkpage of the main article. You are merely continuing that dispute here because you failed to push it there.}}
Dear @Fowler&fowler , is this true ? you debunked me thoroughly, and proved that Ambedkar should not be ragard as Chief/Main architect of constitution of India ? here , I want to listen directly from you about that discussion crux.
Regards. Callmehelper (talk) 10:24, 3 February 2025 (UTC)

:::::::The quote that Ambedkar is "often spoken of as one of the architects of our Constitution. There is no doubt that no one took greater care and trouble over Constitution-making than Dr Ambedkar", would only mean that he is often called as "one of the architects" of the constitution, and there is a reason behind such a thought. This is not supportive of [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ambedkar_Jayanti&diff=prev&oldid=1273502307 your claim] that Ambedkar was "the principal architect of constitution of India".

::::::: Your [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ambedkar_Jayanti&diff=next&oldid=1273502307 new edit] is also unhelpful. Jawaharlal Nehru and Vallabhbhai Patel were also "one of the architects" of the Indian constitution but none of the pages related to them would say that. You are supposed to completely revert yourself. - Ratnahastin (talk) 10:42, 3 February 2025 (UTC) updated - Ratnahastin (talk) 10:47, 3 February 2025 (UTC)

::::::::#@Ratnahastin you mislead that quote. Whole context of that, you take 70s or 80s book reference where ambedkar say some speech and apply on him that he himself considered that he was heck. so i quote that line which clarify that ambedkar don't say as chief architect himself that doesn't mean he is not.
Similarly , Mahatma Gandhi don't considered himself a Mahatma, or never say i am father of nation, but scholars do based on his contributions and that's why Indians considered him as Father of the nation.
For ambedkar being called as chief architect, i provided bunch of reputable articles, govt website, scholars book references , not this specific quote.
Also it's a Ambedkar Jayanti page not Ambedkar main page. Here context matter as on jayanti day , peoples celebrate him as a father of constitution or architect of constitution including govt of india.
so here Context matters.

::::::::Callmehelper (talk) 11:31, 3 February 2025 (UTC)

:::::::::You haven't provided any reference that would discuss this dispute. You are just sharing the sources that state this misunderstanding without discussing it in detail. In the same way, many sources falsely state that Vallabhbhai Patel united all princely states into India, but on Wikipedia we won't state that either, just like we won't state that Ambedkar mostly wrote the constitution. - Ratnahastin (talk) 12:20, 3 February 2025 (UTC)

::::::::::no one say Ambedkar wrote most of the constitution.
Authorship and architect, both are different things. Callmehelper (talk) 13:25, 3 February 2025 (UTC)

:::::::::::But that is what you have been saying for months.[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ambedkar_Jayanti&diff=prev&oldid=1273502307] Even right now you are [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ambedkar_Jayanti&diff=next&oldid=1273502307 trying to get around] the same. - Ratnahastin (talk) 14:28, 3 February 2025 (UTC)

Good Day editors,

I am here from Third Opinion. Having looked through the discussion and it looks like the conversation has gotten just a bit unfocused. I would suggest that maybe one of you (probably Callmehelper given that he has WP:Burden it seems) draft the language change and post it here with the attached sources that support that change. I would suggest we avoid journals as they are less preferred in this context and their impact factors are harder to evaluate given the field.

The language should cover the WP:DUE related positions and, of course be WP:NPOV.

Squatch347 (talk) 14:39, 3 February 2025 (UTC)

:@Squatch347
My argument is - Ambedkar is regarded as the chief architect of constitution of India.
I give almost all the Reputable news outlets that works in mainstream India like The Hindu, Economic Times, Indian Express, etc who used the direct quote Ambedkar as the principal architect of constitution in many articles. which i give in starting conversation
not only that, the Indian government website when tribute Ambedkar, used this discriptions for him . it's very common.
But he ignore all citation along with govt website.
still i give very known scholars books references which clearly say , Ambedkar a chief architect here.
All my point here is, this is Ambedkar Jayanti page and this discriptions will enrich the lead because it's a well known fact now.
But He rejected all by saying, not reliable, not in the lead, depends on context etc. which doesn't seems academic answers but clearly seems like he knows all policies better to used whether according to his personal opinion. Callmehelper (talk) 14:59, 3 February 2025 (UTC)

::Hi Callmehelper, I'm not necessarily here to arbitrate the dispute or pass a verdict. I'm working to perhaps build a consensus where all three of us can be happy with the language added or not.

::Is your proposed edit something like this:

:::{{TextDiff|Ambedkar Jayanti or Bhim Jayanti is observed on 14 April to commemorate the memory of Dr. B. R. Ambedkar, an Indian jurist, economist, social reformer and one of the architects of the Indian Constitution.|Ambedkar Jayanti or Bhim Jayanti is observed on 14 April to commemorate the memory of Dr. B. R. Ambedkar, an Indian jurist, economist, social reformer and the chief architect of the Indian Constitution.}}

::If so, then I think we would need to see that in the main article. I don't see him being listed there as "the chief architect." You might be right that the majority of the sources indicate that he is, but there does seem to be a portion of sources that demure from that opinion, so context should be given in the article. I would recommend first updating his Biography page (where more active editors might be present) with language supporting this and then updating this reference with that page in support.

::Squatch347 (talk) 15:55, 3 February 2025 (UTC)

:::@Squatch347, Okay.
If it ultimately depends on the main article irrespective of the sources, then i will take a break from this for a while. As two three days on Wikipedia go little bit hard overwhelming for me. I have to give some time to understand policy.
Because once you think you have lots of RS , still someone told that reliability doesn't mean to add in the article then it give me instant frustration.
Similarly when i revert by twinkle (AFG) , someone complaint that it was a edit warring, and advice me that being right isn't enough, that is things I don't understand completely.
So it's better to not engage in extensive editing when you have not experienced enough.
So probably i will take this dispute to the main article after few months. For main article, i have to be prepare WP policy wise. I have also exam in 2 month, so I have to give time on that as well.
Thanks for your concern and advice. probably i will tag you, once i will take this dispute in main article.
Thanks again
Much Regards. Callmehelper (talk) 20:15, 3 February 2025 (UTC)