Talk:Phoolan Devi#The Economic Times

This article has no info what happened to her after she surrendered or about her later election to parliament in India. Someone knowledgeable on the subject should add such info. --Cab88 01:22, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

• In 1998, Phoolan Devi was nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize by some members of the British Parliament. [http://www.outlookindia.com/10question.asp?fodname=19980504&secname=National]

Being nominated for the Peace Prize is an honor, but it is not official or even prestigious. Any national legislator or about a third of the university professors in the world can make a nomination, and there have been as many as 140 some years. Nominators are requested to keep their nominations secret, so it's only those wishing publicity who make announcements, and more often it is impossible to verify. Further, in this case we only have the subject's own word in the matter. I see no reason to keep it. No offense to the subject, this is a general Nobel Peace Prize "nominees" issue. -Will Beback · † · 07:36, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

First of all, this article is informative and well written grammatically. My only problem is that much of it reads like a plot synopsis from a movie. I`m not going to try and fix it, without having any knowledge on the subject beyond what is presented in the article, but if the original author (or any else who is knowledeable) is around maybe they could take a look at that. Thanks. Random89 19:31, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

(I suppose the fact that it came from an individual half way around the world has no meaning?) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 152.27.12.200 (talk) 16:41, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

This article may be somewhat informative but it's NOT well written in any way. I came to the page hoping to learn a little more. I learned a little more and that was it. Very few references are given. The article is biased and is clearly not in favor of the subject (the references to her sharp tongue, how the "cops gave her a sound thrashing" etc.) What I did take away from it is that basically a used, abused girl found the courage of a lion and roared......quite loudly. Nobody liked it (no they certainly did not) and proceeded to try to undo her in anyway possible. That may not be correct, but neither is this interpretation of her life. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.119.151.233 (talk) 06:21, 2 October 2013 (UTC)

I want to agree here that this article is blatantly biased in a sexist way, the most shocking section being PD's early life: "Although her father acknowledged that there was some sense to this act, and agreed to it with mild protest, the 11-year-old Phoolan confronted her much older cousin. She taunted him, publicly called him a thief and attacked him physically." Consider here that we are talking about an 11-year-old child while her cousin was a grown man. The article implicitly blames the girl of actually abusing and taunting a supposedly helpless man, which does not sound very convincing. It takes the cousin's side in the land dispute, without providing any evidence, even though it would seem reasonable that both families should share the land, while cutting someone else's tree is not a very nice thing to do. Consequently, it makes the young child sound like an anti-social maniac. It then gets worse. "Phoolan's uncle arranged to have her married to a man named Putti Lal, who lived several hundred miles away and was 20 years older than she ... Phoolan Devi's husband tried to discipline her and make her behave in a more docile and compliant manner, which was agonizing for her to endure, given that she was of fractious and quarrelsome disposition even within her own family..." Here we have a case of socially-approved pedophilia and child abuse, and the article, again, takes the side of the social norms that allow this to happen. The child who protests this is of a "fractious and quarrelsome disposition". It is also implied that marrying an 11-year-old girl to a 31-year-old man is an appropriate response to such a "quarrelsome" child. I suggest all the understatements and value judgements such as "disciplining", "quarrelsome and fractious" as well as opinions about the land dispute are removed from the article. Timegoesbackwards (talk) 15:09, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

Comment: The first version is taken from a Bollywood film and is far more exciting and stereotyped. So people like it more.

The second version is called 'mythical' though Phoolan says that is what happened, possibly because it is so dull and not at all exotic.

Comment: According to Phoolan Devi herself, the land dispute was among her family members and this was the motivation behind her first public protest. The courts decided against her father, and she made the unheard of gesture of protesting to authorities about the decision when he would not. She said that leaving this part of her life out of the film Bandit Queen was enough to make it "not about my life". She said they did not even mention her uncle, whom she believed to be behind most of the horrors of her young life, including the ill-fated first marriage, after this confrontation. As usual, Wiki has only a few of the facts, and glosses over some pretty important ones. There are enough facts on record about this person that they could easily have made a movie about them and it would have been just as stunning. Devi's comments about her multiple rapes are quite interesting. For starters, read the Mary Anne Weaver articles, noted at the end of the entry.

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mau4 (talk • contribs) 16:06, 21 Aug 2007 (UTC{{{3|}}})

As far as I am concerned it is not true that men were killed in Behmai. Phoolan Devi wanted to take revenge for what they had done to her and other girls and women of lower castes, and decided that cutting off their penisses would be analogous to rape.

elisaz 13:02, 18 March 2008

This article contains stupefyingly little referencing of any sort. Most of the so called information disseminated in it, appears not to have any supporting evidence. Long and drawn out episodes characterise her relationship with her husbands' "Second wife", without any references cited.

This article is ungrammatical, poorly spelt, and contains numerous errors of ommission and commission. It reads like a penny potboiler, and does not qualify at all as unbiased, containing as it does unquantifiable gems such as "her family was very poor, but not poorest in village" (sic).

Please edit this article, or proclaim it a candidate for speedy deletion. It does not contribute to a meaningful or even indisputably correct understanding of the subject at hand.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Aspuar (talk • contribs) 19:46, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Yea I agree, this article is atrocious, it doesn't even have any paragraphs, it's just a bunch of sentences with line breaks. Not to mention stuff like this: "The experience broke her body but ignited her hatred for men who routinely denigrated women.", it just sounds like poorly-written propaganda. I think she needs an article, but can we PLEASE do some work on it? 128.223.184.235 (talk) 13:04, 23 May 2009 (UTC)AOEU

i think every unverifiable sentence in this article should be deleted. i am happy to do this work, but as i am a noob i'm not sure if its OK for just one user like myself to edit it in such an extreme way.. is it? PlasticShark (talk) 22:53, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

Please delete this Bio of Phoolan Devi! It reeks of animosity, and lacks clarity. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:645:4301:BA90:D1D:4856:6BE6:8601 (talk) 10:07, 15 July 2017 (UTC)

File:Devi surrender.jpg

Anyone able to verify that photo Devi_surrender.jpg in any convincing manner? --Itu (talk) 11:54, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

This is an incredibly biased article. Why is forty-eight italicized? Why is the marital rape by the husband never mentioned? Why is the fact that she killed men because they would not tell her where the rapists are not mentioned? Why are biased words such as "simply" included? I don't feel I can trust any information in this article, as the wording is so clearly biased against this person. 103.14.125.195 (talk) 18:17, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

I was sad to check this article and see that deceased MP Phoolan Devi (AKA Bandit Queen) has such an under-maintained presence on Wikipedia. The article is written in non-standard English (colloquialisms abound); the tone is not what would be expected from an encyclopedia; the article lacks citations in important areas; citations that do exist contain errors in the links; too much extraneous information is given on Phoolan Devi's early life (in-laws and childhood family) without attribution; insufficient attention is given to Phoolan's later life as an Indian MP.

This article really requires some love and care from an SME. I'm not one, otherwise I'd pitch in. (Everyone's a critic--I know!) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Skunkhaus (talk • contribs) 17:43, 1 February 2016‎ (UTC)

A "moll" is the female companion of a male professional criminal. This is therefore not a proper description of Phoolan Devi. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.44.149.20 (talk) 13:34, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

Has the case for "Moll" as in "Vikram Mallah's moll" been made? SukiKF (talk) 22:25, 4 November 2014 (UTC)SukiKF 22.24, 04 Nov 2014 (GMT)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Phoolan Devi. 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:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.goodbyemag.com/jul01/devi.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160414182145/http://www.sawnet.org/books/writing/roy_bq1.html to http://www.sawnet.org/books/writing/roy_bq1.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160414182145/http://www.sawnet.org/books/writing/roy_bq1.html to http://www.sawnet.org/books/writing/roy_bq1.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070602015649/http://www.crimelibrary.com/gangsters_outlaws/cops_others/phoolan_devi/index.html to http://www.crimelibrary.com/gangsters_outlaws/cops_others/phoolan_devi/index.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

{{sourcecheck|checked=false|needhelp=}}

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:34, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

I'm not sure, but it seems that the word caste is being used where the word jāti should be? Caste equals Varna (Shudra, Vaishya, Kshatriya, Brahmin, and Dalit), jāti equals endogamous groups of similar profession, such as 'boatman' or 'perfume seller'. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 114.76.73.154 (talk) 02:14, 18 April 2018 (UTC)

{{edit COI|D|V}}

In 2017, Iranian director Hossein Martin Fazeli announced the production of PHOOLAN, a documentary film about Phoolan’s life. It hasn't finished production yet but is set to be released sometime in 2018. Could someone add this information under the section Movie and autobiography? Sources: [http://roadsandkingdoms.com/2017/indias-bandit-queen/]; [https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/306681010/phoolan] (Note: I have disclosed a conflict of interest with Roads & Kingdoms. I am not paid for my contributions.) WillA98 (talk) 18:34, 2 August 2018 (UTC)

:The sources you have provided are to a travel magazine with unknown ties to the production company{{efn|This travel magazine was granted extraordinary access to the production, which can compromise their reporting on it. This information would be best coming from another source, perhaps one covering news originating from the film industry and thus more experienced in reporting on film releases.}} and a Kickstarter page. The time to mention this documentary will be when independent, secondary sources begin reporting on it. If the production is notable, others will have reported on it. Regards,  spintendo  20:27, 2 August 2018 (UTC)

{{notelist-talk}}

This article is ridiculously biased and is founded upon a lack of cited sources. Please rewrite or delete this page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 223.196.83.254 (talk) 14:40, 25 July 2017‎ (UTC)

:That seems rather non-specific. It's unlikely to be deleted. To help with rewriting, you'll need to provide specific suggested changes, not just sweeping vague criticism. —BarrelProof (talk) 13:28, 29 September 2018 (UTC)

I think people should read and compare the two versions and judge for themselves. The other version seems to have an agenda to simply damn India, its society, its family culture, and above all, its religion. It is a page of apologetics for a bandit who murdered many people and looted many others. Poverty is pervasive in India and we all live in the same "dirty" country; how many of us become bandits? It surely cannot be right to blame all and sundry for crimes committed by one very damaged personality. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 120.63.20.116 (talk) 15:52, 19 August 2019 (UTC)

Can someone please rewrite this entire article ? Wikipedia primary purpose is to disseminate information,not tell stories.The article can be trimmed by getting rid of minor or unnecessary details. Prav001 (talk) 05:34, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

:This article is certainly not very well sourced and the best way forward may indeed be simply to start again with a new version and to incorporate anything useful from the current version. I'm intending to do that with a view to taking the article to GA and maybe FA, if anyone wants to collaborate, feel free to drop me a line. Mujinga (talk) 19:11, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

::done Mujinga (talk) 17:13, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

Phoolan is mentioned a few times in the Satanic Verses, indeed the fact that I’m reading it is the only reason I looked her up on WP. Could we have a section devoted to media depictions of her? Then we could mention both the film about her and the Satanic Verses in that section. Overlordnat1 (talk) 17:09, 8 November 2022 (UTC)

{{Talk:Phoolan Devi/GA1}}

In the Legacy section, the article states that Shirish Korde's opera Phoolan Devi: The Bandit Queen had its premiere at the University of Boston. This is incorrect. While some careless Boston reviewers (like the source currently cited in the article) mistakenly claimed that the performance in Boston on April 23 was the premiere, the work (which should be credited to both Korde and Lynn Kremer, who co-wrote the libretto and designed and directed the 2010 production) actually had its first performance at the College of the Holy Cross in Worcester, Massachusetts, on April 15, 2010. Both Korde and Kremer are on the faculty of the College of the Holy Cross, and apart from the lead singers the cast in both Worcester and Boston consisted largely of Holy Cross students. There were several performances in Worcester before the production moved to Boston the following weekend. This was correctly reported in the Boston Globe: see Matthew Guerrieri, "'Bandit Queen' Chronicles a Complicated Heroine," Boston Globe, 26 April 2010, page G5 ([https://web.archive.org/web/20121025182209/https://www.boston.com/ae/theater_arts/articles/2010/04/26/bandit_queen_chronicles_a_complicated_heroine/ archived from Boston.com on 25 Oct 2012]); as well as at Stanford University's [https://exhibits.stanford.edu/operadata/catalog/183-66522 Opening Nights database] of opera and oratorio premieres. Photos from the Holy Cross performances are online at the [https://www.holycross.edu/academics/programs/theatre/past-productions/phoolan-devi-bandit-queen web site of the HC Theater Dept]. (Full disclosure: I am unaffiliated with the college myself, but my wife teaches there, although not in the theater or music departments. I attended one of those first performances, and it was fantastic.) – Choliamb (talk) 14:22, 2 October 2023 (UTC)

:@Choliamb Thanks for the full explanation with refs! I hope this is now [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Phoolan_Devi&diff=prev&oldid=1178277151 fixed], please have a look and feel free to adjust. Mujinga (talk) 17:17, 2 October 2023 (UTC)

::: Thanks, Mujinga. Looks good to me. Cheers, Choliamb (talk) 18:16, 2 October 2023 (UTC)

@Nikkimaria the FAC got closed, slightly prematurely perhaps since we were still discussing FN33, but hopefully it doesn't need read re-opening because I'd argue The Economic Times (used twice) is not covered by WP:TOI. Yes they are both owned by The Times Group, but that's like New Scientist being owned by the Daily Mail and General Trust, which also publishes the Daily Mail. Mujinga (talk) 10:31, 19 November 2023 (UTC)

:Do you have anything to suggest it is more reliable? I checked RSN and found a discussion of it being a Wikipedia mirror and not much else specific. Nikkimaria (talk) 14:09, 19 November 2023 (UTC)

::Yes I also checked RSN and didn't find anything conclusive. It is taken as India's leading financial newspaper by other newspapers such as [https://www.google.com/search?q=leading+%22The+Economic+Times%22+site%3Awashingtonpost.com Washington Post], [https://www.google.com/search?q=leading+%22The+Economic+Times%22+site%3Aguardian.co.uk Guardian], [https://www.google.com/search?q=leading+%22The+Economic+Times%22+site%3Anytimes.com NYT], [https://www.google.com/search?q=leading+%22The+Economic+Times%22+site%3Athetimes.co.uk Times]. Is that enough or would you like to discuss at RSN? Mujinga (talk) 20:00, 19 November 2023 (UTC)

:::Given that there hasn't been a conclusive discussion previously, I think it would be useful to get it settled one way or the other. Nikkimaria (talk) 23:47, 19 November 2023 (UTC)

::::@Nikkimaria First off thanks again for doing the image and source reviews. The discussion at RSN was inconclusive; I hope I've solved the issue by removing/replacing the ET references. I have to say I would rather have debated the merits of each individual citation and its specific context, but I'd also be happy to draw a line under this now. Mujinga (talk) 18:16, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Tayi Arajakate, I reverted your recent edits and would if it's OK with you like to discuss them here. The article has been made a featured article after helpful comments at GA and PR, so I would say a consensus on for example caste and OBC has at least roughly been established already. I don't doubt that you know more than me about India in pretty much every way since I know very little, but I have read all the sources I've been able to get my hands on regarding Phoolan Devi.

• edit summary - "restore and expand with better sourcing, post-2010 IT is not that good either"
• : at first glance I thought TI meant ToI and I would be resistant to re-adding ToI links, since that's already been discussed in the FA source review. it seems you mean India Today, can I ask what you are basing that on? it's listed in RSPS
• edit summary - "this does not make sense in this context, OBC is a legal and documentational category, and there is a distinction between lower caste (as stated in the sources) and OBC"
• : there seems to be a lot of debate and controversy on wikipedia about how to use the term OBC. the sources give a range of options to choose from, so do you think it's better to summarise using "lower caste"? I'm trying to work out your rationale here
• edit summary - "add, acc source"
• : so you changed "generally popular among Other Backward Classes." to "generally popular among Dalits and Other Backward Classes" based on then Outlook source. but then later removed Dalits again
• edit summary - "this is way to simplistic a description to the point of being inaccurate, and not necessary in this article anyways
• : I've asked around quite a lot for help on this issue, for example at [Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Women_in_Red/Archive_127#Indian_naming_conventions|women in red] and twice on archive 76 at the noticeboard for india-related topics. I've also asked people who seem to have decent knowledge in this area such as DaxServer, MPGuy2824 and Trangabellam. All with varying degrees of success. We seem to have reached some sort of consensus that a footnote is helpful. Personally I think when this article is on then frontpage a lot of people will be curious about caste structure so something needs to be said. I'm not at all tied to the current footnote but I don't think deleting it is best, I'd be fine with replacing it with an improved version though. Mujinga (talk) 14:29, 30 November 2023 (UTC)
• *:@AryKun I hope you don't mind the ping - since we already discussed OBC and caste quite extensively at the FA review, I'd be grateful if you could give an opinion here. But if you are not so inclined, I quite understand Mujinga (talk) 14:32, 30 November 2023 (UTC)
• :My favorite kind of discussions—the never-ending ones! Snark aside, I do have some thoughts.
• :* I don't see why India Today wouldn't be RS; in any case, if you think it isn't, you'd have to go discuss that at RSP. That edit also seems to me to add a lot of extraneous details and seems slightly puffery-y for the SP, although I do think that her sister joining the SP might be worthwhile putting in the article.
• :* I have to agree with Tayi here; lower caste≠OBC (see SC), and lower castes would be more accurate I think. I will also note that The Graun does say "For the lower castes" explicitly.
• :* This is hard; I guess Dalits and OBCs is a more "hedging our bets" sort of wording, but the source specifically says "The Dalit OBCs", so just OBCs should be fine and is probably more faithful to the source, since the only other mention of Dalit in the source is a quote from one Dalit woman who we can't extrapolate from.
• :* The note should stay; it's simplistic, sure, but not inaccurate, and having some context is better than having none ig.
• :* All this aside, the "100 Indian rupees (equivalent to ₹400 or £4.20 in 2023)" can't possibly be correct considering the marriage occurred sometime around 1973. I think you've used the wrong inflation index; using an inflation calculator for India online, it comes out closer to ₹4000.
• :AryKun (talk) 15:24, 30 November 2023 (UTC)
• :* It's is not listed at WP:RSPS. It's not like its supposed to be a comprehensive list. It has similar problems to ET (the magazine is different but that's not a magazine article). They aren't aren't absolutely unusable but they aren't best sources for an FA. Otherwise I just picked up on the material cited to ET that was removed and re-added and/or expanded on those aspects. I don't see what the problem is with that. If adding how the massacre case continued is fine which it was at the time of the promotion then they should be, right now that bit just seems incomplete. And SP should have a more prominent mention rather than no mention considering it was her party and she is associated most with it. Although the last paragraph itself could be scrapped or re-written, it's a bit much of a random accumulation of very generic happenings rather than an overview, like say the last sentence, where such commemorations are made by Mandal politics parties every year or the other.
• :* I don't think this is controversial in this case at all. The cited sources for the sentence {{tq|"as news of Phoolan Devi's exploits spread, she became popular with the Other Backward Classes, who called her Dasyu Sundari (Beautiful Bandit) and celebrated her as a Robin Hood figure, who robbed from the rich to give to the poor"}} use the term "lower caste" rather than OBC, and they are not inter-changeable. OBC is an official categorisation that was introduced for caste related affirmative action for those groups who didn't fall under the SC (used for Dalits) or ST (used for Adivasis) categorisation but were identified to be marginalised, now there is controversy around who should or shouldn't be in each of these categories, using it doesn't make sense in this context. Lower caste is the relevant sociological term that bypasses all these categorisation problems to simply refer to anyone that is and feels marginalised.
• :* Honestly doesn't matter much, although it's a similar problem as the the second point but the source is different and it explicitly mentions OBCs and focuses on that mostly. I'd say the cited article is not supposed to be comprehensive so this problem arises where her popularity among say Dalits becomes invisiblised.
• :* It doesn't seem to have gotten any attention at all on the noticeboards? Can you show me where the consensus is? It gives readers an inaccurate understanding, it describes the conceptual understanding of Varna and then just replaced Avarna with Dalit, and presents it as the sociological reality. Either one has to go into jati or one would have to condense it to only say something like a very generic "a hierarchical system of social stratification". In fact just read the {{slink|Caste system in India#Modern perspective on definition}} to understand what the problem is.
• :Tayi Arajakate _Talk 19:55, 30 November 2023 (UTC)
• ::@AryKun cheers for the reply, that's a good spot on the rupees, I'll have to look into that Mujinga (talk) 16:02, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
• ::@Tayi Arajakate just a quick reply now, more to come. Thanks for the reply, we all want to improve the article so hopefully we can get this sorted out.
• ::* "It's is not listed at WP:RSPS." - yes apologies that's what i meant to say as well. The article has just gone through a stringent source review so I would like evidence rather than opinion a source isn't reliable
• ::* Let's hope it's not too controversial, everyone seems to have differing opinions. What i need to do is go look again at the sources which the sentence is summarising again to see what is more commonly used
• ::* Yes it's a good point that we need to record she was popular with Dalits as well as OBCs, if I am going through all the sources again I can try to make that clearer
• ::* Indeed that's why I said "We seem to have reached some sort of consensus" rather than pointing you towards a RfC becuase people simply came and made edits, rather than actually discussing. Then AryKun also edited it and nobody else popped up to change it, and it passed at FA so what I now want to avoid is every week a new addition/deletion on the issue of caste. But perhaps that's inevitable.
• ::Mujinga (talk) 16:12, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
• :::Adding a couple more talkpage debates [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Thilsebatti&diff=prev&oldid=1166087954 here] and [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:MPGuy2824&diff=prev&oldid=1165447886#Phoolan_Devi here] Mujinga (talk) 12:12, 2 December 2023 (UTC)

As far as I can see we have five discussion points open. I will take them one by one and hopefully we can find solutions.

• 1 India Today
• 2 lower castes / OBC
• 3 Dalits / OBC
• 4 Note on caste - suggestion
• 5 Rupees

1 Use of India Today @Tayi Arajakate questions the use of IT, AryKun says it's ok, I don't see a problem with it.

• Suggestion: either keep IT or debate at RSN Mujinga (talk) 12:34, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

2 Lower castes versus OBC in lead - seems like we all agree to use "lower castes".

{{tq|As news of Phoolan Devi's exploits spread, she became popular with the Other Backward Classes, who called her Dasyu Sundari (Beautiful Bandit) and celebrated her as a Robin Hood figure, who robbed from the rich to give to the poor}}

• [12] BBC - "Her supporters say that she targeted high-caste families and shared the spoils with the lower castes, but the Indian authorities insisted this was a myth."
• [19] Guardian - "For the lower castes Devi - whose career was immortalised in the film Bandit Queen by Shekah Kupar - was India's answer to Robin Hood. "
• [20] Fernandes - "I discuss representations of Phoolan Devi, a legendary lower-caste woman dacoit in India who was known for raiding villages with her gang and redistributing wealth from upper-class, upper-caste landlords to po"
• [21] Seal - nothing relevant
• Suggestion: change OBC in lead to "lower castes" as TA suggested Mujinga (talk) 12:34, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

3 Dalits / OBC

{{tq|She was celebrated among Dalits (people at the bottom of the caste system) for fighting back against her abuse by men of a higher caste and when she eluded capture by the authorities her fame grew}}

• [24] Time - "in the eyes of millions of Dalits it also turned her into an icon of resistance against caste abuse" and " she was elected to parliament as a champion of the Dalits."

{{tq|Mallah people were happy to have someone of their caste representing them in parliament for the first time and she was generally popular among Other Backward Classes}}

• [32] Outlook - "Phoolan’s transition from a baghi (rebel), as dacoits are referred to in Bundelkhand, to a mainstream OBC leader" and "Phoolan Devi emerged as an important leader in OBC caste politics" and "before being elected as an MP and with the support of the OBC community" and "The Dalit OBCs remember her as their messiah and recount how she had been able to win their hearts in a short period"

Other sources:

• Ponzanesi - "When she was released on parole in 1994 (her involvement in the massacre of Behmai still to be determined), she joined the regional Samajwadi Party (Socialist Party), which represents the lower castes that account for about 85 per cent of those eligible to vote in India."

Not currently in article:

• Madhavi Murty - Reading the Perplexing Figure of the "Bandit Queen": Interpellation, Resistance and Opacity - "A number of these regional parties, including the Samajwadi Party, on whose ticket Phoolan contested and won two elections, were organized by and claimed to represent the interests of historically disenfranchised lower castes, dalits and the rural poor."

• Suggestion: keep as is currently? Mujinga (talk) 12:34, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

4 - The note on caste. This currently reads {{tq| Indian society is divided into four castes or social classes. From top to bottom these are: Brahmin (priests), Kshatriya (warriors), Vaishya (traders) and Shudra (labourers).[5]: 194  Underneath these four classes are the Dalits, also known as the untouchables.[6]}}.

• Suggestion: we keep the footnote but discuss here any adaptation, which would be welcome. Paging {{ping|Sitush}} who [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:MPGuy2824&diff=prev&oldid=1165447886#Phoolan_Devi previously discussed this] with MPGuy2824 Mujinga (talk) 12:34, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

5 rupees - correct sums in article?

• {{INRConvert|100|lk=on|year=2001|to=GBP}} - 100 Indian rupees (R; equivalent to 400 Rs or £4.20 in 2023)
• {{INRConvert|50000|r|-1|lk=on|year=2016|to=GBP}} - 50,000 Rs (equivalent to 72,000 Rs or £750 in 2023)
• {{INRConvert|2.5|c|0|lk=on|year=2001|to=GBP}} - 25 million Rs {(equivalent to 100 million Rs or £1 million in 2023)
• : Aha I see the prob, the top conversion used year 2001 instead of something like 1973. And therefore should be:{{INRConvert|100|lk=on|year=1973|to=GBP}} - 100 Indian rupees (R; equivalent to 400 Rs or £4.20 in 2023) Mujinga (talk) 12:34, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

:@AryKun thanks again for the spot, I'll make the changes when i stop getting database errors. By the way, "My favorite kind of discussions—the never-ending ones!" is still making me chuckle Mujinga (talk) 12:47, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

OK so moving forward withb the suggestions:

• 1 India Today - keep as is
• 2 lower castes / OBC - [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Phoolan_Devi&oldid=1189521435 changed] to lower castes
• 3 Dalits / OBC - keep as is
• 4 Note on caste - keep as is
• 5 Rupees - already sorted Mujinga (talk) 10:44, 12 December 2023 (UTC)

The lead in this article is a mess. The murder she was accused of are being labelled 'executions,' a cult status is being labelled 'heroine.' Blatant WP:NPOV and WP:PUFF violations. LΞVIXIUS💬 16:00, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

:Yes, murders by organised outfits like terrorist organizations, cartels, and bandit groups can be referred to as executions, although that wording could perhaps be changed. The article doesn't state that she was a heroine, it says that she was seen as a heroine, which is demonstrably true and probably why she was able to have a successful political career. We also cannot call her a murderer or say she was responsible for the murders per BLP:CRIME, since she was never convicted. The only NPOV issue here is maybe the wording for the murders, although I think that what is currently there is also acceptable. AryKun (talk) 17:27, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

::{{ping|Levixius}} in case you didn't see this. AryKun (talk) 10:22, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

:::I wouldn't say I'm particularly tied to the word "executed", but it is summarising "twenty-two Thakur men were lined up at the Yamuna River and shot from behind" in the body, which to me does sound like how an execution would be described. Mujinga (talk) 19:02, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

::the lede states that she 'became a heroine' which is bad wording in wikivoice LΞVIXIUS💬 16:32, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

:::Not if reliable sources says that, then the article will reflect that view. Sources backing this view include Ashraf, Fernandes, Guerrieri, Harding, Lawson, Peacock and Seal. Mujinga (talk) 18:52, 17 March 2025 (UTC)

For TFA, 1461 characters, no fair-use foto:

Phoolan Devi (1963–2001), popularly known as the Bandit Queen, was an Indian dacoit (bandit) who later became a politician. She was a woman of the Mallah subcaste who grew up in poverty in the state of Uttar Pradesh, where her parents lost a land dispute. After being married off at the age of eleven and being sexually abused by various people, she joined a gang of dacoits which robbed higher-caste villages and held up trains and vehicles. When she became its leader, she punished her rapists and evaded capture by the authorities, making her a heroine for the Other Backward Classes. She was charged in absentia for the 1981 Behmai massacre, in which twenty Thakur men were executed, allegedly on her command. After this event, the Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh resigned, and calls to apprehend her were amplified. She surrendered two years later and spent eleven years in Gwalior prison awaiting trial, then was released in 1994 after her charges were set aside. She was subsequently elected as a member of parliament for the Samajwadi Party in 1996. She lost her seat in 1998 and regained it the following year; she was the incumbent in 2001, when she was assassinated outside her home in New Delhi. Her worldwide fame had grown after the release of the controversial 1994 film Bandit Queen, which she did not approve of. There are varying accounts of her life because she told differing versions to suit her changing circumstances. (Full article...) Mujinga (talk) 23:57, 3 April 2024 (UTC)

{{Edit semi-protected|Phoolan Devi|answered=yes}}

Zainibeast (talk) 02:41, 10 August 2024 (UTC)

:File:Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Bsoyka (t • c • g) 03:20, 10 August 2024 (UTC)

>After being married off at the age of eleven and being sexually abused by various people, she joined a gang of dacoits. Her gang robbed higher-caste villages and held up trains and vehicles. When she punished her rapists and evaded capture by the authorities, she became a heroine to the Other Backward Classes who saw her as a Robin Hood figure. Phoolan Devi was charged in absentia for the 1981 Behmai massacre, in which twenty two men were killed, allegedly on her command.

This is ridiculous and whitewashing of her alleged crimes. There is no proof that the men were actually her rapists. LΞVIXIUS💬 16:31, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

:The Mala Sen biography discusses this. Also Moxham, Roy, Snyder and Weaver. Mujinga (talk) 18:54, 17 March 2025 (UTC)