Talk:India League

Relationship between India League and 1928 Institute

I've reverted this edit because it suggested that the 1928 Institute is the new name for original India League, whereas the Institute's website states "The 1928 Institute was established in 2020 as a think-tank to continue the work of the original India League (est. 1928)" and to my mind, this suggests that it's not actually the same organisation. Cordless Larry (talk) 12:11, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

This BBC source states that "Formerly known as the India League, the organisation has since rebranded due to its work with the University of Oxford", but this could simply reflect the fact that when the Institute launched, it was calling itself the India League. I don't see any evidence that it's the same organisation as the original League. Cordless Larry (talk) 13:18, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

Hi Cordless Larry I hope all is well. Thanks for sending this through. I do not think that the BBC would publish that statement if it was not true (it's written as a matter-of-fact). When researching their article, they must have spoken with numerous parties in order to confirm that the 1928 Institute is a rebrand of the original India League - in the BBC article they did interview community elders and academics.

Thank you for sending the above link and when I checked out the 'Notable Alumni' and 'Our Journey' - [1], it said that they are a 'continuation of the original India League'. Furthermore, looking at the list of 'Notable Members', I can't imagine them joining a organisation if it was being disingenuous.

Maybe we can e-mail welcome@1928institute.org to get confirmation that its a continuation of the original India League? There is also this scholar - https://www.history.ox.ac.uk/the-india-league , who should be able to confirm the situation. JumpingJimmySingh (talk) 20:52, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

The BBC source doesn't explicitly state that the organisation is a continuation of the original India League though, just that it used to be called the India League (which, as I've demonstrated, it was when it was launched in 2020). Here is another organisation called the India League, which claims to have been founded in 1928 (see also this). Cordless Larry (talk) 20:55, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for sending this across. Shall we just leave the page how it is for now? I can try and contact the aforementioned parties to get a clearer understanding of the matter.

JumpingJimmySingh (talk) 21:20, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

I suggest reverting to this version, so that we don't suggest that the two organisations are the same without proof that that's the case. Cordless Larry (talk) 21:25, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

I've written this and I think it caters for both of our points of view. I hope this is OK - I'd like to introduce the following end of the previous section - "Latterly, its public presence faded.[4] and the group fragmented".

1928 Institute "In 2020, the 1928 Institute was established by academics at the University of Oxford,[5][6][7] , "to research and represent the views of British Indians – the UK’s largest ethnic minority group"[6]. "Formerly known as the India League, the organisation has since rebranded due to its work with the University of Oxford", states the BBC[7].' I'll contact all parties in the mean time to try and get more information.

JumpingJimmySingh (talk) 21:37, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

Using that quote without context suggests that it's the same organisation, which we haven't established, so I disagree with that wording. Cordless Larry (talk) 21:42, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for your speedy response, I messaged the 1928 Institute and they responded with "The 1928 Institute was established in 2020 as a think-tank and is the continuation of the original India League (est. 1928) - https://www.1928institute.org/the-india-league-story."

JumpingJimmySingh (talk) 21:55, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

Well that doesn't help much. We can't cite private communications and it's clear that another organisation claims to be the continuation of the original India League as well. Without an independent source that explicitly makes the connection, we can't suggest this in the article. Cordless Larry (talk) 21:57, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

Hi - I am confident that the BBC is referring to the original India League and not just a group called the India League. If that were the case then the BBC would have made the distinction in the article. The article mentions the India League on 3 separate occasions, 2 of which are in relation to its historical actions (i.e. the original India League) - https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-coventry-warwickshire-58627849. It would be very unlikely for the BBC to then mention the India League for the third time and mean anything but the original India League. Moreover, the article was widely read and if the other 'India League' had an issue, they would have requested an amendment or made a statement on it. May we please keep the page as it is but just add the part about the original India League fragmenting?

JumpingJimmySingh (talk) 22:19, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

If the original League fragmented, then how can the 1928 Institute simply be a new name for it? Why was the 1928 Institute founded in 2020, if it's the same organisation as the League? Cordless Larry (talk) 22:24, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

Hi - I just said fragmented as a way to keep all parties happy in this discussion. Something can fragment and then recompose. Founded could just mean re/establish. I get the impression that you do not want me to edit this page, given this - how would you like the 1928 Section to be accurately written? JumpingJimmySingh (talk) 22:44, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

You appear to be pushing a particular point of view, which adds to my impression that you have an interest in promoting the 1928 Institute. Cordless Larry (talk) 22:57, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

Hi - Thanks for letting me know, I appreciate it. I've just always been interested in the India League and was updating the page before it rebranded to the 1928 Institute. I see your point but if I really wanted to promote the 1928 Institute, then I'd firstly take umbrage with the heavily-politicised quote by Amrit Wilson and focus on that. JumpingJimmySingh (talk) 23:48, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

Hi - I thought we agreed to discuss the changes on here before making live changes. Moreover, the changes which you have made are inaccurate. For example, 'In 2020, a think tank called the 1928 Institute,[5][4][6] with links with academics at the University of Oxford,[7][8][5] ...[9]' should read as the below given the sources and the University of Oxford (https://www.dpag.ox.ac.uk/news/just-over-half-of-british-indians-would-take-covid-vaccine - 'In 2020, 'The 1928 Institute, a think tank co-founded by Dr Nikita Ved, Department of Physiology, Anatomy and Genetics (DPAG), and Kiran Kaur Manku, Department of Psychiatry, are working together to research and represent the views of British Indians – the UK’s largest ethnic minority group')

"In 2020, a think tank called the 1928 Institute, was established by academics at the University of Oxford, with the aim to 'research and represent the views of British Indians – the UK’s largest ethnic minority group" The new brand was established by academics at the University, not just by people 'with links with academics at the University of Oxford'

JumpingJimmySingh (talk) 17:16, 14 December 2021 (UTC)

We did, and you haven't got consensus for your proposed change, so I reverted it. I will adjust the wording about the co-founders now - thanks for pointing that out. Cordless Larry (talk) 17:22, 14 December 2021 (UTC)

Thanks. When you mean consensus, do you mean you and I agreeing on the same point? Or do you mean me convincing you and you are the gate-keeper for the page? Re this statement: "was established, "to continue the work of the original India League".[9]", this is not correct either. Both the BBC article and their own website (https://www.1928institute.org/the-india-league-story) state that they are the India League (albeit with a rebrand).

JumpingJimmySingh (talk) 00:33, 15 December 2021 (UTC)

Per BRD, you need to get consensus for significant changes to the content of articles. If others agree with you and disagree with me, the change can be made - I'm not the gatekeeper, just the only other editor engaging at present. If you want a third opinion, I suggest following the instructions at WP:3O. On the statement you mention, that's a direct quote from the 1928 Institute's website; are you suggesting that they're wrong about this? Cordless Larry (talk) 08:51, 15 December 2021 (UTC)

Hi - Thanks. My point re their website is that you are a referring to an old page. However, older pages state that they are a continuation of the India League. This is consistent with the current statement on their website - 'The 1928 Institute was established in 2020 as a think-tank and is the continuation of the original India League (est. 1928)' - https://www.1928institute.org/the-india-league-story JumpingJimmySingh (talk) 22:41, 19 December 2021 (UTC)

The Revival of the India League

It should read - “Latterly, it’s public presence faded until 2020 when it was ‘revived to promote the interests of today’s British Indian community’.” I don’t understand why you keep removing this quote from the Guardian. They clearly state that the India League was revived in 2020. 78.86.134.72 (talk) 15:13, 19 December 2021 (UTC)

Have you read the section above? The issue is that other sources suggest that the 1928 Foundation isn't the same organisation as the original India League. There's also this organisation, which claims to be the original League. There's also no need to mention the organisation set up in 2020 there as it's covered in the next section of the article. Cordless Larry (talk) 15:20, 19 December 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for bringing up the revival part - I think this is very important for Wiki. It would be correct to say that the India League was 'revived' in 2020 and then 'rebranded' to the 1928 Institute. This corroborated by the BBC, the Guardian, and the University of Oxford. However, there is still another dormant group who calls themselves the India League...yet, no reputable source confirms that they are the original India League. Moreover, this entity just looks like a 'shell' with a hastily made website and no activity re the group. Thus, I think we can disregard their 'claim'. The BBC clearly writes this about the 1928 Institute - The hidden story of these early pioneers has been highlighted by The 1928 Institute think tank, set up to research and represent British Indians. Formerly known as the India League, the organisation has since rebranded due to its work with the University of Oxford. - https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-coventry-warwickshire-58627849

JumpingJimmySingh (talk) 22:41, 19 December 2021 (UTC)

I suspect that the IP was you editing while logged out, and it seems that Drmies agrees. Cordless Larry (talk) 18:20, 20 December 2021 (UTC)

I'd also add that the IP edits yesterday were from an address on the same range as an editor claiming to be the 1928 Institute website owner. Cordless Larry (talk) 22:55, 20 December 2021 (UTC)

What's your evidence? I feels like your are just bullying me into silence because you are unable to counter my arguments. I would like this matter to be escalated as this type of bullying is unacceptable.

JumpingJimmySingh (talk) 22:25, 20 December 2021 (UTC)