Jump to content

Talk:2024 Indian general election

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Soni (talk | contribs) at 00:22, 20 June 2024 (→Improvement comments and taking it to GA: Reply). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.


Use Indian numeric system instead of US System

Example 30,00,000 instead of 3,000,000 HKChakladar (talk) 20:48, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

we on are us wikipeida Eldaniay (talk) 19:47, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No, this is English Wikipedia, not USA Wikipedia. We usually use regional variants of English when the article is relevant to that region. For instance, an article about British politics will use British English. This article even says, at the top of the talk page, that it uses "Indian English". So, in principle, @HKChakladar is right. The only issue with their suggestion might be readability. No other variant of English uses this sort of numeric system, so it would be more confusing to readers than simple spelling differences like labor/labour. Pecopteris (talk) 19:54, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I know it's Indian English, therefore use the Indian numerical system (Crore, lakhs). Indians learn the number as crore, lakh not million, billion. So they relate and visualise crore lakh easily and billion million become confusing. HKChakladar (talk) 23:29, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Well, @HKChakladar, I looked at the Manual of Style to see if it gives any guidance on this.
It says here "Sometimes, the variety of English used in an article may suggest the use of a numbering system other than the Western thousands-based system. For example, the Indian numbering system is conventionally used for certain things (especially monetary amounts) in South Asian English. This is discouraged in Wikipedia articles by WP:Manual of Style § Opportunities for commonality."
It also says "An article's variety of English does not uniquely determine its formatting of numbers. Other considerations – such as conventions used in mathematics, science, and engineering – may also apply. In general, choice and order of formats and conversions is a matter of editorial discretion and consensus at the article."
In the "opportunities for commonality" section, it says "Use universally accepted terms rather than those less widely distributed, especially in titles. For example, glasses is preferred to the national varieties spectacles (British English) and eyeglasses (American English); ten million is preferable to one crore (Indian English)."
So, it appears that adopting the Indian numeric system is generally discouraged, but is a matter of editorial discretion and local consensus.
I have to confess my ignorance here: do most folks in India learn the standard numeric system of "millions" and "billions"? If a reader from India reads this article and sees the term "ten million", will they understand what that means with little trouble, or will they be scratching their head, wondering "how many crore is that?" Pecopteris (talk) 18:51, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
My answer for the question in the last paragraph: In India the concept of "millions" and "billion" is rarely taught in our schools, neither it is used in our daily conversations. Hope it helps. Romilsworld (talk) 17:12, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Regardless of the word-based conventions (ten lakh versus million), at least the digit-based numbers can continue to be formatted as internationally accepted. A person might not know what million means, but 10,00,000 and 1,000,000 are far less likely to be read as two different numbers. 59.98.170.214 (talk) 20:42, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Manmohan Singh remark presented by Modi is not misinformation.

Ex-PM Manmohan Singh indeed said Muslims Have ‘First Right’. " 

We will have to devise Innovative plans to ensure that minorities particularly the Muslim minority are empowered to share equitably in the fruits of development they must they must have the first claim on our resources

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E6Bsz97lRsU?si=sDlDlko4tD9QNqRz&t=53— Preceding unsigned comment added by 106.210.37.75 (talk)

Wikipedia doesn't interpret or analyze who said what and what someone meant. We only report what reliable sources say in their own voice. — hako9 (talk) 21:15, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It should not be under Misinformation then. Because if you, as Wikipedia, do not interpret or analyze what someone meant, then you most certainly have no right to conclude your opinion that it is Misinformation. Maybe put it under Statements made during the election. 77.183.135.185 (talk) 20:26, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia should refer to pmo archives first, before spreading misinformation.
https://archivepmo.nic.in/drmanmohansingh/press-details.php?nodeid=516
The above pmo transcript clearly says particularly Muslims. How i dont see the false propoganda on this page 2.97.13.38 (talk) 23:58, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Addition of Amit Shah's doctored video in the Misinformation section

A video of Amit Shah, a prominent political leader, surfaced that was later found to be doctored. This incident is significant within the context of electoral misinformation and merits inclusion in this section. Multiple WP:RSPSS have covered the topic during the course of the investigation, and the accused are associated with a political party. Hence it can be treated as one party's campaign against the other, thus highlighting the misinformation is necessary in context of the article. The Delhi court has since sent accused into judicial custody with respect to the misinformation case thus marking a judgement over the issue by a neutral third-party source. Xoocit (talk) 11:02, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please provide some WP:RS sources for this. Thanks RogerYg (talk) 22:37, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your input in the discussion, here are some of the sources for said issue.
Amit Shah viral video: Delhi Police files FIR over doctored clips on reservation issue | Mint) (livemint.com)
Amit Shah: Share information on disseminator of fake video, will take action - The Hindu
Amit Shah doctored video case: Amit Shah fake video case: Delhi Police arrest Congress member Arun Reddy - The Economic Times (indiatimes.com)
Congress functionary arrested in Amit Shah’s doctored video case | India News - The Indian Express
Amit Shah doctored video case: Six more Congress social media handlers get notice (newindianexpress.com) Xoocit (talk) 23:52, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the WP:RS sources. This has been added to the Misinformation section. RogerYg (talk) 19:57, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There are 100s of such individual incidents. Is there a reason why this one is more important than anything else? The concern in the note remains unaddressed. MrMkG (talk) 13:36, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This incident has been covered widely in WP:RS national and international sources including BBC. Such WP:RS coverage including BBC has only reported on 2 or 3 incidents, not on 100 incidents, therefore it is WP:UNDUE does not apply. It has been reported over several weeks, so it is not a one time event, Concern has been addressed by the wide coverage in WP:RS national and international sources including BBC, and the discussion on TALK page. It can be brief, instead of full paragraph, but it needs to be included.
The Misinformation section has included an isolated one-time AAP allegation (against BJP), which is not WP:DUE,

https://www.livemint.com/news/phd-in-running-doctored-video-aap-hits-out-at-bjp-s-amit-malviya-after-fir-over-amit-shahs-fake-video-11714456371770.html

Shah's video incident which has been reported widely, so WP:DUE is being misused to hide this information. We need to be WP:NPOV. Thanks. RogerYg (talk) 19:42, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This incident is more important than the others because of direct involvement by a party's social media unit. High value individuals including the CM of Telangana have been summoned to join the investigation which makes it more notable incident and isolates itself from the 100s of individual incident which were not done by party-sponsered individuals.
AAP's reply to the FIR filed by Amit Malviya is missing context as the FIR was filed over the original doctored video which is missing from the article. WP:BALANCE and WP:MAJORASPECT should be applied to do away with the WP:FALSEBALANCE as the AAP's statements is a minor view and is not covered by multiple WP:RS in topics which are independent of the subject. Xoocit (talk) 02:34, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I agree, major incident like Amit Shah's doctored video has been wrongly deleted from Misinformation section by misusing WP:UNDUE argument without any strong reasons. RogerYg (talk) 04:04, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Party's social media organisations, and even MPs, CMs, Ministers, etc are all involved in the 100s of other incidents, usually with impunity. You have not said anything that makes it more important. AAP's statement is removed too. MrMkG (talk) 04:11, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Also agree, it's not as if the CM of Telangana was a puny village chief. Borgenland (talk) 04:16, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Here is one by CM of Uttar Pradesh.
https://www.altnews.in/cm-yogi-adityanath-falsely-claim-that-up-first-to-have-cyber-police-station-in-every-dist/
Here is one by CM of Assam.
https://www.altnews.in/fact-check-rahul-gandhi-is-holding-the-indian-constitution-in-image-shared-by-himanta-biswa-sarma/
There is nothing spectacular about this. MrMkG (talk) 04:26, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We cannot compare isolated one time reported incidents with Amit Shah's doctored video incident, which has been widely reported multiple times in reliable WP:RS national and international sources such as The Hindu, Indian Express, BBC..
WP:UNDUE cannot be misued to hide a major widely reported incident.
I agree with Xoocit (talk) that Amit Shah incident needs to be included. Please read WP:BALANCE and WP:MAJORASPECT. Please avoid making WP:FALSEBALANCE RogerYg (talk) 04:34, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
They are all widely reported. This is a national election and there are international eyes on a lot of things. One thing can't become "isolated one time" and another thing "super major very important" according to your convenience.
The election was rife with disinformation. https://www.france24.com/en/asia-pacific/20240603-india-awaits-the-result-of-a-general-election-marred-by-disinformation MrMkG (talk) 04:46, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
All widely reported incidents with WP:RS can be reported on Wikipedia page. Please do not misuse WP:DUE to delete any widely reported incident. Amit Shah's incident has very reliable national & international sources, so it must be reported. If you have good sources for other incidents, feel free to include them. Thanks . RogerYg (talk) 03:08, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I agree, the deleted text should be restored on the article as soon as possible with proper citations of WP:RS. Xoocit (talk) 06:14, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lede - Election results

The lede first paragraph needs to include briefly the results, as that is among the most notable aspects of this Wiki page per WP: Firstparagraph.RogerYg (talk) 21:48, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Added summarized results in lede as per WP:Lede and WP:First paragraph. RogerYg (talk) 22:35, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Summarized results were deleted from First paragraph using wrong reason of repetition. Now, results summary is moved from last paragraph to avoid any repetition. You may summarize results further in neutral language instead of deleting from first paragraph. Results of elections are considered most notable aspects in almost all Wikipedia election pages, and hence results need to be included per WP:LEDE, WP: First paragraph and WP:LAYOUT. Thanks. RogerYg (talk) 03:27, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 14 June 2024

Need to add to election campaign promises by political parties which had an impact on election results. Source: https://www.ndtv.com/india-news/lok-sabha-elections-2024-rahul-gandhis-taunt-over-rs-1-lakh-to-women-promise-5610230 Rishabh1724 (talk) 00:45, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox

The election infobox includes "first party" and "second party" at the top of the images of party leaders. It seems to be an edit to the template on its page but feels outlandish and out of format. Can we change this? Ok123l (talk) 17:29, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It has appeared as a result of this edit by Jdlrobson. I've asked if they can sorti it out. Cheers, Number 57 22:44, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This should be fixed now for all skins. Apparently this has been showing for mobile users (more than 50% of our traffic!) like this for many years without anyone noticed 😔.
You may need to purge the page to see the results. Let me know if I missed anything. 🐸 Jdlrobson (talk) 23:07, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's fixed, thank you very much! Ok123l (talk) 03:35, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Seems fixed. Thanks for the quick response! Ok123l (talk) 03:35, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Improvement comments and taking it to GA

Hi! I have been working on the article to make appropriate changes intending to improve it to GA quality. As the elections are over, the article should reach relative stability and it can be co-nominated once the changes are complete.

Pinging major contributors Susmuffin, Borgenland and other interested users if willing for reviews and comments. Thanks! Magentic Manifestations (talk) 18:25, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not much at this stage to comment about. But I do think something should be done to allow readers to read Indian numbers within this page rather than having to open a new tab. Borgenland (talk) 18:29, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Borgenland Could you please elaborate on what exactly are you referring to when you mean "Indian numbers"? Thanks! Magentic Manifestations (talk) 03:53, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not everyone has the time to calculate lakh and crore to standard numbering. Borgenland (talk) 07:30, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I would like for this article to reach GA, but it's nowhere near the stability yet. We can probably start regardless, there's a lot of work that needs doing across the board before we get there.
I think the campaign promises is a copyvio concern and may need to be paraphrased if not more. I think the "parties and alliances" section takes too much unhideable space in the middle of the article (and some, like BSP are still un-updated). Similarly for opinion polling. The controversies section needs to be hacked up from scratch with considerations to DUE. I think the reaction and Aftermaths section will need to be fleshed out a fair bit more.
That's the things I could see off the top of my head. I would like to improve this article, but this will require a chunk of work. Soni (talk) 22:33, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@User:Soni I agree that the article needs a lot of working, particularly w.r.t. to some sections. The campaign manifestos indeed is almost a copy vio and needs copy edit and change of paraphrasing to summarize the same.
Reactions and aftermath section needs to be updated to reflect the events a fair bit and needs cleaning up as the reactions are just a laundry list of countries. Will try and work on that. Magentic Manifestations (talk) 03:53, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@User:Soni @User:Borgenland
He removed every content of BJP'S misdeeds and only did not touch BJP propaganda
He also removed famous content of Modi calling Muslims infiltrators [1] [2]..
He is also hiding misinformation of BJP [3] Hsisjwbja (talk) 03:15, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Hsisjwbja I am addressing your comments for the time being constructively. For one, Modi's comments are already part of the main election issues (Ram Mandir and sectarianism) and is a simple WP:CFORK in the later section. The misinformation section was hidden as per WP:UNDUE and WP:WEIGHT which is already explained in comments inline and repeated above by another user. So, suggest that if you have any constructive suggestions, please go ahead, or rather want to contribute constructively, try and expand the section as per WP:NPOV and WP:DUE. Please stop doing WP:POVRAILROAD and non-constructive comments, which does not help. Thanks! Magentic Manifestations (talk) 03:53, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Your edits are BJP biased. I have seen it.
You please contribute constructively as per WP:NPOV. Please stop biasly removing misdeeds of BJP and only keeping BJP propaganda.
Satyameva Jayate (Truth will always prevail) Hsisjwbja (talk) 05:26, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comments by Dharmadhyaksha: Great and challenging idea to take this to GA level. My comments which may help in doing this are as below:
    • In general the article has too many tables and while they all provide good statistics, i think some can be merged (Result "By region" and "By state or union territory") or at least collapsed (Parties and alliances). I would BOLDly do it; but then people usually object and revert to it.
    • Results table is still not fully filled. Sadly, i also dont know where to find all the data as no compiled file has yet been published by ECI.
    • Manifestos of other parties to be mentioned too thus covering the overall topic.
    • The section of "Ministers who lost the election" is incomplete and may be deleted. This is undue here and is covered in Third_Modi_ministry#Outgoing_ministers. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 05:04, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Agree on updating the results part and expanding the article to include manifestos, campaigns of other parties. Tables can be collapsed if there is consensus, same regarding the ministers section. Magentic Manifestations (talk) 06:38, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Ratnahastin and @User:Capitals00, kindly refer to the discussion here. If there are any specific issues that need addressing or queries, please feel free to comment or modify the same. Kindly do not do a blind roll back of all the intermediate edits as there has been quite work done of expansion of certain sections and correcting citations. Magentic Manifestations (talk) 06:38, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your edits are too pro-BJP as rightly observed by Hsisjwbja. The article must highlight the criticism and controversial aspects both on lead and section. You cannot remove it all and say you are just doing a "copy edit". Capitals00 (talk) 06:45, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Capitals00 As I had already indicated above and pointed by other user as well, it will be re-worked upon. If you are seeing my edits, I have been gradually reworking the sections and adding back criticism at relevant sections (say counting related on counting and results, voting related on voting and rest to campaigns. Please do not point fingers as pro-this/that, if that had been the case, I would have not added an entire section on arrest of opposition leaders in the main issues. So, if there are specific instances, where you feel neutrality is at stake, please point out or add those relevant points. Blind reverts are not going to help. Thanks for understanding! Magentic Manifestations (talk) 07:01, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Then you can write your own draft at your userspace and show here when you are done.
This topic is still a current event and your massive overhauling is unhelpful. Capitals00 (talk) 07:07, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Capitals00: I am fine with restoring the particular section of "Misinformation" as it was previously, while it is being worked upon. I have been working with sandbox and doing the edits in steps to avoid a single massive overhaul. Hence, it will be rather helpful if you could point where else do you have issues, so that it will be helpful. Magentic Manifestations (talk) 07:20, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Capitals00 @Ratnahastin, I expected push back when I took up this article for improvement. Please understand that the whole aim is to make the article better. You can also see that a lot of work has gone in improving citations and expansion of sections such as Voting/aftermath of elections. I do not want to push my POV here, so please help be specific as I am open to addressing the issues here. If you guys want an entire copy for comments in the sandbox, I am open to that as well. Thanks! Magentic Manifestations (talk) 07:20, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Some of the paragraphs of this article are poorly written and your edits have only made the article worse. If GA is all you want, then why don't you try your luck at 2004 Indian general election? I don't think your choice of content removals will be entertained there either. Ratnahastin (talk) 06:53, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Ratnahastin Please refer to the conversation above. Regarding your concern on the particular edit, can you please point a specific instance or line as to what has been made worse, to understand the same. There are corrections to citations, convert templates. Regarding the content, the Congress promise has been moved to manifesto and others have remained largely as is. thanks! Magentic Manifestations (talk) 07:08, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You shouldn't be asking this question in the first place. Your edit removed details about unemployment and provided a flattering tone to Modi's claims about the Congress party. This is about just one edit of yours. Ratnahastin (talk) 07:22, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Ratnahastin The unemployment section remains as is. I am unable to understand what is the issue here. Are you referring to the Congress manifesto which was moved to the manifesto section? Thanks! Magentic Manifestations (talk) 07:27, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Capitals00 @Ratnahastin Are you guys ok, if I do this is section by section in the sandbox, so that others can comment? If the dispute is regarding the issues, I specify the changes in parts, so that comments are welcome. Magentic Manifestations (talk) 07:27, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Magentic Manifestations Sandbox is a good way to go. That way we can compare diffs for how the article content gets changed, and fix DUE/NPOV issues as they come. Please note here if you have any specific ideas others can contribute with. Soni (talk) 00:22, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Changes proposed

@Capitals00, @Ratnahastin and others: I am making minor non-controversial changes as is. Following are the other changes proposed section by section, will add one by one, once done.

  1. Expanded and re-arranged the section as per chronology
  2. Moving only reactions to the reactions section
  3. I am in favor of removing the laundry list of countries, depending on comments, can keep or remove.
  1. Unemployment: Again minor edits specifying years for the reports, have preserved the wordings
  2. Ram Mandir: minor edits, grammar tense corrections
  3. Electoral bonds: minor edits, correct syntax of currency values
  4. Add new section on action against opposition leaders
  1. Minor syntax edits
  2. Remove WP:CFORK of Rajasthan speech repeated for the second out of three times
  3. Move the entire arrest of opposition to new section as important issues (as highlighted as an important issue in the lead)
  1. Copy editing and re-organizing as there are too many sections in the NDA manifesto with exact copy paste
  2. INC manifesto has only minor copy edits
  1. Expansion of the section as it details largely only the first two phases
  2. Combine incidents and re-organize as per phases
  3. Remove WP:CFORK of Rajasthan speech repeated for the third time
  1. Move comments by Baghel and Akhilesh on counting day to the section
  2. Add details of the counting day and the summary of the results
  3. Re-arrange table on zonal results by number of seats (Alphabetical should also be fine, currently there is no order)
  4. Move table of results of ministers to the last

@Capitals00, @Ratnahastin and others: My edits are done for the moment. Will wait if you guys have any comments or objections to the changes and go ahead with it if there are no concerns or revert. Thanks! Magentic Manifestations (talk) 09:28, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Magentic Manifestations (talk) 07:48, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 17 June 2024

Change: (under "Cases against opposition" under "Major election issues") After he was released on bail and allowed to vote, Kejriwal urged citizens to "vote against the dictatorship" and was forced to retur to prison after the elections as part of his bail conditions.[1][2] TO: After he was released on bail and allowed to vote, Kejriwal urged citizens to "vote against the dictatorship" and was forced to retur to prison after the elections as part of his bail conditions.[3][4]. However, after the conclusion of the elections, the BJP made a clean sweep in the national capital, winning all seven seats in the Lok Sabha constituencies [5]. Kailash K Singh (talk) 01:45, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:UNDUE. Capitals00 (talk) 07:06, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ "Indian Opposition Politician Kejriwal Urges 'Vote Against Dictatorship'". Barron's. 25 May 2024. Archived from the original on 25 May 2024. Retrieved 25 May 2024.
  2. ^ "Top Indian opposition leader returns to jail, vows to fight 'dictatorship' as Modi eyes victory". France 24. 2 June 2024. Archived from the original on 2 June 2024. Retrieved 2 June 2024.
  3. ^ "Indian Opposition Politician Kejriwal Urges 'Vote Against Dictatorship'". Barron's. 25 May 2024. Archived from the original on 25 May 2024. Retrieved 25 May 2024.
  4. ^ "Top Indian opposition leader returns to jail, vows to fight 'dictatorship' as Modi eyes victory". France 24. 2 June 2024. Archived from the original on 2 June 2024. Retrieved 2 June 2024.
  5. ^ "Delhi Lok Sabha Elections Results 2024: BJP makes history with third consecutive clean sweep, but with lower margins". In a remarkable achievement, the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) has once again stamped its authority in the national capital by winning all seven seats in the recently concluded Lok Sabha elections.The Election Commission of India officially declared BJP candidates Ramvir Singh Bidhuri, Praveen Khandelwal, Bansuri Swaraj, Harsh Malhotra, Manoj Tiwari, Kamaljeet Sehrawat, and Yogender Chandoliya as the winners in their respective constituencies on June 4.

Results By Alliance

@Capitals00 Can you please explain why you have revert No.of Votes in the result section.The regional partis are contesting specific 1 or 2 seats,hence votes gain by that party on seat are added. Mahesh Chhanga 78 (talk) 06:55, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Restored. Capitals00 (talk) 07:05, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 17 June 2024 (2)

In the Misinformation section, please add, "The officials of the Election Commission rubbished reports that OTPs were used to hack EVMs.[1]" 2406:7400:90:92A7:4225:E90A:466A:3BB9 (talk) 08:57, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Minor grammar edit for whoever can do it

"Indians holding foreign citizenship are not eligible to vote as India."

"in", not "as" 59.98.170.214 (talk) 20:44, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  1. ^ "Huge political slugfest over EVM 'unlocking' charge; poll officer reacts to OTP claims. Who said what? 10 points". Hindustan Times. 17 June 2024. Retrieved 17 June 2024.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:2024_Indian_general_election&oldid=1230003230"