User talk:Arjun024
Welcome!
Please “sign” (~~~~) your messages.
Note:Replies of any discussion started here will be replied here itself. Please drop a Talkback box if you have any messages for me elsewhere.
Another two...
I guess we have to keep a closer eye on this one and this one. Vedant (talk) 17:18, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
- Yep; May be you would like to have a look at these articles as well: Kunan Poshpora incident, Burning of Lal Chowk. regular POV pushers' hangout. second one is much POV ridden i would say. Arjuncodename024 17:35, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
- Sigh... Unfortunately there is no shortage of articles like this though thankfully WikiProject India does take some action and atleast the most important articles are not thoroughly defaced by a bunch of vandals. Worse, there are still tons of editors like this though one that sticks out is User:Lalit Jagannath. Take a look at his contributions.
- I do have to point out though that some of these claims are fairly well researched (others not so much) and while I think that certain organizations have a tendency to embellish certain statistics, a lot of these facts don't appear in dispute. It should also be noted that the Indian government is not always the most truthful when it comes to admitting cases of human rights violations which are not an uncommon occurrence in India. In addition, it is practically a given that Indian Security Forces have in the past engaged in gross violations of human rights which I would classify is conduct un-becoming of a democratic government. I'm not attempting to justify the human rights violations of any other country but it would be unfair to dismiss all of these allegations. I do agree with you though that the second article is ridiculously twisted and am forced to wonder how long before said editors decide to widen their interests and make India look like the instigator of all human rights violations in the sub-continent. Vedant (talk) 19:48, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
- And how is this a credible source?Vedant (talk) 19:52, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
- I agree that like any other force, Indian Security Forces have their share of human rights issues; however these editors press hard to show up one side of the topic only and present sources to that regard - thus making up a false illusion that the article is well referenced. For worse, a lot of these editors are the come-and-go type. We see different names in different days all having the same motive though - making it difficult to follow up their contribs. Arjuncodename024 21:46, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
- I agree with you wholeheartedly on that matter, it's just that we should be careful what we add/remove to the article. I believe that the violations of the involved Indian paramilitary/military organizations should be reported on but should be done in a neutral tone. It's also true that most people will just read one article on Wikipedia and formulate their entire opinion on a matter which is why said editors indulge in editing these articles. It seems to me that they are only interested in looking for sources that enable them to push their POV which is why one of the articles in question heavily references only two citations. There's a somewhat similar issue going on in the Sino-Indian War article where certain users consider Neville Maxwell to be the only authority on the matter and take his words as divine wisdom. Vedant (talk) 22:29, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
Re: Srinagar
Please feel free to edit any articles about Muzaffarabad to reflect that they are in "Azad Jammu & Kashmir" or "Pakistani-administered Jammu & Kashmir." The Srinagar page, which I have not edited, clearly reflects the general consensus on WP in terms of nomenclature for J&K cities. I've also noticed that you've started removing fully referenced statements from other articles that I have written. My edits are generally based on neutral, third-party sources. Please do not remove referenced statements from articles. Kabuli (talk) 01:31, 29 May 2010 (UTC)