Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Citizenship (Amendment) Bill protests

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia:Articles for deletion

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Abhinav619 (talk | contribs) at 05:27, 16 December 2019. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Citizenship (Amendment) Bill protests

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

Citizenship (Amendment) Bill protests (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Page is an unnecessary fork and has no inherent notability. A page just for the protests is not justified because there is a lot of media coverage supporting the Bill as well (f)or just giving neutral criticism. So can I create a page for all this too? DTM (talk) 10:30, 12 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

EDIT: Protests happen for all sorts of things in India. Sign of a vibrant democracy. But a separate page for each one like this?DTM (talk) 10:33, 12 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I would like to WITHDRAW this. Article meets basic requirements. Can I close it myself? DTM (talk) 13:07, 15 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. DTM (talk) 10:30, 12 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. DTM (talk) 10:30, 12 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. DTM (talk) 10:30, 12 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - While protests are a regular occurrence, this protest in itself is relevant as (a) It has been covered by numerous international sources, including Al-Jazeera, The New York Times, and BBC News, (b) It has been covered by all of India's major news sources, and (c) It has resulted in 1000+ arrests, 20+ injuries, and a complete curfew in the region, and (d) Soldiers from the army have been called to quell disturbances.
Your other argument (of creating a page for support of the bill) is pointless, because there are no protests supporting the bill which are notable enough. This article is about the protests, and not about opposition to the bill in general (for example, Shashi Tharoor opposes the bill, but he did not come out onto the streets and is therefore not included in the article) --I am not a Seahorse (talk) 12:29, 12 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I am not a Seahorse, curfew is already being relaxed in places such as Dibrugarh. (India Today/PTI) "Curfew relaxed in Meghalaya and Assam" (Business Standard) It hasn't even been 30 hours I guess since the President gave to go ahead, that protests are cooling down already rather than becoming larger. And just the fact that the bill passed easily in both houses is one clear indication that shows there is support.... "Soldiers from the army have been called to quell disturbances" - don't blow this out of proportion (please). DTM (talk) 07:55, 13 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The Hong Kong protests are sustained and cover a lot of ground and have been going on for ages. The protests as of now in India for the Bill/Act are sporadic incidents involving very few people. Also Hong Kong to India population ratio.... the protest is minimal in India. DTM (talk) 06:13, 14 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Also, the comparison of the two laws here is a terrible comparison. DTM (talk) 06:17, 14 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • REPLY for a KEEP : For all sort of protests , I dont think the France, Israel, U.S., U.K governments issue travel advisory . Commons sibi 06:22, 14 December 2019
Commons sibi, Advisories are issued for all sorts of things... even pollution in Delhi which kills many many more people. But that's another matter. DTM (talk) 06:50, 14 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Commons sibi And for that matter statements have been made long back too for this... the (USCIRF) made a statement long back, which the MEA gave a reply to. It is on the main page for the article if you would take the time to shift your focus from the protests back to the actual Bill/Act. We are not reporting every protest. Is that what you want to do? Regards. DTM (talk) 06:55, 14 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
DTM , ///the (USCIRF) made a statement long back, which the MEA gave a reply to// on the protests or on the bill ? While you are trying to explain about / shift my focus to reaction , I still stand by why the article has been written - "protests" and not reactions.--Commons sibi (talk) 11:45, 14 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep These protests have caused deaths and deployment of army as well. This has now became a notable international event. hence based on WP:GNG an article is merited. I strongly oppose a delete here. If folks have concerns on the size and would like it to be merged to CAA article, then remember that there is enough content that a WP:CFORK is merited and if merged, eventually it will again need to be forked off to an independent article. --DBigXrayᗙ 13:07, 14 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

On Saturday, in violent protests in West Bengal, the protestors attacked railway stations and public buses. Five trains were set on fire by the protestors in Lalgola and Krishnapur railway stations in Murshidabad district[1] In Suti railway tracks were damaged.

Let me put this again, if it is not clear by my keep vote, "The refs in the article and my own searches leads me to think that they already are notable enough to merit a separate article."--DBigXrayᗙ 17:28, 14 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ "Anti-Citizenship Act protests turn violent in West Bengal, Assam situation eases". The Hindu. 14 December 2019. Retrieved 14 December 2019.
  • Qulified support keep - I agree that the protests in the northeast have other dimensions, though targeted at the Citizenship Amendment as the immediate trigger. They should be dealt with on their own. But the other general country-wide protests regarding the Amendment themselves, should go in the main article. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 15:26, 14 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Kautilya3 requesting you to rephrase your comment. what do you mean by "qualified" ? do you mean others are unqualified ? And remember you are voting on an AfD nomination and not an RfC. By voting as support, you give an impression that you are supporting the deletion nomination of this article. Is this what you intend to say ? if not please choose from among these. Wikipedia:Guide_to_deletion#Recommendations_and_outcomes--DBigXrayᗙ 21:02, 14 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Reworded now. I am supporting a separate article for the protests in the northeast, but not for all general protests on the Bill. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 21:16, 14 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I do agree that protests in the North Eastern part of India have been going on in a big way. Glad to know that you agree that a seperate protest article is merited. Discussion on the scope and contents must be made on the talk page and not on AfD, where we focus on the notability. --DBigXrayᗙ 21:45, 14 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Citizenship_(Amendment)_Bill_protests&oldid=930980161"