Talk:Citizenship Amendment Act protests

Reasons of criticism

This may be self-evident for anyone familiar with the matter, but at present, the article does not make clear on what grounds the CAB is being criticized for. Is it about easing the path to citizenship in general or about the exclusion of Muslim immigrants? Or are there various factions of protesters with different reasoning? It may not be possible to give one simple explanation, but any hint would be helpful. --80.151.251.9 (talk) 23:12, 15 December 2019 (UTC)

From the Citizenship Amendment Act page:

The passage of the Act caused protests in India.[16] Muslim groups and secular groups have protested alleging religious discrimination. The people of Assam and other northeastern states continue to protest fearing that the non-Muslim illegal immigrants in their regions would be allowed to stay.[10]

-- Kautilya3 (talk) 02:20, 16 December 2019 (UTC)

Fixed IP 80.151.251.9, thanks for bringing this up. I have added the line into the background. --DBigXrayᗙ 10:59, 16 December 2019 (UTC)

I agree with this; it was added to the lede. @Pali Upadhyay: removed the reason with the edit summary "conflation of causes" - if you don't agree, please do not delete it entirely but instead edit the sentences. Onceinawhile (talk) 14:24, 17 December 2019 (UTC)

The addition in question uses two links to allude to two different causes for protests. The vox citation does make a remark on the protests occurring in Assam but does not definitively stated that the causation of the protests is that of the "implication of religious discrimination due to the NRC and CAA" while the Indian Express citation specifically states that the causes of the protests in Assam are due to "demographic changes". The wording in the addition alludes to them being one and the same which isn't a stance taken by any prominent opposition as of yet. The characterization of the opposition as being Muslim and Secular groups is also absent in either of the citations and what we can derive from all the other citations on the article that all groups, organization and protesters are disparate in nature and can not necessarily be clubbed under the characterization. Pali Upadhyay (talk) 14:47, 17 December 2019 (UTC)

The reasons given for the protests by participating Muslim and secular groups include alleged religious discrimination and fears that settlement of non-Muslim illegal immigrants in their regions would change the demographic balance.

References

Onceinawhile added the above version, which created confusion, I have split it to below version. Fyi Kautilya3. --DBigXrayᗙ 14:54, 17 December 2019 (UTC)

The reasons given for the protests by participating Muslim organisations and secular groups include alleged religious discrimination. While the people of Assam and other northeastern states are opposing this for fear that settlement of non-Muslim illegal immigrants in their regions would change the demographic balance.

Yes, DBig's version is correct.

Please be extremely trepidant in using foreign sources for this subject. The CAA and NRC issues are so complicated and subtle that only a handful of South Asian journalists/commentators understand them. Foreign journalists are just reading Indian papers and writing commentaries on them. They don't have much of a clue what is going on. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 16:56, 17 December 2019 (UTC)

Y Added to the lead with minor corrections done by Onceinawhile. --DBigXrayᗙ 17:12, 17 December 2019 (UTC)

Page name

Block evading sock

@DBigXray: What is controversial about "2019 Indian protests"? The name "Citizenship Amendment Act protests" is very ambiguous. Where is it? When is it? A 19th century protests in the US? Or ongoing in India. What do you find controversial about 2019 Indian protests, and even though you're an admin you don't have more rights over other users. You seemed to have picked the current name and have reverted the move back 2 times. DongFen (talk) 13:42, 16 December 2019 (UTC) You are adding multiple unnecessary disambiguations. this is not the only protests that happened in Indian in 2019. Start a wP:RM discussion if you want but your title is not good. the current title clearly disambiguates the topic, there has been no such protests anywhere in the world, the current title is supprted by WP:COMMONNAME see [1] --DBigXrayᗙ 13:46, 16 December 2019 (UTC) Its very ambiguous and uncommon. I was searching for India protests today and the article didn't show up on google. Most searching for India protests have no way of finding this article. If you're concerned about there being other protests it can be "December 2019 Indian protests" or "Indian Citizenship Amendment Act protests" at least to show that it's in India. If you oppose this please tell me fast because readers right now have no way of being able to read the protests in India due to title mishap. DongFen (talk) 13:49, 16 December 2019 (UTC) "December 2019 Indian protests" is not suitable, Please note that because of the protests related to the 2019 Hyderabad gang rape. I dont that "Indian Citizenship Amendment Act protests" will be a better title, because the disambiguation India is unnecessary. the "Citizenship Amendment Act " is specific to India and there is no other article on it. Regarding the ease of searching, you can start the redirects with that. I will start one at "Indian Citizenship Amendment Act protests"--DBigXrayᗙ 13:53, 16 December 2019 (UTC) You're skipping the main issue here. The article is impossible to find via google search. The word india is therefore necessary. 2019 would even make search more easy, so I don't see any reason you should oppose this. DongFen (talk) 13:59, 16 December 2019 (UTC) Even with the redirects, I have no idea by looking at the title what where and when this bill protest is about. India and 2019 must be included in the title... DongFen (talk) 14:01, 16 December 2019 (UTC)

You need to read the article, You are free to start redirects to help the Google Indexing. The article was created recently and the google crawlers take a few days to index recent articles. Wikipedia is not bound to help Google Indexing. Google search is not an acceptable reason for Page renaming. Lets wait what others have to say to your proposal on this page rename thread. --DBigXrayᗙ 14:04, 16 December 2019 (UTC)

Could possibly add a redirect link for India Protests 2019 to this page for the time being. But for the time being I think we should wait a bit before making any name changes. Pali Upadhyay (talk) 13:56, 16 December 2019 (UTC)

No, read my objection above. --DBigXrayᗙ 14:04, 16 December 2019 (UTC)

I wouldn't quite agree to that, the other protests in 2019 were either localized (e.g: Kashmir protests) or very case specific (e.g: 2019 India doctors' strike). My main objection would be on the grounds of it being a bit too early for a name change and the fact that 2019 is almost over and this could potentially go on much longer. Pali Upadhyay (talk) 14:22, 16 December 2019 (UTC)

Actually it is quite difficult to fix a particular article title regarding the protests. Citizenship Amendment Act protests is quite fine and it is better to remain with it. On the other hand this protests related to citizenship issues only happened in India in 2019 so need to mention the country. I initially thought to add the year in consideration but these protests just started in December 2019 and could continue until 2020. So its better to stay with Citizenship Amendment Act protests. Now it has been nominated to ITN, so no need to change the article header. Abishe (talk) 14:08, 16 December 2019 (UTC)

Thanks Abishe for joining the discussion. I agree with all your points. --DBigXrayᗙ 14:20, 16 December 2019 (UTC)

OVERCITE Problem

User:Pali Upadhyay please do not add too many sources for the same piece of information. see WP:OVERCITE to understand more. --DBigXrayᗙ 03:42, 17 December 2019 (UTC)

Maps

Can we have map of protests ? Few protests are mapped @ User:Naveenpf/sandbox/CAB. Medias are always using more visualization. ex :- https://twitter.com/rahulkanwal/status/1206567950448242688 -- naveenpf (talk) 04:47, 17 December 2019 (UTC)

naveenpf it is a good idea, however the map is incomplete. Please refer to the article and add all the locations. How can we add this to the article ? can you share the one with the thumbnail image. --DBigXrayᗙ 05:13, 17 December 2019 (UTC)

Will do that- https://twitter.com/Memeghnad/status/1206825553744908288 -- naveenpf (talk) 09:11, 17 December 2019 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

• Anti CAA painting.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 13:21, 17 December 2019 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians, the file which have been selected for deletion, was by mistake put under a wrong copyright tag. Please help me change the copyright. Abhroneel 13:25, 17 December 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ankur Jyoti Dewri (talk • contribs)

Ankur Jyoti Dewri: You have claimed that it is your own work but it clearly indicates that the image you uploaded have copyright issues to fix. Please refer WP:Copyrights for further clarifications. Wikipedia is strictly abide by the copyright policies. If your image would have been in the publuc domain you wouldn't have the need to seek copyright from the holder. But in this case you have to ask the copyright permission from the holder in order to freely use it in Wikipedia. Abishe (talk) 13:48, 17 December 2019 (UTC)

The issue is that the painting is not a work of a particular artist. Rather it was painted by various artists as a demonstration against the Citizenship Amendment Act 2019. The work is absolutely in public domain, but it was my mistake that I tagged it as my own work. Abhroneel 14:32, 17 December 2019 (UTC)

  Please help me fix the copyright issues. Thanks Abhroneel 14:33, 17 December 2019 (UTC)  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ankur Jyoti Dewri (talk • contribs)  

User:Ankur Jyoti Dewri will it be possible for you to contact some of the artists of this painting? --DBigXrayᗙ 14:35, 17 December 2019 (UTC)

Yeah. I can but it will take some days, but I think till then the file will be deleted. Abhroneel 14:39, 17 December 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ankur Jyoti Dewri (talk • contribs)

I will try to contact some of the artists and will fix the copyright issue. Thanks for your support guys. Abhroneel 14:44, 17 December 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ankur Jyoti Dewri (talk • contribs)

Dont worry Ankur Jyoti Dewri, A file that gets deleted can easily be recovered from the archives. Admins can do that. Please read Wikipedia:Requesting_copyright_permission#For_images and Wikipedia:Declaration of consent for all enquiries on what needs to be done. --DBigXrayᗙ 15:30, 17 December 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for the information. Will remain grateful. :) Abhroneel 16:16, 17 December 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ankur Jyoti Dewri (talk • contribs)

Problematic infobox

@Worthfulrebel:: There's numerous issues at present with the infobox and short description: [CONTENT MOVED TO SUB-THREADS BELOW] @DBigXray: @Kautilya3: @El C: Pali Upadhyay (talk) 12:13, 18 December 2019 (UTC)

If you want me to respond, you will need to create separate sections/threads covering major aspects together instead of making one Khichadi. infobox discussion for example needs separate thread.--DBigXrayᗙ Happy Holidays! 12:50, 18 December 2019 (UTC)

Okay done, this mainly alludes to the infobox anyways which I think needs immediate attention. Pali Upadhyay (talk) 13:17, 18 December 2019 (UTC)

Intentionally replying at the most general thread; in an article as contentious as this, and with categories as fluid as they are, I would recommend keeping the infobox absolutely minimal, and keeping contentious descriptors to the body, where they can be explained/qualified. Vanamonde (Talk) 19:30, 18 December 2019 (UTC)

1 "Anti-Police Brutality" and "Anti-Immigration"

• It segregates protesters in strict categories of "Anti-Immigration", "Anti-Discrimination" and "Anti-Police Brutality" where there is a confluence of such causes especially in the case of "Anti-Immigration" and "Anti-Police Brutality" which itself is alluded to in the very citations for the various students organisations participating in the protests. Pali Upadhyay (talk) 12:13, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
• There is some degree of convergence between the causes of "Anti-Police Brutality" and "Anti-Immigration" as well in certain protests. Therefore making it misleading to strictly segregate the causes of protests in the infobox. The rest of the article can allude to the various nuances present. Pali Upadhyay (talk) 12:13, 18 December 2019 (UTC)

Agree that this is unsourced WP:OR, I have removed them from the infobox. thanks for pointing. DBigXrayᗙ Happy Holidays! 15:23, 18 December 2019 (UTC)

2 Muslim groups

• The charecterization of protesters of "Anti-Discrimination" as "muslims" is uncited and absent in any citation in the article, citations to the contrary are present. The charecerization as well comes into question due to the issues raised by substantial non-muslim organizations and personalities for which there's citations throughout the article. Pali Upadhyay (talk) 12:13, 18 December 2019 (UTC)

I agree with you, I have replaced Muslig groups with multiple groups of citizens, hope it helps. If you have a better suggestions please do let me know. --DBigXrayᗙ Happy Holidays! 14:54, 18 December 2019 (UTC)

3. Citations

• The following citations alluding to the aforementioned nature of the protests have been removed. Pali Upadhyay (talk) 12:13, 18 December 2019 (UTC)

References

Normally per MOS:LEADCITE citations should not be added to the infobox, instead they should be in the article, so please feel free to re-add them into the article along with the relevant content, and only reference them in the infobox when really needed and only refer one citation and not too many. see WP:OVERCITE--DBigXrayᗙ Happy Holidays! 13:44, 18 December 2019 (UTC)

@DBigXray: I added to citations because it was being edited back to "muslim protesters" concerning the protests on the mainland which isn't referenced as such anywhere in the article or even in any of the citations in the article. I also can't not add back the citations since it is under extended confirmed access. Pali Upadhyay (talk) 14:33, 18 December 2019 (UTC)

Pali Upadhyay, yes, it will make sense to add refs for controversial info on infobox, or for entries that are changed regularly. Anything in the infobox must be in the article as well. if it is missing, that needs to be fixed first. you can still edit the article by making WP:EDITREQUEST, I will be glad to add them if you propose the content in new threads with edit request.--DBigXrayᗙ Happy Holidays! 14:37, 18 December 2019 (UTC)

4 political parties

• The inclusion of political parties as support in the infobox is problematic due to the sporadic nature of the support, with no citation of a clear national official statement on it. While a case can be made for some, they remain uncited. There has also been denial of support from political parties in some cases.

@DBigXray: @Kautilya3: @El C: Pali Upadhyay (talk) 12:13, 18 December 2019 (UTC)

References

Pali Upadhyay. what do you want here, remove all the 4 party names from infobox ? --DBigXrayᗙ Happy Holidays! 15:26, 18 December 2019 (UTC)

Do not remove the parties which are mentioned in the infobox who support the protests and favour in repealing the act. Let it remain in the infobox. Only the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party supports the act. Abishe (talk) 15:47, 18 December 2019 (UTC)

Abishe then please add sources and add in the body also--DBigXrayᗙ Happy Holidays! 16:12, 18 December 2019 (UTC)

Haven't four opposition CM's declared that they will not implement NRC/CAA in their states? That itself is a protest. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 16:30, 18 December 2019 (UTC)

Five opposition CMs have done so but three of them belong to the INC while there's INC states which haven't done so. But regardlessly I think there is a good case for all of them anyways except perhaps AAP whose support is a bit ambiguous considering they are currently in a verbal spat with the BJP which is accusing it of encouraging vandalism while the AAP is denying its presence in the protests itself while the party leader has however raised the same concerns regarding the NRC and CAA as that of the protesters. The part regarding AAP is however not in the body of the article currently and there is support from various other parties of a similar nature. Pali Upadhyay (talk) 19:41, 18 December 2019 (UTC)

Kautilya3, Pali Upadhyay makes a good case. What do you think. regardless about the end result of this discussion, it is obvious that AAP does not need to be in this list and I have already removed AAP from the list. We con continue the discussion if we should keep others or not. --DBigXrayᗙ Happy Holidays! 20:26, 18 December 2019 (UTC)

Fine, I am happy with the three parties whose CM's have protested publicly. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 20:47, 18 December 2019 (UTC)

Cool Kautilya3. Abishe FYI based on your feedback, I have added BJP and ABVP in the support section--DBigXrayᗙ Happy Holidays! 21:28, 18 December 2019 (UTC)

Isn't Kolkata affected by protests?

I went through the article and it is nicely updated. One thing I noticed one of the sources which mentioned that the 2020 IPL auction would proceed as planned on 19 December in Kolkata despite the reports of violence in West Bengal and it also mentioned Kolkata is safe. I am not convinced by the point which mentioned that Kolkata isn't much affected by the Citizenship Amendment Act because I understand Kolkata is the capital of West Bengal. I am confused after looking at the source. Abishe (talk) 15:43, 18 December 2019 (UTC)

The auction takes place in the ball room of a five star hotel, not on the road or the ground, so it is understandable that they are not affected. General public are not allowed inside. If you think something is lacking WP:BOLD and add it in the West Bengal Section. thanks. --DBigXrayᗙ Happy Holidays! 15:47, 18 December 2019 (UTC)

Yeah, I also acknowledge that the auction takes place in a big five star hotel but I was wondering why the source mentioned that Kolkata is not affected by the protests. Hope it is just a minor error. Thanks for the clarification. Abishe (talk) 15:54, 18 December 2019 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

• A child taking part in an anti-CAB NRC protest.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 16:36, 19 December 2019 (UTC)

Timeline of Protests & Protests

Is there a requirement for two seperate sections for timeline of protests and protests? They seem to be repeating the same things. Pali Upadhyay (talk) 16:38, 19 December 2019 (UTC)

The protests section has become too big to read for new users and hampers understanding. Consider the timeline as a timewise summary of the Protest section. It will have one liners about the content that goes into the protest section. The timeline will only contain major incidents of violence or news. Other less major incidents and the details about the major incidents will go into the Protests section. --DBigXrayᗙ Happy Holidays! 16:43, 19 December 2019 (UTC)

The Caravan

The Caravan articles usually don't show up in Google searches. But they are a goldmine of information. Please cover them here. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 12:25, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

FYI User:Pali Upadhyay--DBigXrayᗙ Happy Holidays! 17:20, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

Return National Awards and Honour

Some people decided to return National Awards and Honours. Should it be added?S. M. Nazmus Shakib (talk) 13:03, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

Indeed, that should certainly be added, consider adding a new section titled "Return of Awards" after Protest, and include the content along with source. thanks. --DBigXrayᗙ Happy Holidays! 13:07, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

DBigXray I have added one. Please, take a look.S. M. Nazmus Shakib (talk) 13:19, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

Good work, I made some cosmetic copy edits and moved it under protest, since this is also a kind of protest. Pali_Upadhyay do you think this could be added to the infobox as methods ? I am not sure, but I will likely leave it from the infobox. --DBigXrayᗙ Happy Holidays! 13:21, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

DBigXray State honour refuse should be added?S. M. Nazmus Shakib (talk) 13:31, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

Yes, please add. All national or state level awards are notable enough to be added. --DBigXrayᗙ Happy Holidays! 13:34, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

I am not sure if they should be added in the infobox itself since it's not a tactic, common protesters are or can resort to, there's various other forms of localized protests which aren't listed on there. Pali Upadhyay (talk) 13:41, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

Yes, I have similar feelings. Lets skip adding this to infobox. --DBigXrayᗙ Happy Holidays! 13:50, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

Ok, I am doing. Please correct if I did any wrong as I am relatively new user than you. Thanks.S. M. Nazmus Shakib (talk) 13:47, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

DBigXray Supriyo Sen (see জাতীয় পুরস্কার নয়, অনুষ্ঠান বয়কট করেছি: সুপ্রিয় সেন (lit. trans. I decided not to attend NFA ceremony not NFA), Jahnu Barua (Assam cannot take the burden of the consequences of CAB: Film maker Jahnu Barua (decided to remove his film from state film award), Yaqoob Yawar (decided to return Uttar Pradesh State Urdu Academy Award for translation) see (CAB: Two Urdu Writers to Return Awards in Protest should be added?S. M. Nazmus Shakib (talk) 14:16, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

Yes, please add. --DBigXrayᗙ Happy Holidays! 14:21, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

Cluttered Infobox

Is it necessary to show the political affiliations of every organisation involved when the wikipage of the organisation has already been linked to it? It seems to be causing unnecessary cluttering so I'd suggest removing all of them with the exclusion of any official position any individual has within the government. Pali Upadhyay (talk) 16:20, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

I'm supportive of keeping the information in the infobox but rearranging it so that it's easier to read for those who complain. I think the information is important to retain. Another option might be to discuss it in terms of "youth wing and student wing of the Communist Party of India" rather than writing out four+ names. Worthfulrebel (talk) 16:24, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

None of the organisations listed belong to the Communist Party of India and they are also all seperate organisations with substantial individual membership. Pali Upadhyay (talk) 16:47, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

I suggest moving the current version of the content that has student parties + affiliations to a new section, calling it "participants". and then in the infobox, only use party name ( no need to say student wing of X in the infobox, that info is there in the main body). I think this strategy may improve. thoughts ? --DBigXrayᗙ Happy Holidays! 17:00, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

That seems more appropriate to me, yeah. Pali Upadhyay (talk) 17:10, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

Pali Upadhyay, cool, please proceed, whenever you can. DBigXrayᗙ Happy Holidays! 17:18, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

I support this as long as the party names are retained. The article needs to make it clear that, apart from the Assam protesters, the majority of the protesting student groups are allied with the left-wing, whereas most of the right-wing student groups are counter-protesters. Worthfulrebel (talk) 18:36, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

The party names are retained in the article as well as in the infobox. There have not been much counter protests as far as I am aware, ABVP is the only organisation included because it had clashed with the NSUI in the protests. Grouping the various organization under CPI or CPIM is inaccurate, two of the organisations have a relation with the CPIM. Pali Upadhyay (talk) 18:58, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

I have partially reverted Wortful. Your version is extremely ugly and unnecessarily detailed. You can click the link if you want to know their affiliations. Also this is against the talk page consensus discussed above. You are introducing your own WP:OR that "all are left parties", No they are not. I agree with Pali above. --DBigXrayᗙ Happy Holidays! 18:59, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

I believe the party names add a lot of needed information to the article and infobox. Ugliness isn't an excuse for excluding much needed information from the article. And no there isn't an agreement on removing the information yet, so I will put it back. I personally support keeping the party affiliations outright. Worthfulrebel (talk) 19:09, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

The information isn't even accurate as it qualifies organisation which aren't related to the INC or CPIM as being so, the supporting parties are also listed. Pali Upadhyay (talk) 19:16, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

Worthfulrebel This is your only warning for violation of WP:1RR. If you want to add what you want to add, produce relable source or drop this and work on improving and adding today's updates. there is a lot to add from yesterday and today into the article. --DBigXrayᗙ Happy Holidays! 19:26, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

That warning requires me to revert information so I'll take that as a non-warning. I had also changed the text to reflect that there are a number of communist parties involved. Furthermore, the infobox alludes to the idea that all these protesters want the same thing, despite the fact that the Assam groups (including students) are against Muslim migration and opposed to the views of the INC/CPI and Muslim protesters. There have been riots between the two groups in recent history as well. Worthfulrebel (talk) 19:29, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

Worthfulrebel, One more revert and I will have to report you on WP:ANEWfor blocking--DBigXrayᗙ Happy Holidays! 19:33, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

Please show me where I have reverted information? Furthermore you asked me to provide references and repost the information. And finally you alone are not the controller of this article, and there has not been any consensus to remove the party affiliations from the infobox. Worthfulrebel (talk) 19:39, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

I have added the diffs on WP:ANEW. This is extremely unfortunate that you have resorted to ride a roughshod on WP:1RR. I will not be happy if you are blocked for this, and so I would suggest you to self revert your recent addition of the disputed line from the infobox. I am willing to withdraw the complaint if you self revert and agree to not edit war anymore and continue the talk page discussion. --DBigXrayᗙ Happy Holidays! 19:50, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

It's also unfortunate that the only method you can find of shoehorning political biases into this article is to ban people. The text in question is valid as the Assam protesters and these student groups do not share the same political goals, and furthermore it's important to know that these student groups are protesting due to their own political leanings rather than because they support the Assam protesters at their core. The only groups that actually care about the consequences of the bill are the Assam protesters and a handful of Muslim groups - every other group is protesting based on political affiiliation. The idea that something should be removed because it's "ugly" is beyond ridiculous - try to come up with a substantive excuse at least. Worthfulrebel (talk) 19:59, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

I suppose the above means that you refuse to self revert and face block. Fine suit yourself. --DBigXrayᗙ Happy Holidays! 20:01, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

This is just assertions and POV insertion at the point, and now allegations. The reasons given by various organisation are well varied and extremely convoluted, let alone the reasons for individual protesters. They are accounted for in the article and if not, they can be accounted. The infobox can't contain all the information. Here is an example of the KMSS which is an Assamese organisation arguing against the act on the basis of both "religious discrimination" and "illegal immigration" — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pali Upadhyay (talk • contribs) 20:09, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

That's also not what is generally accepted. The Assam groups that are rioting now were historically involved in the Anti-Muslim tensions in Assam, and you are forgetting the Assam riots in 2012. There's utterly no reason to remove political affiliations either (on both sides) as saying an infobox looks "ugly" is ridiculous considering how messy an infobox on Middle Eastern topics can get. If you want to stop bring in POVs then essentially reinstate the original text with political affiliations (which I don't think is too cluttered) or create your own text that adds said information into the inforbox without making it too cluttered. Or simply write "student groups affiliated with INC and communist parties" without writing their names if you really want to make it less cluttered. I don't see why the student groups should be there when plenty of other groups have been protesting as well. Worthfulrebel (talk) 20:14, 20 December 2019 (UTC)