Talk:2020 Delhi riots
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the 2020 Delhi riots article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20Auto-archiving period: 5 days |
The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles, which has been designated as a contentious topic. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. |
There have been attempts to recruit editors of specific viewpoints to this article, in a manner that does not comply with Wikipedia's policies. Editors are encouraged to use neutral mechanisms for requesting outside input (e.g. a "request for comment", a third opinion or other noticeboard post, or neutral criteria: "pinging all editors who have edited this page in the last 48 hours"). If someone has asked you to provide your opinion here, examine the arguments, not the editors who have made them. Reminder: disputes are resolved by consensus, not by majority vote. |
The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information. |
Please stay calm and civil while commenting or presenting evidence, and do not make personal attacks. Be patient when approaching solutions to any issues. If consensus is not reached, other solutions exist to draw attention and ensure that more editors mediate or comment on the dispute. |
This article is written in Indian English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, analysed, defence) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
A news item involving 2020 Delhi riots was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the In the news section on 26 February 2020. |
This article is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
|
This article has been mentioned by multiple media organizations:
|
1RR now in effect
This section is pinned and will not be automatically archived. |
Please be mindful, everyone. El_C 14:39, 29 February 2020 (UTC)
- Can this fact be included in a new section or mentioned somewhere in the article. Zikrullah (talk) 18:03, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
- It is noted in in the article whenever one edits, in Template:Editnotices/Page/2020 Delhi riots, as well as at the top of this talk page in Template:IPA AE. El_C 18:52, 10 March 2020 (UTC)
Fowler&fowler's: Developing the article main body, and eventually rewriting the lead (in POV-embattled India-related articles)
This section is pinned and will not be automatically archived. |
"POV-embattled," by the way, means battlements of POV dot, litter, even crisscross the topic. This is long, but please bear with me. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 13:56, 5 April 2020 (UTC)
- Stage 1
The lead which is locked in the article right now is a summary of the topic, not the main body. It has due weight and overall reliability. In Stage 1, we have cited and summarized content from newspapers:
- (a) which have correspondents based in India.
- (b) whose articles (which are of interest to us) have bylines (i.e. the name of the correspondents shows up below the title of their story) and
- (c) which are published in liberal democracies where there is no significant POV around this issue. (i.e. South Asian newspapers have been ruled out at this stage.)
We have cited from: NYTimes, Washington Post, Independent, Guardian, Times (London), and Le Monde. (There are obviously others as well, which we did not use. I will make a list elsewhere of newspapers which have correspondents based in India.)
By definition, the lead will not have all the notable details. The sources it cites may not have all the notable details either, because their main audience (an international one) may not be conversant with, or generally interested in, all local details. For expansion, therefore, you will need to look at the reliable high-quality Indian sources whose perspectives match the one in the lead, which now serves as a template of DUE.
- Stage 2
In my view, for recent Indian events just six national newspapers in India are enough for fleshing out the details:
The Statesman (Kolkata, founded 1875/1817), The Hindu (Chennai, founded 1878), The Free Press Journal (Mumbai, founded 1928), The Indian Express (Delhi, founded 1933), Deccan Chronicle (Hyderabad, founded 1938), and The Telegraph (Kolkata) (founded 1982)
- Question: Why bother to write such a lead in the first place?
- Answer: Because if we don't, we will not have a DUE summary of the topic against which to measure the neutrality of our additions. Later, when a topic becomes older, text-books, other encyclopedias, reviews of literature, and so forth, become available for determining DUE, but for now, there is nothing else. Also, as the lead is what people read first, and sometimes, they read no further: it is important for it to be comprehensive and neutral, especially when the rest of the article is not.
- Question: Why start with only these six Indian newspapers?
- Answer: Because these newspapers have old traditions of excellence and independence. As print newspapers based in different regions of India, they necessarily have to summarize—in the multi-ethnic Indian context—in a manner that local or digital newspapers do not.
As an example, consider the "peace marches" in the New York Times story, which have been paraphrased in the lead as:
After the violence had abated in the thickly-settled mixed Hindu-Muslim neighbourhoods of North East Delhi, some Hindu politicians paraded alleged Hindu victims of Muslim violence in an attempt to reshape the accounting of events and to further inflame hostility towards Muslims.[1]
References
- ^ Gettleman, Jeffrey; Yasir, Sameer; Raj, Suhasini; Kumar, Hari (12 March 2020), "'If We Kill You, Nothing Will Happen': How Delhi's Police Turned Against Muslims", The New York Times, Photographs by Loke, Atul, retrieved 13 March 2020,
The religiously mixed and extremely crowded neighborhoods in northeastern Delhi that were on fire in late February have cooled. But some Hindu politicians continue to lead so-called peace marches, trotting out casualties of the violence with their heads wrapped in white medical tape, trying to upend the narrative and make Hindus seem like the victims, which is stoking more anti-Muslim hatred.
There are stories about one peace march on February 29 in:
- this Deccan Chronicle story (with byline, )
- this Hindu story (with byline, )
- this Indian Express story (with byline )
- this Statesman story (by their web desk, not OK)
- The Telegraph (Kolkata) Press Trust of India (PTI) feed, (not OK)
- The Telegraph (Kolkata) signed article by Pheroze Vincent, printed two days later ( )
These should, therefore, be used to further expand the topic of peace marches, at least one peace march. Similarly, determining whether there were other marches, before or after, will require examining these sources for other dates.
- Stage 3
- After the main body is fleshed out in such fashion, the lead should be rewritten by summing up the main body. No footnotes, let alone extended quotes, will then be required in the lead unless a statement is highly controversial. But for now, they are essential.
In the language of artificial intelligence, the stages are 1: The lead is written using sources that are relatively low-res (or high-level (OED: high-level: relating to or concerned with a subject, system, or phenomenon as a whole, rather than its particular details.), or macro-level). 2. The main body is fleshed out using sources that are high-res (low-level, micro-level), but in keeping with the content of stage 1 (i.e. DUE). 3. The lead is rewritten as a low-res/high-level version of the main body.
Good luck, @SerChevalerie, NedFausa, SharabSalam, Kautilya3, Slatersteven, and DIYeditor: Pinging also: @RegentsPark, Abecedare, DougWeller, El C, Anachronist, Drmies, Johnbod, Bishonen, and Vanamonde93: Fowler&fowler«Talk» 13:56, 5 April 2020 (UTC)
- Fowler&fowler, thanks. SerChevalerie (talk) 14:34, 5 April 2020 (UTC)
- Even though you haven't pinged me, I have been keeping this talk page in my watchlist. You did very well! Thank you, Fowler&fowler. --KartikeyaS (talk) 08:58, 7 April 2020 (UTC)
Fowler&fowler's List of foreign newspapers with correspondents in India
Dear @SerChevalerie, NedFausa, SharabSalam, Kautilya3, Slatersteven, DIYeditor, and KartikeyaS343: Pinging also: @RegentsPark, Abecedare, DougWeller, El C, Anachronist, Drmies, Johnbod, Bishonen, and Vanamonde93: Collapsed below is a list I had mentioned above. It is much bigger than I had thought, and there are still some (Haarets, Jerusalem Post, in Israel, South African newspapers) which I have not examined. Still, used judiciously, it may prove useful in the future. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 00:34, 8 April 2020 (UTC)
- PS I have not added the links/urls for newspapers that rigorously require a subscription, only the titles of the stories. (It is easier to search the title on Google.) If someone wants small blurbs from them, I'm happy to provide them. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 00:44, 8 April 2020 (UTC)
North America
Newspapers and other media in the US and Canada with correspondents in India
|
---|
|
United Kingdom and Ireland
Newspapers and other media in the UK and Ireland with correspondents in India
|
---|
|
Europe
Newspapers and other media in Europe with correspondents in India
|
---|
|
Asia and Australia
Fowler&fowler«Talk» 00:34, 8 April 2020 (UTC)
Vote
- Support
- Sounds good, I have already used a couple of these for the "Aftermath". SerChevalerie (talk) 17:56, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose
OI FOWLER NOOOOO!! NedFausa (talk) 15:23, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
- Please note: in registering my opposition, I used the verbatim wording prescribed here. If I was misled, please advise. NedFausa (talk) 15:36, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
- Per wp:consensus "In determining consensus, consider the quality of the arguments, the history of how they came about, the objections of those who disagree, and existing policies and guidelines. The quality of an argument is more important than whether it represents a minority or a majority view. The arguments "I just don't like it" and "I just like it" usually carry no weight whatsoever.", you have to actually make a case.Slatersteven (talk) 15:48, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Once again, WP:BLP applies here - and this is not a discussion page for the riots
This section is pinned and will not be automatically archived. |
If multiple reliable sources discuss someone's activities and you want them added to the article, bring them here and suggest your wording.
DO NOT use this page to discuss them (or in fact the riots) - this isn't a forum, this page exists only to discuss improvements to the article. Doug Weller talk 10:50, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
Every request to include reliable references about the other side of the story are getting denied by the editors. The page is clearly blaming hindus for the riot. It is blaming mr kapil mishra for the riot. But mr tahir Hussain's name cannot be found in the article. Because no indian court has convicted him yet. Has any indian court convicted the hindus? Has any indian court convicted mr kapil mishra? No discussion is possible here because the output is clear. The editors will not include any valid reference about mr Hussain's involvement. They will not included any reference which shows that not only hindus, the muslims were also involved in the riots. There seems to be no violation of wp:blp when including Mr kapil mishra's name more than 30 times in the article. This article is an absolute violation of wp:npov. So no discussion is possible here. The editors are pushing their pov. So what else can be done? Where to raise complaints agains this religiously biased article? Quanta127 (talk) 04:07, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
Once again, we cannot call people terrorists are murders on this page unless they've been convicted
This section is pinned and will not be automatically archived. |
I'm removing them from the record when I can as WP:BLP violations. If I catch someone doing it twice I'll block them at least from this talk page and the article. Doug Weller talk 09:55, 15 June 2020 (UTC)
- Should have have some banner at the top or something (not that I think it will matter, as this is all about POV pushing.Slatersteven (talk) 10:01, 15 June 2020 (UTC)
WP:BLP is not getting violated when the entire article indicates that Mr Kapil mishra is the main culprit behind the riots? Numerous references are included which indicate that mr mishra is the mastermind of the riot. Does WP:BLP apply to people of a particular religion. If not then where is Mr. Tahir Hussain's name? Including Mr Hussain's name is violation of WP:BLP but including Mr Kapil mishra's name is allowed? This is clearly POV pushing by the editors. If the editors are including Mr kapil mishra's name then include Mr tahir Hussain's name also. If if the editors do not want to include Mr. Hussain's name then remove Mr. mishra's name. There is WP:BLP violation by the editors of the page. So please do the necessary. Quanta127 (talk) 05:40, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
Wikipedia policy on police reports and a note that Wikipedia is not a place to carry on real world conflicts
This section is pinned and will not be automatically archived. |
The policy that we enforce most strictly is our policy on recently deceased and living persons. WP:BLP. Part of that policy, WP:BLPPRIMARY says "Do not use trial transcripts and other court records, or other public documents, to support assertions about a living person. Do not use public records that include personal details, such as date of birth, home value, traffic citations, vehicle registrations, and home or business addresses."
This policy applies not just to the article but to this talk page. Just to strengthen it, I'm putting the article (and talk page) under our BLP discretionary sanctions.
I hope this explains to all the new editors why Administrators such as myself have been taking the actions that we have taken and will continue to take. If anyone continues to break our policy either here or the article after warnings, they can expect to be blocked from editing at all, or banned from any pages in the sanction area. Too many editors are treating the article and talk page in a WP:BATTLEGROUND matter. Wikipedia is not here to WP:right great wrongs. Probably something like this belongs at the top of the page, although too many new editors probably don't read anything there. Doug Weller talk 09:10, 16 June 2020 (UTC)
WP:BLP is violated in this page because allegations made against Mr Kapil Mishra. He is a living human being. He has not been convicted by any indian court. On the other hand Mr Tahir Hussain's name is nowhere to be found, because of WP:BLP violation. Even Mr. Hussain's confession about "teaching the Hindus a lesson" is also nowhere to be seen in the article. The excuse "he has not been convicted by an Indian court". Has Mr kapil mishra been convicted by an indian court. Seems like the editors are pushing their POV on the excuse of WP:BLP. WP:BLP is for all living persons. Then why WP:BLP is not violated for Mr. Kapil Mishra but it is getting violated for Mr. Hussain. What is the reason is not personal bias? Quanta127 (talk) 05:49, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
Rana Ayyub's opinion is not an RS.
The writer of "gujrat files" and renowned Modi hater Rana Ayyub's opinion has been cited as RS #48. Is this a joke? Please remove reference number [48]. Please understand that just because some references support your POV doesn't mean that is an RS. Then please include some random bjp supporting journalist's opinion also. I will be happy to share some of those here. Quanta127 (talk) 11:03, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
No issue with its removal, why do we need it?Slatersteven (talk) 11:10, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
- I've removed the opinion piece. Regards, TryKid [dubious – discuss] 11:25, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
- My edit wasn't saved to a server error. Let me try again. TryKid [dubious – discuss] 11:27, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
- okay finally done. I've removed Ayyub's opinion piece. Regards, TryKid [dubious – discuss] 11:33, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
Useful source
This is just out from the BBC; seems useful. Vanamonde (Talk) 05:40, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
- As is this one Tanyasingh (talk) 11:05, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
- Thanks for those links. By a consensus of many months ago, we are only using international third-party newspapers (or news organizations such as ABC (US and AU), CBS, NBC, CBC, NPR, PBS, BBC, DW) with correspondents in India.
BBC is of course usually RS, but not for this page and tBBC would be OK, but this article doesn't really have a byline. We should perhaps wait. Al Jazeera is not for reasons explained in a section I had created of the RSs. I did a quick check (NYTimes, WaPO, LATimes, SF Chronicle, WSJ, Independent, Times London, and Le Monde) for stories after April 1. (The Amnesty story is new, so I will check again in a day or two.) What I found was (a) an opinion column in WaPo by Rana Ayub, which of course we cannot use (b) the NYTimes Story India Rounds Up Critics Under Shadow of Virus Crisis, Activists Say By Sameer Yasir and Kai Schultz July 19, 2020 New York Times. There was nothing else in those newspapers. I did not check the Guardian, but that does not require a subscription. There was also a story: Inde : un éditeur accusé de censure après l'annulation d'un livre, about a book on the Delhi riots, which the publisher withdrew allegedly under pressure. That website does not qualify as an RS for this page, but the story might appear in the RSs Fowler&fowler«Talk» 13:38, 28 August 2020 (UTC)- There is also an AP report without a byline (carried now by the NYTimes Amnesty Says India Police Violated Rights in Religious Riots but that too is not an RS. (AP needs to have a byline and to be carried by a few of the RSs) Fowler&fowler«Talk» 13:54, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
- @Fowler&fowler: Disqualifying the BBC doesn't sit right with me, and as far as I'm aware, they do have correspondents; are we disallowing them because it's they're not a newspaper? Vanamonde (Talk) 16:23, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
- Sorry, I forgot what we had agreed to. (Scratched and corrected above). BBC is OK, but this report does not really have a byline, a problem with immediate media reactions. We have used articles by their regular India reporter Soutik Biswas. I'm sure a BBC report with the byline of a reporter in India will appear soon. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 16:35, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
- PS He writes the print articles (even if they don't appear in hard copy) that are RS. She who has done some kind of analysis in the link above is their international news reporter in India; she is not RS for this article. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 16:46, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
- Sorry, I forgot what we had agreed to. (Scratched and corrected above). BBC is OK, but this report does not really have a byline, a problem with immediate media reactions. We have used articles by their regular India reporter Soutik Biswas. I'm sure a BBC report with the byline of a reporter in India will appear soon. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 16:35, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
- @Fowler&fowler: Disqualifying the BBC doesn't sit right with me, and as far as I'm aware, they do have correspondents; are we disallowing them because it's they're not a newspaper? Vanamonde (Talk) 16:23, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
- @Fowler&fowler: the Al Jazeera article mentions that, "Deadly violence broke out in February after weeks-long peaceful sit-in protests by Muslims in northeast Delhi against a controversial new citizenship law were targeted by Hindu nationalist mobs". So in the first paragraph of the article, can you change "Hindu" to "Hindu nationalist"; because otherwise, it is giving a negative connotation to all Hindus. I mentioned this before to SerChevalerie (talk · contribs) in archive 14, but it didn't help. ----Ritwik.m07 (talk) 07:25, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
- There is also an AP report without a byline (carried now by the NYTimes Amnesty Says India Police Violated Rights in Religious Riots but that too is not an RS. (AP needs to have a byline and to be carried by a few of the RSs) Fowler&fowler«Talk» 13:54, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
- Thanks for those links. By a consensus of many months ago, we are only using international third-party newspapers (or news organizations such as ABC (US and AU), CBS, NBC, CBC, NPR, PBS, BBC, DW) with correspondents in India.
- Wikipedia controversial topics
- Wikipedia articles that use Indian English
- Wikipedia In the news articles
- C-Class Crime-related articles
- Low-importance Crime-related articles
- WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography articles
- C-Class Death articles
- Low-importance Death articles
- WikiProject templates with unknown parameters
- C-Class Disaster management articles
- Low-importance Disaster management articles
- C-Class Discrimination articles
- Low-importance Discrimination articles
- WikiProject Discrimination articles
- C-Class Firefighting articles
- Low-importance Firefighting articles
- WikiProject Firefighting articles
- C-Class Hinduism articles
- Low-importance Hinduism articles
- C-Class India articles
- Mid-importance India articles
- C-Class India articles of Mid-importance
- C-Class Delhi articles
- High-importance Delhi articles
- C-Class Delhi articles of High-importance
- WikiProject Delhi articles
- C-Class Indian history articles
- Unknown-importance Indian history articles
- C-Class Indian history articles of Unknown-importance
- WikiProject Indian history articles
- C-Class Indian politics articles
- High-importance Indian politics articles
- C-Class Indian politics articles of High-importance
- WikiProject Indian politics articles
- WikiProject India articles
- C-Class Islam-related articles
- Low-importance Islam-related articles
- WikiProject Islam articles
- C-Class law articles
- Low-importance law articles
- WikiProject Law articles
- C-Class Law enforcement articles
- Low-importance Law enforcement articles
- WikiProject Law Enforcement articles
- C-Class Religion articles
- Low-importance Religion articles
- WikiProject Religion articles
- C-Class sociology articles
- Low-importance sociology articles
- Wikipedia pages referenced by the press