Talk:Sushant Singh Rajput

FAQ — READ THIS FIRST if you are requesting changes

• Why are you saying it's suicide? The investigation is ongoing!

Various credible secondary sources - in this case, mainstream news outlets - reported that Mumbai's and the AIIMS' medical examiners determined it was suicide and that Rhea Chakraborty is being accused of abetment of suicide. Note that the final determination of death doesn't mean the investigation is over, especially in a case involving a celebrity (see also Chris Benoit double-murder and suicide). We are also not allowed to cite investigation or government documents as they are considered primary sources.

---

• This death is mysterious! Why aren't you calling it as such?

The actual mechanism of death - asphyxia via hanging - is publicly known and not seriously disputed by any sensible party. We also do not use words or terms that imply profoundness where there is only vagueness in Wikipedia's voice - they must always be attributed.

---

• This is a case of murder! Why aren't you saying so?

No official investigations or credible news reports are calling Rajput's death a murder, with the CBI-sanctioned AIIMS autopsy review definitively ruling it out. Wikipedia does not include fringe or conspiracy theories that no credible source is taking seriously, and our biographical policy likewise forbids us from including them in this particular instance.

---

• Why are you rejecting my interpretation of the sources?

We're not allowed to synthesize new information by "reading between the lines". We are limited to whatever information the source explicitly says. Creative interpretations of sources also flagrantly violate our biographical policy.

---

• The Central Bureau of Investigation said (something)! Why aren't you mentioning this?!

The CBI has outright stated that they are not shar[ing] any details of the investigation with the media and that any claims attributed to it (As of the time of this writing, 19 September 2020 UTC) are not credible. It should be noted this is generally standard operating procedure for serious investigations the world over, generally to avoid prejudicing the case before it goes to a jury or (as has happened here) inflaming a trial by media.

---

• Why are you censoring his height?

Unless a person is notable specifically for their height or their height is otherwise relevant (such as for sports where height/weight is a major factor), Wikipedia's policy is to omit height from a person's article and infoboxes. Sushant Singh Rajput's article is no exception; the only time height was ever mentioned in the article was either as the result of unsourced edits prior to the announcement of his death or additions made immediately after the news broke on social media, all instances of which were reverted quickly on the English-language Wikipedia for having no source and which would shortly after be removed from the article on Hindi Wikipedia for the same reason. See Talk:Sushant_Singh_Rajput/Archive_1#Height for more details.

---

• If the news of Rajput's demise broke around 2:15 p.m. then why did the article have death info around 9 am?

The confusion here is of time zones. News broke around 2:15 p.m. IST. Wikipedia shows timestamps in UTC. IST is 5 hour 30 minutes ahead of UTC. Death info first appeared in article at 8:55 UTC (this edit) which means at 14:25 IST (2:25 p.m.)

---

• What about Sushant's sister Priyanka? Doesn't she get a say in this?

Unless she (or one of her supporters) has additional sources that can back up her assertions, no. It should be noted that Priyanka is herself the subject of an FIR in connection with the case.

---

• Why are you rejecting my edit request out of hand?

When someone requests an edit that is very likely to be challenged, they are required to provide links to credible published secondary sources that support the edit they wish to make. In addition, requests to make edits against a consensus or that are part of an ongoing dispute will generally be declined.

References

Death

Please remove the death reason from the article. Just add the link for full article on Sushant Singh Rajput's death. (User Ayanabha Banerjee) (link- https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCFzmPLFY-YL3NKAFz5_Xgiw)— Preceding unsigned comment added by AyanabhaBanerjee (talk • contribs)

 Not done @AyanabhaBanerjee: the reason, suicide, is verified by reliable sources (see #FAQ). We don't remove things on Wikipedia just because we don't like them. Also, I'm not sure what the relevance is of that YouTube link is. —MelbourneStar☆^talk 10:43, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

Death reason is almost confirmed as murdered so it is advisable to not to put suicide as the death reason Riyasma (talk) 10:17, 13 September 2020 (UTC)

@Riyasma: Not done: reliable sources provided confirm it was suicide. —MelbourneStar☆^talk 12:00, 13 September 2020 (UTC)

"almost confirmed as murdered" is also blatantly wrong as the CBI has made it perfectly clear they're not going to say anything that could risk prejudicing the investigation and any subsequent trial. Far as I am aware, the CBI doesn't even have a formal timeline out for their enquiry, so saying it's "almost" anything is presumptuous at best and prevarication at worst. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Hasteur Hasteur Ha-- oh....} 07:38, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

Can you please tell us the reliable sources? News channels have confirmed some foul play. Don't talk before researching. Happybunny0000111 (talk) 07:59, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

You mean the news channels who've been blasted by judges, activists, and India's main journalistic watchdog for turning this into a media shitshow? —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Hasteur Hasteur Ha-- oh....} 11:18, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

There's is nobody,not even the police saw the hanging body. The people pushing forward the suicide theory are accused of murdering him and are arrested so they aren't reliable sources. Happybunny0000111 (talk) 08:01, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

@Happybunny0000111: "Don't talk before researching" - I couldn't have said that better -- please take your advice. The reliable sources are cited in this article, in black and white. Thanks, —MelbourneStar☆^talk 08:42, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

The initial autopsy ruled out foul play and he was indeed found hanging. The only reason they are disputed is because the family demanded CBI intervention (and it should be noted that the charges against Chakraborty are abetment of suicide, as reported by several news agencies reporting on this). —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Hasteur Hasteur Ha-- oh....} 11:23, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

Yeah,you may have your formalities, I don't know how wikipedia works but this I guess we both know for sure that his death is controversial and it's under cbi investigation, so my point was to not declare it as suicide as we don't know yet for sure, you could keep the death as not known, just a suggestion, you know the rules better than me for sure . If suicide feel right, keep it. Happybunny0000111 (talk) 11:21, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

We've discussed this already. The thing is that the reliable sources that did call a manner of death called it suicide pretty much unanimously, and none of them have retracted that. (In fact, one could see reporting on Rhea's legal troubles with the family as doubling down on the suicide claim.) —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Hasteur Hasteur Ha-- oh....} 11:27, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

My research about his death is perfect, but I don't know about wikipedia and what it considers 'reliable'. Anyways, have a good day. Happybunny0000111 (talk) 11:23, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

No dear,by sources I don't mean over hyped media but NCB, ED , and CBI.You know, the police? Happybunny0000111 (talk) 11:25, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

Funny you should mention the CBI, because they've explicitly stated that any information that is attributed to them while the investigation is ongoing is not credible. Since the CBI isn't speaking publicly about the case - which is SOP for investigations like this - that makes me doubt your other two claims. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Hasteur Hasteur Ha-- oh....} 11:33, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

Who found him hanging,tell me please? The accused ? @alittle blur bori

Happybunny0000111 (talk) 11:26, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

Did you read any of the sources cited, or are you deliberately ignoring them to prove a point? —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Hasteur Hasteur Ha-- oh....} 11:28, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

References

FAQ draft

I've started to draft an FAQ for the topic area (read: SSR's death and the situation following it). I'd like some opinions on it (such as questions I've missed, tone, etc.) and I wouldn't mind others tweaking it to make it fit for purpose. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Hasteur Hasteur Ha-- oh....} 21:09, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

For context, there was a previous FAQ discussion here—now archived—that went nowhere. NedFausa (talk) 21:15, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

I think any FAQ would be useful at this point, as opposed to answering the same query over and over again; however, of course, the right tone needs to be struck. Pinging all participants of the previous FAQ discussion as a courtesy: @NedFausa: @Cyphoidbomb: @ProcrastinatingReader: @Newslinger: @Redrose64: @Dipindgr8:. Kind regards, —MelbourneStar☆^talk 08:51, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

The main issue I want to address is figuring out a way to encourage the drive-bys to actually read it. I've seen evidence enough that they aren't reading anything on this page at all. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Hasteur Hasteur Ha-- oh....} 11:10, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

Unfortunately, it's looking like a case of leading a horse to water. At least with a FAQ, it can be directed to as to avoid repeating the same answers to the same queries. How about an Edit notice? —MelbourneStar☆^talk 11:54, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

An edit notice would work. I'm just looking for some way to get these new/unregistered users' eyes on it, especially since this is likely going to need to be done to Death... and Rhea Chakraborty's talk pages as well in the event we need to resort to semi-protection (I suspect there is an active AECE sock). —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Hasteur Hasteur Ha-- oh....} 11:57, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

I'm disappointed that editors are not giving me a chance to respond to edit requests, which I have volunteered to do. As I explained to MelbourneStar at his user talk page, I cannot answer on the same day that requests from India are posted because of the time differential—the USA time zone where I live has an 11½-hour offset from IST. Yet instead of waiting overnight for me, editors are engaging in real-time squabbles with new users such as Happybunny0000111, who admits "I don't know how wikipedia works," and then proposing Template:FAQ and Wikipedia:Editnotice to deal with avoidable disagreements. One editor, throwing Wikipedia:Please do not bite the newcomers to the wind, even added Happybunny0000111 to a sockpuppet investigation on the grounds of "Refusing to look at sources, trying to make strawmen, etc." Patience is in sadly short supply. NedFausa (talk) 15:12, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

@NedFausa: I understand where you're coming from, but I think we need to acknowledge that even if you were in the right time zone—this incessant posting about Rajput's death is a problem. Not only is it unnecessary that you me or anyone else respond to every identical query, but rather, these queries are questioning the subject's death – who is a recently deceased person, thus covered by WP:BLP. I think there needs to be some sort of compromise, I just don't know that that is. —MelbourneStar☆^talk 15:26, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

@MelbourneStar: Why are you citing WP:BLP? I see nothing in that policy that prohibits users from questioning the subject's death. NedFausa (talk) 15:34, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

@NedFausa: actually on the contrary, per WP:BDP: “Such extensions would apply particularly to contentious or questionable material about the dead that has implications for their living relatives and friends, such as in the case of a possible suicide or a particularly gruesome crime.” — clearly, this matter is contentious/controversial. —MelbourneStar☆^talk 15:40, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

@MelbourneStar: If you interpret that single sentence as prohibiting users from questioning a subject's death on the associated talk page, I am at a loss. And I am positive neither Template:FAQ nor Wikipedia:Editnotice are going to prevent such discussions. NedFausa (talk) 15:51, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

WP:BDP/WP:BLP extends to all pages on Wikipedia, not just the article space. Again, BDP describes suicides as contentious; the subject of this article died by suicide. That’s policy, and understandably so, considering it is so recent and this person does have a family/we wouldn’t want questionable claims be made anywhere. You’ve said that FAQ/Edit Notices won’t work, yet neither will responding to every single query as has just been demonstrated. Anyway, speaking of time zones, it’s pretty late over here! Good night, —MelbourneStar☆^talk 16:02, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

If you or any other editor believes Extended-confirmed-protected edit requests or other comments on this talk page have violated WP:BLP, then I urge you to immediately seek Wikipedia:Revision deletion of those entries. Since admin Cyphoidbomb has joined this thread, he may be particularly receptive to your claims. NedFausa (talk) 16:12, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

I see that admin Cyphoidbomb has now purged one of Happybunny0000111's contributions even without a WP:REVDEL request, but solely on the grounds of "Rubbish." That's one way to do it. NedFausa (talk) 17:04, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

@MelbourneStar: I'm not sure if edit notices are visible to mobile readers, but it would be better than nothing. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:36, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

@Cyphoidbomb: In view of your removal of a contribution to this talk page by Happybunny0000111 on the grounds of "Rubbish," I consulted Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines. I wondered if only an admin such as yourself could exercise that power. But I see no such restriction! The guideline declares that it is appropriate to remove prohibited material such as BLP violations, which we have been discussing on this thread. Please, will you clarify? If MelbourneStar, Jéské Couriano, and other concerned editors, who are not admins, are at liberty to revert Extended-confirmed-protected edit requests or other comments on this talk page, it might alleviate their aggravation, and eliminate any necessity for Template:FAQ or Wikipedia:Editnotice. No need to discuss or even mark the request as answered. Just undo it with a click, add a single-word edit summary, and move on with improving Sushant Singh Rajput. Problem solved. NedFausa (talk) 19:06, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

It is regularly done in talk pages of Ext-protected articles. See Talk:Saini for example. I've reverted pesky requests myself, like many other non-admins. Difference is most of the requests in that article come from a sockfarm - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 19:29, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

Not every request made is done by an ÆCE sock. In fact, I think I've got a firmer grasp on how ÆCE behaves, and these drive-bys aren't likely to be them; they're more likely just Indians who have cultural/religious reasons to reject suicide, even if it's staring them in the face. Again, I do believe the drive-bys are acting in good faith; they're just resistant to reading up on how Wikipedia works and suffering from cognitive dissonance that someone they looked up to could have chosen to self-terminate. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Hasteur Hasteur Ha-- oh....} 20:43, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

I don't think there is any cultural and/or religious thing in this. What actually happened is some photos and videos of the dead got viral, the net detectives deduced he was murdered judging from the "evidences" in them. More people started believing that murder scenario, it spread like wild fire in the social media. Then some notable individuals like this person came up with 20+ points why it is a murder, this lawyer also deduced the same thing. After almost a month and a half this news channel started their campaign on this. Obviously most requests are in good faith, but note that there is also an anti-Wikipedia bias. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 08:14, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

I've created some kind of FAQ in the meantime, with a single Q/A, since this has been under extensive discussion since the first time NedFausa and I discussed the idea in August. No prejudice to consensus replacing with the draft once ready, or hashing out details, or anything else, of course. Just seems like we've debated it ad infinitum and I think we're ready to at least have something by this point. ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 22:35, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

By the looks of it, barring the addition of more questions-and-answers, the FAQ is just about ready. Should I just transclude it into the section at the top (after moving it to a more suitable venue, such as, say, a /FAQ subpage of this talk page)? —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Hasteur Hasteur Ha-- oh....} 21:08, 19 September 2020 (UTC)

I would be fine with that, thank you all for the work on getting the FAQ together. RickinBaltimore (talk) 21:19, 19 September 2020 (UTC)

You should replace the /FAQ I've created with it. Though, I have concerns with a few points on your draft. e.g. not seriously disputed by any sensible party seem degrading and not helpful. We're not going to get anyone to change their mind, especially not if opinions are being backed by a media parade and religious/cultural issues. Besides, nobody has ever changed their mind by being called insensible. Changing people's mind isn't what we're trying to do, though, we're just trying to cut down on perennial edit requests. I also think there's too many questions. I think more Q&As => less chance any of them get read. Not sure ones like "Why did Wikipedia say that Rajput was dead before the authorities announced his death?" are necessary anymore, that circus stopped last month. Same with "Why are you rejecting my edit request out of hand?" -- I don't think this complaint is an issue currently. If they submit and want to discuss, that's not so much disruptive (can also reply with "see FAQ" if point raised is generic). Disruptiveness is the perennial request in the first place. I think we can sum this up in 1-3 Q&As: "why is it called a suicide", "why won't you call it mysterious circumstances -- investigation ongoing!", and "it's a murder!" ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 21:43, 19 September 2020 (UTC)

"Not being disputed by any sensible party" is because the only people who are disputing the actual cause of death are those buying into "he was murdered" conspiracy theories or those who are conflating the cause of death ("How did he die?") and the manner of death ("Why did he die?"). The actual major parties to the situation - SSR's family, Mumbai police, Chakraborty, etc. - all agree, as far as I can grok from the sources, that he died from asphyxia by hanging (in part because he was found dead hanging from a ceiling fan); they just dispute the manner of death.
As to rejecting requests out of hand, that is pretty much what's happening with 80% of the edit requests that we're seeing - they are being rejected without further discussion because they are deficient. That question is there to explain what we're looking for as far as a request we can actually act on. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Hasteur Hasteur Ha-- oh....} 22:25, 19 September 2020 (UTC)

@ProcrastinatingReader: I deleted the "Why did Wikipedia say that Rajput was dead" question/answer per your suggestion. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 23:40, 19 September 2020 (UTC)

Visibility

In the FAQ discussion archived from August, I quoted administrator Newslinger: The only caveat is that the FAQ template does not show up on the Wikipedia mobile website, which means that most editors who use a smartphone to access Wikipedia will not be able to see it. To which ProcrastinatingReader added: Editnotices also don't show on mobile.

Moreover, please consider the process by which users with less then extended confirmed access must formally request an edit. At the top of the Sushant Singh Rajput page, they click View source, then click Submit an edit request. This does not lead to the article talk page, where FAQs or Edit notices would appear. Instead, it goes to an "Editing Talk:Sushant Singh Rajput" screen that does not display such notices, even if present on the talk page. Accordingly, users who are intended to read a Template:FAQ or Wikipedia:Editnotice will not see them unless they visit the talk page beforehand, which seems unlikely. As for users who edit the talk page directly, only those who are not using mobile platforms will see the notices. Mobile users such as Happybunny0000111 will never see the carefully crafted billboards that are meant to "educate" them about Wikipedia and discourage them from posting here. NedFausa (talk) 21:43, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

So what are we supposed to do, other than open a phabricator ticket? If we just put it on the talk page itself it'll either get edited without being read (if a timestamp is omitted) or archived (if timestamped). —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Hasteur Hasteur Ha-- oh....} 23:12, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

Phab ticket exists, has for a long time. WMF has bigger priorities, as they say. re archiving see {{DNAU}} ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 00:03, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

On desktop an edit notice for the talk page would show, I believe. So we could still show FAQ there. It’s less effective due to the preload, though, which also loads in a bunch of notices with little relevance, so it just becomes spammy. For mobile users, easiest way around is to have a regular section at top of talk page with FAQ. That will be visible, albeit collapsed. Effectiveness unknown, but it certainly can’t hurt. ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 00:01, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

I remain convinced that a FAQ or an Edit Notice is appropriate. No action would result in unnecessary responses to duplicate queries. If an editor doesn’t want to point to the edit notice or FAQ, and wants to directly respond to a query—- have at it. WP:BDP exists for articles such as this, where people are continuously speculating about whether the subject died of suicide (as described by RS) or was murdered (as speculated). I’m really not sure why a single editor opposes FAQ/Edit Notices so much, considering they’re tools used on many articles, but interesting dialogue nevertheless. —MelbourneStar☆^talk 02:11, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

The opposition here stems from the nature of the people we're trying to reach. Most, if not all, are editing via mobile; edit notices and FAQ templates, as mentioned, won't show up on mobile, and if we put it in its own section it's likely to be misinterpreted. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Hasteur Hasteur Ha-- oh....} 04:11, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

• FAQ thoughts: @Jéské Couriano: Do you want to have the FAQ discussion here, or on the sandbox's talk page? Alt: we could treat the document as a live collaboration and add suggestions/notes under each bullet, which could be deleted as needed. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:07, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

I took a big swing here to see if this in-line style of noting would be an easier way to read notes and make changes. If you hate it, revert it. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:30, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

My intent is to treat it, at least while we're still thrashing out details, as a live collaboration. I'm okay with Cyphoidbomb's in-line notes. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Hasteur Hasteur Ha-- oh....} 21:20, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

Looks good to me as well. RickinBaltimore (talk) 21:41, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

I'd suggest adding an editnotice, as well, which may help with the desktop edits at least (like the most recent one a few hours ago) but the default edit request form is filled with so many banners I doubt it'll help at all. This is the problem with banner blindness - the more crap people add, the less chance people will read anything on the page (if I were doing a driveby edit request, I probably wouldn't read a word myself). ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 21:51, 19 September 2020 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 16 September 2020

Desimomme (talk) 06:44, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

Cause of death should be left unknown until investigation is complete. There seems to be a good possibility for it to be a murder/homicide.

 Not done Wikipedia doesn't work on possibilities. The current version is as per the reliable sources. The outcome of the recent investigation will be reflected when it gets completed. Regards - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 07:03, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

Also, the mechanism is known and not disputed (asphyxia by hanging). You are conflating mechanism (how he died) with manner (why he died). —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Hasteur Hasteur Ha-- oh....} 11:12, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

Change the cause of death.

There's proof of some conspiracy behind his death and the chances of suicide are gone down to zero. Please change it or rather change it if you want true information to be put o wikipedia. Happybunny0000111 (talk) 08:03, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

@Happybunny0000111: Wikipedia doesn't work based on WP:JUSTDONTLIKEIT. You need to back your claims with WP:RS. - The9Man ^(Talk) 08:31, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

 Not done Extraordinary claims require iron-clad sources. We're not going to entertain anything claiming it's murder without very, very strong sources. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Hasteur Hasteur Ha-- oh....} 11:08, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

So how can you even claim it a suicide the if it's under controversies? My point is not to proof it's a murder, but if the death is not known for sure, write it mysterious. Happybunny0000111 (talk) 11:30, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

I agree we don't have strong proof for murder, but the point is that the proofs for suicide is also not 'very very strong' as claimed by the investigating agencies and NOT media. Happybunny0000111 (talk) 11:32, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

My question is suicide not an extraordinary claim? Murders and suicides are very common,unfortunately. Happybunny0000111 (talk) 11:35, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

All these have been discussed already. The sources are provided. New developments will be reflected on the page with reliable sources in support after CBI comes up with its final report. Besides the FIR by Singh's family is "Abetment of suicide" - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 17:09, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

U can write the cause of death as mysterious death or under investigation. If it can't mention as muder then it should not mention suiside also...... Dev Suranjan (talk) 07:01, 19 September 2020 (UTC)

 Not done @Dev Suranjan: the difference between "murder" and "suicide" is that the former is unsourced and the latter is verified by reliable sources. —MelbourneStar☆^talk 07:06, 19 September 2020 (UTC)

Withdrawal from talk page

I rescind my offer to respond to edit requests. It has become clear that I am an outlier here, out of sync with other editors, serving only to distract them from the important task of improving Sushant Singh Rajput. Accordingly, I will no longer participate on this talk page, and apologize to everyone I have annoyed. NedFausa (talk) 03:31, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

You haven't annoyed everyone, but taking it upon yourself to effectively answer every edit request does get tiring after some time, especially if they're the same requests ad nauseam. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Hasteur Hasteur Ha-- oh....} 04:08, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

As Ponyo notes, a FAQ at the top of this page could serve as a useful mechanism against edit request fatigue. With it, you just answer repeated requests with the respective item on the FAQ and you're done. El_C 05:05, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

@El C: Do you happen to know if FAQs are visible to mobile users? Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:19, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

I just tested on my mobile device, no FAQ appears when you launch the talk page. Collapsed sections of the talk page appear, but nothing about the related DS or any FAQ. RickinBaltimore (talk) 16:24, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

Mobile version is so poorly constructed, it doesn't even link to the article talk page itself from the article. You have to type Talk:Sushant Singh Rajput into the searchbox to even get to it. It's puzzling. El_C 19:34, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

At least on Android in Chrome, the option for Talk is at the top of the page, under the title of the page itself. (Just checked to be sure). RickinBaltimore (talk) 19:45, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

NedFausa, you've done an absolutely incredible job in trying to maintain a NPOV article in a changing news environment with highly passionate fans. There's part of me that respects the desire to reply to each request in hopes they will learn and understand Wikipedia's policies. I can't help but think that at some point in time though, at a minimum the repeated requests could be hatted with a comment of See FAQ and at this point, some requests should just flat be removed with the comment of See FAQ. The sheer volume of requests makes the talk page challenging to use (and even the archive hard to use!). I'm not sure that if FAQ was being displayed to mobile users would reduce the number of requests, these are passionate fans that have strong beliefs. Ravensfire (talk) 20:07, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

I hope that it does, but all indications seem to be that they aren't reading anything on the talk page, given that we effectively have a lot of requests for edits that have already been asked and answered previously. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Hasteur Hasteur Ha-- oh....} 20:18, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

A way around the suckiness of mobile could be to also have a pinned section with the FAQ on it. El_C 22:33, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

Okay, I have now done so. El_C 22:41, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 18 September 2020

Kindly change the cause of the death as the case is still under CBI investigation It is not proved yet whether it is a suicide or a murder.

Please change the cause of the death Sue kaur (talk) 07:25, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

 Not done for now: As you have stated “it’s still under investigation”, but multiple sources have recognized it as the cause of death, so unless the investigation is done, it’s not going to be changed. Megan☺️ ^{Talk to the monster} 07:27, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

The manner, actually. The actual cause of death (asphyxia via hanging) isn't seriously disputed by any party in the external dispute as far as I am aware. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Hasteur Hasteur Ha-- oh....} 20:19, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

sushant singh's death shouldn't be written as suicide

The case is being investigated by the police and what the evidence shows is not suicide and the probability of murder is over 99%. Ariya.ayene (talk) 17:45, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia doesn't work on speculations. Wait for the CBI reports to get widely reported in reliable news agencies. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 17:57, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

 Not done There are absolutely no reliable sources to verify that claim. RickinBaltimore (talk) 18:03, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

Cause of Death

Change the cause of death to Murder. It has been proven it was not a suicide. Tanujk619 (talk) 05:43, 19 September 2020 (UTC)

 Not done Provide a source. NOW. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Hasteur Hasteur Ha-- oh....} 05:46, 19 September 2020 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 19 September 2020

no one saw Sushant Singh Rajput hanging , there are no evidence either . Its conspiracy , murder. Parimalac (talk) 18:26, 19 September 2020 (UTC)

 Not done Please read the FAQ. There are no reliable sources that state this. RickinBaltimore (talk) 18:27, 19 September 2020 (UTC)

Change Cause of death and height

Though editing is protected , still we can see few users are continuosly changing his cause of death , personal life and other information .One user is Fylindfotberserk. He is misleading people. Investigation is going on .So remove cause of death as Suicide . Saathindustani (talk) 08:51, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

 Not done @Saathindustani: Please read the #FAQ at the top of this page. His death is suicide per the reliable sources provided. Thanks, —MelbourneStar☆^talk 09:04, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

Misleading? Nobody has changed his cause of death (suicide by hanging) since the last 1 month. And as far as height is concerned, we do not put bogus stuff like that unless the subject is a sportsperson or a model. See template documentation. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 10:26, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

The last time someone brought up height, it was pointed out that we don't have height or weight in the infobox or anywhere else in the article. See Talk:Sushant Singh Rajput/Archive 1#Height for why the conspiracy theorists have fixated on height with respect to the Wikipedia article. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Hasteur Hasteur Ha-- oh....} 13:22, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

@Jéské Couriano: Ahh.. I see. Thanks for the link. I patrol this article but was out for 4 months, in the meantime the subject died. Don't know about of the initial development in the talk pages after his death. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 17:06, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

When case is under investigation why wiki hs written Suicide by hanging ? Its a misleading information Saathindustani (talk) 17:27, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

Because in any encyclopedia, including Wikipedia, the last reliably sourced version is kept. Under investigation in not a "cause of death". The article will be updated after the said investigation gets complete and we get new information/sources for that. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 17:55, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

And, as noted in the FAQ in the section at the top of this page, nobody is disputing that he asphyxiated due to hanging. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Hasteur Hasteur Ha-- oh....} 21:13, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 20 September 2020

Ankit823 (talk) 20:01, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

Death Murder

 Not done Please read the #FAQ at the top of this page. Reliable sources list his death as suicide. Valenciano (talk) 20:37, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 20 September 2020 (2)

Ankit823 (talk) 20:03, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

Cause of death :- Murder

 Not done Please read the #FAQ at the top of this page. Reliable sources list his death as suicide. Valenciano (talk) 20:37, 20 September 2020 (UTC)