Talk:2022 Jahangirpuri violence

Page Removal

Seeking help from all pro-islamic Wiki moderators to help to ban this page. This is a minor incident and no death took place. Please help to remove this page or change reference to our reliable source of news instead of the one mentioned. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.66.3.93 (talk) 06:04, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

I am afraid it is not minor any more since the Supreme Court is involved. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 10:25, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

True, it has gotten far beyond "wide coverage" in media as well. >>> Extorc.talk 12:02, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

"held by the Sangh Parivar organisations"

@Kautilya3, In your recent edit, you added this source to state that
"On the day of Ram Navami, huge processions called Shobha Yatras (processions of pomp and glory) were held by the Sangh Parivar organisations around India, and numerous Hindu–Muslim clashes occurred."
But in the source, it is nowhere to be found that these processions were organized by Sangh Parivar organizations. >>> Extorc.talk 12:28, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

For now, you can consult Ram Navami riots, where these things are discussed in detail. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 12:49, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

Even if I do consider looking at that page, it states
"According to the The Hitavada, a grand procession called Shobha Yatra was started on the occasion of Ram Navami in Nagpur, the home of the RSS, around 1967."
Which is not what you are adding to this page. You are stating that  :

• The processions that erupted into violence in recent times were held by Sangh Parivar.
• The Wiki page states that a procession was started in the home of RSS.

It doesn't state it was started by RSS, or maintained every year by RSS

The statement over there itself is problematic and I'm still in the process of examining the source cited there. >>> Extorc.talk 13:10, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

It also states that, in 1987, the VHP started holding "Shobha Yatras" around the country. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 13:20, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

Yes, I missed that by mistake. But still, how does that become the basis for assuming that All these Ram Navami processions in 2022 were organized by Sangh Parivar. >>> Extorc.talk 13:25, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

I have added a couple of citations now. The journalists don't seem to enquire into these things on a customary basis, but only when things go wrong. Whenever this has happened in the last 30 years, the Sangh Parivar organisation was always clear. For exmaple, this was 3 years ago:

On the evening of 12 April, a procession of around three hundred people participated in the “Ram Shobha Yatra,” a rally in Delhi organised by the Vishwa Hindu Parishad—an affiliate of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh—along with a few other religious organisations, to celebrate Ram Navami, a festival marking the birth of the Hindu deity Ram.

-- Kautilya3 (talk) 14:32, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

I checked the three sources cited, and didnt find any of them linking it to the Sangh. While Im fairly certain that some would be no doubt organised by the RSS and affiliates, I do doubt that all of the yatras can be linked to them. If there is a source that does so, please add it to the inline ref.Captain Jack Sparrow (talk) 11:14, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

Targeting one community

@Kautilya3, in your recent edit, you added
'targeting "one community" (Muslims).'
and cited this source
I am assuming that you are deriving the statement from this section of the source.
"A petitioner who rushed to the SC ... a disturbing pattern ... communal clashes followed by demolition drives targeting one community ... before the razing operation."
This is the statement of one petitioner and is not an established fact. >>> Extorc.talk 20:54, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

I added another source for the "pattern". More information coming today.

On another note, I am not yet sure the details of the municipal corporation need to go in the lead. The acronym "NDMC" might be in local use, but we don't need it. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 08:19, 21 April 2022 (UTC)

All of these patterns are Allegations and accusations. Either you would have to add "Muslim residents allege" or "according to Muslim residents of the Area." >>> Extorc.talk 09:04, 21 April 2022 (UTC)

It looks you haven't yet read this article:

• Liz Mathew, Abhinav Rajput, Amit Shah holds meet with Delhi BJP, Panda cites ‘immigrants in Europe’, The Indian Express, 21 April 2022.

Note also the prominent mention of "BJP-controlled". -- Kautilya3 (talk) 11:37, 22 April 2022 (UTC)

Could you quote the relevant section? The article repeats the claim that it was not one sided, and not that one community was targeted. Captain Jack Sparrow (talk) 11:18, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

The Wire (citation 9 in the current version) says:

The pattern of processions during Hindu festivals leading to communal clashes, followed by bulldozing of properties belonging to Muslims has been repeated across several north Indian states. In Madhya Pradesh’s Khargone, the government moved to demolish several properties that belonged to Muslims, accusing them of pelting stones at a Ram Navami procession on April 10. In Gujarat too, ‘bulldozer justice’ was handed out. Similar threats were made to the Muslim community in Uttarakhand’s Roorkee.

NDTV (citation 10) said:

A petitioner who rushed to the Supreme Court to stop the demolition flagged what they called a disturbing pattern seen in states like Uttar Pradesh, Gujarat and Madhya Pradesh - communal clashes followed by demolition drives targeting one community.

Newsclick (citation 22) wrote (of Madhya Pradesh):

The Madhya Pradesh government went a step ahead. Properties of those accused of being "rioters" (the majority of them are from the minority community) were demolished without even following the due process of law.

The Quint wrote (of Madhya Pradesh):

A day after communal clashes erupted in the city on Ram Navami, the district administration demolished at least 16 houses and 29 shops, mostly owned by members of the Muslim community, citing their involvement in stone pelting and clashes.

BBC wrote (of Madhya Pradesh):

Several Muslim homes and shops are being torn down in Madhya Pradesh in the aftermath of communal violence which broke out on 10 April, the day of the Hindu festival of Ram Navami.... Some have called it an instance of collective punishment against Muslims.

The Washington Post wrote:

In Delhi and Madhya Pradesh, which saw some of the worst rioting this month, officials bulldozed the homes of Muslims accused of throwing rocks.

-- Kautilya3 (talk) 14:02, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for the refs. However, these quotes, apart from the wire, are not as authoritative as saying "Demolition drives had been carried out....targeting "one community" (Muslims)". Most, even in your refs, have attached "some said", "mostly muslim", "so and so called it". A more acceptable phrasing would be "Demolition drives had been carried out following communal clashes in the states of Uttar Pradesh, Gujarat and Madhya Pradesh, all ruled by BJP governments, which many criticised for targeting Muslims". Captain Jack Sparrow (talk) 18:35, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

References

Police story

The Police story has been completely demolished by the local people.

• Tarique Anwar, Mukund Jha, Witnesses Narrate How Jahangirpuri Hanuman Jayanti Rally Turned Communal, News Click, 18 Apr 2022.
• Watch: How Communal Clashes Broke Out in Delhi's Jahangirpuri, The Wire, 21 April 2022.

It is embarrassing to put up a huge section called "Investigation", while the police say the investigations are still "ongoing". The policemen were right there and have seen everything! What are they investigating? -- Kautilya3 (talk) 14:23, 21 April 2022 (UTC)

Attackers posing as victims.

Same happened in case of Tahir Hussain from chandbagh in 2020.

1. Illegal encroachment- every Delhi citizen knows it but again hue and cry. 2. Pre-planned attack yet posing as victims . Why? 45.118.158.17 (talk) 08:46, 22 April 2022 (UTC)

"Hindus"

Extorc, you have added:

Hindus claimed that they were unarmed and were suddenly attacked by stones, bottles and people were called from outside to perpetuate violence.

References

In the first place, you can't say "Hindus". It must be clarified whether you are talking about the processionists or local residents (who serve as third-party witnesses).

The sources are talking about two processionists, one who claims to have led the procession (and got injured) and a second one, who was "returning home". The claim that they were "unarmed" is laughable because practically every newspaper has noted them being armed and the Internet is full of videos and pictures.

The rest of the sentence is a repitition of what was said already except for the mention of "called from outside to perpetuate violence", which seems to be WP:OR.

By the way, both the sources are substandard. Aaj Tak's partisan reporting is a talk of the town. The Hindu, though normally good, did a poor job here. It mentions only one Hindu respondent, whom it calls a "resident". Resident of what? Jahangirpuri is a huge neighbourhood. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 12:04, 22 April 2022 (UTC)

I dont have anything against your reasoning to remove my edits. >>> Extorc.talk 12:58, 22 April 2022 (UTC)

But, why have you re-added the "BJP controlled" in the statement where I removed it? >>> Extorc.talk 12:59, 22 April 2022 (UTC)

Yes, with a pointed source. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 14:02, 22 April 2022 (UTC)

Alright, its fine with me. >>> Extorc.talk 14:35, 22 April 2022 (UTC)

"Riot season"

Where is this phrase coming from? I have not seen it in any ref, neither does the inline ref inserted with this revert have the phrase. Captain Jack Sparrow (talk) 12:05, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

The rioting season started with Karauli riot on 2 April, which was also the beginning of Ramadan, and is expected to last till Eid, though there are no guarantees. It will become clear when I fill out the 2002 section of the Ram Navami riots. For now, I will change it to "month" rather than "season". -- Kautilya3 (talk) 19:37, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

No issues with it now, "Month of April" is fine. Marking as resolved. Captain Jack Sparrow (talk) 04:45, 24 April 2022 (UTC)

Resolved

Neighbours

Kautilya3, this is from the citation :-

"However, both Hindus and Muslims praised him. “They (Ansar and his family) have been living here (B-block) for the past 12 years and never indulged in any form of violence. He has always helped us,” said one of his neighbours."

The statement in the article reads :-

"However, the local residents, both Hindu and Muslim, remember him as an extremely helpful person and deny that he indulged in any violence."

It's attributing the statement of the neighbour almost word for word, to general residents (both Hindu and Muslim). I had corrected it in my edit here, but you seem to have reverted it. Any reason why? Captain Jack Sparrow (talk) 05:07, 28 April 2022 (UTC)

What do you think the Hindus and Muslims "praised" him for? -- Kautilya3 (talk) 06:09, 28 April 2022 (UTC)

Not sure, and not the issue at hand. This is just incorrect attribution of the statement. I dont mind inserting the part about Hindu - Muslim praise, but we do need to attribute correctly. "However, he was praised by the local residents, both Hindu and Muslim, and one of his neighbours said that he was an extremely helpful person and denied that he indulged in any violence" would be the correct format if you wanted to include the bipartisan praise. Captain Jack Sparrow (talk) 07:14, 28 April 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia doesn't do such grudgeful writing. Reading the article as a whole, it is clear that he helped both Hindus and Muslims, and they acknowledged it. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 08:21, 28 April 2022 (UTC)

Not contesting that he would have helped both. The denial about violence part is the point of contention. The statement of one man saying he never engaged in violence, being stated as a general statement by many that he never indulged in violence is extremely misleading. Captain Jack Sparrow (talk) 13:14, 28 April 2022 (UTC)

Ok, I will omit the bit about violence for now. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 14:04, 28 April 2022 (UTC)

I have no other concerns with this, thanks. Marking as resolved. Captain Jack Sparrow (talk) 14:45, 28 April 2022 (UTC)

Resolved

New Section for Arrests

a lot of arrests have been made and I think they are underrepresented in the article. A new Heading for arrests should also be made. Xoocit (talk) 17:22, 28 April 2022 (UTC)

Note:Editors on this page should be aware of WP:BLPCRIME. At a quick glance, the current version of the article already names several arrestees, which possibly violates that policy. Please consult the BLP noticeboard if unsure on how the subject should be handled. Abecedare (talk) 17:41, 28 April 2022 (UTC)

New Section for Reception of the Incident

Since this has received widespread news and media coverage, it would be a good idea for a reception and analysis section to be added. Lord Clayton7 (talk) 07:38, 9 May 2022 (UTC)