Talk:Ashura processions in Kashmir

Neutral point of view

@Sharafat99:, your own given link says that police doing it to prevent "pro freedom" violent demonstrations. so no need ti hide other side. we need to write about both sides and it doesn't matters where you live. Policy of wikipedia is neutral. Now you gave proper link to that police injures people and it will not get deleted. Thank you, --Human3015 18:16, 31 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Article issues

I reviewed the current version of the article and:

Large sections of it are unsourced and unsupported, eg the Framework section, and most of the History and Background.
The Recitations section is sourced solely to this opinion column of unclear reliability, apparently penned by User:Mifciw who has edited this article extensively and says that he is an activist in the area.
The article also cites some blogs such as Inside Kashmir (possibly run by Mifciw), and Kasmir Media, which are not usable as sources.
Finally, many of the other sources are being misrepresented, in that they do not support the sentence they are being attached to as citations.

Given all this, the article needs to be essentially rewritten to accurately represent the reliable sources that exist. Also we need to consider moving the article to Ashura processions in Kashmir (or even merging with Day of Ashura#Socio-political aspects) although that can be decided once the article's content and sourcing issues have been dealt with,and we have a better idea of its subject and lenght. Abecedare (talk) 18:25, 11 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I had missed a reference to the book "History of Ashura Procession in Kashmir. Rising Kashmir." in the Framework section. So the section is not completely unsourced. But I couldn't find any information on the book to even verify that it exists, let alone assess its reliability. So that doesn't really help. Abecedare (talk) 18:34, 11 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Abecedare:, I certainly agree with you regarding sources, the way Kashmiri media have written things they are certainly not reliable. We must have consensus with others. I have been involved in edit war kind situation regarding this article with @Sharafat99: who now changed his user name to @Mifciw:. He has some of his concerns, his claim is that he is native of Kashmir and he has seen what is "real condition". But "eye witness" can't be a source here. We need reliable print media source. The same user added this Ashura section in Human rights abuses in Jammu and Kashmir article, we need to edit that too. --Human3015 19:15, 11 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note I have rewritten the article to reflect what the reliable sources say. See the edit-summaries accompanying my recent edits on the page for a short explanation of why certain content and sources were removed. See above note for overview, or ask for further details. Abecedare (talk) 19:40, 11 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A preliminary search engine test doesn't seem to show the word "grand" anywhere. I think it's safe to move it. Don't know about merging it though. -Ugog Nizdast (talk) 22:23, 11 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

That was my observation too, although I have mainly read the sources that were cited in article and haven't searched for sources independently. I suggest that we wait a couple of days before deciding on the appropriate title for the article, in case there are more sources that are brought forth, or if there are suggestions to refocus the article onto the procession in Srinagar alone, etc. That way we will ~~have~~ avoid multiple moves and creation of innumerable redirects. Abecedare (talk) 02:58, 12 April 2015 (UTC) (fixed have -> avoid. Abecedare (talk) 09:15, 13 April 2015 (UTC))[reply]

Question: Let's say that this gets redirected to some main article. After some time, some user tries to create this article again with a slightly different title. What can be done then other than referring to this (assume we have done already) discussion? Not much right? CSD has no criteria other than previously deleted per discussion. -Joel. Ugog Nizdast (talk) 09:43, 12 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I believe the current article (Ashura processions in Kashmir) can stand on its own, and need not be merged with Day of Ashura, given that there are enough sources to pass the (pretty low IMO) WP:GNG bar. If you are asking about the possibility that the user recreates his problematic version at Grand Ashura Procession In Kashmir, which is currently a redirect to his page: I am pretty sure that will result in him being blocked for continued disruption given the past record.

In general though, disputes over whether an article should be merged, converted into a redirect, or stand alone that cannot be resolved on the talk page need to be taken to AFD. Example (not to be taken as an invitation to participate!). Abecedare (talk) 16:29, 12 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I am sure you are not reading sources

@Abecedare: Don't you see the history of Juloose ashura link i provided which relied on Kashmir Observer a state newspaper. Read that fully, you will find History and Background and other sections mentioned there which you are removing. If we will start removing content on Wikipedia than whole of wikipedia should be cleaned as all wikipedia content sources rely on citations and references as same as I provided. Read the guidelines and Be bold! Consider searching for references and adding them to the article, instead youhave started a campaign of cleaning content. And stop intimidating me to block, Wikipedia does not depend on your personal views. Mifciw (talk) 04:24, 13 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Martyr vs Death

Isn't this a case of WP:WTW or not? -Joel. Ugog Nizdast (talk) 09:54, 14 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Borderline. If this were a recent figure, I would definitely prefer "death". For a 7th century figure, its perhaps sanctified enough by age/tradition to be read as a statement of belief by most readers in any case. My (slight) preference would be for "death", but not enough to go back and forth on it. Abecedare (talk) 05:04, 15 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ansari's petition quote

How relevant is this to the article? Our dear friend has added it again here citing greaterkashmir.com and kashmirdispatch.com. From here, Kd.com seems a bit reliable compared to Gk.com. Kd only mentions the petition while the quote is from Gk.com. I think it's fine but anything added by our friend can't be ignored. -Joel. Ugog Nizdast (talk) 10:03, 14 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the sentence as redundant/undue, since the article already mentions the violence, and Ansari's position. If the article were 5-10 times longer, this detail would perhaps be fine (after copyediting), but as it stands the sentence doesn't read well. Abecedare (talk) 04:58, 15 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Traditional Srinagar route

Just for the record here are two descriptions of what constitutes the traditional route in Srinagar:

...start from Abi Guzar in the City and then after traversing Maisuma and adjacent old City would finally culminate at Zadibal.
— GreaterKashmir article

...from Guru Bazzar and proceed through Lal Chowk. The procession would culminate at Dalgate, on the extreme end of Lal Chowk.
— Kashmir Dispatch article

I am assuming that the two are simply alternate descriptions of the same route, but anyone familiar with the city geography (or, interested in spending some time of Google maps), please confirm, and correct article description accordingly. Of course, a map of the route that could be added to the article would be ideal! Abecedare (talk) 04:55, 15 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Turning into pro-freedom protests

Apparently, this is disputed even though it is referenced to a Hindustan Times report. I've taken reworded it to sound more vague only because I couldn't find another reference supporting that, only found one for the newer wording. Ugog Nizdast (talk) 00:25, 26 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I would however point out that

the disputing editor is an indefinitely blocked editor who is socking now (again) and there's no reason to WP:AGF at this point. There's no evidence given why that ref is unreliable, only taken the editor's word on that it's wrong.
this topic is barely notable, even getting one reference for it is a great thing, doubting the credibility of that single one isn't wise. Ugog Nizdast (talk) 02:14, 28 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Ashura processions in Kashmir. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:54, 10 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]