Talk:Deep Saini

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.

If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

Biography: Science and Academia

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
	This article is supported by the science and academia work group.

Physiology Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physiology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Physiology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PhysiologyWikipedia:WikiProject PhysiologyTemplate:WikiProject PhysiologyPhysiology articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.
	This article has been classified as relating to the field of physiology.

The following Wikipedia contributor has declared a personal or professional connection to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include conflict of interest, autobiography, and neutral point of view.
Their edits to this article were last checked for neutrality on 24-10-2022 by Quick, Spot the Quetzalcoatl!.

Chloewestlakedal‎ (talk · contribs) This user has contributed to the article. This user has declared a connection.

Dalhousie involved editor

A new editor has started editing this page, trying to add content sourced to Dalhousie itself whose user name reflects an employee of Saini. I think it would behoove us to keep an eye on this. Quick, Spot the Quetzalcoatl! (talk) 15:30, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This article has been Astroturfed by Palestine protesters

It's disgusting, the whole article has been taken over for propaganda purposes by disgruntled protesters. Everyone, from Premier Legault down to Mayor Plante and the SPVM, will tell you that squatting on private property is illegal. The article is totally disingenuous to suggest they've said otherwise! --142.170.68.102 (talk) 14:28, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Recent reversions

I invited recent editors that have concerns about the content on this page, who have tried to delete certain content, to discuss their concerns here in advance of making further edits in order to prevent WP:Editwarring. Happy to discuss here! Quick, Spot the Quetzalcoatl! (talk) 20:09, 12 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thus far I have made sure that any properly sourced content that was within my reversions of the white-washing of this article were placed back into the text so that we are not losing good content! Quick, Spot the Quetzalcoatl! (talk) 20:13, 12 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Clearly biased

The section regarding the student encampment is clearly biased to one side, and claims opinions as fact. 2605:8D80:580:38DE:E52F:D38C:C17A:5593 (talk) 20:40, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It is not appropriate to tag a page without a clear reason. What are the actual policy reasons within Wikipedia that you do not believe the content, which is entirely sourced to relevant reliable sources? If there are other newspaper sources that bring additional light, please do point to them. Otherwise, just because you don't like the balance of the content, does not mean it is biased. 23:59, 7 October 2024 (UTC)

You also added a tag that a prior editor did, are you the same person or was it someone else? Quick, Spot the Quetzalcoatl! (talk) 00:00, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, same person. I’m using a mobile device which has a dynamic IP. Here’s some blatantly false claims made in the section:

“The Globe and Mail reported that as of the end of May 2024, Saini continued to push the law enforcement to try and intervene despite them informing him that nothing illegal was occurring.”

This line cites this article: https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/article-president-of-mcgill-decries-lack-of-police-action-against-protests/

However, the only sentence about the police’s comment is this:

“Montreal police spokeswoman Melanie Bergeron said police could not comment because an investigation is under way.”

As well, the article paraphrases the following from a McGill official, which can be backed up by photo evidence on other articles at the Globe and Mail, among other sources:

“Buildings on campus have been defaced with graffiti that crosses the line into discriminatory speech, he added.”

Later, the section notes that Saini accused the protests of being antisemitic, and then notes that Independent Jewish Voices and “Jewish students” rejects this accusation, citing only IJV.

Another paragraph in this section claims that there was a “protest occurring in the James administration building”, which significantly downplays the fact that the students had occupied the building, vandalized the building, and threatened staff hiding in the building (a claim later disputed), all this according the exact source cited by the section.

The section then says that “Riot police pepper sprayed, tear-gassed, and used batons and shields against students protesting around the building.” However, the only sources cited for this are two student groups who participated in the protests. Why not use the Montreal Gazette article cited just a bit later, instead of two obviously biased sources? The claims in this sentence are not even false, but the sources are definitely not neutral.

So yes, I do find it to be rather biased towards one side. 2605:8D80:580:2FE:70D1:5A1E:989:3CF5 (talk) 07:19, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

My next question would be - do you work for McGill, or are you affiliated with the university in any way? Quick, Spot the Quetzalcoatl! (talk) 16:31, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As regards your overview: the sources do indeed back up the content on the page, it appears you would prefer different sources to be used. That is not bias. The article is about what Saini has done or said, or how his actions have been referred to, not others. In any case, you have stated a) that the riot police issue did indeed happen; b) that extra details about the occupation have been included (that is not about Saini himself, so I would be hesitant to expand upon that on a biographical page) and, oddly enough, that you believe that what you want added - the hiding - isn't true (?), that reads to me as if you have ties to the institution itself; c) that there is indeed a source for the antisemitic accusation, but that you don't like it; d) that it shouldn't be included that Saini's efforts in the courts and with the police were turned away, however there are plenty of sources that support that. So, I don't see what you would change, other than to neuter the content provided by others. If you would like to contribute to the page, assuming you do not work for the university, you are free to do so. However, there is no reason for the page tag if the above is your concern, strictly policy speaking. Quick, Spot the Quetzalcoatl! (talk) 15:37, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No, I have no affiliation to McGill. It seems you’ve ignored the first half of my comment about the Globe and Mail. As well, on the Wikipedia policy page about neutral POV it says:

“All encyclopedic content on Wikipedia must be written from a neutral point of view (NPOV), which means representing fairly, proportionately, and, as far as possible, without editorial bias, all the significant views that have been published by reliable sources on a topic.” (Bolding mine).

It is clear that this is not the case here. 2605:8D80:580:2FE:70D1:5A1E:989:3CF5 (talk) 19:25, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Again, you are free to contribute to the content, but you have shown no actual bias here. I am quite concerned about some of your comments above though. Why did you say that "threatened staff hiding in the building (a claim later disputed)" - what is being disputed and by whom? How did you come across this page with no prior personal edits, to target solely parts of this page that are not fully flattering? In any case, as you are free to edit as you wish, as we all are, and you have raised no specifics as to bias, it is time to remove the tag. Quick, Spot the Quetzalcoatl! (talk) 20:04, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]