Talk:2020 Delhi riots/Archive 4

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

→

Archive 10

Police

What about cops inefficiency and involvements. Reports showing that they could have stopped this before it could have started rather helped the pro-CAA and right wings 1, 2, 3, 4, 5. Dey subrata (talk) 19:59, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

We must not use twitter. Telegraph, Scroll is fine. Verification result of Altnews can be added --⋙–DBigXrayᗙ 20:04, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

I have added twitter link of journalist reporting from site, that thread is of Reuters' journalist. Dey subrata (talk) 20:22, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

Dey subrata, I do understand but the twitter feed is raw and has not undergone uditorial oversight. hence unfit. ⋙–DBigXrayᗙ 20:53, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

Ok lets wait for media articles on the same. Dey subrata (talk) 20:56, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

I have removed a para which uses tweets as source. Let's wait out for more info. —Sarvatra (talk, contribs) 22:11, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

The removed materials are restored, second part of the discussion is about the police involvement, not the journos thing. However, police involvement articles and video reporting by prime times of channels already been published, will be added soon by evening. Dey subrata (talk) 01:53, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

DBigXray tag for archiving. I am just in awe seeing number of edit requests and their raw comments of name calling, how much people are brainwashed. Dey subrata (talk) 18:18, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

We must not use twitter. Telegraph, Scroll is fine. Verification result of Altnews can be added ....Why is Telegraph & Scroll trustworthy? Aren't they known for slant in news-coverage?

Mallikarjunasj (talk) 12:18, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

Ignorance by police

can we add a new section we can add the role of Police all pro and cons. In some cases they can be seen they are with rioters and targeting victims. Also they were ignoring SOS calls. few refs — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rashid Jorvee (talk • contribs) 06:51, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

References

Rashid Jorvee, We have to follow WP:NPOV and WP:DUE. Please present the proposed draft here on talk page first, to get consensus. --⋙–DBigXrayᗙ 06:56, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

DBigXray Sure, let me draft somthing. thank you. Rashid Jorvee (talk) 07:13, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

Rashid Jorvee, yes, this would be quite a significant addition, please draft something for review. SerChevalerie (talk) 18:05, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

Rashid Jorvee Check the above mentioned links. It will help you to build the section. Dey subrata (talk) 04:17, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

Rashid Jorvee, Did you create the draft. You can do it in your user sandbox. ⋙–DBigXrayᗙ 07:49, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

SerChevalerie Dey subrata DBigXray I have drafted little bit and available in my sandbox. I also tag you guys there. Please take a look and get it merge if you find helpful. Rashid Jorvee (talk) 09:49, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

link to sandbox User:Rashid Jorvee/sandbox ⋙–DBigXrayᗙ 11:06, 29 February 2020 (UTC)

The section still has a lot of issues, will edit on his sandbox and then let's discuss. SerChevalerie (talk) 14:03, 29 February 2020 (UTC)

Dey subrata, DBigXray, have rewritten his draft. Refer to his sandbox. SerChevalerie (talk) 18:36, 29 February 2020 (UTC)

Dey subrata is currently blocked. SerChevalerie, Rashid Jorvee I have made some changes in the draft, since all three of us agree with the version. I have moved it to the article. further improvements can take place here. thanks a lot for your help in improving this section. --⋙–DBigXrayᗙ 05:53, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

DBigXray, thank you! SerChevalerie (talk) 07:09, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

 Done updated in article. ⋙–DBigXrayᗙ 07:41, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

Kapil Mishra election relevance

Winged Blades of Godric, please check the source:

Kapil Mishra, a local politician with India’s leading Hindu nationalist party, had just lost an election. Acquaintances in the area, which now feels like a war zone, said he had been looking for a way to bounce back.

-- Kautilya3 (talk) 13:17, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

Kautilya3, hmm. Sorry :-( ∯WBG^converse 13:18, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia is taking too much time and so I want to stay off it. However, I wonder why Kapil Mishra can be cited in this article and not Tahir Hussain. This edit by me was reverted!— — Preceding unsigned comment added by Spasiba5 (talk • contribs) 13:35, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

References

@Winged Blades of Godric:, all your edits from this morning seem to be problematic. For instance, this edit, which is summarised as "ce", removed the leading NYT citation, added an unsourced phrase in the lead paragraph (for which we have an edit request to revert below), removed the key incendiary sloganeering of Kapil Mishra and so on. I am afraid I have to revert all your edits wholesale. DBigXray, since you have interspersed your edits with WBOG's, you have made it harder to do a clean revert now. I think some of your edits will get lost too when I do a revert. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 19:09, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

Kautilya3, you have my consent for my revert. try to restore my edits if possible. ⋙–DBigXrayᗙ 19:11, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

Well, we try to paraphrase sources and quoting a verbatim translation of Mishra's slogan is weird. I propose that the exact quote be mentioned in a note. As to the rest of issues, did another round of edits. Feel free to revert any/all of my edits. (Since 1RR is in force, I explicitly permit any and all reverts of my edits by K3 or DBX to not fall under such provisions.) ∯WBG^converse 20:09, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

Tahir hussain

This article is written totally one sided to defame Hindu. (BLP violation removed) also so many weapons has been captured from his house. All the proofs are against him, still this article says nothing about him, but telling totally false things. Mehul18292 (talk) 16:14, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

Kautilya3, Tahir Hussain has been cited as a person who was involved in the rioting by many citable references online, but he is only mentioned with respect to the murder of Ankit Sharma. Can you please add those sources with suitable sentences? I observed that Kapil Mishra is mentioned many times throughout the article but not the rioting Muslim politicians. Please correct it!——Spasiba5 (talk) 16:25, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

Spasiba5, Mehul18292, kindly refer to above discussion, Talk:North_East_Delhi_riots#Role_of_Tahir_Hussain, where we have already discussed why the information is not added yet. Also, please contribute positively by providing a request in "Change X to Y format" with sufficient WP:RS provided. SerChevalerie (talk) 16:37, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

I have added {{RBLPV}} above. SerChevalerie and others, This page cannot be used to make such allegations related to living person. they are a violation of wP:BLP. Discussion at Talk:North_East_Delhi_riots#Role_of_Tahir_Hussain please join there. ⋙–DBigXrayᗙ 16:43, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

Please treat Kapil Mishra equally. 2405:204:3318:B8D4:F850:AF06:7EBF:D5F2 (talk) 18:10, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

Guy in the video of "national anthem" died.....

This incidence has a specific significance in its own way. Reported by Huffington post here. In thr video police was forcing and brutalising people, they were singing national anthem and police was pulling hairs and saying take the azaadi. One of the guy in the video died. Shouldn't it be mentioned or not? Edward Zigma (talk) 19:22, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

Edward Zigma, It was discussed yesterday and consensus was to include. it is already there in the article, in police section. --⋙–DBigXrayᗙ 19:37, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

References

I Apologise. I read the article but I missed it somehow. I will read it again.Sorry to disturb you.Edward Zigma (talk) 19:47, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

 Already done SerChevalerie (talk) 20:08, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 2 March 2020

Please change "The next day, a riot had ensued in North East Delhi with Hindu nationalist mobs vandalizing Muslim properties and mosques, while carrying saffron flags and chanting Jai Shri Ram." to "The next day, a sectarian violence had ensued in North East Delhi."

As it is not proper to mention the hindu slogan in synopsis, source of which refers to an incident, that does not generalise its use. 47.30.199.7 (talk) 03:26, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

 Not done. This is something for which consensus needs to be established for. So, please feel free to work collaboratively toward that end. Good luck. El_C 03:28, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

Please see https://theprint.in/india/anger-towards-other-side-echoes-in-hindu-dominated-areas-of-riot-hit-northeast-delhi/372502/ for damage to properties belonging to hindus.47.30.199.7 (talk) 03:34, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

That's your opinion.Kindly stick to the discussions relevant to the article. Shubham2019 (talk) 06:19, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

the violence in Delhi is not a ‘riot’. It is targeted anti-Muslim brutality

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/mar/01/violence-in-delhi-is-not-a-riot-it-is-targeted-anti-muslim-brutality

Opinion pieces aren't valuable sources here. ~Anachronist (talk) 03:43, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 2 March 2020

The causes of riots are not Islamophobia, why making this riots as such, to maintain communal harmony you should delete it or change it to both Islamophobia and Hinduphobia Sourav123456 (talk) 03:29, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

 Declined. You have not provided any reliable sources for this. If you do, you can re-open this request. ~Anachronist (talk) 03:42, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

Op-eds by writers sitting abroad and their philosophical ideas do not carry any weight in Wikipedia. Kindly do not include any content from this article. Wikipedia is not an opinion piece, which unfortunately it is turning out to be.

Shubham2019 (talk) 15:56, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on March 2 2020

Please add

This is a highly contested topic with dozens of notices and warning on Talk page but no notice on article page. Appropriate notices and warnings should be placed on article page. At minimum, Article page should say that "Neutrality of this article is under dispute".

Inviting all editors to chime in Fowler&fowler Johnbod DbigXray Can I Log In qedk Gayatri9876 Sarvatra Souniel Yadav Shubham2019 LEPRICAVARK AstralAngel Raghavendran80 Datta UrbanCentrist DrAshishPandey Psha12 Aswin8 Kkartiki18 Aman.kumar.goel Bhav2916 ML Sanwat A14i12 Spasiba5 Sourav123456 Vasantray Vachhani Anandraghuvanshistar Winged_Blades_of_Godric Unbiasedpov (talk) 16:26, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

I placed a POV tag on top of the article, but it was removed by an admin called Vanamonde93. An AE request was filed by Aman Kumar Goel against the user DBigXray for his POV pushing, but it was closed with prejudice without any action.—Spasiba5 (talk) 17:07, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

 Not done. A matter for discussion rather than an edit request. Unbiasedpov please stop the mass pings. That is inappropriate. El_C 17:13, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) My involvement here has been limited. Looking over the history of this article and the talk page, it looks to me like the neutrality of this article is disputed mostly by drive-by editors and POV-pushers, resulting from off-wiki canvassing, who want to complain about "unfairness" without bothering understanding Wikipedia's editorial policies about reliable sources and undue weight. ~Anachronist (talk) 17:14, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

El_C, I saw that you have mentioned that mass pinging is inappropriate. I have asked for the opinions of others about Ishrat Jahan here, but hardly any one replied. How do I get every editor here to at least take a look at it? What is the appropriate way to do so?—Spasiba5 (talk) 18:06, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

Looks to me like at least six different people replied in that section. I don't see a consensus, or even a rationale as to why the fact being discussed is significant. ~Anachronist (talk) 19:17, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

Nonconstructive complaint hatted. El_C 17:15, 2 March 2020 (UTC)
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 3 March 2020 I would request to publish the information only from the confirmed govt sources, like police dept. This page creates wrong perception without having enough evidence and opinion is biased. The author could be from any political party doesn't look like have neutral reporting. 203.244.219.1 (talk) 05:38, 3 March 2020 (UTC)  Not done See our sourcing policy. — Wug·a·po·des​ 05:47, 3 March 2020 (UTC) Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 2 March 2020 In the riots, a hindu officer of the intelligence bureau (IB), was brutally stabbed 200+ times, and killed. A muslim councillor of the AAP party was subsequently arrested for the murder. Source: https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/delhi/delhi-violence-autopsy-report-shows-over-200-injuries-on-ib-official-ankit-sharmas-body/articleshow/74366588.cms https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/tahir-hussain-aap-councillor-booked-for-ib-officers-murder-during-delhi-violence/articleshow/74378649.cms Raghavendran80 (talk) 01:33, 2 March 2020 (UTC) That is already mentioned at North East Delhi riots#25 February—Spasiba5 (talk) 01:39, 2 March 2020 (UTC)  Already done, per above. El_C 02:45, 2 March 2020 (UTC) Correctly said .. india Infected with #RadicalIslamicTerrorism Rajat Rauth (talk) 06:17, 2 March 2020 (UTC) Bring in relevant sources and it will be edited out. Also read the above discussions and contribute constructively if you can. Shubham2019 (talk) 06:20, 2 March 2020 (UTC) Who's gonna listen ..the top left liberals are editing this as per thier ideology and will Anandraghuvanshistar (talk) 10:54, 2 March 2020 (UTC) doesnt help its already mentioned, because at the mention it is trying to make it sound like a political problem with AAP party, while its clearly a case of islamic violence killing a hindu police official. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.4.75.217 (talk) 17:41, 2 March 2020 (UTC) Too much citations There are too much citations mostly are low level, prejudiced personal opinions. Souniel Yadav (talk) 16:32, 1 March 2020 (UTC) Your comment is too terse to be useful. El_C 16:36, 1 March 2020 (UTC) Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 3 March 2020 , a riot had ensued in North East Delhi with Anti CAA protesters pelted stone on Pro CAA protesters & that led to a Hindu-Muslim riots and properties being damaged from both side, while gruops were chanting chanting Jai Shri Ram & Allah-hu-Akbar. 165.225.104.129 (talk) 06:20, 3 March 2020 (UTC)  Not done, nothing to do, no specific changes requested and no reliable sources offered. ~Anachronist (talk) 06:23, 3 March 2020 (UTC) 43 people Also 43 people have been killed to the number should also be updated Shubham2019 (talk) 16:47, 1 March 2020 (UTC) Over forty persons dead. Both Hindus and Muslims, almost in equal measure. What is worse is the horror of several unidentified dead, in fact, close to a third of them, listed simply as “unknown”. Here it is. Shubham2019 (talk) 16:56, 1 March 2020 (UTC) Shubham2019, 46 as per todays news. it is already update. please check. --⋙–DBigXrayᗙ 16:59, 1 March 2020 (UTC) Again the current lines are not relevant because the sources are outdated and were written before the death count reached 46. So the line majority of sufferers are muslims is not justified. Shubham2019 (talk) 05:44, 2 March 2020 (UTC) deliberate misinformation This page is a deliberate misinformation campaign which hides truth and facts of violent acts by Muslim community. Publish the whole truth. Deepsea20 (talk) 17:00, 2 March 2020 (UTC) Find reliable sources (sources that comply with WP:RS) and we'll include them. Wikipedia doesn't publish material based on opinion pieces and unreliable sources. ~Anachronist (talk) 17:09, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 1 March 2020

Of the 46 deaths, 30 have been identified: (BLP violation removed) https://thewire.in/communalism/delhi-riots-identities-deceased-confirmed 49.206.209.75 (talk) 15:46, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

 Not done. There needs to be consensus about whether the article should add a victim list or not. El_C 15:49, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

I have removed the list of names which were copy pasted here. The source does not state the religion of each victim. Pasting the list of names here and assigning and classifying them into a religion is speculation and original research, not to mention that this is highly irresponsible and insensitive. Please do not paste the list of victim names again.--DreamLinker (talk) 15:54, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

El C, This has been discussed and the consensus at Talk:North_East_Delhi_riots#Victim_list is to remove the list. ⋙–DBigXrayᗙ 15:55, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

Copy that. El_C 16:06, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

"The source does not state the religion of each victim. Pasting the list of names here and assigning and classifying them into a religion is speculation and original research, not to mention that this is highly irresponsible and insensitive."

then the 42 dead majority muslims should not also be there, as the sources are op-eds, and only 42 dead is confirmed by NDTV not the majority of Muslims claim. please see 2405:204:3318:B8D4:7065:6C8D:AD1B:E694 (talk) 16:27, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

Why are you guys taking reference from theprint which is a biased media. This source is not reliable as they Write whatever suits their agenda. Kaafir786 (talk) 19:28, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

Kapil Mishra snapshot

He is not the only cause of the riots. I suggest we use a snapshot of rioters instead of his snapshot!—Spasiba5 (talk) 16:09, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

Please join discussion at #Removing Kapil Mishra photo--⋙–DBigXrayᗙ 16:22, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

Consensus was clear on that section that irrelevant photos should be removed. And since Spasiba (another editor) is now objecting to the pictures so I have removed them again. @DBigXray: WP:CON means "decision making and reaching consensus involve an effort to incorporate all editors' legitimate concerns, while respecting Wikipedia's policies and guidelines", not "but I don't agree so there is no consensus". ML ⁹¹¹ 12:36, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

Status of Riot

I think riots are over..Situation is under control ..No report of violence since last 2-3 days...why it being mentioned as ongoing? Anandraghuvanshistar (talk) 13:12, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

(+1) roughly. This struck me yesterday, as well. ∯WBG^converse 13:45, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

 Already done. SerChevalerie (talk) 10:07, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

Put End Date

Hi @DBigXray: kindly put end date in the infobox most media sources state that riot has ended. I'm not sure what exact date the riot ended. Moreover put some images of the riot victims or riot hit areas. Thanks--Isak.lund (talk) 06:23, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

Isak.lund, I know, someone did and someone else reverted them claiming that we need RS. since this is now on WP:1RR, I have no intentions to mess with that dispute. Let a consensus with WP:RS emerge here in this thread, after which the content along with wP:RS can be added into the article. --⋙–DBigXrayᗙ 06:39, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

Alright.--Isak.lund (talk) 06:42, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

Isak.lund, DBigXray, found these sources: [1], [2]. Let's wait for WP:RS from tomorrow (about today) to add the end date with consensus (the idea being that no incidents on two days means that the riots have ended.) SerChevalerie (talk) 16:32, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

Support move, it should be

Feb 2020, Delhi Roits Souniel Yadav (talk) 16:26, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

Yep lets wait.--Isak.lund (talk) 18:46, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

Found 3 more sources: [3], [4], [5] SerChevalerie (talk) 04:06, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

SerChevalerie, please go ahead and add it. Is it 29 February? -- Kautilya3 (talk) 21:33, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

 Done SerChevalerie (talk) 04:26, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

This quote against Tahir Hussain is needed

More so when an quote by victim's relative blaming Kapil Mishra is there.

Ankit's father, Ravinder Sharma, who also works with the Intelligence Bureau, has accused supporters of an Aam Aadmi Party leader, Tahir Hussain, of attacking Ankit and killing him.

"Get Hold of him (AAP leader). He is responsible for the deaths and he is on the run. Police should get hold of him," said one of the family members, speaking to NDTV.

References

2405:204:3318:B8D4:7065:6C8D:AD1B:E694 (talk) 13:57, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

As per the request of the ip, we can have, "Speaking to NDTV, one of the family members of Ankit Sharma claimed that the Police should get hold of Tahir Hussain the Aam Aadmi Party corporator as he is responsible for many deaths and is on the run."—Spasiba5 (talk) 15:17, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

There is already a mention of Tahir Hussain in connection with the FIR. Nothing more can be said at this time. The ball is in the Police's court. The statements of the family would be WP:UNDUE since they are hearsay. They cannot be used especially when there is WP:BLP involved. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 15:25, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

Kautilya3, Tahir Hussain has been cited as a person who was involved in the rioting by many citable references online, but he is only mentioned with respect to the murder of Ankit Sharma. Can you please add those sources with suitable sentences? I observed that Kapil Mishra is mentioned many times throughout the article but not the rioting Muslim politicians. Please correct it!—Spasiba5 (talk) 15:41, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

I think we should remove the multiple mentioning of Kapil Mishra.—Spasiba5 (talk) 15:45, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

Spasiba5, I think we should remove all mentions of Kapil Mishra. ⋙–DBigXrayᗙ 15:51, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

DBigXray You are right. I think we should do that till the court makes some direct observations/statements against Kapil Mishra.Trojanishere (talk) 16:12, 2 March 2020 (UTC)Trojanishere

Please be fair, an quote by victim's relative blaming Kapil Mishra is mentioned in a colored box.2405:204:3318:B8D4:7065:6C8D:AD1B:E694 (talk) 16:07, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

Incorrect Facts

Please put the right facts. The violence was started by Tahir hussain, who is absconding. All the arms and ammunitions have been found from his home. Most casualties have been hindus. An IB officer was brutally stabbed 400 times. This was a form of Jihad. You are putting the blame on hindus which is not true at all. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AstralAngel (talk • contribs) 00:02, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

AstralAngel No one is "blaming" anyone. Wikipedia summarizes what independent reliable sources state. If you have independent sources that have information not in this article, or describe events differently, please offer them. This is a contentious subject, and requires extreme collaboration and civility among editors of different viewpoints, religions, and beliefs to arrive at a consensus as to what the article should say. 331dot (talk) 00:05, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

Look. This is not something which can be allaged. It happened. Kapil Mishra gave a speech,[ which was "incendiary"(my pov)], and after that violemt started. And its written in that way. If we dont have any proof that he said this, then it could be alleged. But we have dont know how many media reports. He said provocative and violence started. The point is that the wiki article is showing sequence of event. He said something, people got mobilised and clashes started. How could something be "alleged" when it's happened. It could be alleged if we dont have any proof that he said that. Edward Zigma (talk) 05:28, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

Look. This is not something which can be allaged. It happened. Kapil Mishra gave a speech,[ which was "incendiary"(my pov)], and after that violemt started. And its written in that way. If we dont have any proof that he said this, then it could be alleged. But we have dont know how many media reports. He said provocative and violence started. The point is that the wiki article is showing sequence of event. He said something, people got mobilised and clashes started. How could something be "alleged" when it's happened. Edward Zigma (talk) 05:29, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

Yes agree with this proposal, we are just writing information about the riots. We are not the judge and jury. People have alleged that the violence was a result of intimidation by anti CAA protestors for more than a month, some have alleged it was Amanatullah Khan's (a local AAP MLA) speech, some say it was Waris Pathan's (15 crore is dominant on 100 crore remark), people have also filed complaint against Swara Bhaskar and others. Shubham2019 (talk) 06:11, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

References

CAA and NRC/NPR both. Coz that's what all the protests are about. Edward Zigma (talk) 09:41, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

Then please remove it Ryk72/Aswin8!—Spasiba5 (talk) 17:51, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

Why have you mentioned my name in this topic's discussion, Spasiba5? Moreover I'm not an extended confirmed user, so I can't publish edits to the article for as long as it is extended protected. Aswin8 (talk) 18:29, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

Article biased, sources attempting to portray only Hindus as perpetrators

As detailed as the articles on Wikipedia are, majority of crucial information and facts have not been presented in unbiased manner in this article. Names of identified radical Islamic rioters/ terrorists such as Shahrukh, Tahir Hussain and their roles in inciting violence, Tahir Hussain's role in murder of IB officer Ankit Sharma, harboring rioters/ terrorists in his own house along with ammunition, stones, petrol bombs, acid bombs, him being on the run from Delhi Police; such facts are not clear in the article. The article attempts to draw attention to unconfirmed rumors such as Hindu groups being involved in inciting violence, while there are no official reports/ statements by any authorities confirming the same. It is unethical, and directly demeaning to Hindus to be portrayed as the perpetrators in this article, when the officials in charge have made no such conclusions. Exclusions of the major names aforementioned who led the violence against the common people of Delhi, CRPF personnel and Delhi Police; is misleading to readers. This article does not live up to the impeccable reliability, correctness and fullness of Wikipedia articles, as it lacks the most important facts and identities of perpetrators behind the said unfortunate riots and at the same time only accusing a particular religious identity, when the State authorities have made absolutely no such conclusions. It is important that the said facts be made visible to the readers to have a correct understanding of the events mentioned in the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ashudafashuda (talk • contribs) 18:16, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

For that, find a news article that says what you want, fill the details as per this format:-

To cite a news article with a credited author:-

<ref>{{cite news |last= |first= |date= |title= |url= |work= |location= |access-date= }}</ref>

To cite a news article with no credited author:-

<ref>{{cite news |author=<!--Staff writer(s); no by-line.--> |title= |url= |work= |location= |date= |access-date= }}</ref>

and post it here, we will add it if it is appropriate!—Spasiba5 (talk) 18:27, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

If that is too much to do, just give us the url (the webpage). Thanks!—Spasiba5 (talk) 18:30, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

Your claim that, "The article attempts to draw attention to unconfirmed rumors such as Hindu groups being involved in inciting violence, while there are no official reports/ statements by any authorities confirming the same" is justified. I request others for comments.—Spasiba5 (talk) 18:48, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

Official reports would be a primary source, and so wouldn't be cited in any case. If we weren't able to have articles until the government had confirmed it, we'd lose quite a few articles Nosebagbear (talk) 19:11, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

We don't need Government confirmation but the whole article is biased. Hindu groups have been maligned throughout the article, but if we want to add something about Ishrat Jahan or other Muslim perpetrators, DBigXray reverts us!—Spasiba5 (talk) 19:45, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

Please read this discussion about Ishrat Jahan. He says Wikipedia is not a newspaper and is keen to avoid mentioning her in this article!—Spasiba5 (talk) 19:51, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

Yes this article seemed biased to me only against Hindu rioters, like what you said. Gone are the days when Wikipedia used to be a neutral platform! Arka 92 22:32, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not a newspaper

Wikipedia is not a newspaper and so I suggest that we should reduce the length of this article. I request you all to comment.—Spasiba5 (talk) 09:38, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

It will probably happen in time when things have calmed down and coverage get a little distance. As of now, with the large amount of coverage in WP:RS (and non-WP:RS), it's hard to see what is of lasting importance or even reasonably correct. This is fairly normal with articles of this kind. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:48, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

Gråbergs Gråa Sång, you can probably start by removing the references cited that don't meet the WP:RS criteria.—Spasiba5 (talk) 09:55, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

Are there any specific publishers you are thinking of? I see a few "Twitter", but context matters. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:05, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

Number of deaths in 2020 North East Delhi riots is now 49

Number of deaths in 2020 North East Delhi riots is now 49
https://www.firstpost.com/india/high-cost-of-riots-in-northeast-delhi-list-of-49-people-who-died-during-three-days-of-violence-8108751.html
https://thewire.in/communalism/delhi-riots-identities-deceased-confirmed
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qkdXe2qU8yo
https://www.thepolisproject.com/the-high-cost-of-targeted-violence-in-northeast-delhi-a-list-of-the-deceased/#.Xl8JKR8zbIV

Please update.--Fathimahazara (talk) 01:50, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

References

 Done. NedFausa (talk) 06:40, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

Infobox goals parameter

In reverting my recent edit, SerChevalerie invited me to discuss this on Talk page. Our difference of opinion relates to the Infobox, which is titled North East Delhi riots and whose goals parameter reads "Preventing Citizenship Amendment Act protests." Perhaps I'm missing some dialectical subtlety, but I do not understand how the goal of this riot was to prevent protests. I've read the two references affixed to the parameter, to no avail. To me, it seems the goal of the riots was to protest the Citizenship Amendment Act. NedFausa (talk) 20:18, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

On Sunday, February 23, the BJP’s Kapil Mishra, who lost his seat in the recent Delhi election, focused his ire on a sit-in by Muslim women in the north of Delhi that was blocking a road. If authorities didn’t clear the road of demonstrators before Trump left India, Mishra warned, his supporters would clear it after the U.S. president’s departure. Loath to wait, the mob set to work within minutes, quickly moving into the adjacent neighborhoods, beating and killing Muslims and looting and burning their property.

Loud and clear. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 21:16, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

References

Kautilya3, thanks for your reply. I stand corrected, and now see how it's possible to riot in order to prevent or dispel someone else's protest. NedFausa (talk) 21:58, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

Why "Pogrom" is removed from infobox ,Kautilya3 ? Is there any consensus on that? It was cited I mean.Edward Zigma (talk) 04:30, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

Edward Zigma, why are you flogging this dead horse? Administrator Anachronist has explained not once but twice why he removed pogrom from the Infobox. What more needs to be said? NedFausa (talk) 04:42, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

Heres the non opinion news articles you should check. They are calling it pogroms.First,second, third. There are enough news articles I think. Requesting ,Kautilya3,DBigXray,EL_C to take a look a look in this self consensus going on hereEdward Zigma (talk) 05:10, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

References

Edward Zigma, in case you hadn't noticed, DBigXray has retired. Plus Kautilya3 and El_C are not likely to see your request unless you format their usernames correctly. NedFausa (talk) 05:21, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

Of those sources, Telegraph India is an opinion piece, and Huffington Post refers to the Atlantic opinion piece. Neither justify Wikipedia stating those opinions in Wikipedia's voice. The only decent source there might be National Herald, but that's just one source out of many, so it would be WP:UNDUE weight to single it out as something representative of Wikipedia's voice. ~Anachronist (talk) 07:02, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

I can't see any credibility in Atlantic opinion piece by a polemic trying to present only one side of the conflict. Since all we have got are 'claims' we need to give weight yo all sides. Wareon (talk) 05:29, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

Religious/ethnic cleansing

Kautilya invited me to raise the second "motivation" i.e. religious/ethnic cleansing here. The claimed citation from HuffPo is an op-ed. Illustrating a burnt Quran (along with a burnt mosque) isn't enough to establish the said motive. Crawford88 (talk) 05:08, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

Crawford88, where is it said that it is an "op-ed"? -- Kautilya3 (talk) 09:39, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

See the URL. It's uploaded under the url, "huff*post.in/entry/". It's not filed under /news, as they have it. Crawford88 (talk) 05:09, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

Time

Requesting a couple of edit-less hours, wherein I will be heavily editing the article. I have worked with these types of articles earlier (1990 Bijnor Riots) and this will compete to be the worst article, I've ever seen in domain of Indian politics. ∯WBG^converse 10:58, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

Kautilya3 WBG El_C DBigXray :Just a point that Spasiba5 and NedFausa are changing the page without consensus and self declared consensus. Please look into that. Theu have removed the "Pogrom" and other discription without proper discussion from the article to basically suit the POV. And many things are changed by them slowly. Take a look into this.Edward Zigma (talk) 11:18, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

No, I removed "pogrom" based on the consensus I saw in a discussion above. A single opinion piece using that word, even if the piece was written by an expert, does not constitute a reason for us to state it in Wikipedia's voice. ~Anachronist (talk) 14:53, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

WP:BRD cycle implies that editors can edit the article, others can revert them, and a discussion follows. It bothers me that Spasiba5 fails to discuss.

He has not yet made any response in defence of his #Tahir Hussain again edit. If he continues this pattern of commando editing, I will ask for him to be sanctioned. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 11:43, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

Kautilya3, I read what you asked, but I observed that you had reverted it and left it at that. I did not re-insert it! If there is a rule which says that I am obliged to answer every question here, let me know.—Spasiba5 (talk) 12:09, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

Edward Zigma, I have not removed anything. I don't have the time for any edit war!—Spasiba5 (talk) 12:09, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

Spaciba5, it is good that you didn't edit war, but you should not be, in the first place, making edits that you are unable to defend. Especially, when the issues have been discussed ahead of time on the talk page, and objections have been raised, it is unreasonable for you to go and make bad edits anyway. Since this is a controversial subject, you need to exercise caution and refrain from making edits that are likely to be reverted. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 12:44, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

• Winged Blades of Godric, I would like to register my objection to the removal of the "incitement" section. It has been validated by numerous top-quality sources including the NYT, The Atlantic etc. I am afraid your efforts are going to be wasted because I will revert any effort to water down the culpability. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 11:49, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

Winged Blades of Godric, why not do it section by section in your sandbox? What changes do you intend to make? SerChevalerie (talk) 11:54, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

• Kautilya3, there's no watering down. I have copied the near-entirety of the first paragraph to the sub-section.
  The last line After the rally, Mishra posted a video threatening police on Twitter is factually incorrect (at least per the citation) in that it impresses upon a reader that Mishra gave some new set of threats and posted its video over Twitter; it was basically the clip of his speech.
  Second paragraph second line has been copied in near-entirety to new subsection. The death-toll needs to be obviously at the end of the article in some section which cumulates all damage; I don't know what it is doing over the incitement section. We need not thrust down a reader's throat that Mishra killed those 42 folks or something to similar effects.
  Accusations by relatives of victims about the ones behind the riot have varied a lot (I spot Mishra, Tahir, Kejriwal and many others) and is hardly highly relevant in pinpointing blame on Kapil. Notwithstanding the fact that the part. blame was cherrypicked to suit the themes of the subsection, it belongs to the article somewhere down the body.
  I have no remote clue about what a line about outsiders (rather than locals) engaging in the violence was doing over that section.
  The police-complaints about Kapil belong to the article but again, over the three sections where we are dealing with all the police and legal stuff, that has manifested around this locus. ∯WBG^converse 12:11, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

Trustfullness and truthfullness of left biased sources/references

Many admins/mod/editors are not taking Opindia, SwarajyaMag, Deccan Chronicle, JihadWatch.org and many other sources mentioning pre-planned nature of anti-Hindu Delhi riots as biased while many sources with history of intentional biased news like WSJ, The Wire, Quint, Carvan and others are considered as valid and truthfull. Why this discrimination ? Ravi1991ss (talk) 07:33, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

Deccan Chronicle should not be in that list.

The others are not mainstream news organisations and, indeed, they are not regarded as reliable sources. See WP:NEWSORG.

If what they say is fact, we would expect it to appear in mainstream news. If it doesn't, it isn't. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 07:59, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

Only Deccan Chronicle and WSJ are reliable sources in that list. Most of the other sources are never used, though some of them are still used but attribution is needed; this happens only when better source isn't available. Aman Kumar Goel^(Talk) 08:06, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

Deccan Chroncile has been cited in the article. Tayi Arajakate _Talk 08:11, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

Undue quotation on section

WP:UNDUE quotation on the section on North_East_Delhi_riots#Incitement_of_violence should be removed, which is made by the father of a victim Rahul Solanki. As the matter is too recent, we should avoid using quoteboxes for now, coz nothing much has been confirmed yet Azuredivay (talk) 19:28, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

Yes that single quotation is WP:UNDUE and is being used to allege a WP:BLP of a crime which is far from being concluded. Aman Kumar Goel^(Talk) 19:35, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

So please remove it. I suggest that the number of times "Hindu groups" are mentioned in the article should be reduced. A lot of people are complaining to Wikipedia about it.—Spasiba5 (talk) 20:09, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

 Done by Aman.kumar.goel, and I agree. ~Anachronist (talk) 20:33, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

I am ok with the quotebox going. But I am troubled by Spasiba5's prescription for "reducing Hindu groups" because some people complain about it. That is not WP:NPOV. Wikipedia is based on reliable sources, not people that might or might not complain. That is quite backwards. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 20:37, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

That's correct. Wikipedia is not censored for the benefit of any group who might feel offended. ~Anachronist (talk) 20:42, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 1 March 2020

Please change " 42 people were killed, the majority of whom were Muslims" to "46 people were killed, deceased include both the Hindus and the Muslims"

As the four sources are given The CBS, the Guardian does not say majority muslims, the firstpost link says "Of the deceased, 15 were Muslims and 10 were Hindus, while the religious identities of the others is not clear." and the Time link is op-ed giving NDTV link for deceased not majority muslims. 2405:204:3318:B8D4:F018:2066:9EB5:98D4 (talk) 19:41, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

 Not done for now: being discussed in thread above. ⋙–DBigXrayᗙ 19:44, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

Let the discussion continue. It is not right to write so when sources do not say so. 2405:204:3318:B8D4:F018:2066:9EB5:98D4 (talk) 19:56, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

Amit Shah’s answer

• The Delhi pogrom 2020 is Amit Shah’s answer to an election defeat

Interesting article. Can we use anything from this article ? --⋙–DBigXrayᗙ 21:04, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

No. It's an opinion piece. And only that. For example, second para first line "The Delhi pogrom of 2020 is state-sponsored. Anyone who cannot see that is pretending to be blind". Really? —Sarvatra (talk, contribs) 21:32, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

DBigXray Everybody in Delhi knew this, its actually NOT opinion, its the bitter fact after all. Dey subrata (talk) 04:56, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

Dey subrata Thats your opinion. As it is this article is slanted and highly highly lacking WP:NPOV and you two are responsible for pushing propaganda here. 203.88.145.110 (talk) 17:19, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

Victim list

I am going to start the discussion by saying that for this particular article having a victim list does more harm than good. I am aware of victim inclusion on events such as Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting, but also see articles like Kyoto Animation arson attack (at GA status). Right off the top we have an issue with the first thing that was added for the section: "34 people died in several incidents of violence. Below is a list of some of them:", why are there only "some" of the victims included? Are "some" more notable than others? When the death count becomes higher, it becomes more of a challenge to include all of the names without having the article turn into a Memorial. Its really up to editors here if having a victim list will improve the quality of the article or not. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 14:16, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

I would note that I support this comment by Knowledgekid87. ⋙–DBigXrayᗙ 14:20, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

I also support it, but we must first list the Aam Aadmi Party politicians who started the riots and cite references for the same!—Spasiba5 (talk) 14:24, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

@DiplomatTesterMan: Reverting without discussing things here is considered disruptive. I will copy and paste your above statement here though...

"Following from a section above about the casualty list - since this riots supposedly also have a lot to do with religious orientation, the religious demographics of those killed should be mentioned in the article and further as part of the CAA casualty list over on the main article for this CAA protests - "Names of 19 People Killed in Delhi Riots Confirmed (The Wire)", Delhi violence | Death toll rises to 27 (The Hindu)."

Citing the Citizenship Amendment Act protests article falls under WP:WAX as I have already pointed out that casualty list inclusion depends on the article. I do not see the justification of citing Religious demographics here for inclusion as in the end people are people. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 14:48, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

I second Knowledgekid87, having a victim list will not make much sense, especially if the list grows larger. SerChevalerie (talk) 16:00, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

I am not going to break WP:3RR, if someone feels there is a consensus then remove the "casualty list". - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 16:39, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

Knowledgekid87 I think we should remove the list. It does more harm than good because the name reveal religious identities and further it needs to be updated. As one of the citations (from the Hindu, I reckon) themselves have more names. Perhaps we could include them.Trojanishere (talk) 04:40, 28 February 2020 (UTC)Trojanishere.

I believe consensus has been achieved to Remove the section. Will add it back if we can prove that it adds significant value to the article, while covering every single casualty. SerChevalerie (talk) 05:18, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

It's not like Coronavirus; so, the victim list won't keep expanding indefinitely. I think the final tally will stand at 39.

For example https://www.ndtv.com/india-news/delhi-situation-improving-dont-believe-rumours-says-centre-10-points-2186970

To add to pages that have and don't have lists of casualties:

Columbine page doesn't have a list Columbine_High_School_massacre.

Nor does the page about the Las Vegas shooting 2017_Las_Vegas_shooting.

The Orlando nightclub shooting page has the list of victims Orlando_nightclub_shooting

I would prefer to have the list here as that adds encyclopedia value by clearly indicating that the victims were from one community. Of course, one can cite 10 or 20 'reputed' news organizations from both India and abroad who will say the same thing.

For example, USCIRF has said what it has said and GOI has responded with what it has responded. So, we can put both on Wikipedia.

https://www.indiatoday.in/india/story/comments-by-uscirf-others-delhi-caa-violence-attempt-politicise-issue-mea-1650462-2020-02-27

(BTW, this bit pertains more to the 'other' discussion thread about whether the article is 'neutral' or not. But kind of relevant to this discussion as well.) Sachi Mohanty 09:09, 28 February 2020 (UTC) Sachi bbsr (talk)

Stating that all of the victims were from the same community can easily be summed up in a sentence or two. I just feel its too much on the WP:OR side to say that all of the victims were from the same community by just looking at a list of names. The names on the list could be included in the article when their notability is established as much. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 15:03, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

I agree Knowledgekid87, but see the 'latest' additions to this Talk page at the bottom. As I write this, it is 29th February. A special day! Someone is again raising the 'both sides' issue. Having the names out there on the page for ready reference might make things clear. The operative word being 'might.' It won't convince those who resolutely refuse to see or understand. Let me stress, this is a friendly observation and not an 'argument.' Sachi_bbsr talk 10:30, 29 February 2020 (UTC)

As per the earlier wiki pages like Orlando_nightclub_shooting has the victim list because It has reference because the names were made public in notable reference.

To add,

1. Existing victim list in CAA Protest should be removed unless we have a reference to a list of people it may be daily stats [Will start a talk there also.]

2. We cannot each victim individually from different sources/references. Such calculations will be incomplete and may lead to bias as a person may choose to add a particular person as a victim and leave others.

3. You cannot classify a person on the regional ground (This should not be your past knowledge/original work) I guess for that too you need references.

4. We can give the count of people belonging to the different communities if we have concrete numbers.

5. Any deceased person who is a notable person with a lot of reference in Wikipedia can be added in the timeline/riots section without a sub - section. WhiteTheme (talk) 21:47, 29 February 2020 (UTC)

Wareon, Italawar, please refer to the above discussion. It was decided per consensus that it should be removed, but if further consensus is achieved, then the section can remain. SerChevalerie (talk) 10:22, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

Takbir

One more thing I want to know(just to clear) that article mentions that clash occurs with "Takbir" too. Do we have any reliable source for that? I searched it but cannot find any reliable source on this one.Edward Zigma (talk) 11:03, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

Hi there is a discussion here, source is very weak and temporarily accepted, the author has not replied since then Talk:North_East_Delhi_riots/Archive_1#25th_February. Kautilya3 Please take a look. --⋙–DBigXrayᗙ 11:10, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

Deccan Chronicle is a weak source. This comprehensive story from The Caravan datelined 25 February cites Jai Shri Ram and worse, but no mention of Takbir. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 11:25, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

AsianAge Scroll.in.DeccanChronicle Please see 2405:204:3318:B8D4:7065:6C8D:AD1B:E694 (talk) 13:46, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

Ok, thanks for the sources. I will add it back after checking some more for better information. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 15:21, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

I think it could be added but in the details. Is there enough weightage to add it in synopsis? On one reported incident. There could be chantings from both sides. But synopsis is something which should be 100% confirmed.Edward Zigma (talk) 16:17, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

Sorry but the Hindu slogan "Jai Shree Ram" is mentioned in the begginng itself. Please see 2405:204:3318:B8D4:7065:6C8D:AD1B:E694 (talk) 16:21, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

The reason for that there are many articles on riots specifically concentrated on that slogan. Do you have any article which concentrate on takbir slogan particularly on Delhi riots? The article you gave is reporting an incident.That's what I am saying.Edward Zigma (talk) 16:30, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

The sources I gave refer to two different incidents, please see 2405:204:3318:B8D4:7065:6C8D:AD1B:E694 (talk) 16:43, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

Thats what I am saying. The sources confirmed that the in clashes the slogans were used. See Takbir. It has a whole section for its use in political warfare. I am saying that there is no denying that it should not be added. But on a few incidents, where other one got whole articles(see this, then it should be mentioned that its use was limited until we get a more reliable source on its widespread use. If it was used widespread, then obviously it should be added. Until than making it generalised doesn't make any sense.If you have any source for its generalised use then I will make a way for it myself.Edward Zigma (talk) 16:56, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

The caravan source mentions an incident in details, nowhere claims that use the Hindu slogan was general and the muslim slogan was not general. 2405:204:3318:B8D4:F850:AF06:7EBF:D5F2 (talk) 17:27, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

The article of itslef has heading with the name of slogan. 1)See this. 2)See this . 3)See this. Check these articles. One was generalised in the clash/riot/pogrom whatever you call it. But the other one has some incidents . There are many videos too on this slogan. But I have provided the news sources which are reliable. So I request to whoever will edit this that(Kautilya3, that please make the differentiation cleae which I have explained.I am limiting myself to this discussion only as I have decided to not to involve in this.Edward Zigma (talk) 17:50, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

Three sources you cited give the hindu slogan in heading, but nowhere they say the hindu slogan was generalsed and the muslim slogan was not. Three sources have also been given of use of the muslim slogan. 2405:204:3318:B8D4:F850:AF06:7EBF:D5F2 (talk) 18:17, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

References

Doesn't the slogan itself in the article headline make it obvious? I will leave this to WP:3O on this. The slogan was generalised, it was stated in caravan headlines itself. Rest others will decide.Edward Zigma (talk) 18:38, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

No dear that's your take, mentioned in the headline does not mean the use of Hindu slogan more generalised than the muslim slogan, headlines are made to be catchy. 2405:204:3318:B8D4:8957:E684:E91F:592F (talk) 19:20, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

Edward Zigma is right. "Jai Shri Ram" was reported pretty universally in all kind of contexts by practically all newspapers [6]. "Allah-o Akbar" only popped up in Deccan Chronicle/Asian Age (which is the same story) and in connection with Vinod Kumar's death. "Jai Shri Ram" is being used as a weapon in itself, being chanted while people are being beaten or killed, while "Allah-o Akbar" is only being mentioned as a slogan. Once again, you are demanding "equality" where it doesn't apply. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 22:49, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

The muslim slogan is also similarly used in the violence, needs to be mentioned in the synopsis just like the hindu slogan. You say "the hindu slogan is used as a weapon in ifself while the muslim is only being mentioed as a slogan" quite strange both slogan yet one when chanted is used as a weapon in itself while the other is just a slogan. Equality does apply, but is not being applied here. 2405:204:1384:72A9:20A6:45A1:974F:EFF7 (talk) 02:53, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

This is a false equivalence that's why. On one hand we have a lots of reliable sources with headlines themselves on other we have other with merely one or two reported incidents. I have explained what I want to convey. I didn't even open this discussion but it got open somehow. I have rest my case explaining above.Edward Zigma (talk) 18:59, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on March 1 2020

1st major incident of riot in NE delhi happened on Dec 17, 2019. Please include the incident in timeline:-

On Dec 17 2019, Violent clashes occurred in Delhi's Seelampur area which is part of north east delhi injuring 50 people. Police retaliated with tear gas and batons against the stone throwing protesters. Several protesters and officers were injured. A police station was set on fire and buses were vandalised in the area (1) (2) Unbiasedpov (talk) 16:53, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

 Not done for now: It's already stated in Background. I'll give you this to reconsider this edit request. {{replyto|Can I Log In}} me if you still want this to be done. Can I Log In (talk) 17:07, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

I checked the background [[7]], Background refers to Feb 22, 2020 event. In contrast, Above event happened on dec 17 2019. It is a riot in NE delhi over CAA. It is a notable event it should be included in timeline. Timeline should start with the 1st event. Dec 17 2019 is the first significant event i found. Unbiasedpov (talk) 17:33, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

@Can I Log In: I think this incident merits a place in timeline. Unbiasedpov (talk) 18:00, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

@Unbiasedpov: Your request does not seem to fit the timeline section as it is designated for February 23-future. I may insert your request in background since that is the most relevant section I could put it as your request is background information. To reply, copy and paste this: {{SUBST:replyto|[[User:Can I Log In|Can I Log In]]}} ([[User talk|talk]]) 18:20, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

The request has been answered, Unbiasedpov — please do not revert me again, or you will be sanctioned. El_C 18:05, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

Tahir Hussain again

Spasiba5, you have added this passage late in the day today:

Subsequently, the AAP suspended Tahir Hussain from the primary membership of the party. He is supposed to have lead a group of 300 to 400 hardcore rioters during the violence. A number of videos had surfaced on social media, showing people allegedly throwing petrol bombs and stones from his rooftop, following which the Delhi Police have sealed Hussain's house besides registering a case against him. In one such video, Hussain is seen holding a wooden stick with smoke rising from his building. The police seized petrol bombs, acid, stones and bricks which were allegedly used by rioters during the violence from the house of Tahir Hussain. The police claim that he is now absconding.

References

Many many severe problems here:

• None of your citations have dates. And your text says "now". How is one supposed to know what time you are supposedly talking about?
• What is meant by "he is supposed to have led"? Who supposed?
• Your citation 3 ("Bennet, Coleman and Company") gives not only the allegations made of him, but also his response. Why did you omit his reponse?
• "The Police claim that he is now absconding". Isn't this out of date given your citation 3?
• Have you read any of the numerous discussion that have taken place on this talk page regarding Tahir Hussain?

This is a completely incompetent edit, and a WP:BLP violation. I am reverting it.

El_C, I need you to reconsider 1RR in the light of all the bad edits getting made today. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 19:30, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

• @Kautilya3: I'm afraid that's not how AC/DS works. --qedk (t 桜 c) 19:32, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

qedk there is an existing consensus on the thread on Tahir to not include these details, per wP:BLPNAME

User:Kautilya3, I note that Spasiba started a new thread, failed to get consensus for these edits on the talk page and still proceeded to add them anyway. I support a removal of these edits due to above reasons. QEDK, what is your opinion. A consensus on this thread can be used to revert it per consensus. ⋙–DBigXrayᗙ 19:40, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

@DBigXray: The only exceptions that apply are specified in WP:3RRNO, you can rely on point #7 to revert, but that's putting yourself on thin ice imo. --qedk (t 桜 c) 19:52, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

QEDK, Thanks, yes, #7 seems to be appropriate here as the edits are a violation of (1)WP:BLPNAME and (2) an existing talk page consensus. ⋙–DBigXrayᗙ 20:04, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

@El C: Enforced BRD seems to be needed here. --qedk (t 桜 c) 19:54, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

@QEDK: I actually don't know if we're at that stage yet, but I've no objection to you (or anyone else) adding that enhancement to the existing 1RR regime. El_C 20:00, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

@El C: (edit conflict) You reply was lost in an edit conflict (and I conflicted with you now, how ironic). I cannot carry out administrative roles in this area (per my reading of WP:INVOLVED), so I'll leave it up to you (or any other administrator if they see it fit). --qedk (t 桜 c) 20:12, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

Copy that. If in the next little while you still find 1RR to have become insufficient, please feel free to make that request again. El_C 20:17, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

QEDK, for the benefit of the lesser mortals can you please clarify what this enforced BRD is. I believe 1RR itself is a pain, I would not support anything that aggravates it. ⋙–DBigXrayᗙ 20:18, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

@DBigXray: it would look like this:

l1RR + BRD

El_C 20:22, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

El_C, thank you for explaining. Ok I support it. It seems that this makes 1RR less partial, as it brings both parties on equal footage. So yes, bring it on. --⋙–DBigXrayᗙ 20:28, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

Yes, I support it as well. It seems to be a relaxation of 1RR in supporting the enforcement of consensus. BLP is exempt from even 3RR but it is "thin ice" as QEDK pointed out :-( -- Kautilya3 (talk) 20:39, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

I'm not sure I know how to technically add it to the edit notice. I've never seen enforced BRD outside of AP2. El_C 20:43, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

@El C: There's detailed documentation at Template:Ds/editnotice. Remove the 1RR parameter and add your own, that's about it. --qedk (t 桜 c) 20:48, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

@QEDK: yeah, in AP2 it's automatic. By all means, have at it (permission to do so as uninvolved admin granted). El_C 20:51, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

qedk,@El C: see below, quickl made it. never thought I will be doing this, since I hate 1RR, but any way. --⋙–DBigXrayᗙ 20:54, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

l1RR + BRD on IPA
{{IPA AE}}

@DBigXray: I was referring to adding it to Template:Editnotices/Page/North East Delhi riots. El_C 20:57, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

El C, you can use Template:IPA AE/Edit notice ⋙–DBigXrayᗙ 21:05, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

 Done Might want to log it now. --qedk (t 桜 c) 21:02, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

 Done on my part (logged at AEL), as well. El_C 21:06, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

• Tahir Hussain and Kapil Mishra are not being treated equally. 2405:204:3318:B8D4:FDA3:1EE2:2C99:CCE9 (talk) 20:11, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

Of course not. Why will they be treated equally? -- Kautilya3 (talk) 20:16, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

The WP seems only matter to when it comes to Tahir Hussain, not Kapil Mishra, strangely both are living persons. 2405:204:3318:B8D4:FDA3:1EE2:2C99:CCE9 (talk) 20:19, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

Yes, both are living persons and the same policies apply. But how they are "treated" depends on what the reliable sources say about them, not our policies. People demanding "equality" are engaging in their own WP:OR, which is prohibited on Wikipedia. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 20:22, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

We must avoid any discussion on comparison of alleged crimes on talk pages. per OR and BLP. Wikipedia is not a court. ⋙–DBigXrayᗙ 20:33, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

Demanding equality OR? they are not being treated equally not because RS issue, many RS have allegations against Tahir Hussain just as against Kapil Mishra, while an FIR is registered against Tahir Hussain, no one is convicted by an court of law, the article prominently menttions allegations against Kapil Mishra and just mentions FIR against Tahir Hussain. This is unequal treatment. 2405:204:3318:B8D4:FDA3:1EE2:2C99:CCE9 (talk) 20:37, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

Should be for both. 2405:204:3318:B8D4:FDA3:1EE2:2C99:CCE9 (talk) 20:37, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

Not on this Wikipedia. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 20:43, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

Not on this Wikipedia? 2405:204:3318:B8D4:FDA3:1EE2:2C99:CCE9 (talk) 20:45, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

Yes, the English Wikipedia. There is no mention of any two individuals, or any two subjects, being treated as "equal" anywhere in our policies. You should quit making such arguments.

If there is anything wrong with the way each subject is being treated, on their own, taking into account what the WP:RS say about them, then feel free to bring it up. That is all. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 21:26, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

The living person policy needs to be applied equally to living persons, more so when it is in the same artice. Yes there is everything wrong with the way each subject is being treated on their own in this article. 2405:204:1384:72A9:20A6:45A1:974F:EFF7 (talk) 03:02, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

El_C, I understand the 1RR rule, but please let me know where I can read up about the BRD and BRD on IPA rules.—Spasiba5 (talk) 00:18, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

Template:Editnotices/Page/North East Delhi riots outlines what should be done. But unlike consensus required, there is no supplemental page devoted to it, I'm afraid. El_C 00:22, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

Islamophobia as a cause for the riots

It does not seem to be fair citing "Islamophobia" as a reason for the riots, since it is a bit of a stretch in this context. Furthermore none of the sources cited for Islamophobia actually contain that word, let alone clearly state it as the cause.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fXoZvLkd70E

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-51639856

https://indianexpress.com/article/cities/delhi/delhi-violence-ashok-nagar-school-mosque-6288437/

https://theprint.in/india/never-thought-hindu-muslim-riots-are-possible-in-delhi-weve-always-co-existed-peacefully/370982/

https://www.thehindu.com/news/cities/Delhi/up-in-flames-firing-stone-pelting-continue-no-policeman-in-sight/article30917600.ece Aswin8 (talk) 10:14, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

Have not yet reviewed the video, which is from NDTV's verified YouTube channel, but, on review, Aswin8 is correct - the other sources do not contain "Islamophobia". This needs sourcing, or removal. Either way, these sources should be removed from this section. - Ryk72 ^talk 10:58, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

Kautilya3, Dey subrata, Sarvatra, UrbanCentrist, Datta, Aman.kumar.goel, My Lord, , SerChevalerie, A14i12, DiplomatTesterMan, Sachi bbsr, Trojanishere, S. M. Nazmus Shakib, Vanamonde93, WashingtonPrime, Souniel Yadav, Gayatri9876, Edward Zigma, Shubham2019, WhiteTheme, Spasiba5, please do voice in your opinions regarding this. — Preceding unsigned comment

 Done Having confirmed that none of the references mention Islamophobia—including the NDTV video (that's 11 minutes, 45 seconds of my life I'll never get back)—I removed Islamophobia from the Infobox as a cause. NedFausa (talk) 05:56, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

Attack on Police Officers

I think this section should also be added.. Many police officers have also been injured . Anandraghuvanshistar (talk) 10:51, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

@Anandraghuvanshistar:, there's mention of injured police officers in the article where's there's a source. Unless there's a huge amount of content additions should probably go into the current timeline subsections. Whether that approach or a section you'd need to provide an initial draft (or drafts if adding smaller edits) of what should be added, and, especially critically, reliable secondary sources covering it Nosebagbear (talk) 12:00, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 2 March 2020

The origins of the Delhi Riots can be dated back to December 2019, when a group of students gathered at JNU to protest against the government. This protest turned violent when a group of holligans barged into the campus and incited violence against the student protesters.

Then in January Shaheen Bagh tragedy happened. This was a religious clash between Hindus and the Muslims.

Popular Front of India has received funds to incite this protest. Popular Front of India is a jihadist organisation known to have stakes at dismantling the BJP ruled Indian government. Sanjrath (talk) 19:17, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

 Not done, nothing to do. There is no request above to change anything, add anything, or include any sources. Please be specific, and make a request in the form "change X to Y". This talk page is not a forum for discussing the topic, it is for discussing improvements to the article. ~Anachronist (talk) 19:20, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

SDPI members were paid Rs.10000 to attack leaders supporting CAA in Bengaluru according to the Police

References

There is still no specific edit request here. Again,  Not done, nothing to do. ~Anachronist (talk) 20:40, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 3 March 2020

Dear Sir, I feel behaviors of Doctors also should be updated on this page as I have gone thru the news on THE WEEK with headline - From shaming patients to asking full form of CAA, how doctors failed Delhi violence victims. Here is the link - https://www.theweek.in/news/india/2020/03/02/from-shaming-patients-to-asking-full-form-of-caa-how-doctors-failed-delhi-violence-victims.amp.html?__twitter_impression=true&fbclid=IwAR0DSprCLJPMbrwFwUNU-QSiqgMJoF0G8skWvXweXJZzy5KA54cQDxSiRtI

Regards, Kalim ullah Kalimedia123 (talk) 08:08, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

@Kalimedia123: Can you suggest a brief sentence to add? The source looks OK. ~Anachronist (talk) 15:00, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

Here is another source from HuffPo. Will look into it when I have time. The report can be created into a section if more sources are available. SerChevalerie (talk) 11:02, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

Kalimedia123, Anachronist, Kautilya3, have created a draft at User:SerChevalerie/sandbox#Handling of the riots by doctors. If there are no objections then I'll move it to the main article. SerChevalerie (talk) 20:06, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

I tweaked it a bit. I'm not happy with the Huff Post citation; it's written in a more sensationalist than journalistic tone. ~Anachronist (talk) 23:39, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

Anachronist, noted, thanks. Marking this as  Done, inviting others to improve upon it in North_East_Delhi_riots#Delhi_Health_Services. Thank you. SerChevalerie (talk) 03:43, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

Casualties

Added by User:Italawar[8], removed by other user[9] then added back by Italawar saying get consensus.[10] This editor has no idea how consensus works.

I support removing whole section, we are not a collection of indiscriminate information. Wareon (talk) 06:52, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

Wareon, Italwar, please refer to the existing discussion Talk:North_East_Delhi_riots#Victim_list to achieve further consensus there. SerChevalerie (talk) 10:20, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

I have removed the list as it was added without consensus. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 14:42, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

Marking as  Done. SerChevalerie (talk) 19:33, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 4 March 2020

This is the picture of burnt shops at Shiv Vihar.

.This is the picture of burnt shops at Shiv Vihar. Banswalhemant (talk) 17:45, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

Banswalhemant, thank you!  Done. SerChevalerie (talk) 19:26, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 4 March 2020

Delhi police arrested mobster Sharukh Pathan who fired 8 bullets and also fired at unarmed Delhi Constable Mr. Dahiya. Constable without fearing for his life confronted Shahrukh and saved many lives. Another rioter Tahir Hussain expelled councilor of Aam Aadmi Party is on run and Police suspect him as master mind of Riot. Sanjayg11 (talk) 20:22, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

Many users like ManuT2020 and you just complain and disappear. Please give us links to articles we can use and what you want to add based on what is said in those links.—Spasiba5 (talk) 20:28, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

 Not done Sanjayg11, this has been discussed before. Also, please use WP:RS and use the "Change X to Y" format. SerChevalerie (talk) 20:32, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

Majority of Muslims among the victims

Someone please unarchive https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:North_East_Delhi_riots/Archive_2#Extended-confirmed-protected_edit_request_on_29_February_2020 there was no consensus on use of majority of dead muslims. With out of 42 death, 15 muslims , 10 hindus, 17 unidentified, use majority muslim is not justified. 2405:204:3318:B8D4:7065:6C8D:AD1B:E694 (talk) 14:54, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

There is no need to unarchive it since the old discussion is available.

Can we have some more comments on this please? The current text states:

42 people were killed, the majority of whom were Muslims and 70 were injured.

References

-- Kautilya3 (talk) 15:37, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

Please also see The Print "Over forty persons dead. Both Hindus and Muslims, almost in equal measure. What is worse is the horror of several unidentified dead, in fact, close to a third of them, listed simply as “unknown”. 2405:204:3318:B8D4:F850:AF06:7EBF:D5F2 (talk) 18:43, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

Here are the quotes.

Guardian

They killed or burned alive Muslims who could not escape and the victims were largely unprotected by the police. At least 37 people, almost all Muslims, were killed and many others beaten half to death.

CBS News

local reports suggest the majority of the dead and injured are Muslims.

Time

the official number of those killed has reached 42, a majority of them Muslims

Firstpost

Of the deceased, 15 were Muslims and 10 were Hindus

Wire

The Wire has identified 30 persons among the deceased, including from a list released by GTB Hospital and those released by the news agency PTI

⋙–DBigXrayᗙ 06:52, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

There is still no evidence that muslims suffered more. I suggest you remove the line altogether or write "Both hindu and muslim community of the area suffered greatly due to this tragedy, both in terms of lives lost, people injured or properties destroyed." Shubham2019 (talk) 15:18, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 1 March 2020

Change "Shortly after his statement, violent clashes started across North East Delhi with Hindu nationalist mobs vandalizing Muslim properties and mosques, carrying saffron flags and chanting Jai Shri Ram." to "Within hours, the worst Hindu-Muslim violence in India in years was exploding. Gangs of Hindus and Muslims fought each other with swords and bats, shops burst into flames, chunks of bricks sailed through the air, and mobs rained blows on cornered men."

For these are the exact words of the source given, not what is written first in the brackets. 2405:204:3318:B8D4:F850:AF06:7EBF:D5F2 (talk) 17:45, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

References

 Not done: Please paraphrase instead of copying a quote from the article. To reply, copy and paste this: {{SUBST:replyto|[[User:Can I Log In|Can I Log In]]}} ([[User talk|talk]]) 18:29, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

@Can I Log In: "Soon, the worst Hindu-Muslim violence in India in years was ensuing." will it do? 2405:204:3318:B8D4:F850:AF06:7EBF:D5F2 (talk) 18:37, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

 Partly done:. I left some parts in the article in there, and replaced your rewording of "soon" with "Within hours". To reply, copy and paste this: {{SUBST:replyto|[[User:Can I Log In|Can I Log In]]}} ([[User talk|talk]]) 18:44, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

@Can I Log In: Please see you have kept "with Hindu nationalist mobs vandalizing Muslim properties and mosques, carrying saffron flags and chanting Jai Shri Ram." which not given in the source, please remove it. 2405:204:3318:B8D4:F850:AF06:7EBF:D5F2 (talk) 18:49, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

I would like to introduce you to this source. That will deny your request to remove the chanting. To reply, copy and paste this: {{SUBST:replyto|[[User:Can I Log In|Can I Log In]]}} ([[User talk|talk]]) 18:57, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

You added a new source to decline edit request this is not proper, yet the source details another incident it is not related to alleged Kapil Mishra speech incitement, this is not appropriate in the synopsis. Here is a source claming a mob shouting Allah hu Akbar killed someone, add this to the synopsis. 2405:204:3318:B8D4:8957:E684:E91F:592F (talk) 19:09, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

This remains unanswered. Someone please read.2405:204:3318:B8D4:FDA3:1EE2:2C99:CCE9 (talk) 20:08, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

References

This is correct Sourav123456 (talk) 03:30, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 2 March 2020

Please can someone added more international reactions such as OIC reactions and statement from turkish president erdogan regarding violence in Delhi. I found source that adds the statement

• https://www.siasat.com/oic-condemns-anti-muslim-violence-india-1842843/
• https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/20200228-india-commiting-massacres-against-muslims-erdogan-says/

Please also add reactions from Indian diaspora like this.

• ‎https://www.telegraphindia.com/amp/states/west-bengal/indian-diaspora-assembles-in-18-european-cities-to-condemn-the-delhi-riots/cid/1750148 182.1.51.6 (talk) 04:15, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

 Not done. Please set out the exact changes you wish to see implemented, with such a proposal being outlined in specific detail. Thanks. El_C 09:01, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

Hatting nonconstructive comments in violation of article talk page guidelines. El_C 08:56, 2 March 2020 (UTC)
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
The equivalence you are making is false here. Yes the articles do mention some incidents, but they were not generalised as whole in all clashesEdward Zigma (talk) 09:50, 2 March 2020 (UTC) We are not court. If court will conclude this reason then allegedly word will be removed. That’s what we do!— Harshil want to talk? 11:21, 2 March 2020 (UTC) If Ishrat Jahan who is arrested for incitement of Riots through hate speech is not worth mentioning then remove the incitement section altogether. Because there is no point writing about Kapil Mishra who has not been arrested for any such activity. There is only a PIL in court seeking the FIR against him. Thus it seems that Kapil Mishra is being made the villain without substantial evidence against him. Shubham2019 (talk) 21:11, 2 March 2020 (UTC) Caused by Hinduphobia and not Islamophobia PritiTripathi68315 (talk) 08:15, 2 March 2020 (UTC) PritiTripathi68315, can you provide reliable sources to back up your word? Otherwise, none of this is going to be considered. Tayi Arajakate Talk 08:36, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

It was an Anti CAA riot to scare Hindus

The riot was started by anti CAA protesters who were Muslim, as clearly seen in videos of rioters pelting stones on police, throwing petrol bombs on houses/hindu schools. Most damage was done from house of a Muslim AAP party leader Tahir Hussain where arms were stored by rioters. It was an riot to scare Hindus, incited by words of AIMIM leader Waris Pathan. Destruction to Hindu houses and shops were targeted, by marking Muslim shops shutters with words "No CAB". Remaining all hindu/jain shops were burnt. Pritmr (talk) 06:52, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

WORLD INFECTED WITH RADICAL ISLAMIC TERRORISM

We can all see what is happening all over the world and after seeing this, I feel that every country is suffering a great loss from Islamic terrorism. The main reason for rioting in India is Islamic terrorism. Rajat Rauth (talk) 05:50, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

Whoever cited the article from The Atlantic must read the article in its entirety instead of just going by the title. In fact, I was expecting that some one would cite that article when I opened this topic. The article was purely one sided as the contents of this wiki page. It does not even try to compare the number of deaths that occurred on both sides. Of the 40 - 50 casualties that occurred as of this writing, equal number of Hindus lost their lives. The cited article never stated that.

It is quite clear that the author and the person who cited the article are in clear rush to push a political agenda.

This must be definitely reported to and looked into by the admin.

The reference to the word pogrom must be removed from the article. Kunapulir (talk) 06:38, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

Muslim women recall horror of Molotov cocktails and arson

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-51670096 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.157.87.105 (talk) 03:39, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

Please don't just post links — there needs to be a discussion about how the given source and what it says can affect the article. El_C 08:58, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

List of Hate Speaches

(Redacted) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 106.76.89.225 (talk) 10:15, 2 March 2020 (UTC)