Talk:Radhakant Nayak

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.

This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Biography: Politics and Government

	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 politics and government work group.
	This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool because one or more other projects use this class. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the `\|auto=` parameter.

India: Politics Low‑importance

	India portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Indian politics workgroup (assessed as Mid-importance).

nayak as suspect

The India Today article describing Nayak as a suspect dates to October 18. The article describing arrests is from October 16 and does not mention Nayak at all. The point here being that no one is accusing Nayak of murder, but people are accusing him of masterminding it. The October 16 article is irrelevant and tells the reader nothing about Nayak. Its a poor anachronistic attempt at minimizing the allegations levelled against him. If someone criticizes the link to Nayak, then it belongs in said section, not an article that does not even mention Nayak.Pectore^talk 00:48, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The police link, unjustifiably removed by Soman, noted that an actual governmental investigation was launched against Nayak. This is very notable to the subject, as it obviously could mean jail time under Indian law for "communal unrest" at the least. This sort of whitewashing is the worst kind of censorship.Pectore^talk 00:59, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Belief and complicity

I think that some people need to read WP:BLP again. This article is still showing unfounded allegations from 2008 concerning the death of Swami Laksmanananda Saraswati and is still making wild claims about his religious beliefs. For example,. this source is useless without some sort of update - it is five years since, ffs! - and so too is this one which is also used to verify his involvement with the YMCA even though it doesn't seem to mention the YMCA.

From an old version of his Rajya Sabha profile, it is clear that Nayak has been involved with a lot of organisations and has, for example, been awarded prizes by Buddhist groups. WP:BLPCAT is explicit that he has to self-identify his religious belief if we are to include it in the article, and politically-motivated claims of such seriousness as complicity in murder really do need to be followed through or dropped. I suppose that there might be an argument for retention of such claims if we can sort out the wording but right now it is hopelessly damaging and unfair on him. Pectore also needs to re-read WP:VANDALISM and retract the attack made in this edit summary. - Sitush (talk) 05:06, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]