Talk:Yasin Malik

Yasin Malik Didn't accept that he killed those Airforce people.

Tim Sebastian and talk between Yasin Malik puts no admission by Yasin Malik that he or JKLF has killed those people. But Yasin Malik challenged the trial of the court has not begun yet. Bilalahmadj (talk) 15:19, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

He pleaded guilty of 1990 killing of IAF officers and 2017 J&K terror funding case in Delhi High court on 11th May 2022. Kunal Mystry (talk) 05:11, 12 May 2022 (UTC)

Kunal Mystry, do you have a citation to support the killing of the IAF officers and funding terrorism in 2017? Jurisdicta (talk) 05:06, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

Improve this article

Could the author please make this article a bit more readable? You could maybe begin by splitting the sentence into paragraphs. Also there appears to be a lot of un-verified matter. Nitin (talk) 07:40, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Clean up

This article needs a lot of clean up, will try to work on it today --sarvajna (talk) 05:10, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

The section where it is mentioned that Yasin Malik met with Pakistani Prime Minister, it is necessary to mention that he met with late PM Manmohan Singh ji (India) as well.

Ref: https://www.timesnownews.com/videos/times-now/india/kashmiri-files-congress-stand-sparks-controversy-manmohan-singhs-picture-with-yasin-malik-video-90197251 115.114.136.244 (talk) 10:54, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

Imprisonment, Election rigging

@Kautilya3: Why are you removing sourced information that they were imprisoned without a formal charge, court appearance or a trial? Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 20:39, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

Did I? I am sorry. If I did, it wasn't intentional. You can put it back. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 20:48, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

I did a search and couldn't find these words either inserted or deleted. I have no idea.

I did delete the allegation that Delhi rigged the elections. I don't know if it did. And this source doesn't seem reliable for such a claim. Kashmir had its own Election Commission under the autonomy deal, and NC rigged every election up till 1977. The 1977 and 1983 elections were ok, but in 1987 things went back to the old ways. Bose says that NC rigs elections routinely even now, even for little things like local trading councils. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 21:05, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

Regarding, Your revert with summary this is not WP:HISTRS.

No, it does not have to be WP:HISTRS, we have discussed it many times. WP:HISTRS is an essay and does not take precedence over WP:RS which is a policy. You can replace the source with a WP:HISTRS source if it supports this content but you cannot remove reliably sourced content saying that it is not according to your favorite essay. That source specifically says that Rajiv's government was involved in rigging 1987 election, you need to provide the proper context, even if all other elections were rigged but 1987 rigging is considered to have huge impact on Malik's political life. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 21:11, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

This is not an RS either. News reports are only reliable for news, not history. People remember history in their own ways. We can't rely on it unless there is scholarly analysis.

The Kashmir Life article, which is more thoroughly researched, tells you quite clearly what NC did, blow by blow.

It is precisely because 1987 elections are so important that we have to use proper sources. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 21:21, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

That news report quotes Prem Shankar Jha as saying that Delhi rigged elections. But Jha says that NC did here. I will double check why I cited that report at all. It doesn't seem reliable at all. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 21:30, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

This is getting curioser and curioser. In the actual interview, which is reproduced on Nabi's own blog site, Jha says "The elections were rigged not by the Government of India, but by the successive state governments." The statement Nabi puts in quote marks in his article is part synthesis and part fabrication. The News International has a yet another variant: "The elections were rigged not only by the government of India, but also by the successive state governments." I guess we have to hand it to the News International's efficiency. It can achieve the needed distortion by adding just two words! -- Kautilya3 (talk) 23:08, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

Ok, when it was according to your POV then it was an RS, now when we found that it says something which is not according to your POV then its not RS anymore. I do no think we can make things work like that and I am not going to take your word on this. Moreover, its not what Jha says, its what that source says and I have no doubt that its an RS. Look, the text I added which is sourced as well does not say that Government of India solely did the rigging, it says that federal government facilitated the rigging and that is also confirmed by some other sources and I am adding one of those in the article so we basically take Nabi and Jha out of equation here. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 13:56, 4 October 2016 (UTC)

References

More changes

I have made few more changes:

1. The bit about spearheading militancy is not necessarily true that it was spearheaded by JKLF, militancy in Kashmir is there since 1947 but JKLF was not. Moreover, this is an undue bit as well.
2. causing disturbances is kind of an example of POV language and OR to be frank.
3. The source is unclear and vague about which group disrupted the match, if there is a more clearer source which says that JKLF disrupted the match then you are welcome to add it back, this article is not about JKLF anyway.
4. Dropped Pakistan-administered from Azad Kashmir as other Kashmir is not written in the same term, also its not needed.

Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 15:43, 4 October 2016 (UTC)

1. There was no armed militancy in Kashmir before 1987.
2. Saima Bhat's article says they organised a protest for Maqbool Bhat's death anniversary, which then burnt a bus. That is "causing disturbances" in my book.
3. The source says it was Tala Party. JKLF wasn't in the play yet before 1987.
4. "Pakistan-administered" is quite the key.

-- Kautilya3 (talk) 00:04, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion:

• Yasin-Malik.jpg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 02:52, 25 May 2019 (UTC)

1990 IAF personnel killing case

Yasin Malik's trial resumes in Jammu

After a delay of almost 3 decades, the trial of Yasin Malik in 1990 Indian Air Force personnel killing case resumed on Wednesday at the TADA court in Jammu

A TADA court on September 7 had issued non-bailable warrants against Yasin Malik and others allegedly involved the killing of four Indian Air Force (IAF) personnel inKashmir in 1990.

https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/yasin-malik-not-only-killed-my-husband-but-ruined-us-slain-iaf-officer-s-wife/story-kfX3CkGXIVDXlq3NOJS6ML.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rameshaha (talk • contribs) 07:18, 22 September 2019 (UTC)

References

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 18 June 2021

I want to suggest changes in Twitter profile of Yasin Malik. Link to his official Twitter account is https://mobile.twitter.com/Da_Influenzer Thehoodhero (talk) 21:09, 18 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: Account is not verified, we would need reliable sources naming that as his account. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 22:27, 18 June 2021 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 16 March 2022

Karan Karankapadiya (talk) 15:39, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 15:47, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 17 March 2022

2409:4050:DBB:4913:9FF:9327:203A:B9DF (talk) 17:20, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

Separation of Kashmir from only India not from both

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Cannolis (talk) 17:23, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

Last line of intro

The last line of the intro mentions that the subject has renounced violence and has adopted peaceful methods for his cause. Being in the intro of the article mandatorily means that such claims have to be supported. Please add a citation.Intensearistocrat (talk) 12:23, 18 March 2022 (UTC)wiki user

Infobox

Shall we change the infobox on the page from Infobox Officeholder to Infobox Criminal so that we can add the Criminal Status, Charges, Conviction considering he is now a convict and waiting to receive sentencing on 25 May.
This revert is the context. >>> Extorc.talk 17:55, 19 May 2022 (UTC)

Changed it to Infobox person. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 18:00, 19 May 2022 (UTC)

Infobox criminal is to be used if the criminality is the main notability, not otherwise. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 18:01, 19 May 2022 (UTC)

What is the main notability here? >>> Extorc.talk 18:02, 19 May 2022 (UTC)

I would say that this Secessionism/ Militancy/ Terrorism is the main notability here. >>> Extorc.talk 18:03, 19 May 2022 (UTC)

Stop glorifying Terrorist‘S

Stop glorifying Terrorist & their actions. This Wikipedia page is full of lies & false information. Well I think Wiki’s is funded by Separatist’s group so no wonder all praise for Terrorist like Yasin Malik 😡 65.95.200.220 (talk) 22:56, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

There are two sides to every story. Yasin Malik is a notable human, and deserves a Wikipedia page. Stick to the facts, and quote your sources. Wikipedia is not about pursuing agendas, it is about recording human history. Cheers. Billyshiverstick (talk) 05:18, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 27 May 2022

Yasin Malik was a Pakistani terrorist who went to Kashmir through PoK and killed lakhs of Kashmiri Hindu Pandits, forcefully turning them into a Muslim and accusing women and girl child. 146.196.36.143 (talk) 00:54, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. 💜  melecie  talk - 01:03, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

It is said...

I appreciate that English is not the first language of the authors, however, the phrase "it is said" has no place in Wikipedia. It is a weasel phrase. Please insert your content with "Journalist So and So said" where you want to use this phrase. Thanks. "Who said?" Billyshiverstick (talk) 05:15, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

Is this about the he is said to have, They were said to have, Pakistan is said to have in the article or something else?
Kindly Contextualize. >>> Extorc.talk 06:06, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

If you can prove that that is the only journalist who said such a thing, you can add an in-text attribution. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 08:28, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

Dear Extorc - yes, those are the types of phrases I'm highlighting. The word "said" is the giveaway. Unless it refers to a subject eg: "said Winston Churchill" with a citation for the quote. Does that make sense? Thanks for listening. If I get a minute, I'll adjust some. I'm too busy this week though. Billyshiverstick (talk) 08:45, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

@Kautilya3, for now I have removed the "is said to have" from these instances because they are very unnessecary considering they are not brought in the source as stories or standalone claims. If required, in-text attributions can be added in future. >>> Extorc.talk 10:27, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

Billyshiverstick, it does appear that these phrases need not be present there in the way they are mentioned. I have cleaned the ones I could here. >>> Extorc.talk 11:03, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

Well, sacrificing accuracy to satisfy the language police is the worst thing to do. But I don't have the patience to deal with this nonsense. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 10:54, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

"booth-capturing"

this is used but does not have a definition listed on wiki Spacemeatsheep (talk) 02:01, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

Awkward phrasing

Malik disagrees. "Let me clear it, rigging in 1987 elections didn't result in armed militancy. We were there even before 1987," he says.[15]

This phrasing seems really awkward. It would be more comprehensible if it was changed to "Malik disagrees by saying, "Let me clear it, rigging in 1987 elections didn't result in armed militancy. We were there even before 1987. Roostery123 (talk) 05:59, 30 May 2022 (UTC)

Yeah, that is fine. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 10:49, 30 May 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 30 May 2022

Add the following image ''File:Protesta a favor de l'alliberament del Yasin Malik.jpg'' to 2017 terror funding case's section with the following chart: Protest in Barcelona (Catalonia) in favour of the release of Yasin Malik on 29 May 2022. KajenCAT (talk) 17:04, 30 May 2022 (UTC)

 Not done for now: This is actually a controversial edit, so you'll need to discuss first with other editors. Please open a new section here and start a discussion. No boosterism. TrangaBellam (talk) 06:18, 1 June 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 31 May 2022

Migfab008 (talk) 08:48, 31 May 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. >>> Extorc.talk 14:22, 31 May 2022 (UTC)

I will edit correctly an I will not provide vandalism.

Article is somewhat indian biased.

The article contains some indian bias especially on the so called "terrorist funding case". He might have pleaded guilty but his wife mushal mullik and other family members suspect that the court forced him into this. (Tweet by mushal mullik) Ontop of that, there is no mention of yasins statements after the case. I suggest the topic deserves to be detailed in a separate section instead of.directly mentioning it in the introduction. 203.175.72.22 (talk) 12:29, 10 June 2022 (UTC)

First of all, there is no reason for us to believe that the court forced Yasin to plead guilty not only because that has not been seen anytime in the past but also because no reliable sources suggest that. Also, speaking from opinion, he did not get a death sentence partially because he pleaded guilty. >>> Extorc.talk 05:00, 11 June 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia is written by summarising reliable sources. Politicians, spouses, and random commentators are not reliable sources. Please refrain from engaging in WP:OR and forumy debate. This article is under discretionary sanctions. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 14:55, 11 June 2022 (UTC)

@Kautilya3 Found out his Lawyer got a brain hemorrhage under Mysterious circumstances according to mushal mullik in a press conference

https://thecentrummedia.com/why-is-yasin-malik-convicted-by-the-indian-court%ef%bf%bc/ Pr0pulsion 123 (talk) 23:22, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

Indian judicial system has convicted him under POTA which makes him a terrorist and not a separatist leader as mentioned in the article. Unless there is a strong reason to support what is written, he should be called a terrorist.

Yasin Malik was convicted under the Indian penal code of POTA, someone who supports and promotes terrorism. The article calls him a separatist leader which is inconsistent with his current status. Unless someone is challenging the Indian legal system, Mr. Malik must be called a terrorist. 2603:8001:B341:332A:911A:9191:9117:BBCC (talk) 07:04, 16 June 2022 (UTC)

i agree Wikipedia is too biased toward left in politics related articles Rajeshwar Singh (talk) 15:19, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

Why this article doesn't Mention him as a terrorist

he killed so many people in terror activities and people still call him separatist leader, Hypocrisy is real on Wikipedia. Rajeshwar Singh (talk) 15:17, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia is written by summarising reliable sources. Please cite the sources for any new information you would like to see. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 16:00, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/5/19/yasin-malik-india-convicts-top-kashmir-separatist-of-terrorism Rajeshwar Singh (talk) 09:13, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

https://www.indiatoday.in/india/story/tada-court-holds-yasin-malik-prima-facie-responsible-for-iaf-officer-killing-1655606-2020-03-14 Rajeshwar Singh (talk) 09:18, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

Please state what in these sources allows Wikipedia to call him a a "terrorist". -- Kautilya3 (talk) 15:27, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

He killed air force officer, funded terrorism and was proved guilty in court and sentenced, is this not enough to call him terrorist Rajeshwar Singh (talk) 17:23, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

At this Point i really don't care if this article mention him as terrorist or not, i don't want to argue further, let it be as it is now. Rajeshwar Singh (talk) 17:32, 27 December 2022 (UTC)