Talk:2020 Delhi riots/Archive 3

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

→

Archive 10

Removing Kapil Mishra photo

The article in its current form has a lot of details other than the provocative statements by Kapil Mishra. His photo just takes most of the focus away from all those details, as if he's the most important part of the entire article. I say his picture should be removed. Discuss if disagree. —Sarvatra (talk, contribs) 06:27, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

Sarvatra, He is the central figure in this riot. He has to be mentioned and hence his pic is relevant. I have reverted the removal. I will add more quotes from Mishra. ⋙–DBigXrayᗙ 06:34, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

I am suggesting only to remove his picture, not any other content, as pictures grab focus. Makes the article look like more about him than anything else. —Sarvatra (talk, contribs) 06:46, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

Sarvatra, I am against this proposal for reasons above. ⋙–DBigXrayᗙ 06:48, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

Sarvatra, DBigXray Probably the picture of the person, who is arrested for shooting the policeman, is more appropriate to show the sense of riots? Secondly why the incident is swept under the carpet in this article? —staryash (talk, contribs) 05:16, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

How Kapil Mishra became the central figure of the riots? Is there any direct evidence that his statements lead to the riots. New evidences and news reports confirming that the riots were planned way ahead of his remarks. Tahir Hussain's home was used as a central point of the riots with alleged killing of people happened there. Why he is not the central figure of the riot? Who decides it on Wikipedia? Bishupriyaparam (talk) 09:50, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

What relevance does Amit Shah's photo have to the article? M4DU7 (talk) 09:41, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

M4DU7, he is calling the shots. ⋙–DBigXrayᗙ 09:46, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

Can you explain what you mean by "calling the shots" and why his picture is needed? M4DU7 (talk) 09:55, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

Home Minister is the in-charge of Law and order in Delhi. He controls Delhi Police and all the central paramilitary fources like RAF, CRPF, etc. All the law and order meetings are being held under his chairmanship. Hence all the responsibility for allowing this riot to spread and the deaths directly falls on him. This is exacly the reason wby opposition parties are asking for his head.⋙–DBigXrayᗙ 09:58, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

What the opposition asks for is hardly relevant here. I'd agree with you if the SC or HC called out Shah and held him responsible for the riot to spread. But otherwise, it is highly inappropriate to divert the focus to him. M4DU7 (talk) 10:15, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

M4DU7, I am expanding the content on Amit Shah and recent updates. Apparently Shah chaired 3 meetings in 24 hours, I will return to this discussion once ⋙–DBigXrayᗙ 10:36, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

M4DU7 The article did not say that HM Shah is reposnsible, the photo clearly mentioned the law and order is his responsibilities, I don't see any confusion, CM Kejriwal used the CrPC section 130 and asked the para-millitary force from Shah, but he eventualy refused on 25th citing everthing was looked after. So yes, its very relevant to add the photograph of the person whose responsibilty was to maintain law and order. Dey subrata (talk) 20:21, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

He is not a central figure in the riot since lot of such inciting statements were made by saveral leaders.Lot of unnecessary fear-mongering was done which led to this riot. Priyaraj544 (talk) 20:15, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

Priyaraj544, The riots started a few hours after his provocative speech. Please read the news of Delhi high court today. Even Hon. HC asked to file case for inciting the riot. ⋙–DBigXrayᗙ 20:26, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

It would be better if this article is written without any self emotions and biasedness involved. Whole timeline should be mentioned from december protests, and provocative speeches made all over India, And pictures should be added more for the riots. Putting pictures of ministers totally takes away the story. Sra1du (talk) 01:37, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

Sra1du Yes the article is written in a unbaised way only, if someone did something wrong, it should be added, there is no baisedness in that. "..from december protests, and provocative speeches made all over India"- Does other leader brought their supporters by saying "come there with huge number and will reply the jaffrabad protesters" ? Does any other person give such ultimatum to police and directly challenging police if not protesters removed they will take law on hand? Did thakur, a&p verma deliver hate speech or not, and is there anyother leader who deliver such in Delhi? Who are the people against whom court asked police to take actions? Better get your rationale straight and discuss something better than whataboutism. And those picture are not taking anything away from story, no one forbade you to read the article and to just look at picture and even description in the picture clearly says what its describing. Dey subrata (talk) 04:05, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

Dey Subrata (talk · contribs) How is that the statements of Sonia Gandhi, Rahul Gandhi and Priyanka Gandhi in Delhi during the elections calling out Muslims to fight against the law passed by the parliament are not the reason behind the riots? Bishupriyaparam (talk) 09:52, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

Please add a line on the AAP Counciller Tahir also. Also, I dnt think the word persecution should be used. Instead, use the word ethnic and religious clash Arkadeep Dey (talk) 04:49, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

Sorry for the typo.. I meant to say that the word persecution should not be used. Arkadeep Dey (talk) 04:51, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

And through some articles of opindia,swarajya, I came to know that 'NAARA A TAQBEER' , 'ALLAH HU AKBAR' were raised. Pls do add if relevant. Arkadeep Dey (talk) 04:56, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

Please add Tahir Hussain's name too he is a bigger stakeholder of destruction than any of the names mentioned above Truetothewiki123 (talk) 06:28, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

Truetothewiki123, This thread is not for discussing Tahir, we have a separate section to discuss Tahir, read the comments there and reply there if you want to. Arkadeep Deyopindia,swarajya are not Reliable source ⋙–DBigXrayᗙ 07:45, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

DBigXray Who decides that OpIndia and Swarajya are not reliable sources and NDTV, Indian Express are not? Is there anything factually wrong in what they have reported? Bishupriyaparam (talk) 09:52, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

Bishupriyaparam, WP:RSN decides that, you can read the old discussions on these websites in its WP:ARCHIVE. OpIndia and Swarajya are non reliable propaganda sources they cannot be used on Wikipedia. %%%⋙–DBigXrayᗙ 09:57, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

Bishupriyaparam, OpIndia and Swarajya has a history of fake and propaganda articles. Don't compare established news sites/paper/channels with such propaganda website. WP:RSN is the best place for these. Dey subrata (talk) 15:09, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

• @Dey subrata: Consensus is clear here that we must not keep photo of Kapil Mishra with a caption on main article for now. It is clear POV pushing at this stage. Aman Kumar Goel^(Talk) 17:02, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

Read consensus and POV policies, then comment here. And read the discussion, to me its clear, the picture of the person who is cause of this violence is very important for the article. Dey subrata (talk) 17:12, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

I agree with nearly everyone above that the pic of Amit Shah and Kapil Mishra are totally irrelevant on main article and they can mislead readers. ML ⁹¹¹ 18:34, 29 February 2020 (UTC)

ML, there is no consensus to remove the pics. I have added the images that were removed wrongly, these subjects are discussed in detail in every reliable source, on the topic and our article also refers to them at several places. So it is totally relevant to the article and is not misleading in any way. SerChevalerie, Kautilya3 Rashid Jorvee since you have contributed to the article, what are your thoughts. ? --⋙–DBigXrayᗙ 14:30, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

Remove Kapil Mishra's photo or add Tahir Hussain and Shahrukh's photo Sandeep83sen (talk) 14:33, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

Remove kapil Mishra's photo. And put tahir hussain, amantullah khan, and waris pathan photo. Bahut galat information likha hai yaha pe. Ye sab remove karo. Jaldi. Rajveer1585 (talk) 14:52, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

To both new users above: Wikipedia operates by consensus, not by voting. If you fail to provide an explanation and merely state a preference, then little weight will be placed on it. El_C 14:56, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

He is not the only cause of the riots. I suggest we use a snapshot of rioters instead of his snapshot!—Spasiba5 (talk) 16:33, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

The photo is giving an impression that Kapil Mishra solely responsible for the violence, however allegation is only of incitement by a speech in which he claims he would not listen to police if the police does not clear the roads blocked by protester in three days. 47.31.154.216 (talk) 16:53, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

Guess who are probing Delhi riots

• Guess who are probing Delhi riots, Both officers have been in the news recently (unsigned comment by DBigXRay)

Good catch. Sachi Mohanty 07:54, 29 February 2020 (UTC) User:Sachi bbsr

Showing half-side does make this article misleading and creating false impression.

Twisting of facts and showing half-side of the picture does make this article misleading and creating false impression. International media may cover as it wish, someone wrote what is permissible for a newspaper is not permissible for Wikipedia. For how an international media may write misleading and incorrect facts see this

https://time.com/5757332/uttar-pradesh-citizenship-protests/ which says "... Anti-government protests had been brewing across India since almost 2 million people were stripped of their citizenship in the northeastern state of Assam earlier this year as part of the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) government’s National Register of Citizens (NRC) exercise that makes it mandatory for all Indians to provide certain documents to prove citizenship...."

Which is totally false as the SC started directing and monitoring the NRC in Assam 2013, even before BJP came in power and NRC in Assam has its roots in the Assam accord of 1985.

That Ankit Sharma was killed by Tahir Hussain supporters is the allegation by his family members, so is reported by NDTV who visited Ankit Sharma's house. The WSJ in later report made no mention of telephonic interview of victim's brother claiming victim killed by mob chanting Jai Shree Ram, on the basis which someone concluded that he was killed by mob chanting Jai Shree Ram.

This article shows only one side, no hate speeches by muslims, no rioting by muslims, no attacks on journalists by Anti-CAA protesters, no mention of Tahir Hussain,no mention of Shahrukh Khan who fired eight shot at pro-CAA protersters, less property loss to Hindus, so is misleading. By this article Wikipedia is very much serving as a #WP:SOAPBOX to serve biases and prejudices. It was as much riots by muslims against hindus as much the article connotes roits by hindus against muslims. 2405:204:3323:9B54:C0C2:C292:3543:4879 (talk) 07:30, 29 February 2020 (UTC)

Ishrat Jahan has been added under Lead figures

As per the latest investigation and premierly court inquiry, Ishrat Jahan has been added to the Lead figures. The same can be found in the third-party reliable souces published at Ishrat Jahan, ex-Congress municipal councillor, arrested for inciting violence during Delhi riots and Delhi Violence: Court Rejects Bail Plea of Arrested Ex-Congress Municipal Councillor Ishrat Jahan. — Sanskari ^Hangout 08:11, 29 February 2020 (UTC)

@Sanskari:, which source says that she had a lead role? -- Kautilya3 (talk) 10:29, 29 February 2020 (UTC)

Attacks on journalists by anti-CAA protesters is missing in the article

"Mere saat jo tha, woh chala gaya [The guy, who was with me, has died],” Mr. Napa said with a sense of loss. The reporter claimed that he was shot by anti-CAA protesters. " Please see https://www.thehindu.com/news/cities/Delhi/first-came-petrol-bomb-stones-then-they-shot-at-me-reporter/article30926971.ece

"Urjita said she and Fatima — whom she was with — constantly exchanged names depending on the crowd." Please see https://theprint.in/opinion/why-delhi-riots-are-different-what-theprints-13-reporters-photojournalists-saw-on-ground/371981/ 2405:204:3323:9B54:3DA8:164E:97BB:EB4E (talk) 09:15, 29 February 2020 (UTC)

Please see wP:ER and make request accordingly. regards. --⋙–DBigXrayᗙ 09:21, 29 February 2020 (UTC)

Mentioned a fact that attacks on journalist by anti-CAA protesters are missing in the article, so that it improves the article which seems baised to me. 2405:204:3323:9B54:4957:F10B:C46D:B495 (talk) 09:42, 29 February 2020 (UTC)

Someone here is deleting comments on the talk page also

Very sad that people are deleting comments on talkpage also. 2405:204:3323:9B54:4957:F10B:C46D:B495 (talk) 09:40, 29 February 2020 (UTC)

Any comments that is wP:BLP violation and is intended to malign a living person can be removed from talk page. --⋙–DBigXrayᗙ 09:43, 29 February 2020 (UTC)

It has gotton worse now. A hundred posts an hour, or close to it! Pointless comments without any reliable sources, repeating the same personal opinions again and again are basically disruptive and serve no purpose. Wikipedis is not a forum. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 09:47, 29 February 2020 (UTC)

Sadly I find the article is written as if the Wikipedia is a forum to reinforce and sell biases, totally selective inclusion and exclusion of contents, violates neutral point of view. 2405:204:3323:9B54:AC73:9DD8:1917:2285 (talk) 10:35, 29 February 2020 (UTC)

Kautilya3, Agree. I had almost abandoned the talk page and stopped responding to it. I think all of the page watchers owe thanks to User:El C for the reprieve. ⋙–DBigXrayᗙ 13:57, 29 February 2020 (UTC)

Mobs chanting Jai Shri Ram

That is false. Nobody not even victims mentioned mobs chanting Jai Shri Ram. That was just reported by The Guardian. Some thi bad (talk) 10:06, 29 February 2020 (UTC)

Really? There are numerous reports about mobs chanting Jai Shri Ram.

References

We use reliable sources on Wikipedia and we go by WP:WEIGHT of coverage. An overwhelming number of media has reported that mobs were chanting Jai Shri Ram.--DreamLinker (talk) 10:28, 29 February 2020 (UTC)

Where does WP:WEIGHT of coverage goes when it comes to Tahir Hussain? 2405:204:3323:9B54:C52E:6E2D:E178:BB9 (talk) 11:19, 29 February 2020 (UTC)

Only selective parts of sources are referred when suits

"Property of both Muslims and Hindus were destroyed with greater destruction to Muslim properties." source https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/26/world/asia/delhi-riots-kapil-mishra.html also mentions "On the other side, Muslim rioters have also been violent - some of them also armed - and a number of Hindus, including security personnel, are among the dead and injured." but for that part a different opinion is citied, which says most of dead are muslims. 2405:204:3323:9B54:AC73:9DD8:1917:2285 (talk) 10:19, 29 February 2020 (UTC)

PM reaction line reflects bias

PM reaction line sources do not mention mention "After three days of violence with 20 deaths" prefix, which removes the context of departure of US President. --2405:204:3323:9B54:AC73:9DD8:1917:2285 (talk) 10:23, 29 February 2020 (UTC)

Here is the quote from the BBC source you listed

Three days and 20 deaths later, Prime Minister Narendra Modi tweeted his first appeal for peace.

did you miss it ? %% --⋙–DBigXrayᗙ 10:41, 29 February 2020 (UTC)

Yes

Still the "After three days of violence with 20 deaths" prefix, removes the context of departure of US President, reflects lack of good faith, is there in BBC opinion source. As the NYT source mentions "... Prime Minister Narendra Modi, who hosted President Trump as the fighting raged, broke his silence on Wednesday after Mr. Trump had departed, urging people in a Twitter post to “maintain peace and brotherhood at all times.” He added, “Peace and harmony are central to our ethos.” so maintains the context of US President departure so is not quoted here, but the BBC source which suits more here,. 2405:204:3323:9B54:C52E:6E2D:E178:BB9 (talk) 11:07, 29 February 2020 (UTC)

References

Not an edit request but  Done SerChevalerie (talk) 14:01, 29 February 2020 (UTC)

Latest disruption hatted. El_C 14:19, 29 February 2020 (UTC)
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
Fake narrative published by biased writter This is completely fake narrative published by a biased writer to spread lies. It should be immediately removed, otherwise a police complaint should be launched against parties involved in spreading lies and maligning social environment. Jigar11790 (talk) 11:11, 29 February 2020 (UTC) Jigar11790 Please be aware of the no legal threats policy. If you have specific concerns about this article(which is written by many people), please offer them. Note that Wikipedia summarizes content about a subject that appears in independent reliable sources. 331dot (talk) 12:05, 29 February 2020 (UTC) One sided discussion What happened was massive and there are several perspectives. I fail to understand why this article is so anti Hindu. Not that wiki is that influential but I feel one sided narratives in 2002 Gujarat riots eventually led to anti CAA protests and subsequently the riots. DrAshishPandey (talk) 12:33, 29 February 2020 (UTC) Shame on spreading fake articles. Wikipedia shame on You For spreading fake news or articles . You fake site you are supporting the Islamic terrorists . I will talk about that in my friends and family circles . And I will report it site and Boycott your site . Shame shame. Siddarth048 (talk) 12:50, 29 February 2020 (UTC) Neutral Point of View This article is not neutral and is biased. It attributes the entire incident to a few individuals but leave aside the perpetrators of violence who on were caught on camera. It ignores that building of catapults, cache of of several trucks of brick-stones on roof tops, acid and patrol bombs show that it was pre-planned attack. This article brings shame on Wikipedia. If it can not be included, it's title should be changed to BJP party official's provocations to North East Delhi riots as it has nothing except that. Shooter at Jafrabad In the afternoon, a shooter fired eight rounds of bullets indiscriminately and also pointed his pistol at a cop who was trying to confront him. Per altnews, the man was a part of anti-CAA mob and initially was mistaken to be a part of pro-CAA crowd. The shooter was later identified by the police was arrested next day after an FIR was registered against him. References @DBigXray: I have undone your edit. Multiple sources, including NDTV, have reported his arrest. —Sarvatra (talk, contribs) 09:07, 26 February 2020 (UTC) And I have moved it here on the talk page. Please do not WP:EW over this. This is a content dispute and it needs to be discussed for wP:CONSENSUS. Please respond to the issues I raised in the section above. --⋙–DBigXrayᗙ 09:15, 26 February 2020 (UTC) Your concerns were about man shooting the police constable are already taken care of. In my edit, it is clear that "man pointed gun at policeman", and NOT that "it was him who shot the policeman". This is backed up by the sources added. Anything else? —Sarvatra (talk, contribs) 09:20, 26 February 2020 (UTC) Sarvatra, yes, why is this unknown man being singled out with complete disregard to wP:BLPNAME ⋙–DBigXrayᗙ 09:27, 26 February 2020 (UTC) He's the only person among all protesters (pro or anti-CAA) who had a gun, and pointed at a police constable, and fired shots using the gun. The name can be dropped. —Sarvatra (talk, contribs) 09:35, 26 February 2020 (UTC) Sarvatra, "He's the only person who had a gun" wow, thats a big claim. source please. ⋙–DBigXrayᗙ 09:47, 26 February 2020 (UTC) Per reports so far, yes. You have any source for other people brandishing guns at policemen and shooting? —Sarvatra (talk, contribs) 09:51, 26 February 2020 (UTC) No, it is you who is claiming he is special and deserves a mention in a para. Based on 50% bullet wounds, many were carrying guns and I dont consider him worthy enough of a mention. I would rather cover the deaths and the arson . ⋙–DBigXrayᗙ 09:54, 26 February 2020 (UTC) "I dont consider him worthy enough of a mention" - So basically anything you believe should be there is what is being mentioned. Does that now create a bias towards what you only believe is necessary? [Times of India], ABP News have considered this to be important to dispel the fake news that is spreading around. It is imperative that a section of this man should also be included. --Datta (talk) 11:56, 27 February 2020 (UTC) And a man firing shots illegally in front of the police is not relevant? Similar incidents of shooting were also covered in other article about anti-CAA protests. —Sarvatra (talk, contribs) 10:03, 26 February 2020 (UTC) @DBigXray i think the issue here is there is an identifiable perpetrator.The person confronted the police officer,shoved him and shot the bullets into the air perhaps as an act of intimidation.There was no reported injuries to the police officer however.User:UrbanCentrist Yes, I am totally aware of what he did. Perpetrator of what exactly ? The problem here is, he is of no encyclopedic value to Wikipedia. had he been a brutal murderer for a few people, he probably could have found a mention here. But that is not the case, for now. ⋙–DBigXrayᗙ 15:40, 26 February 2020 (UTC) @DBigXray The incident can be interpreted that it represents a single identifiable point of escalation of violence.I think when someone reads this article it would be useful information to understand that the event included an armed gunman confronting a police officer — Preceding unsigned comment added by UrbanCentrist (talk • contribs) 16:10, 26 February 2020 (UTC) Please WP:SIGN and WP:INDENT your posts. Interepreted as such by whom ? If an WP:RS says that then we can probably add that. As of now this is of no useful value. Here is a question. Do you think that a gunman confronting a cop is more useful encyclopedic information or a cop shot dead ? I would say the latter. regards. ⋙–DBigXrayᗙ 16:13, 26 February 2020 (UTC) Admin note: clarification (underlined) added to sentence by request. Primefac (talk) 16:42, 15 March 2020 (UTC) Quoting the India Today article "as tension continued to simmer in Delhi's Jaffrabad and Maujpur areas a day after clashes, a youth opened fire on the streets on Monday afternoon in the same area while the police tried to control him.A man was seen pointing his country-made pistol at the police personnel on the Jaffrabad-Maujpur road. The man fired 8 rounds before the police overpowered him. He was later identified as Shahrukh, a local." I think a cop being shot dead and gunman confronting a cop are both useful information.With regards to the confrontation it was an observable incident where as the dead shot cop was hidden in the fog of violence.Since a timeline is mentioned it would be useful to provide that information as it was a unique circumstance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by UrbanCentrist (talk • contribs) 17:07, 26 February 2020 (UTC) DBigXray I have added this one previously seeing the coverage by all prominent media, and also taking care of the WP:NEUTRAL and WP:NOTE polices for which name was not added. Someone might have added something else after my edits last night, for which the discussion is here now. My line was "In the afternoon, a shooter fired eight rounds of bullets indiscriminately and also pointed his pistol at a cop who was trying to confront him. The shooter was later identified and was detained and questioned about his intentions." Dey subrata (talk) 19:24, 26 February 2020 (UTC) Dey subrata, and UrbanCentrist please look at the big picture 25 dead and more than 200 injured. And here we are bickering about a guy who waved his gun and fired in the air (didn;t even kill or injure any one). I suggest we focus on other major points that need to be added. I really appreciate UrbanCentrist, patiently discussing this with me, unfortunately I am still not convinced if we should add it. Let me ask, are foreign media, Reuters, BBC covering this ? ⋙–DBigXrayᗙ 19:29, 26 February 2020 (UTC) No I am just saying that was my line, and if it could be added, secondly, I am also waiting for police to release any statement on identification of shooters in several incidents, then can be added I think. We can wait. Dey subrata (talk) 19:36, 26 February 2020 (UTC) Yes i think it is preferable to wait.Should the other shooters be identified it would be not as important to cover this.--UrbanCentrist (talk) 02:50, 27 February 2020 (UTC) Hope the fact of foreign media coverage is not used as a measuring stick to edit the document and add facts. Foreign media is not free from biased reporting just as Indian media is not free from biased reporting. They are not a yardstick by any means. Also if Shahrukh the shooter has done nothing wrong then why was he arrested? He used an illegal country made weapon, brandished it and used it to threaten a police officer. All of the above mentioned are offences under Indian law. Delhi Police Sources now clarify that Shahrukh has not been arrested and search for him continues. The police now says they never arrested him. Tomorrow they will say his name is Amitabh.[1] --⋙–DBigXrayᗙ 21:24, 27 February 2020 (UTC) NOt true, https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/times-fact-check/news/fact-check-ankit-sharmas-brother-denies-saying-his-brother-was-killed-by-those-chanting-jai-shri-ram/articleshow/74355310.cms — Preceding unsigned comment added by Psha12 (talk • contribs) 23:46, 27 February 2020 (UTC) I agree that the biased New Delhi media is hyping this one person only because he is Muslim. We should not be swayed by the chest-thumping of the Unionist new channels. Firing is a regular part of these riots, and hundreds of shots have been fired by what must have been hundreds of people - including the Police - but the racist Lutyens media octopus is only focussing on this one person. We should follow the global media here and give it its due weightage, while simultaneously utilising the Non-Hindi media to provide proper perspective from within South Asia itself. So far, this article relies too much on the Chanakyapur channels, and as a result comes across as too biased in favour of the Hindi Supremacist Sangh Parivar and the oppressive Indian Union Government. I hope editors will redress this bias in future edits, and not allow Wikipedia to become a platform for New Delhi's racist - or, as they say in South Asia, 'Manu-wadi' - propaganda. WashingtonPrime (talk) 05:54, 28 February 2020 (UTC) I think the fact that the shooter was Muslim is important. The Western media is incorrectly projecting this riot as prognom and initially did try to spin this person as Hindu. DrAshishPandey (talk) 12:36, 29 February 2020 (UTC) "Intelligence Bureau staffer named Ankit Sharma" I would regard this kind of phrasing as WP:POV, because it suggests that Sharma was acting in an official capacity. He wasn't. He was simply a resident of the area, and he fell victim to the riot when he was coming home from work (according to reports). The "Intelligence Bureau" is entirely irrelevant. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 08:58, 28 February 2020 (UTC) Kautilya3, ok. what is your proposed version of this line. ⋙–DBigXrayᗙ 09:14, 28 February 2020 (UTC) I would use WSJ as the source and report it exactly as they did. The Hindutva camp is obviously hugely embarrassed that their rioters killed an IB man. A huge campaign is on the way to hang WSJ [2], but as far as Wikipedia is concerned WSJ is a reliable source. We cannot omit it. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 10:15, 28 February 2020 (UTC) Read the brother's face. Worth a thousand words. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 10:18, 28 February 2020 (UTC) For " The Hindutva camp is obviously hugely embarrassed that their rioters killed an IB man" Please provide evidence For "A huge campaign is on the way to hang WSJ" If a WSJ report is false why should not be complaint lodged against it? Mind you the link given by you, itself has video of victims brother claming WSJ report is false. Please see Does NDTV for https://www.ndtv.com/delhi-news/delhi-violence-aap-leader-tahir-hussain-accused-in-ib-employee-ankit-sharmas-killing-defends-himself-2186401 condradict WSJ report so, also belong to the Hindutva Group ?2405:204:3323:9B54:C536:B0F2:63:FFAD (talk) 13:00, 28 February 2020 (UTC) @Kautilya3: Times of India is also reporting in contradiction to WSJ's report [3]. Do they also belong to "Hindutva camp"? —Sarvatra (talk, contribs) 10:23, 28 February 2020 (UTC) Sarvatra, There are no doubts in any "experienced" Wikipedia editors mind that ToI tows the BJP and Hindutva line. anyway focus on the topic. I find myself in agreement with Kautilya3. Can someone mail me the WSJ article. ⋙–DBigXrayᗙ 10:38, 28 February 2020 (UTC) Note that the WSJ report is from 26 February. If any other newspaper reported what the brother said on 26 February, please share it. What he said afterwards is a different matter altogether. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 14:20, 28 February 2020 (UTC) India TV on 26 February: Ankit Sharma was working as a Security Assistant in the Intelligence Bureau (IB). In 2017, the officer joined the Intelligence Bureau and was training as a driver. By the way, they were also given the impression that he was "returning home" from work, when he was attacked. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 09:58, 1 March 2020 (UTC) Kautilya3, The above quote was conflicting. Republic article below makes it clear. Ankit Sharma had joined the Intelligence Bureau in 2017 and is reported to have been on probation. He was posted as a driver under training in Chanakyapuri as per sources I think this can be added. Any objections ? ⋙–DBigXrayᗙ 12:58, 1 March 2020 (UTC) No way. Republic is hardly reliable. I don't think we know really what his role or rank was. "Security assistant" or "assistant", as the terms that the RS used, is quite adequate. I posted these quotes just because I have seen efforts to paint him as an "officer", "sleuth" etc., which are all made-up. I think the "probation" idea is also in the same boat. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 13:09, 1 March 2020 (UTC) References Any thoughts https://www.indiatoday.in/news-analysis/story/questions-emerging-from-delhi-riots-call-for-fixing-accountability-1650848-2020-02-28 Can it be helpful to the article?S. M. Nazmus Shakib (talk) 09:16, 28 February 2020 (UTC) S. M. Nazmus Shakib, yes, maybe. SerChevalerie (talk) 18:55, 29 February 2020 (UTC) Sachi_bbsr, DBigXray, maybe this can be added to the proposed "Aftermath" section? SerChevalerie (talk) 19:00, 29 February 2020 (UTC) SerChevalerie, Yes. Ten or so sentences with 10 or more references at the very least seems appropriate for a major event in the national capital which is being compared to Delhi 1984 and Gujarat 2002. https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/02/what-happened-delhi-was-pogrom/607198/ Sachi_bbsr talk 03:19, 1 March 2020 (UTC) Sources to expand Cops Got 7,500 Calls For Help On Day 3 Of Delhi Violence: Sources Y ⋙–DBigXrayᗙ Delhi Gets New Police Chief Amid Severe Criticism For Cops Over Violence Rs 10 Lakh Compensation For Relatives Of Those Killed In Delhi Clashes WhatsApp Groups Used To Incite, Organise Delhi Violence: Police Sources AAP Demands Action Against BJP Leaders After Delhi Violence Maujpur clash Flag March Reactions Delhi Violence: US Says "Raised Issue At Highest Levels" With India "Spirit Of Gandhi Needed More Than Ever": UN Chief On Delhi Violence Chand Bagh? Chand Bagh keeps getting mentioned again and again. Can somebody provide the coordinates for it? -- Kautilya3 (talk) 21:47, 28 February 2020 (UTC) https://goo.gl/maps/oCwTGa6Sfv2Yhs347--⋙–DBigXrayᗙ 21:49, 28 February 2020 (UTC) An article in Scroll today https://scroll.in/article/954668/this-young-muslim-woman-took-us-around-a-riot-hit-delhi-locality-the-view-was-revealing Hope this helps. Sachi_bbsr talk 10:22, 29 February 2020 (UTC) Musalman aur Hindu ki shaan tiranga Bharat ki pehchaan tiranga Zindabad! Inqalab Zindabad! -- From the plaque on a burnt Madrasa. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 14:36, 29 February 2020 (UTC) Kautilya3, this is quite good. Should we add this ? where ? ⋙–DBigXrayᗙ 07:37, 1 March 2020 (UTC) Sachi bbsr, what do you propose we add to the article ? ⋙–DBigXrayᗙ 07:36, 1 March 2020 (UTC) DBigXray, in a quote box of its own! -- Kautilya3 (talk) 09:09, 1 March 2020 (UTC) Kautilya3, yes, I wanted to discuss, which section to add the box. Timeline ? ⋙–DBigXrayᗙ 09:14, 1 March 2020 (UTC) Yes, I can't think of anywhere else. So, timeline, which ever day the madrasa got burnt down. Perhaps we should also add it to an article on Indian madrasas, if there is one. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 09:34, 1 March 2020 (UTC) DBigXray, what about an umbrella section called Aftermath which will contain this Talk:North_East_Delhi_riots#Police_Inhumanity_along_with_Vivek_Agnihotri's_Tweet , Chand Bagh tour, Indonesia's official summons to India's High Commissioner there, other international reacations that haven't been captured in the article so far, etc. Sachi_bbsr talk 13:36, 1 March 2020 (UTC)