Talk:Hardeep Singh Nijjar

Requested move 19 September 2023

Hardeep Singh Nijjar → Death of Hardeep Singh Nijjar – This recently deceased person appears to notable for his death and the aftermath and is therefore a WP:BLP1E. The article being created posthumously I believe is evidence of this. The scope of the article should therefore be on the death and aftermath, not of the person, which is liable (and has already been) WP:ATTACKed by POV-pushers. Move to "Death/Killing/Murder/Assassination of ..." (not fussed over the wording). ― "Ghost of Dan Gurney" (talk)  17:55, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

@GhostOfDanGurney Support - per nom. MaplesyrupSushi (talk) 18:26, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

Oppose There seems to have been a reasonable amount of coverage of Nijjar before his murder going back to 2016 so I’m not sure if BLP1E applies. Here are some examples: [1] [2] [3] [4] There is also a larger amount of coverage in Indian sources which, to me, often don’t seen reliable but demonstrate wider notability before his murder. Vladimir.copic (talk) 18:29, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

I'm not sure if many Indian sources on this subject could be reliable given the sensitivity of the issue. Regardless, people are primarily searching for his name on the internet because of the diplomatic row his death has caused. ― "Ghost of Dan Gurney" (talk)  18:46, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

Yes, of course people are Googling this more now because of the murder. My point is that Nijjar, and to a certain extent the diplomatic row around him, was notable before the murder and therefore isn’t BLP1E which is the argument for moving the article. I’ve provided four non-Indian sources demonstrating this from a very quick Google. Vladimir.copic (talk) 18:56, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

Oppose Too soon to create a separate article. Also I am not convinced with the POV-pushing examples given by the nominator.

Can you give us examples of attacks by POV-pushers? Wrythemann (talk) 18:52, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

[5] ― "Ghost of Dan Gurney" (talk)  19:00, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

How is that POV pushing? CanadianSingh1469 (talk) 21:44, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

Yeah - we now have the New York Times stating the same. Not POV. Wrythemann (talk) 23:13, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

[6] ― "Ghost of Dan Gurney" (talk)  19:00, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

This seems borderline. If you read the source provided it does allude to this. Wrythemann (talk) 23:14, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

Oppose - He isnt just notable for the death, he has featured in quite a few wanted lists earlier also and was a known separatist leader. Coverage of this exists, and so BLP 1E isnt valid in this case. Captain Jack Sparrow (talk) 19:03, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

Oppose If anything would made, the thing should have been made would be separate pages as Hardeep Singh Nijjar by himself with his past life has enough encyclopedic information to make an entire page while his assassination, death and investigation of this crime scene is an entire different set of information. Cactus Ronin (talk) 19:07, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

• Speedy close as moot; I have created Death of Hardeep Singh Nijjar. ― "Ghost of Dan Gurney" (talk)  19:08, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

Oppose - He seems to be a notable figure in the Khalistan movement prior to his death. Ironically, that seems to be what made him a target for assassination. Riposte97 (talk) 23:26, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

I have my doubts that it's even possible to expand the biography aspects of this article beyond a stub, if this article is not renamed and content is instead split into Death of Hardeep Singh Nijjar. ― "Ghost of Dan Gurney" (talk)  02:21, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

In any case, it may be prudent to wait a while, as I expect a great deal will be written about him in WP:RS in the days to come. Riposte97 (talk) 05:55, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

Support per nom and to cleanly separate notability problems. The notability of Nijjar apart from his death does not yet have a clear consensus (and is being debated in this very RfM), but there is clear consensus that Nijjar's death is notable. Let this article be about the consensus notable subject that prompted it to be created. If that makes room for an article on Nijjar himself then that’s good: let a consensus on the notability of Nijjar himself be determine by editors of an article about him. Moving this article will vastly simplify the difficulties of editors determining how to apply BLP appropriately. Since this article falls also under contentious topic sanctions, more clarity on how to apply policies will support the two goals of avoiding disruption to Wikipedia and off producing a quality article. — Saxifrage ✎ 16:33, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

@GhostOfDanGurney Come on, I mean Death of Hardeep Singh Nijjar is just a classic WP:CONTENTFORK… It gives no real additional information and isn’t needed at this stage. Maybe this needs a stand alone in the future but right now - no way. Vladimir.copic (talk) 19:39, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

I believe there is information than can be moved from this article to the other. Or you can otherwise expend it. I'm late for work now, though. ― "Ghost of Dan Gurney" (talk)  19:42, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

Soft Support - He seems best known for his death and murder, and the resulting international relations crisis. I note that the article was created two days after his death, not while he was living. That said, I could be convinced that he was notable prior to his death if shown significant coverage in WP:RS pre-dating his death on June 18, 2023.--Darryl Kerrigan (talk) 20:58, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

Oppose seems to me that WP:BLP1E doesn't apply here. I suspect there's already plenty of source material for an article about him. See eg Alexander Litvinenko who was low profile before his poisoning/death. We also have an article Poisoning of Alexander Litvinenko. Whether the current murder will become such a massive story is difficult to tell. Nigej (talk) 07:15, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

• Oppose. Wikipedia is a work in progress; lots of articles on notable subjects have not been created yet. There are plenty of RS available covering the subject independent of his death. VQuakr (talk) 18:45, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

  There are four sources above as noted by Vladimir.copic. I am not sure those alone amount to WP:SIGCOV. Are there other RS you think we should be considering to demonstrate notability as distinct from his death? Darryl Kerrigan (talk) 20:17, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

Serious review requested

Whole article has just become homepage for info surrounding his death and allegations by Canadian authorities. The article needs to be sanitized and only person-specific encyclopedic content should remain on this page. Also @GhostOfDanGurney has already created separate page for his death and allegations. Ankraj giri (talk) 20:01, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

This is exactly why I tried to change the scope of the article before creating the Death of... article, but was reverted. Fully agree that the BLP issues (re ent deaths still count under BLP policy) and POV issues need addressed asap. ― "Ghost of Dan Gurney" (talk)  20:06, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

Request for Inclusion of Bipartisan Sources

I noticed that the article heavily relies on Canadian sources. While Canadian media outlets are undoubtedly credible, I believe that it is essential to maintain a balanced perspective by including sources that are neutral and bipartisan. 103.82.125.16 (talk) 20:25, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

The article currently includes sourcing from American, British, Canadian and Indian based news agencies. If there are other WP:RS covering this topic that you believe should be referenced or included, I encourage you to add them.--Darryl Kerrigan (talk) 20:47, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

Because the page is under semi-protection, if you have changes/sources you would like added, please make an edit request. Wikipedia:Edit Request Wizard/Protected can help you make the request, if needed. Thanks! ARandomName123 (talk)^{Ping me!} 20:54, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected Edit Request

• What I think should be changed (format using {{textdiff}}):

{

−

Canadian Minister of Foreign Affairs Mélanie Joly expelled a diplomat whom she described as the head of India’s intelligence agency in Canada. India's foreign ministry rejected the allegation, calling it "absurd" and politically motivated

+

Canadian Minister of Foreign Affairs Mélanie Joly expelled a diplomat whom she described as the head of India’s intelligence agency in Canada. India's foreign ministry rejected the allegation, calling it "absurd" and politically motivated and in response, expelled a senior Canadian diplomat by asking him to leave the country in 5 days

1. Please change the following text "". To ".

• Why it should be changed:

[6] is the citation from CNN whose title highlights expulsion of Canadian diplomat by India. Although the preceding text talks about Canadian expulsion of Indian diplomat,it doesn't talk about Indian expulsion of Canadian diplomat. I believe both are very important events to add at the same place.

• References supporting the possible change (format using the "cite" button):

Vajrasuchika (talk) 01:41, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

References

 Not done: According to the page's protection level you should be able to edit the page yourself. If you seem to be unable to, please reopen the request with further details. ARandomName123 (talk)^{Ping me!} 01:53, 21 September 2023 (UTC)