Talk:1984 anti-Sikh riots

Infobox

CanadianSingh1469 The infobox in this article implicates BJP and RSS in the kllings, citing a source by Jaijee's book page 109, I took a look at the book and p.109 doesn't seem to say anything about BJP or RSS. Furthermore, you added a source Terrorism in the Tarai by Jitender Kaur, a book which is not available on Google Books, Internet Archive, or any other library-esque platform, making me somewhat curious as to how you gained access to this information.Southasianhistorian8 (talk) 07:35, 2 June 2023 (UTC)

I didn’t add that to the infobox. Also are you sure you are using the right book by Jaijee? CanadianSingh1469 (talk) 07:37, 2 June 2023 (UTC)

For Terrorism in the Tarai I used this glitch (I think it is) where you can trick the Google snippet into giving most or the entire page of the book. CanadianSingh1469 (talk) 07:39, 2 June 2023 (UTC)

You're right about the info box part. My sincere apologies for that, the edit was made in close proximity to one of yours which is why I assumed that. Orientls could you kindly explain? Southasianhistorian8 (talk) 07:42, 2 June 2023 (UTC)

No worries. What book of Jaijee’s did you check? CanadianSingh1469 (talk) 07:43, 2 June 2023 (UTC)

I checked page 109 of Jaijee's SAGE book The Long Road to Normalcy. Southasianhistorian8 (talk) 07:45, 2 June 2023 (UTC)

Where did you find it? CanadianSingh1469 (talk) 07:46, 2 June 2023 (UTC)

LibGen Southasianhistorian8 (talk) 07:49, 2 June 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for telling CanadianSingh1469 (talk) 07:50, 2 June 2023 (UTC)

Do you have a link to it that you can share? CanadianSingh1469 (talk) 07:51, 2 June 2023 (UTC)

I tried posting the link but Wikipedia has the site on their blacklist, most likely to avoid copyright issues. In any case, you an just go on LibGen site and type the name of the title, however you have already provided a RS alleging BJP-RSS involvement, so I don't have any particular qualms about its inclusion in the info-box, however the source claims that their involvement was alleged (as opposed to the plethora of secondary sources which conclusively implicate Congress in the riots), would you be okay with the addition of "alleged" into the infobox? Southasianhistorian8 (talk) 07:57, 2 June 2023 (UTC)

Also note as I believe this may be brought up: The source claims 14 FIRs were filed against BJP/RSS leaders, I'm not commenting on whether they were involved or not as they would be beyond my scope of knowledge, but an FIR registration doesn't necessarily lead to the conclusion of guilt on their part, as anyone can file a FIR against anyone in India. Southasianhistorian8 (talk) 08:01, 2 June 2023 (UTC)

FIRs are by police not anyone. CanadianSingh1469 (talk) 08:09, 2 June 2023 (UTC)

No, an FIR is the equivalent of a police report, it can be filed anyone, particularly the victim of a crime or someone aware of a cognizable offence. Per Legal Services India [1] - Every information relating to the commission of a cognizable offence, if given orally to an officer-in-charge of a police station, shall be reduced to writing by him or under his direction, and be read over to the informant; and every such information, whether given in writing or reduced to writing as aforesaid shall be signed by the person giving it, and the substance thereof shall be entered in a book to be kept by such officer in such form as the State Government may prescribe in this behalf. Southasianhistorian8 (talk) 08:13, 2 June 2023 (UTC)

I think I can find some more sources so let’s wait on adding alleged. CanadianSingh1469 (talk) 08:12, 2 June 2023 (UTC)

Sure. Southasianhistorian8 (talk) 08:13, 2 June 2023 (UTC)

Also note, the source states It is not implausible that BJP-RSS leaders employed their proficiency. (stress on plausible). The book is clearly speaking in theoretical and conjectural terms as opposed to making a factual case against BJP . In essence, the book is saying "It might make sense if BJP and RSS leaders were involved". In my opinion, such wishy-washy languages does not justify its inclusion in the info box (reneging from my earlier position) and is better suited for the body. Southasianhistorian8 (talk) 20:45, 3 June 2023 (UTC)

BTW that sight seems to be illegal and have pirated content. CanadianSingh1469 (talk) 20:58, 3 June 2023 (UTC)

I did a search and a google snippet showed it on page 108 not 109. Try checking that page. CanadianSingh1469 (talk) 21:18, 3 June 2023 (UTC)

@Suthasianhistorian8 CanadianSingh1469 (talk) 04:38, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

Do you have any sources that conclusively implicate BJP in the riots? Southasianhistorian8 (talk) 04:40, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

The source that was cited said BJP was involved. You can check it. Also Jaijee page 108.

@Orientls you added BJP’s involvement. Can you chime in and share some sources? CanadianSingh1469 (talk) 04:44, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

My comments regarding your arguments are right above you, so I'm a bit confused as to why you're reiterating them. Orientls's source made no mention of this and the second source speaks in theoretical and conjectural terms as opposed to an in depth explication of BJP's supposed role in the riots. Southasianhistorian8 (talk) 04:47, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

I will bring the quote from Jaijee.

Here are other sources:

Caravan Magazine

Tribune CanadianSingh1469 (talk) 04:51, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

Jaijee says, “ Most of the 14 FIRs lodged against the BJP and RSS workers have been registered at the Sriniwaspuri Police” CanadianSingh1469 (talk) 05:01, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

Here is another source

Scroll CanadianSingh1469 (talk) 05:11, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

There are many sources pointing to BJP and RSS being involved. It seems to me that there should be no objection to restoring the information you removed. CanadianSingh1469 (talk) 05:13, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

Did the FIRs result in a conviction? Did scholars conclusively ascertain their role in the riots? You have also said [2], so does this not apply here. Southasianhistorian8 (talk) Southasianhistorian8 (talk) 05:33, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

That was BLP and I was talking about an individual person not an organisation.

All the sources I have cited quite clearly say that BJP and RSS was involved. There should be no debate on the fact.

Also it seems they were convicted unless I am misunderstanding what the sources say. To quote from the Tribune article I cited, “He said most of these people were arrested and charge-sheeted ”

Jaijee names many lead BJP/RSS men as part of the violence. Such as Ram Kumar Jain “… the election agent of the then Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee”

Also just because someone wasn’t convicted doesn’t mean they didn’t do it. BLP doesn’t apply here. The article names multiple Congress men as leading violence of whom only one was ever convicted. CanadianSingh1469 (talk) 08:04, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

By the way in your appeal to your ban, which was accepted by @Rosguill, you pledged to not revert anyone who reverts your edits. You have broken that pledge.

I had reverted your edit and pointed you to the talk page discussion to which you hadn’t responded to for a month. A talk page discussion talking about what you removed. A talk page discussion which was quite active when it lasted, and could have been resumed at any time. In my last comment in the discussion I pointed to the correct page for Jaijee. You never replied so I assumed the matter was closed. What I am trying to say is that I am just quite perplexed as to why, you, out of the blue removed all mention of BJP and RSS when there was a discussion which could have been resumed at any time. A discussion which never truly finished. A discussion that you never responded yet you removed, without consensus or any talk, what was the matter of discussion.

Another point is that what you said in the edit summary when you removed mention of BJP and RSS involvement was clearly addressed by me or at least could have been addressed in this discussion. You said, “jaijee makes no mention of this” which I clearly addressed here in my last comment. CanadianSingh1469 (talk) 10:07, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

Just noting, since I was pinged, that as this was an informal promise as part of a standard offer-unblock, rather than a formal unblock condition, I am not going to be swooping in to respond with sanctions. If there are concerns of disruptive editing, take them to AE or ANI. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 14:49, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

Oh, I wasn’t suggesting sanctions or anything. I was just making an observation. CanadianSingh1469 (talk) 17:41, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

I've reverted my edit. Feel free to add the Caravan and scroll source if you'd like. Southasianhistorian8 (talk) 10:33, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

I'd also like to add that while I did revert twice instead of my promise of 1RR, it is a general rule of thumb that the person seeking to include content ought to refrain from reverting when concerns are raised over source reliability or misinterpretation per WP:ONUS. Nonethless, I'll try to rectify my lapses and stick to 1RR, but I would also ask that you go over what Wikipedia considers reliable sources, which in my opinion would resolve over 90% of the disagreements between us. Southasianhistorian8 (talk) 10:51, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

To clarify on this In my last comment in the discussion I pointed to the correct page for Jaijee. You never replied so I assumed the matter was closed. Jaijee had not stated anything unique to the Routledge source you added in the infobox, essentially both sources stated that FIRs were filed against BJP-RSS leaders. I had already rejected that rationale however writing but an FIR registration doesn't necessarily lead to the conclusion of guilt on their part, as anyone can file a FIR against anyone in India., especially considering Hinduta-Sikh dynamics and relations in the past century, it was inexorable that RSS leaders would be accused of atrocities whether they were involved or not. I was under the assumption that you would provide sources that indicted BJP-RSS leaders in a matter of fact way, in no uncertain terms, stating they were involved in the violence, which you had not done in the past month, which is why I reverted you. You just now provided some news article that seem to meet this requirement hence my revert and reinclusion of BJP-RSS in the infobox. Southasianhistorian8 (talk) 11:11, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

Congress vs Sikhs!

the entire episode was congress leaders taking revenge on Sikhs for indira's death. The whole article is about the same!

Then why did you drag BJP and RSS along with congress in it against Sikhs? There is. Ot a single instance or hint in whole article to tell about it. None of this is hinting of saffron party supporting congress in this henious genocide 203.81.241.148 (talk) 20:31, 12 September 2023 (UTC)

Khotestanis have filled this page with falsehoods

It appears that khotestanis have filled this page wirh falsehoods. While everyone acknowledges the incident was a dark spot everyone knows this led by congress leaders and carried out by their goons, however the current khalistani supporters have added BJP and RSS to the list of parties who had nothing to do with this incident. It is also known this is a common khotestani and ISI tactic to recruit more khotestanis since BJP is in power now and enticing hate against BJP and Modi is a good recruitment tool to brainwash uneducated and naive Sikh youth. The references are weak. False and does not connect anyone in the BJP and RSS to this pogrom so if the mods have an iota of self respect stop lying and fix this page. 47.185.211.70 (talk) 12:56, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

Replace riots with massacre

103.122.62.96 (talk) 15:46, 12 October 2023 (UTC)

 Not done Please clearly express the change you would like to see (e.g., change sentence X to Y) and please provide reliable sources to support that change. If you are referring to the article title, then see WP:RM. RegentsPark (comment) 16:36, 12 October 2023 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Gender, Race and Computing

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 25 September 2023 and 15 December 2023. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): KarthikVetri (article contribs). Peer reviewers: DubiousDoubt, Mikamek1, J2singh, Terrindeep.

— Assignment last updated by NavyBear314 (talk) 14:44, 8 December 2023 (UTC)

Figures

@CanadianSingh1469: The cited figures are random and they don't indicate if any research was carried out behind those numbers. Why any weight should be given to the numbers that lack any research or basis? Capitals00 (talk) 15:02, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

How do you know the number has no research behind it? If a reliable source says 17,000 we add 17,000. The source quire clearly says that 17,000 Sikhs were burned alive. We can’t remove figures from a reliable source just because we think there is no research behind it. If a confirmed academic publisher says it there was probably some research behind it. It isn’t a random number.

@RegentsPark Can you chime in here? CanadianSingh1469 (talk) 15:27, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Looks reliable and an over reliance on government sources is never a good idea. Perhaps you could rewrite it as "while estimates from independent sources vary from 8,000 to 17,000". RegentsPark (comment) 16:10, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

"there was probably some research behind it" that's your assumption. If there was any research then we would know that.

How come there is only 1 source that claims 17,000 figures without providing any details? From where this '17,000' figure came? Aman Kumar Goel ^(Talk) 04:42, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

RSS Role in Riots

RSS helped protecting Sikhs during 1984 Anti-Sikh Riots. Sikh intellectual and author of ‘A History of the Sikhs’, Khushwant Singh, credits members of the RSS with helping and protectingSikhs who were being targeted by members of the Congress(I) political party during the 1984 Anti-Sikh Riots.

riots Ak6016 (talk) 20:23, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Thoroughly unreliable source. Aman Kumar Goel ^(Talk) 04:15, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

Do you have any data that calls it unreliable? 96.255.235.139 (talk) 11:14, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 24 November 2023

Change the title of Sikh riots to Sikh genocide 2607:FEA8:EDF:5DFA:217C:50AD:91CE:84EE (talk) 03:44, 24 November 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Cannolis (talk) 06:05, 24 November 2023 (UTC)