Talk:Canada–India relations: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively

← Previous edit Next edit →

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Inline

Revision as of 06:25, 23 October 2024

India 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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article was last assessed in May 2012.

Canada: Governments Low‑importance

	Canada portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Canada on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CanadaWikipedia:WikiProject CanadaTemplate:WikiProject CanadaCanada-related
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Governments of Canada.

International relations Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject International relations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of International relations on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.International relationsWikipedia:WikiProject International relationsTemplate:WikiProject International relationsInternational relations
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Image copyright problem with File:Coat of arms of Canada.svg

The image File:Coat of arms of Canada.svg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --15:49, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Canada and India relation

150.129.164.18 (talk) 07:52, 1 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

a question!

I added a paragraph here ↗ after Canadian reaction to 41 diplomat withdrawal. Do I have to reflect it on this article page or what to do. Because this page's 2023 diplomatic crisis section is getting particularly somewhat identical to 2023 Canada–India diplomatic row. `~ᴀɴᴋʀᴀᴊ ɢɪʀɪ🎇✨ 06:20, 24 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

update=26 Oct.

I think we should summarize the section on 2023 Canada India dispute in this article to max 5-10 sentences and people interested to read more can go to specific article i.e., 2023 Canada–India diplomatic row. This will be more like encyclopedia rather than news article which updates with current happenings.

`~ᴀɴᴋʀᴀᴊ ɢɪʀɪ🎇✨( C • Talk ) 15:39, 26 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Canada-India diplomatic row

I suggest it's time we WP:SPLIT this article and restore the Canada-India diplomatic row as a standalone article. The 2024 India–Maldives diplomatic row is a precedent for such an article. The subject of the article passes WP:GNG and has received WP:CONTINUEDCOVERAGE since last year. Keeping the content in this article will raise WP:WEIGHT and WP:TOOMUCH detail concerns. 119.155.181.242 (talk) 16:36, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think content from Hardeep Singh Nijjar should also be split out into such an article about the diplomatic row for the same policy-based concerns as 119.155... points out here. ― "Ghost of Dan Gurney" (talk) 16:49, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support, given the latest developments. This is something that can stand on its own. Currently the content is awkwardly split between this article and Hardeep Singh Nijjar § Death, subsequent diplomatic dispute and criminal investigation. Cremastra (talk) 20:26, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed to split. New developments are significant.VR _{(Please ping on reply)} 05:39, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support, given the issue has propped up again, been there for more than a year and has got sufficient coverage. The section had become more of a newsreel and had too much information, trying to balance information on the killing incident vs actual relevance to the relations (WP:TOOMUCH). Given that it is prolonging, it is bound to expand further. It makes sense to split.Magentic Manifestations (talk) 09:48, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support passes WP:N, so it's clearly time to just do it. samee converse 20:57, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I had a thought of doing it today, but the proper article title, Canada–India diplomatic row (with en dash) is fully protected due to someone repeatedly copy-and-pasting from Hardeep Singh Nijjar, which had a consensus to not split from that article at that time. ― "Ghost of Dan Gurney" (talk) 23:44, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've submitted a request at WP:RPPD. Cremastra (u — c) 01:31, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

NPOV

@राजकुमार: please explain your policy-based reasons for disagreeing with my edit, and be mindful of WP:ONUS ― "Ghost of Dan Gurney" (talk) 18:56, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@GhostOfDanGurney this whole article filled with Canadian allegations and you removed that part which Canadian government admitted that they don't have any hard evidence. I don't know which NPOV of you talking about. राजकुमार^(talk) 02:41, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The source that said that part was a misappropriation and omitted important context. ― "Ghost of Dan Gurney" (talk) 02:42, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Indian Express is an undeniably reliable source. You do not represent Justin Trudeau. He admitted just after the diplomatic tension of October 2024, so it must be included in the article. If you are aware of the context Justin refers to, then enhance that context with a reliable source instead of removing it.राजकुमार^(talk) 02:52, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

He is clearly talking about the evidence that existed during the time period between when Nijjar was murdered and when he went public with the allegations in October 2023, which makes it inappropriate to post in the section about the events of October 2024. ― "Ghost of Dan Gurney" (talk) 13:50, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Furthermore, from The Hindu, concerning your latest edit to the page: "India-Canada relations reached a new low after Canada, citing alleged involvement in the killing of Hardeep Singh Nijjar and naming them as ‘persons of interest’ in 10 investigations. Canada has expelled six Indian diplomats, including High Commissioner Sanjay Kumar Verma. In a tit-for-tat move, India too expelled six Canadian diplomats including the head of mission Stewart Ross Wheeler. Both sides have given time till October 19 for the diplomats to leave."[1] While this article does mention the conflicting statement India put out, it mentions this after it mentions that the diplomats were expelled. So this source doesn't exactly support the Indian narrative that much. ― "Ghost of Dan Gurney" (talk) 13:54, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Alleging that a foreign government is responsible for killings in parliament without evidence is a serious matter. I didn't write that edit before, but I'm re-adding that part with your additional context. If you still think that some extra context is missing, please add it instead of removing the whole part. राजकुमार^(talk) 01:32, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Intelligence is evidence. Cremastra (u — c) 01:50, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The way I see it, this is the Indian press splitting hairs between "solid evidence" and "intelligence" so they can say "Ha, Trudeau must be lying, because of the specific phrasing he used. So there." I can't see how this opinion-pushing deserves mention in the article. Cremastra (u — c) 01:47, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 49: / Line 49: @@
 ::::::Intelligence ''is'' evidence. '''[[User talk:Cremastra|<span style="color:#3D613F;">Cremastra</span>]]''' ([[User:Cremastra|u]] — [[Special:Contribs/Cremastra|c]]) 01:50, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
 :The way I see it, this is the Indian press splitting hairs between "solid evidence" and "intelligence" so they can say "Ha, Trudeau must be lying, because of the specific phrasing he used. So there." I can't see how this opinion-pushing deserves mention in the article. '''[[User talk:Cremastra|<span style="color:#3D613F;">Cremastra</span>]]''' ([[User:Cremastra|u]] — [[Special:Contribs/Cremastra|c]]) 01:47, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
-{| style="border-top: solid thin lightgrey; padding: 4px;"
-| [[Image:Searchtool-80%.png|15px|link=]] '''Response to [[WP:Third opinion|third opinion request]]:'''
-|-
-| style="padding-left: 1.6em;" | I need help with an [https://w.wiki/BeHB edit] I made to the India-Canada relations article. I added info about the Canadian government admitting they lack solid evidence tying India to the killing of Hardeep Singh Nijjar. This admission came from Justin Trudeau after the diplomatic tension in October 2024. But [[User:GhostOfDanGurney|GhostOfDanGurney]] disagree with including this info, saying it's not appropriate because it's from a time before the Canadian government went public with its allegations. I just want the article to be fair and accurate, so I'd really appreciate a third opinion from a neutral editor. <!-- Template:Third opinion response --> [[User:राजकुमार|<span style="color: #E63E62;font-family:Georgia;">'''राज'''</span><span style="color: #414A4C;font-family:Georgia;">'''कुमार'''</span>]][[User talk:राजकुमार|<sup style="color: #E63E62">(talk)</sup>]] 06:20, 23 October 2024 (UTC)
-|}