Talk:Irom Chanu Sharmila

comments

Limited to statement of fact which cannot be libellous. The SS group is seeking the ending of all trials, the stopping of rearrests and the ending of force feeding which will resutlt in the death of my fiancee Irom Sharmila within 7-20 days. I am seeking only for their supporters to come forward Mr Haminoon has done so. This is not a libellous statement. https://www.timesofassam.com/headlines/irom-sharmilas-court-appearance-insensitivity-of-state/ This is a reference to the SS group. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DesmondCoutinho (talk • contribs) 07:48, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

The group Coutinho is referring to uses the acronym SSSC, not SS. Strangely enough Amnesty International is also calling for the stopping of all re-arrests. Mr Coutinho's latest input into the article was mostly unrefererenced and possibly contained original research and falsehoods. He has been warned many times about posting original research and conflict-of-interest editing. I have incorporated some of his material into the article but his latest edits had nothing salvageable. -- haminoon (talk) 09:58, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

The SS group has gone through many name changes the only consistent acronymic letters are SS and fo ther historical allusion I have kept those two. If Amnesty International India is calling for the end of all re-arrests which would mean the end of force feeding and her death within 7-20 days then that is for Amnesty International to justify if I say anymore Mr Haminoon having allowed discussion will now just as arbitrarily revoke the discussion. I have provided two references for this counterview which Mr Haminoon removed without reason this time. There is a counterview which has plenty of references it is time wiki editors stood beside fair comment and free speech. Otherwise people are scared off by petty bullies with very strange backers — Preceding unsigned comment added by DesmondCoutinho (talk • contribs) 10:52, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

It wasn't a counter-view - it was original research. The text you wrote wasn't backed up with references. You have been told many times what orginal research is and have chosen to ignore it. -- haminoon (talk) 11:23, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Mr Haminoon you deleted a reference to an 11 minute interview by Ashok Pandy of NDTV which is a national indian news TV company and you deleted two more references from the Indian Express and a report from a local news paper in Manipur. You have also deleted all references to the trials in Manipur. I have refrained from explaining what is said in the interview. As I have undone your delete others can check ie listen to the 11 minutes where Sharmila refers to honor killing, talks of the diversion of funds, and compares these so called supporters to the Taliban. In the Indian Express story filed by a terrified young woman scribe. She points out that these fake supporters would not allow Sharmila to take her satyagraha to Ima's Market and that the police backed the false supporters. In the other reference it is shown that the last time she did manage to get to the Imas market it looked like she would have mass support so again the false supporters took her away and arranged for an easy arrest the next morning. These are all referenced. I do not have a lifetime ban. Sharmila has about a year left to live. It is for those with integrity among wiki editors to examine the facts. You are telling untruths now and need to step back. Sharmila will be dead soon. You have already stated that you understand these groups are demanding unconditional release and you understand that this means an end to force feeding and you understand that the nonmoral medical facts are that Sharmila will be dead within 7-20 days of that outcome. Your defence appears to be Amnesty backs the call. I do not wish to discuss this with you as you have your own agenda. But It's difficult to get anyone to back you when you are in violation of wiki policies and continue to tell untruth. This is a discussion page. Is there anyone who doesn't want her dead prepared to look at the references I have provided and see whether they should stand or not. This is a biography page for Irom Sharmila Chanu not that of Haminoon or the groups he supportsDesmondCoutinho (talk) 13:51, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

For the benefit of anyone else reading the above exchange; most of the above is completely untrue. I am not a supporter of SSSC. -- haminoon (talk) 10:15, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Haminoon - you have vandalized this page enough. You have removed many citations from reputed Indian Media and adding valueless Blogspot blogs and promoting some self pro-claimed activists. Having a blogspot blog and few people as team to distribute press release by email doesn't increase any authenticity. You must come up with valuable citation. Otherwise your edits will be revised. Comment added by Dhruba Jyoti Deka 07:53, 11 July 2015 (UTC)DhrubaDeka DhrubaDeka

Legal situation

I came here from COIN and started looking things over. I don't understand the current legal situation. In this dif I removed incoherent content that tried to address the current legal situation and said there are two trials going on concurrently. The article as it stands doesn't explain clearly. I am going to start digging into this to look for sources that explain what is going on. If anybody interested in this has reliable sources that explain, it would be very helpful to post them here. Thanks. Jytdog (talk) 17:02, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Some chap wanted reports on the two trials in Imphal. Today this was posted on Epao which is an on line repository of various manipuri media agencies http://www.e-pao.net/epGallery.asp?id=8&src=AFSPA_Related/Sharmila20150804 It does not state what happened at the trial. But they appear to be up to date photographs of Irom Sharmila entering and leaving Uripok Cheirap Court. It's a third world police state. But I can confirm these are photos of Uripok Cheirap Court and that is Irom Sharmila. The photographer claims he took them on 4 August. The previous trial date second day of prosecution witnesses was set for 17 July. It is likely that on this last occasion the Judge will have formally authorized her presentation at the Delhi Patiala Court because they don't like disrespecting brother judges. I fully understand you cannot publish this info that is why I am posting it here. And when she is dead I don't really care what you publish.78.17.55.197 (talk) 09:38, 8 August 2015 (UTC)

That site is not a reliable source. Jytdog (talk) 12:43, 8 August 2015 (UTC)

This is the first report of Sharmila being sent for trial to Delhi http://thepeopleschronicle.in/?p=14918 You have to understand how to read third world censored police state news reports. Wheels are already up. She'll be arriving at Delhi airport in the next few hours. Because he is pushing hard the date of 12 August and the prosecution has already rested then this is my original research. The defence will present no case. The Judge will allow Sharmila to speak her in her defence briefly then the Defence will rest and verdict will be delivered the same day. If they have flexible tickets the Manipuris will fly her out 12 August early morning. I get you don't care. But you cannot have verifiable reporting from a third world police state. Maybe read some Orwell and get up to speed. By tomorrow other Manipuri press will begin reporting her departure. In Delhi on the other hand there is a chance for some verifiable reporting. But that will depend on Journalists in Delhi. There is a new law that prohibits the press from talking to undertrial prisoners in case their reports mind put India in a poor light. So journalists have to pay a bond of 1 lac rupees and submit any recorded materiel to the Jail SP for three days. If in his opinion they intend to publish something that will show India in a poor light he can confiscate all materiel and publishing against his determination becomes a criminal offence http://thewire.in/2015/08/08/centre-under-fire-for-new-guidelines-that-severely-restrict-access-to-prisoners-8086/. I get the whole current accepted wisdom thing but you don't seem to understand the problems of discovering the truth about political prisoners kept in isolation in third world police states. I do hope I don't get banned for writing this. We are free here still yes. 78.17.55.197 (talk) 08:00, 10 August 2015 (UTC) Hell yeah they have barred me from commenting there on orders of the fury. Bunch of poor little rich kids who would sell out their grannies for a few paise. it's the photographs and the date taken that might be reliable. All be over soon mate one way or another.78.17.55.197 (talk) 13:49, 8 August 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a newspaper or blog. What we record in the article needs to be reliable. That is just what this place is. If you have some reliable sources to bring that we can use, then please do feel free to post here. Otherwise, please stop using this page as a blog for soapboxing - I will delete future posts like the one above. I am sympathetic to Irom but Wikipedia is what it is. Thanks. Jytdog (talk)

If I see anything I'll post it here and you can decide. You seem like an intelligent chap you post what you want. And shove your sympathy. Can i say that?78.17.55.197 (talk) 13:14, 10 August 2015 (UTC)

I haven't found anything on the Imphal trials. I've noticed journalists cover her many trials haphazardly. -- haminoon (talk) 09:39, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

WP:NOTFORUM - my request was for sources Jytdog (talk) 13:10, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
With all due respect the trials in Imphal began only in August 2014. All references to them were taken out by editors on the grounds of recentism. They were reported from August 2014 when Mr Khaidem Mani appeared as senior counsel for Irom Sharmila. In August he put forward the plan to have all trials ended. He failed with the Judicial Magistrate First Class who ruled that there was a case to be heard and ordered the trial to begin, so he appealed to the Chief Judicial Magistrate Imphal East who agreed with the previous judge and all the other juges who had granted judicial remand pre-trial for the previous 14 years on fortnightly repeated judidial remands. However the District & Sessions Judge at Uripok Cheirap Court dismissed that particular Charge Sheet on the grounds that the police hadn't brought any evidence. In legal terms as the prosecution had failed abysmally to show any evidence of mens rea he wasn't going to rule on whether there was any actus reus. However this led to some confusion whether she could be rearrested on a fresh charge if the police actually brought evidence. To make certain the Government of Manipur challenged the District & Sessions Court Judgement of August 2014 at the Manipur High Court. The Manipur High Court also in August stayed the verdict of the District and Sessions Court and you can find verifiable reports that they have done and are awaiting defence counsel's reports. On being re-arrested in August on fresh charges then by the police that came to trial in November where I was present and Mr Mani had by use of public punishment beatings kept all press away from farther hearings. This was the second trial in Imphal (if you delete this account from talk no one will ever know what's going on but your call) There had been no previous trials apart from these two. Mr Mani then attempted the same strategy to demand that the trial be stopped on various legal fig leafs, ie double jeopardy, that IPC 309 had been nullified, that even if it hadn't been nullified that a political hunger strike is not an attempt to commit suicide and therefore hte previous 14 years imprisonment ruled legal by all the previous judges was in fact illegal, he also included the entire 100 page Malta Declaration of the World Health Association as part of the evidence and on 22 December also began a series of punishment beatings in and outside the court to persuade the judge to give an answer before Xmas day. So as not to waste the time of the busy. The Judge Mr Justice Wisdom Kamodang Judicial Magistrate first class imphal east at Lamphel Court complex ruled that the police had not brought any evidence to go to trial and therefore without any actual evidence from the prosecution being presented he was dismissing the case that was on January 22 2015 while Mr Mani had me banged up in Sajwa Jail being tortured I assumed they were going to kill me as they clearly were trying to have her killed. This time the Government of Manipur did not appeal the decision but rearrested Sharmila and that FIR of 22 January 2015 was turned into a charge sheet on 20 June 2015 the second day of trial was 4 July 2015. You can of course work backwards to the last verifiable report. But essentially the trials began in Imphal in August 2014 which was reported widely especially the release on grounds of lack of evidence though widely misrepresented (the original judgement is available on line) and the last report of the three trials in Imphal was on 22 January 2015 it was actually also my habeas corpus day but I was not presented because some reporters did come to report a new release and they would have had access to me and so to avoid any suggestion of truth saying I was detained more illegally. But this page is not about me Mr Haminoon or the spokesman he has alluded to as Sharmila's true spokesman. I am sure that was too much information for some but it is why you are having difficulties and shows how those difficulties can be overcome. Where there is a will there is a way. We called them proverbs when I was young.78.16.54.211 (talk) 08:26, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

reverting DhrubaDeka

This is the explanation for reverting DhrubaDeka's edits, which I originally posted on his talk page and has since been removed. The edits were reverted back without discussion.

• You've re-added some material that was removed that had been discussed on the talkpage, but you didn't join in the discussion on the talk page and say why the material should be in the article. The WP:BRD essay explains how to deal with disputes. Simply reverting edits you disagree with can be considered WP:editwarring.
• You've removed an external link with the justification "Promoting a blogspot blog without any authentication." I'm not sure what you mean by authentication. The organisation has been campaigning for the article's subject over a long period. I added the link and I am not a supporter of the organisation, so it is not "promoting". That they are using blogspot as a host is immaterial. Please see Wikipedia:External links for our guidelines on external links. If you think it should be removed you need to explain why on the article's talk page.
• You've removed an archiveurl to webcitation.org for no reason I can gather. I suggest you read Wikipedia:Link rot so that you understand how important this is to the page.
• You've removed a reference because "Source link expired and source domain being used for other purpose". However the reference had a date accessed field and is archived in the Internet Archive. You later removed some content and another reference for the same reason. If you don't understand how something works please ask someone; don't just remove it. -- haminoon (talk) 07:30, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

Haminoon - you have vandalized this page enough. You have removed many citations from reputed Indian Media and adding valueless Blogspot blogs and promoting some self pro-claimed activists. Having a blogspot blog and few people as team to distribute press release by email doesn't increase any authenticity. You must come up with valuable citation. Otherwise your edits will be revised.

Senior Editors' Observation needed

I appeal attention of Senior editors from the globe to maintain the accountability of this page.

There have been many poor citations that are being used for cheap link building purposes and self-promotions.

Wiki user Haminoon is proven as doing vandalism here with inclusion of dead/non-existing & poor citations. He is including blogspot blogs also as references.

Haminoon should know the following:

• Anyone can create a Blogspot blog and write this or that for years. If we start to give value to Blogspot blogs(that too not blogs of renown people) - then Wikipedia will be spammed by Blogspot blog links.
• No reference should be served as self promotion that is not relevant to Irom Charmila.
• What is "Save Irom Sharmila Campaign"? Where it is?? What they have done??? Do they have any valid citation of their instead of their own blog? If not then why they should be promoted?

Hence I appeal attention to prevent vandalism on this page.

Dhruba Jyoti Deka 07:39, 11 July 2015 (UTC) DhrubaDeka

I'm sure you are capable of doing a Google News search for the "Save Sharmila Solidarity Campaign". It appears to be run by people involved with Human Rights Alert, which Sharmila was working for prior to the Malom massacre. I understand that some people are unhappy with some of the people involved in these activist groups but Wikipedia is not a place for settling scores. All I can go on is what the reliable references say. I've done quite a bit of work to improve referencing on this article, including adding archive links for dead links, so I don't appreciate your accusations. If you can find one example of me being "proven as doing vandalism" or adding non-existent citations I'll eat a hat. Most of this article was written by people a long way from India so I doubt there is much self-promotion in it. -- haminoon (talk) 07:56, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

News based on press release from any organization(that is not active in any field work) can't be served as any valuable citation. Everyday many organization claims "this" or "that" via emails. If Wikipedia starts serving such press release based news - that too, for such organization who is not active in practical field - then Why don't you serve Al-Qaida's claims too? Make sense? Dhruba Jyoti Deka 08:12, 11 July 2015 (UTC)DhrubaDeka

I also prefer google to wiki for reliable in depth info. But if the claim is the SS group is a front for HRA then why have you not published a verifiable reference for that. I am not for suppression of facts but allowing both views to be published. And if the SS is part of the HRA then there would be a 11 year gap between the starting of Sharmila's fast and the formation of the first SS group. I don't think that your statement that the SS groups are run by people involved with HRA is verifiable that's why you haven't verified it. Even if it were true that is not what they want published.

Certainly the HRA does use Sharmila's name in negotiations with the Manipur CM Ibobi Singh to remove the AFSPA from Imphal West and Imphal East in 2004 and the founder of the HRA Joykumar Singh then took over policing in Imphal becoming the first DG Imphal Police Commandoes. You must be capable of using google news to look into the link between the police the State Intelligence Bureau and the HRA. The problem seems to be that wiki follows Hume. You can verify only facts not theories, sequence and not consequence. If wiki editors have broken any of wiki's rules as regards payment that is a internal matter for wiki. This page is talk about Irom Sharmila yes.78.16.54.211 (talk) 08:20, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

Both of you: please stop misrepresenting statements and edits of other editors. -- haminoon (talk) 09:22, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

Page protection

In light of the ongoing violations of the WP:BLP policy, which applies to Talk pages as well as articles, I am seeking page protection so that IP addresses cannot edit the article or talk page. You cannot write things anywhere in WP about living people that are not supportable with reliable sources. Jytdog (talk) 14:38, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

I think you're still going to have some problems with a few users, though I think you know who. Dr Crazy 102 (talk) 15:47, 12 August 2015 (UTC) Dear Doc Crazy if your comment stands so does this response. My name is Desmond Coutinho if I log on i get irritating messages that remind of the final scene of Scent of a Woman. It is not my job to police wiki this is gentlemen's club I leave it to you gentlemen. I asked only for mr jytdog to get a second to back him and you are that second delete or add to this talk page on discussion as you see fit des batshitcrazy coutinho

78.17.55.197 (talk) 09:11, 14 August 2015 (UTC)