Jump to content

Talk:The Kashmir Files

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Mossad3 (talk | contribs) at 15:25, 7 July 2022 (→Discussion). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 26 June 2022

The Kashmir Files, is based on incidents in Jammu and Kashmir. Throughout the movie (I've seen it), non-Muslims are called Kafir, so please find the first mention of the word, non-Muslim (it is first mentioned in the plot section) and link that word to the Kafir article from this article. If possible, please change the word, non-Muslim to Kafir as that is the word the terrorists use for non-Muslims in the movie.— BitOfKarate (talk) 02:35, 26 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

GenoV84 has linked some articles with the Kafir article, where the articles mention the term, "non-Muslim".—BitOfKarate (talk) 04:56, 26 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Kautilya3: According to the reliable sources cited in the article Kafir, the term means "Non-Muslim".[1] You reverted my edits asserting that the term cannot be linked because it would be a WP:EGG. Please explain where, because the term means exactly that, and this is the first time that I meet another editor which claims that certain articles are not allowed to be linked on Wikipedia.... Once again, according to which rule of WP:MOS? GenoV84 (talk) 07:25, 27 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
WP:EGG says, "Keep piped links as intuitive as possible. Per the principle of least astonishment, make sure that the reader knows what to expect when clicking on a link." "Non-Muslim" is a self-evident concept, which doesn't need to be linked to anything. You and your friend are trying to engage in agenda-driven editing. Neither can the term "Kafir" be used in the Plot section as per WP:FILMPLOT. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 07:31, 27 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Kautilya3: You didn't reply to my question, instead you are accusing me and another user of "agenda-driven editing".... Are you serious now? Check out how many articles related to the history of Islam and other Abrahamic religions I edited throughout the years and dare to say that to me again, instead of accusing me without evidence in blatant violation of the policy WP:BADFAITH. GenoV84 (talk) 08:05, 27 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Kautilya3: "Neither can the term "Kafir" be used in the Plot section as per WP:FILMPLOT"... According to whom? Nobody. Where is it written? Nowhere. Stop misrepresenting WP policies in order to patronize this article; it doesn't work. See also the related entry on the Wiktionary. The specific term in Arabic and the translation in English have the exact same meaning. Now what? GenoV84 (talk) 08:33, 27 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Do you have reading difficulties? It is the third sentence: "The plot summary is an overview of the film's main events, so avoid minutiae like dialogue, scene-by-scene breakdowns, individual jokes, and technical detail." -- Kautilya3 (talk) 08:39, 27 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Wikilinks are NOT mentioned. Can you read, mate? GenoV84 (talk) 08:54, 27 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
You asked why Kafir cannot be mentioned, I answered. Now apparently you can't read your own questions either. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 09:00, 27 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Wow man, sucks to be you! As I said before, this is the first time that I hear from another user that certain articles are not allowed to be linked on Wikipedia.... Once again, according to which rule of WP:MOS? Exactly: none. Furthermore, in case you didn't know, Wikipedia is not censored. GenoV84 (talk) 09:05, 27 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
By the way, you've also removed the link to the article Mass grave with your reverts. Is there also a particular reason supported by WP policies for deleting links to that article as well? Do you have an explanation for that? GenoV84 (talk) 09:11, 27 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Linking "mass grave" is less of a problem. But are you confident that the content of that page is relevant to what is depicted in the film? Have you watched the film? -- Kautilya3 (talk) 13:14, 27 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
No, and I don't care to watch it. I'm just trying to understand why you're behaving this way, and what's the point of reverting my edits when those wikilinks that I previously added seem to be both pertinent and relevant regarding the context of this article. GenoV84 (talk) 16:00, 27 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Kautilya3, the term used in the movie is Kafir, not non-Muslim which is why I asked both those points to be considered. I don't find your answer convincing but I would like an admin to explain what is right. I liked what I read at Wikipedia is not censored.—BitOfKarate (talk) 18:17, 27 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia cannot call non-Muslims as "Kafirs", nor can it link non-Muslim to "Kafir" (which is an underhand way of doing the same thing). If the film calls all of them "Kafirs", it can be stated, but not as part of the "plot". It can be stated in the commentary sections, with WP:RS. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 18:26, 27 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Then please add this: ".....mosque sermons urged ‘believers’ to give the Kafir one last push in order to usher in the true Islamic society."[2] GenoV84, Kautilya3, RegentsPark, please add this with quotation marks or paraphrase it.—BitOfKarate (talk) 02:54, 28 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
That is very nice! You gave a properly formatted citation, but omitted the author field. Why was that? -- Kautilya3 (talk) 08:01, 28 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
But where is Wikipedia calling them kafirs? It is just the plot...if needed, it can be specified that the film is calling them so. Kpddg (talk) 12:55, 28 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Kautilya3, I had a draft template which I used, so I didn't add any new field thinking it will cause a citation error. Here are more citations for, ".....mosque sermons urged ‘believers’ to give the Kafir one last push in order to usher in the true Islamic society."[3][4][5][6][7]-BitOfKarate (talk) 16:16, 28 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Someone must start a Request for Comments, according to WP:RFC, whether to link the term, "non-Muslim" to the Kafir article. I am travelling and don't have the time.-2409:4071:E0D:66C3:A135:3C87:31E0:DD33 (talk) 06:52, 2 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Before starting an Rfc, there needs to be a proper discussion, like this. Kpddg (talk) 07:09, 2 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Kpddg, RegentsPark, says it can be done here - I am now in a remote place with network issues, sorry if I don't reply. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2409:4071:240f:5ad6::d17:88ad (talk • contribs)

References

  1. ^ Willis, John Ralph, ed. (2018) [1979]. "Glossary". Studies in West African Islamic History, Volume 1: The Cultivators of Islam (1st ed.). London and New York: Routledge. p. 197. ISBN 9781138238534. Kufr: Unbelief; non-Muslim belief (Kāfir = a non-Muslim, one who has received no Dispensation or Book; Kuffār plural of Kāfir).
  2. ^ "Rewinding History, Unwinding Apathy: Why They Don't Want You To See The Kashmir Files". News18. 2022-03-16. Retrieved 2022-06-27.
  3. ^ "Explained: The Kashmiri Pandit exodus that Vivek Agnihotri's 'The Kashmir Files' tells us about". Firstpost. 2022-03-16. Retrieved 2022-06-28.
  4. ^ Gadbois, Helen O. (2022-03-15). "Why they don't want you to see the Kashmir files". True Religion Jeans Outlet BO. Retrieved 2022-06-28.
  5. ^ "Kashmiri Pandits offered three choices by Radical Islamists". Indian Defence Review. 2022-03-17. Retrieved 2022-06-28.
  6. ^ "convert run or die in kashmiri language". screen. 1990-01-04. Retrieved 2022-06-28.
  7. ^ Das, Sib Kumar (1934-12-09). "The Hindu exodus shown in 'Kashmir Files' was seventh of its kind". Argus News. Retrieved 2022-06-28.

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 2 July 2022

Kashmiri files is not a fictional story. So i request you to change it 202.142.121.219 (talk) 05:43, 2 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. --N8wilson 🔔 06:03, 2 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Please also review guidelines for edit requests if you choose to resubmit with sourcing. Also note that this topic is controversial and has already been discussed in an earlier RfC on this page which reached consensus. A compelling case would need to be made in order for editors to support changes that depart from existing local consensus. --N8wilson 🔔 06:13, 2 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

RfC about linking the term non-Muslim to the Kafir article

Should we link the first mention of the term "non-Muslim" in the plot section to Kafir?-Mossad3 (talk) 18:55, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ Willis, John Ralph, ed. (2018) [1979]. "Glossary". Studies in West African Islamic History, Volume 1: The Cultivators of Islam (1st ed.). London and New York: Routledge. p. 197. ISBN 9781138238534. Kufr: Unbelief; non-Muslim belief (Kāfir = a non-Muslim, one who has received no Dispensation or Book; Kuffār plural of Kāfir).
  • Oppose - As stated in an earlier section, "non-Muslim" is self-explanatory term and there is no need to link it to anything. If the film has Muslims using the term "kafir" often, that is an entirely different matter, and needs to be covered in a separate "Themes" section as for MOS:FILM. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 20:26, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Kautilya3, Shouldn't our readers know what Islam says about the Kafir? A link should be allowed for the reader to click and read that.-Mossad3 (talk) 18:00, 6 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Kautilya3, I can't comprehend your rationale here. If the film has the characters using the term Kafir in the sense of non-Muslims in a trivial sense, it is not a "theme" detail, nor some minute like a dialogue, it is a basic plot detail on who is being targeted there. Newslaundry describes the plot like this: Similarly, the militants are also portrayed as one undifferentiated mass. [...] In fact, there cannot be political differences between militants because they don’t have any political grievances or aspirations – all of them are driven by their hatred towards the Hindu kafir. [...] As far as the civilian population of Kashmir goes, they are also completely in on the project of kafir persecution. Other sources use the term non-Muslim, and if the commenters here are correct, they're translating the word Kafir as non-Muslim, and not some other word like ghair-Musalman. How can there be an EGG concern when the article defines it as non-Muslim, and news articles freely translate it as such? They're equivalent terms in certain contexts, such as this one. Kafir is also an English word now—if the film uses it, we can use it directly use it in the plot section, and if we must translate it to non-Muslim, then there should be no problems linking the original word used in the film. regards, TryKid [dubious – discuss] 23:38, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    If you want to link "non-Muslim", write a page on "non-Muslim" and link it there. Doing anything else is WP:OR and WP:EGG. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 03:06, 6 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Kautilya3, you ignore the full argument. if the film uses the word Kafir, what grounds do we have to replace that with non-Muslim? is that not an interpretation? but it wouldn't be OR or an unjustified interpretation, since multiple sources identify the "Kafir" of the film with non-Muslims. and when that identification is made, our linking it wouldn't be OR either. but we can also simply use the word "Kafir" in the plot, since that's the word used in the film, I don't think you've made any convincing argument against the former or the latter options. the EGG argument is incomprehensible. the linked article makes it clear that Kafir = non-Muslim, so readers would be delivered to the article they were expecting, not to something surprising. regards, TryKid [dubious – discuss] 05:56, 6 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    An RfC is not the place to make arguments. That should have happened before]. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 11:08, 6 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    very bureaucratic. but it's not a formal RfC anymore anyway. the tag has been removed. consider it a normal talk page discussion. TryKid [dubious – discuss] 12:41, 6 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    TryKid, it is now. I restored the RfC ID.-Mossad3 (talk) 07:58, 7 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - I agree with the arguments of TryKid above; we can simply use the term, "Kafir" everywhere, as in the movie, instead of non-Muslim.-Mossad3 (talk) 00:17, 6 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
You can’t really support your own RfC just so you know. | Zippybonzo | Talk | 08:26, 6 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - per Kautilya3 above; it’s a self-explanatory phrase. | Zippybonzo | Talk | 08:24, 6 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support: The film mentions non-Muslims as kafirs, so I don't see why the plot can't contain this. The term can also be added this way if needed- ...non-Muslims (called kafirs in the film) Kpddg (talk) 13:30, 6 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Not convinced by opposition. TrangaBellam (talk) 08:07, 7 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose As mentioned, non-Muslim is self-explanatory + kafir, inherently has derogatory connotations for someone who does not adhere to the Islamic belief much like terms such as pagan and infidel do. Further context is needed if said term is to be used. Veggieramen (talk) 13:01, 7 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose (Summoned by bot) - We use descriptive language. That particular words are used in the movie doesn't mean we should use them (or undermine the neutral description with an WP:EASTEREGG). — Rhododendrites talk \\ 13:47, 7 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support: This film explicitly mentions "Non-Muslims" by using the Arabic word Kafir, therefore the wikilink Kafir seems to be both pertinent and relevant regarding the context of this article and of the movie itself. I thoroughly agree with user TryKid when they say that if the film uses the word Kafir, what grounds do we have to replace that with non-Muslim? is that not an interpretation?. Furthermore, contrarily to what Kautilya3 and some other users claim, the English term "Non-Muslim" is not self-explanatory to people who are not Muslims (i.e., the vast majority of human population on planet Earth) because it has a very specific meaning along with derogatory connotations in the Islamic religion,[1] therefore a wikilink to the appropriate article concerning the meaning, explanation of this term, and its consequences is more than needed.

I think that none of the opposing users have proposed a convincing argument against the usage of this wikilink, at all. In the previous discussion that we had on this same Talk page weeks ago, I asked Kautilya3 to give me a satisfactory answer to the following question, but he tried to dodge my request and never gave an answer to it: according to which rule of WP:MOS and WP:NOTCENSORED certain articles are not allowed to be linked on Wikipedia? GenoV84 (talk) 15:13, 7 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

Rhododendrites, Veggieramen, Kautilya3, the WP:EASTEREGG description would be applicable if we use the word, Kafir only, but what about my original rfc? Zippybonzo, readers must understand what was meant by the director of the movie by using the term, Kafir throughout the movie, as the English term "Non-Muslim" is not self-explanatory to people who are not Muslims (i.e., the vast majority of human population on planet Earth), so, linking the first mention of the term, non-Muslim to the Kafir article seems necessary (that article explains what Islam says about the Kafir).-Mossad3 (talk) 14:55, 7 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  1. ^ Willis, John Ralph, ed. (2018) [1979]. "Glossary". Studies in West African Islamic History, Volume 1: The Cultivators of Islam (1st ed.). London and New York: Routledge. p. 197. ISBN 9781138238534. Kufr: Unbelief; non-Muslim belief (Kāfir = a non-Muslim, one who has received no Dispensation or Book; Kuffār plural of Kāfir).
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Talk:The_Kashmir_Files&oldid=1096929615"