The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. This article is related to India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan, which is a contentious topic. Furthermore, the following rules apply when editing this article:
You must be logged-in to an extended confirmed account (granted automatically to accounts with 500 edits and an age of 30 days)
This article is written in Indian English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, analysed, defence) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourcedmust be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.This page is about a politician who is running for office or has recently run for office, is in office and campaigning for re-election, or is involved in some current political conflict or controversy. For that reason, this article is at increased risk of biased editing, talk-page trolling, and simple vandalism.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
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 articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Hinduism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Hinduism 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.HinduismWikipedia:WikiProject HinduismTemplate:WikiProject HinduismHinduism articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Conservatism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of conservatism 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.ConservatismWikipedia:WikiProject ConservatismTemplate:WikiProject ConservatismConservatism articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics 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.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Discrimination, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Discrimination 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.DiscriminationWikipedia:WikiProject DiscriminationTemplate:WikiProject DiscriminationDiscrimination articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Veganism and Vegetarianism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of veganism and vegetarianism 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.Veganism and VegetarianismWikipedia:WikiProject Veganism and VegetarianismTemplate:WikiProject Veganism and VegetarianismVeganism and Vegetarianism articles
This article was copy edited by Miniapolis, a member of the Guild of Copy Editors, on 12 March 2015.Guild of Copy EditorsWikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsTemplate:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsGuild of Copy Editors articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Asia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Asia 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.AsiaWikipedia:WikiProject AsiaTemplate:WikiProject AsiaAsia articles
The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information.
This article has been viewed enough times in a single week to appear in the Top 25 Report5 times. The weeks in which this happened:
Why are we only using a biased media like Washington post for the claiming that the Airstrike failed?
Washington post is biased and clearly against India. Why is Wikipedia this biased against India? 103.218.133.35 (talk) 08:03, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Considered complicit not just by the scholars but also by the court of India who handed punishments to some BJP members and also handed punishments to the members of other Sangh Parivar organisations like Bajrang Dal who operated under the command of the then BJP government in centre. Capitals00 (talk) 12:20, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
1. Supreme counrt of India rejected modi governments role in gujarat riots[1]
There are a good number of Sangh Parivar members who are out of jail now because they have spent their time in jail. For a name, look at those Bilkis Bano convicts who are currently missing.[1][2]
It is stupid to say that Wikipedia relays on 'scholarly articles’ on crime and convictions , completely going against what courts of the world has given the verdict.
For one thing, because an entire government is never tried by a court; the court cases were for individuals. Secondary sources are the only ones who can meaningfully analyze the broader patterns. But in any case, you are expressing a problem with our policies on sourcing, and you need to raise that at WP:VPP, or the talk page of a specific policy. Vanamonde93 (talk) 16:21, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Verdicts of courts in a country don't invalidate what reliable sources have written about it. And on wikipedia, we go by what reliable sources say. — hako9 (talk) 18:09, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
ok, then can we mention that :
Modi administration is considered complicit in the 2002 Gujarat riots by various scholarly articles while Indian court invalidate this
Aljaseera source says : Not done by modi's administration during the riot, but Gujarat government after that. Even though in Centre modi is in power, it was Gujarat state government who did that.
How come action after the riot, which was not during modi at state government responsible to say that 'Modi administration is considered complicit in the 2002 Gujarat riots' ? Afv12e (talk) 03:51, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Indian courts have no jurisdiction to invalidate reliable sources on wikipedia and they have better things to do. You seem to not understand how wikipedia works. — hako9 (talk) 09:29, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
+1 to hako9, that's why people who have no knowledge about Modi should be confused about who fixed the "complicity". As the "Reliable Source" and the reliable sources covering Supreme courts judgement both have opposing views. In order to maintain WP:LIVE, WP:NPOV and to keep WP:PURPOSE
its mandatory to mention that Modi administration is considered complicit in the 2002 Gujarat riots by various scholarly articles, while the Indian Supreme court appointed special investigation team didn't find any evidence against Modi in connection to the riots.
@BlackOrchidd: The discussion is not yet over. How can you add this on your own and mention in your edit summary: "As per the discussion"? Do you have consensus to add this? No! How can you do that? GrabUp - Talk17:28, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Apologies, I didn't see this discussion. Either way, the change is not acceptable. On wikipedia, we can state judicial outcomes but they are not considered authoritative which is why it is included later in the lead. And, of course, it is not just scholarly sources that consider Modi to be complicit. A rewrite is fine but this particular one was very poorly written.RegentsPark (comment) 17:35, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The Modi administration has been considered complicit in the 2002 Gujarat riots by various scholarly articles, although a special investigation team appointed by the Indian Supreme Court found no evidence against Modi in connection to the riots
I find it quite annoying that the editors proposing changes here do not appear to have read the paragraph they wish to change, let alone the rest of the article. Two sentences later, our article states "A Special Investigation Team appointed by the Supreme Court of India in 2012 found no evidence to initiate prosecution proceedings against him", which is substantively identical to the proposed additions above, as well as a more appropriate use of in-text attribution. Vanamonde93 (talk) 19:20, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
To your knowledge there are different levels of courts in India. So the sentence 'The Modi administration has been considered complicit' is ambiguous and the proposed change combing the two sentences make it clear composite by who ? Afv12e (talk) 20:08, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think the point you're missing is that the verdict of a court does not matter and is not something that is considered on wikipedia. We can mention the verdict but not use it to increase or decrease the level of complicity. Since the verdict is already mentioned, there really is nothing else we need to do. RegentsPark (comment) 21:55, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"court does not matter and is not something that is considered on wikipedia" Thats a pretty vague & irresponsible comment by Admin @RegentsPark.
The threshold for inclusion on Wikipedia is whether material is attributable to a reliable published source, not whether it is true.
The courts order are not directly asked to be cited , courts order are only facts whether true or not. They must be mentioned in the lead. Otherwise a common reader may confuse. Not mentioning courts judgement published by reliable secondary source in the lead and also not attributing this line His administration is considered complicit in the 2002 Gujarat riots is a gross violation of NPOV [User:BlackOrchidd|BlackOrchidd]] (talk) 04:25, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Are you really saying that Sangh Parivar members who were convicted of theit crimes in the riots are not connected to Modi administration? See WP:RGW. Capitals00 (talk) 06:10, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
how can someone say that 'if somebody who is a member of bjp is arrested or punished in any crime, then Modi administration is responsible for that ?' Afv12e (talk) 12:54, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 25 May 2024
This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.
Can you add this in the lead ?
He initiated and oversaw the world's largest toilet-building program under the Swachh Bharat Abhiyan (Clean India Mission), significantly improving sanitation and public health across the country [2][3][4]Afv12e (talk) 01:47, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
how come corruption has anything to do with the above sentence highlighting improving sanitation and public health across the country. The above sentence never said it was 100% corruption free. In india no projects are corruption free! Afv12e (talk) 03:54, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 25 May 2024
This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.
Can you add this in the lead ?
He, has been instrumental in developing the country's road infrastructure, overseeing the construction of a record number of roads and highways during his tenure. Compared to the previous United Progressive Alliance (UPA) government, the Modi administration has significantly accelerated highway construction. Data from the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways indicates that the average road construction rate has increased from 11.67 km per day under the UPA to 36.5 km per day under the Modi government[5][6]. This unprecedented growth in road infrastructure has not only improved connectivity across the country but has also driven economic development and reduced travel times significantly. Afv12e (talk) 01:51, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 25 May 2024
This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.
can you add this in lead?
Narendra Modi's strategic foreign policy enabled India to secure significant quantities of discounted Russian oil during the Russia-Ukraine war, despite international sanctions against Russia. This move not only provided economic relief to India but also highlighted Modi's adeptness in navigating complex geopolitical landscapes.[7][8][9][10][11]Afv12e (talk) 02:25, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nothing impressive. Under Modi administration, India has been mainly selling the oil they purchased to Europe at record levels and those involved in the process are private companies. Now we are in 2024, the situation is no longer the same.[4]Capitals00 (talk) 03:21, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
so what? it was a economic relief to India. It was a huge diplomatic success despite international sanctions against Russia.
Because CAA protests really happened unlike the non-existing example of some exceptional foreign policy which you are claiming for the Modi government. Abhishek0831996 (talk) 07:51, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Naageshwarg: The Indian PM can't really do anything here, nor is he free to do so. Wikipedia is independent from the government. Thanks for letting us know about this; I am informing an admin.
@Afv12e: The text means that Modi claimed he helped his father sell tea, but Wikipedia mentions that this is not reliably corroborated, as no reliable secondary sources have confirmed it. GrabUp - Talk18:22, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
it is not conveying the meaning and it like mean. How about rewriting this like this:
His account of helping his father sell tea at the Vadnagar railway station highlights his humble beginnings and strong work ethic, although some sources have debated its precise detailsAfv12e (talk) 18:37, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
His account of helping his father sell tea at the Vadnagar railway station has become a well-known part of his personal narrative, though some sources have debated its precise details.
level-5 vital article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
.svg){kind=small}
Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Note that there are multiple references confirming welfare cuts in the economy section, and citations about environmental cuts in the environment section. Jamedeus (talk) 02:49, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. M.Bitton (talk) 19:21, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
