Talk:2024 Sambhal violence

The larger issue

Should we add a section that these surveys are part of the larger campaign of "reclaiming temples" by organizations that have a Hindutva tilt? DataCrusade1999 (talk) 15:37, 3 December 2024 (UTC)

Are there an WP:RS that makes the connection between this event and that? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:33, 3 December 2024 (UTC)

There are articles describing each issues but I think there are very few articles which do make that connection I'll try to find it. DataCrusade1999 (talk) 04:41, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

I think we need a standalone article on that. See Controversy Over Claim of Lord Shiva Temple at Ajmer Dargah Sharif for one of the many recent examples of this revisionist campaign. - Ratnahastin (talk) 01:05, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

Yeah I agree a standalone article would be great. As far as I know an MP(Member of Parliament) claimed that there are 20-25 such disputes in the making. DataCrusade1999 (talk) 04:39, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

Sounds good. Whoever wants to create an article about Anti-Mosque campaign in India is free. I will contribute too. - Ratnahastin (talk) 04:47, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

I think this title is a little biased and we should make it sound neutral Mavrick2022 (talk) 04:51, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

We should look at what WP:RS calls it. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 05:03, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

Would the Demolition of the Babri Masjid be considered part of this topic? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 05:02, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

Depends on how exactly the topic is viewed. some would say yes and some would say no. There where temple remains found under that mosque. so its tough to say Mavrick2022 (talk) 05:07, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

Assuming the topic is roughly "Religiously/politically motivated demolition of mosques in India" (I'm not saying it's a good title), I don't see how remains would make it off-topic. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 05:34, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

What if the topic is "reclamation of temples in India", such topic would totally change the tone of the article and how a layman would look at such an article, since if remains of temple were found is important as we also need to check if such an activity is mindless grabbing or not Mavrick2022 (talk) 18:56, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

Yes, see Jaffrelot, Christophe (2010). "Ayodhya, the Babri Masjid, and the Ramjanmabhumi Dispute". Hindu nationalism: a reader. Princeton, N.J: Princeton University Press. p. 279. ISBN 978-1-4008-2803-6. In the eighteenth century the common belief was, apparently, that the birthplace of Rama was marked by a small platform near the Babri Masjid, a mosque built in 1528 under the auspices of the first Mughal emperor, Babur.But in 1853 Hindu ascetics from the Bairagi order claimed that the mosque was built on Rama's birthplace itself.However, a compromise was found whereby Hindu devotees were to worship Rama on the platform (chabootra) near the mosque. It was here that, in 1883, a local pandit asked for a temple to be built—a demand that the British rejected because of its proximity to the mosque - Ratnahastin (talk) 05:39, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

should'nt excavation report also be taken into consideration while deciding if the mosque was built on top of the temple ? Mavrick2022 (talk) 18:53, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

@Mavrick2022 When the standalone article is written, we would have to rely on reports produced by the ASI(Archaeological Survey of India). These ASI reports have often been inconclusive when determining whether a temple existed at the site of a mosque or not. But still, these reports ought to be considered. DataCrusade1999 (talk) 10:25, 13 December 2024 (UTC)

@DataCrusade1999 if ASI reports where inconclusive, then why did the supreme court of india use them for their judgements? Any article which suggests they are inconclusive? Mavrick2022 (talk) 07:04, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

See WP:NOTFORUM, you should stop talking about Babri issue here. - Ratnahastin (talk) 07:12, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

My fault for engaging in that debate. DataCrusade1999 (talk) 09:52, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

You could read the original Ayodhya judgment ASI wasn't able to prove that temple existed there. The judgment is online you should read it. It's actually very hard to establish things like this scientifically. DataCrusade1999 (talk) 09:49, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

@Gråbergs Gråa Sång In my humble opinion Babri mosque ought to be considered a part of this campaign. DataCrusade1999 (talk) 10:15, 13 December 2024 (UTC)

Here's something we can use in the standalone article.

https://www.barandbench.com/news/11-religious-sites-dispute-india-7-uttar-pradesh DataCrusade1999 (talk) 10:12, 13 December 2024 (UTC)

@Gråbergs Gråa Sång @Mavrick2022 @Ratnahastin More resources that we can use for article creation.

1. https://thediplomat.com/2024/02/temple-mosque-disputes-are-sprouting-across-india/

2. https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/the-mosques-which-face-survey-petitions-explained/article68974682.ece

3. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/oct/30/thousands-of-mosques-targeted-as-hindu-nationalists-try-to-rewrite-indias-history

4. https://www.barandbench.com/news/11-religious-sites-dispute-india-7-uttar-pradesh

5. https://www.reuters.com/world/india/hindus-throng-another-disputed-mosque-india-2024-02-08/ DataCrusade1999 (talk) 10:35, 13 December 2024 (UTC)

@Gråbergs Gråa Sång @Mavrick2022 @Ratnahastin one more article

1. https://indianexpress.com/article/political-pulse/mosque-temple-rows-and-elections-disputed-sites-9771932/?ref=hometop_hp

I have also made some initial edits on the page

Anti-Mosque campaign in India DataCrusade1999 (talk) 15:22, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

If someone can move this topic of the larger issue on the talk page of the Anti-Mosque campaign in India I would be grateful. DataCrusade1999 (talk) 15:25, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

New update kindly update the aftermath section

The team of officers found one 9 mm misfired shell and one shell with PAKISTAN ORDNANCE FACTORY inscribed on it from the spot, the police said, Besides, two shells of 12 bore and 2 shells of 32 bore guns were recovered, the police said. Officers are currently engaged in the search operation. Superintendent of Police (SP), KK Bishnoi said, "At the spot where a body was found, the Forensics team & Municipal Corporation today found a fired case POF 9mm 68-26, one FN Star case which has a mark of a striker pin, a Made in USA 12mm bore cartridge were found...None of these bores belong to the Police. A total of 6 fired cartridges have been found. This investigation and search will continue tomorrow. It is a sensitive matter. We are identifying the persons visible in the footage of the incident."

https://www.firstpost.com/india/made-in-pakistan-bullets-found-in-sambhal-police-say-cartridges-likely-used-during-nov-violence-13841516.html

https://m.economictimes.com/news/india/twist-in-sambhal-violence-police-recover-pakistan-us-made-cartridge-at-crime-scene-during-probe/videoshow/115956648.cms

https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/lucknow/sambhal-violence-shocking-use-of-made-in-pakistani-ammunition-revealed-by-police/articleshow/115947405.cms

https://zeenews.india.com/india/shocking-twist-in-sambhal-violence-case-cops-find-made-in-pakistan-bullets-2827581.html

https://www.ndtv.com/india-news/shocker-in-sambhal-violence-probe-cops-find-made-in-pak-bullets-7164250 Prohibited00 (talk) 12:04, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

All of these sources are from Godi Media and have a poor reputation for fact checking. - Ratnahastin (talk) 12:54, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

Respectfully requesting to kindly keep your prejudices aside i have quoted links from news agencies deemed to be left leaning too.all agencies have reported the same unchallenged, its on national television as well. while i cannot comment on uour perception but as this is a relevant fact that needs to be informed so viewers get the unbiased whole picture. Prohibited00 (talk) 13:51, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

There is no prejudice. Godi media is the best way you can describe the sources you have cited. Falsifying their political stance won't fly. - Ratnahastin (talk) 14:46, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

Everyone is entitled to have his/her/their own opinions. I cannot make comments on that.I speak for myself and for me it seems improbable that 20k+ newspapers and more than 400 tv channels all or most have been sold out to a single political party in India. Prohibited00 (talk) 15:22, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

This time you are misrepresenting my comments. I never said every single outlet from India is Godi media. - Ratnahastin (talk) 15:27, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

so who decides which media is godi media? Anyone that doesn't speaks against a narrative that people who hate certain political figure is godi media? I dont think NDTV is one of them . They are tooth and nails after him so how did you arrive at this conclusion that its a godi media? Prohibited00 (talk) 17:19, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

WP:RS decides which outlet is Godi media. - Ratnahastin (talk) 17:22, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

i never found a list its a list of guidelines, according to that this article should not have existed because it says wikipedia is not a newspaper. But people are adding information from videos available on social media and political statements of politicians. Is social media and statements from politicians more reliable source for wikipedia? If this is happening then i must say the mission has been hacked ny some political ideology. Prohibited00 (talk) 17:33, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

NDTV and times of India have also covered it, which is left-leaning or as some say "sit in the godi of opposition". Since both the sides have covered it, this sounds very reliable too Mavrick2022 (talk) 18:50, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

See WP:TOI. You should also see the recent developments of NDTV because it has been purchased by Gautam Adani and a number of sincere journalists left it because of its degradation. - Ratnahastin (talk) 01:37, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

Don't be this disheartened with everything. They are godi media of the other side . Entrepreneurs like adani and ambani have "coordination" with all political parties where ever they are in power. At state level they are doing "business" with people in opposition also. Prohibited00 (talk) 11:17, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

exactly! every media house in india and a lot of countries are running biased coverage and no one is an exception to this unfortunately Mavrick2022 (talk) 07:19, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

Bad sources can come from any country, but WP:NEWSORGINDIA makes it extra hard for the Wikipedian who is after independent sources. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:03, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

I think the bigger problem for Indian news sources is the presence of news agencies. ANI is compromised, UNI is on death bead, IANS is sold out, and PTI also seems to have been captured somehow. Whatever these agencies produce then gets circulated widely often without acknowledgement. Then you get what appears to be a prevalent view, which is unfortunately coming from a single compromised source. The traditional gripes about "BJP IT cell" and "Godi media" do not cover the extent of the problem.

A second problem is that most of the journalism has become "mechanical", just reporting the day-to-day events, without attempting to understand the larger picture, without distinguishing between the dominant groups and the persecuted groups, shying away from criticising the state and the power blocks. In that sense, the entire media has become "Godi media". -- Kautilya3 (talk) 19:08, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

I think the journalist should infact remain mechanical and impartial to any news. Problem starts when they start interpretation and making conclusions of their own. This is not new , every media house seems to have an sop and a narrative they keep following. Its the same lens they see and project any news. Their subscribers also prefer to consume the same content. Hence, there are more incentives to be "godi media" or "dogi media". Those that go against the wind end up like Jagendra Singh. Prohibited00 (talk) 05:16, 7 December 2024 (UTC)

@Kautilya3 While I do agree with the general sentiment of your message I also think that there are enough Island of excellence that Wikipedians can use for the articles that we write to make sure everybody gets access to knowledge. I also think that we should add more independent Indian outlets to

• http://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Perennial_sources

so that they can be used more widely across Wikipedia and disputes from their usage can be ended quickly these independent outlets might also get some much needed visibility. DataCrusade1999 (talk) 12:16, 13 December 2024 (UTC)

@Prohibited00,@Mavrick2022,@Ratnahastin

On 25 November Superintendent of Police Krishna Kumar Vishnoi said that the protesters only threw stones. Now they are changing the story to put all the blame on the protesters. They killed six people, and now they are trying to act innocent.

Newslink , archived

Indian media is losing its reputation day by day!

N.B. Godi Medias have edited their news! Lol - Cerium4B • Talk? • 09:51, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

I agree with your later statement about indian media loosing its reputation . About the statement above that, this is an event that's still unfolding. Everyone is free to have his /her / their opinions. Indian Judiciary is still largely impartial esp. SC and acess is very easy for people and it is the right decision making authority. Hence, my humble request would be we should wait to see what comes out of the event instead of making assumptions. Pollution of wiki articles by RW and LW by mudslinging is not helpful to anyone. Prohibited00 (talk) 11:10, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

Anyone can inscribe anything on those bullets and it's not as if Cops of Uttar Pradesh are paragon of virtues.

1. As SC Stops Mosque Surveys, Muslims In UP’s Sambhal Accuse Police Of Firing, Bias & Rushed Burials
2. Two weeks after four died in Sambhal, police say ‘fired warning shots’ this is after they (UP Cops) denied that they even fired.

For now we should wait for the report of the Judicial Commission to get more information. DataCrusade1999 (talk) 11:47, 13 December 2024 (UTC)

with due respect never have i ever heard anyone make inscriptions on bullets Prohibited00 (talk) 11:55, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 4 December 2024

Dear Wikipedia Editors,

I hope this message finds you well. I am requesting a review and potentially deleting the paragraph discussing the Samajwadi Party's criticism of the BJP and the Uttar Pradesh government regarding the ASI survey and related issues.

While I respect the need for balanced and accurate reporting, this paragraph may lack sufficient neutrality and could unintentionally fuel divisions by highlighting politically charged accusations without adequate contextual support or corroborating sources. As Wikipedia upholds a neutral point of view, the current phrasing might not align with this principle. Moreover, it risks misinforming readers by emphasizing a single party's perspective on a complex, multifaceted issue.

I suggest revisiting this section to ensure it aligns with Wikipedia’s commitment to providing unbiased, well-sourced, and balanced information. Alternatively, its removal could be considered if neutrality cannot be established through verified, non-partisan sources.

Thank you for your attention to this matter. I am happy to assist in reviewing or improving the content to ensure it effectively serves Wikipedia’s mission. KeerthanaManiN (talk) 15:12, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

 Not done. Don't use AI for writing your messages. You must use your own words and describe what changes do you exactly want. - Ratnahastin (talk) 15:29, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

You (KeerthanaManiN) made this edit: "The paragrah I have deleted is against political views of Indians and BJP." 2 comments on that: The Samajwadi Party people are Indians, and WP content can include stuff the BJP disagrees with. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:52, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 4 December 2024 (2)

Please correct your statement that the incident was provoked by the chanting of "Jai Shri Ram" slogans. This is patently untrue and has been proven by video evidence. 43.250.210.143 (talk) 16:55, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. LizardJr8 (talk) 17:17, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

If you read the article, you'll see it does not state this. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:01, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

Exitended-confirmed-protected edit request on 6 December 2024

I would like to request addition of few articles in the "See also" section, like Destruction of Somnath temple and Destruction of Martand Sun Temple to show a balanced view point as I feel these articles also add to the context Mavrick2022 (talk) 07:29, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

They are completely irrelevant to this article. - Ratnahastin (talk) 07:30, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

Even Delhi Riots article it irrelevant to this article, but thats not removed Mavrick2022 (talk) 13:32, 8 December 2024 (UTC)

Gråbergs Gråa Sång can you please have a look into this? Mavrick2022 (talk) 06:44, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

Per MOS:SEEALSO,

"Links in this section should be relevant and limited to a reasonable number. Whether a link belongs in the "See also" section is ultimately a matter of editorial judgment and common sense. One purpose of "See also" links is to enable readers to explore tangentially related topics; however, articles linked should be related to the topic of the article or be in the same defining category."

This gives reasonable people a lot of space to disagree. At a glance, the links in question appears to me as stuff that happened (?) many centuries ago, also the Somnath section in completely uncited. They don't seem very interesting in this context to me. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:04, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

I understand and I believe same yardstick should apply to Delhi riots as even that has no relevance to the matter at hand Mavrick2022 (talk) 19:11, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

We are not discussing Delhi riots. This article is about a Islamic place of worship and controversy over it the. See also section contains other "tangentially related" articles key word being here tangentially related. DataCrusade1999 (talk) 12:54, 20 December 2024 (UTC)

DataCrusade1999 I dont get why are you getting agitated, this discussion is about relevance of delhi riots in see also sections, cause it is in no way "tangentially related" Mavrick2022 (talk) 18:58, 20 December 2024 (UTC)