Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license.
Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat.
We can research this topic together.
:::{{ping|Vanamonde93}} It does seem "complex" and one reason is indeed not enough for a infobox. Even in 2017, we had 1 more option that we should get rid of the infobox but 5 years have passed and there has been no other controversy with the infobox. I agree that this new addition is even more confusing because "state terrorism" (very minority view) and "ethnic cleansing" (one of the common view) is the classification of the riot than the "cause". I agree that this parameter can be blanked again. ] (]) 07:49, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
:::{{ping|Vanamonde93}} It does seem "complex" and one reason is indeed not enough for a infobox. Even in 2017, we had 1 more option that we should get rid of the infobox but 5 years have passed and there has been no other controversy with the infobox. I agree that this new addition is even more confusing because "state terrorism" (very minority view) and "ethnic cleansing" (one of the common view) is the classification of the riot than the "cause". I agree that this parameter can be blanked again. ] (]) 07:49, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
::::Kautilya, I trust that's okay with you? <span style="font-family:Papyrus">] (])</span> 07:51, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
::::Kautilya, I trust that's okay with you? <span style="font-family:Papyrus">] (])</span> 07:51, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
== The S.I.T as well as the supreme court have ruled that Modi was not responsible for the riots, and found no 'material evidence' against him and the other officials in the State. (1, 2, 3, 4, 5). So how is it appropriate to say: 'His administration has been considered complicit in the 2002 Gujarat riots' in the lead, when the apex court has given a clean chit? ==
The S.I.T as well as the supreme court have ruled that Modi was not responsible for the riots, and found no 'material evidence' against him and the other officials in the State. (1, 2, 3, 4, 5). So how is it appropriate to say: 'His administration has been considered complicit in the 2002 Gujarat riots' in the lead, when the apex court has given a clean chit? ] (]) 17:49, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
Revision as of 17:49, 29 August 2022
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the 2002 Gujarat riots article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
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.
Please stay calm and civil while commenting or presenting evidence, and do not make personal attacks. Be patient when approaching solutions to any issues. If consensus is not reached, other solutions exist to draw attention and ensure that more editors mediate or comment on the dispute.
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.
Please sign all your posts on Misplaced Pages talk pages by typing ~~~~ to be accountable and to help others understand the conversation.
This article was copy edited by Mehmuffin, a member of the Guild of Copy Editors, on 10 August 2017.Guild of Copy EditorsWikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsTemplate:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsGuild of Copy Editors
This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Crime and Criminal Biography articles on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Crime and Criminal BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyCrime-related
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Death, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Death on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.DeathWikipedia:WikiProject DeathTemplate:WikiProject DeathDeath
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Discrimination, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Discrimination on Misplaced Pages. 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
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Hinduism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Hinduism on Misplaced Pages. 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
This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Misplaced Pages's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Islam, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Islam-related articles on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.IslamWikipedia:WikiProject IslamTemplate:WikiProject IslamIslam-related
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Misplaced Pages's articles on Religion-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.ReligionWikipedia:WikiProject ReligionTemplate:WikiProject ReligionReligion
This page has archives. Sections older than 30 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present.
References
The article casts numerous and repeated aspersions alleging involvement of then Gujarat CM Shri Narendra Modi into the unfortunate riots. It also suspects the findings of Supreme Court appointed SIT, which acquitted Shri Modi of all such charges. However, conspicuously the article fails to mention anywhere that the subject SIT report acquitting Shri Modi of any wrongdoing has been accepted by three layers of Indian Judiciary, the latest being Supreme Court in June 2022. The highest court has also observed that activists like Smt Teesta Sheetalvad and some of her accomplishes tried to keep the matter alive and presented tutored witnesses during the SIT proceedings. A legal investigation into the role of all such persons has been initiated by Gujarat ATS after the subject SC verdict. Puru0506 (talk) 19:32, 1 July 2022 (UTC)
We add the template for violence against Hindus when reliable sources broadly describe the incident as one of violence against Hindus. In this case, they do not. Please take a look at the plentiful previous discussion on this topic. Vanamonde (Talk) 05:39, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
Don't the reliable sources state in the start of this article that the riots were started by a murder of Hindus? Many people of both groups have been killed. Kpddg05:47, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.
Change content under heading "Attack on Muslims". There are so many biased fake events that are described there and needed to be removed. 111.223.26.101 (talk) 15:04, 8 April 2022 (UTC)
@D4iNa4: The talk page section you linked to does not in any way establish consensus for this parameter; nor do the sources provided there actually support it. We have sourced text in the lead and the body saying that the causes of the riots were complex (to say the least). Please demonstrate that this text is WP:DUE (not just verifiable). Pinging @RegentsPark, Kautilya3, El cid, el campeador, and Capitals00: as the other participants in that discussion (not pinging Sdmarathe, as he is banned from interacting with me and therefore cannot participate directly in this discussion). Vanamonde (Talk) 11:40, 20 August 2022 (UTC)
That's now more complete, and also more confusing. The Godhra burning is generally acknowledged as a trigger, but not a root cause. State terrorism and ethnic cleansing are terms used for the riots themselves; sources say "the riots were an example of ethnic cleansing", not "the riots were caused by ethnic cleansing". It's just too complex to convey in three words in the infobox; hence my contention that it should just be removed. Vanamonde (Talk) 16:08, 20 August 2022 (UTC)
@Vanamonde93: It does seem "complex" and one reason is indeed not enough for a infobox. Even in 2017, we had 1 more option that we should get rid of the infobox but 5 years have passed and there has been no other controversy with the infobox. I agree that this new addition is even more confusing because "state terrorism" (very minority view) and "ethnic cleansing" (one of the common view) is the classification of the riot than the "cause". I agree that this parameter can be blanked again. D4iNa4 (talk) 07:49, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
The S.I.T as well as the supreme court have ruled that Modi was not responsible for the riots, and found no 'material evidence' against him and the other officials in the State. (1, 2, 3, 4, 5). So how is it appropriate to say: 'His administration has been considered complicit in the 2002 Gujarat riots' in the lead, when the apex court has given a clean chit?
The S.I.T as well as the supreme court have ruled that Modi was not responsible for the riots, and found no 'material evidence' against him and the other officials in the State. (1, 2, 3, 4, 5). So how is it appropriate to say: 'His administration has been considered complicit in the 2002 Gujarat riots' in the lead, when the apex court has given a clean chit? 223.190.86.17 (talk) 17:49, 29 August 2022 (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. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 15:10, 8 April 2022 (UTC)