Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 15:12, 27 August 2020

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the 2020 Bangalore riots article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2Auto-archiving period: 7 days

The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles, which has been designated as a contentious topic. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Misplaced Pages, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.

The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan, which has been designated as a contentious topic. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Misplaced Pages, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.

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.

There have been attempts to recruit editors of specific viewpoints to this article, in a manner that does not comply with Misplaced Pages's policies. Editors are encouraged to use neutral mechanisms for requesting outside input (e.g. a "request for comment", a third opinion or other noticeboard post, or neutral criteria: "pinging all editors who have edited this page in the last 48 hours"). If someone has asked you to provide your opinion here, examine the arguments, not the editors who have made them. Reminder: disputes are resolved by consensus, not by majority vote.

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 has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Crime and Criminal Biography Low‑importance 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 Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Death Low‑importance 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 Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Disaster management Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Disaster management, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Disaster management 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.Disaster managementWikipedia:WikiProject Disaster managementTemplate:WikiProject Disaster managementDisaster management Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. [REDACTED] Discrimination Low‑importance [REDACTED] 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 Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. [REDACTED] Firefighting Low‑importance [REDACTED] This article is within the scope of WikiProject Firefighting, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to firefighting on Misplaced Pages! If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.FirefightingWikipedia:WikiProject FirefightingTemplate:WikiProject FirefightingFirefighting Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Hinduism Low‑importance 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 Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. India: Karnataka / History Low‑importance 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 Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Karnataka (assessed as High-importance). This article is supported by the Indian history workgroup (assessed as Low-importance). This article was last assessed in August 2020. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Islam Low‑importance 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 Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Law Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Law Enforcement Low‑importance This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Law Enforcement. Please Join, Create, and Assess.Law EnforcementWikipedia:WikiProject Law EnforcementTemplate:WikiProject Law EnforcementLaw enforcement Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Religion: Interfaith Low‑importance 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 Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is within the scope of Interfaith work group, a work group which is currently considered to be inactive. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Sociology Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sociology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of sociology 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.SociologyWikipedia:WikiProject SociologyTemplate:WikiProject Sociologysociology Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 27 August, 2020

It is requested that an edit be made to the semi-protected article at 2020 Bangalore riots. (edit · history · last · links · protection log) This template must be followed by a complete and specific description of the request, that is, specify what text should be removed and a verbatim copy of the text that should replace it. "Please change X" is not acceptable and will be rejected; the request must be of the form "please change X to Y". The edit may be made by any autoconfirmed user. Remember to change the |answered=no parameter to "yes" when the request has been accepted, rejected or on hold awaiting user input. This is so that inactive or completed requests don't needlessly fill up the edit requests category. You may also wish to use the {{ESp}} template in the response. To request that a page be protected or unprotected, make a protection request.

Information to be added or removed: please change the very first sentence of the lead which says, "violent clashes" to violent clashes/riots by Muslim mobs targeting the police Explanation of issue: it now seems like it was a Hindu-Muslim clash, but it wasn't so.—Dr2Rao (talk) 14:18, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

See extensive talk about this.Slatersteven (talk) 14:22, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

Where Slatersteven?—Dr2Rao (talk) 14:26, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

Sorry, bit confused with another article. Is Akhanda Srinivas Murthy a member of the police force?Slatersteven (talk) 14:31, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

No, he is a member of the Karnataka Legislative Assembly. Bangalore is the capital of the state of Karnataka. Please answer my question in my previous post.—Dr2Rao (talk) 15:11, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

So as it was his actions that sparked this, and as he was the initial target how was this "targeting the police"?Slatersteven (talk) 15:12, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

Requested move 12 August 2020

It has been proposed in this section that 2020 Bangalore riots be renamed and moved to 2020 Bangalore violence. A bot will list this discussion on the requested moves current discussions subpage within an hour of this tag being placed. The discussion may be closed 7 days after being opened, if consensus has been reached (see the closing instructions). Please base arguments on article title policy, and keep discussion succinct and civil. Please use {{subst:requested move}}. Do not use {{requested move/dated}} directly. Links: current log • target log • direct move

2020 Bangalore riots → 2020 Bangalore violence Imv, violence would be the more appropiate name per WP:COMMONNAME according to which the "the name that is most commonly used as determined by its prevalence in a significant majority of independent, reliable English-language sources" should be used. An analysis of the articles used by various reliable sources (in this case news orgs) show that the term "riots" for this incident is rather conservatively used, whereas "violent protests" or "violence" are much more common. Tayi Arajakate _Talk 16:08, 12 August 2020 (UTC) —Relisting. Steel1943 (talk) 22:26, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Misplaced Pages contributors. Misplaced Pages has policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes. However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts: {{subst:spa|username}}; suspected canvassed users: {{subst:canvassed|username}}; accounts blocked for sockpuppetry: {{subst:csm|username}} or {{subst:csp|username}}.

• Comment @Tayi Arajakate:Are you sure you want to run this as an RfC (which typically expires after 30 days) instead of the more specific requested move which gets reviewed after seven days? Zindor (talk) 17:08, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Zindor, I suppose I can convert it to a move request. Tayi Arajakate _Talk 17:44, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
    • It would make more sense. Good luck with the discussion. Regards, Zindor (talk) 17:51, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
• Agree, conditional on what news reports and other sources in the next few days say. SerChevalerie (talk) 18:30, 12 August 2020 (UTC)

  International reports are so far calling it "violence" too (see the NYT report cited above, which is based on a report by AFP). I say we give these more weight than the indigenous publications, per WP:NEWSORG. SerChevalerie (talk) 20:02, 13 August 2020 (UTC)

  Why should NYT report be more credible than a report by a local publication like 'ThePrint' which called it a riot? Regardless, facts remaining same based on the author and initial reporting, a particular term can get used more than the other. To be unbiased on this, a better course of action is to take the facts from reports of trusted sources and apply the wording as they had been applied in the past across Misplaced Pages articles to keep consistency. Joshikamal (talk) 15:36, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

•  Disagree - as per Misplaced Pages's definition on Riot vs Violence. -- ♪Karthik♫ ♪Nadar♫ 19:04, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Misplaced Pages is not a reliable source. For definitions you may consider citing standard dictionaries. Bubka42 (talk) 10:12, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
• Support – Riot is a loaded term and most often violates NPOV on Misplaced Pages. As shown above, violence has the benefit of being the COMMONNAME and is neutral as an added bonus. --- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 23:14, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose per Karthik. Also, the Times of India and Newsweek too call it a riot. Emperor of India (talk) 23:43, 12 August 2020 (UTC)

Wouldn't really call ToI a reliable source on this kind of issue, I've otherwise added Newsweek to the list. Tayi Arajakate _Talk 01:26, 13 August 2020 (UTC)

ToI is totally reliable and is one of the leading news agency of India since 181 years as on The Times of India Branstarx3 (talk) 01:52, 13 August 2020 (UTC)

Times of India (RSP entry) isn't a news agency, its a newspaper and it has deep rooted issues with paid news, covert advertisements and a pro ruling party bias, contentious topics like this is exactly where it should be avoided. Tayi Arajakate _Talk 02:18, 13 August 2020 (UTC)

Not trusting TOI is your POV. If that's the case, DW and Gulf News calls it riots (both are international). Domestic one, Indian Express calls it riots. -- ♪Karthik♫ ♪Nadar♫ 13:04, 13 August 2020 (UTC)

Not trusting ToI is not just my POV, I've linked the RSP entry for a reason. The Indian Express article doesn't even mention the word riot anywhere in the body of its article, its singular mention in the subheading is likely for SEO purposes. DW is already present in the list and sure I'll add Gulf News but that's hardly a quality international source. Tayi Arajakate _Talk 14:31, 13 August 2020 (UTC)

Ohh dude, regarding the Indian Express article, just check the into. I'm sure CTRL + F (riot) would help you. Great work on updating the list. :-) -- ♪Karthik♫ ♪Nadar♫ 14:50, 13 August 2020 (UTC)

I did do that, its mentioned once in the sub-heading and never in the body as I already said. That's the sole usage of the term riot in pretty much every article by the Indian Express btw. For example, none of the following articles mention it as a riot whether in the heading, subheading or in the body of the article.

• Bengaluru MLA’s house attacked over ‘derogatory post by relative’
• Police probing role of SDPI in Bangalore violence Tayi Arajakate _Talk 15:44, 13 August 2020 (UTC)

•  Disagree A riot is a form of civil disorder commonly characterized by a group lashing out in a violent public disturbance against authority, property or people. And this correctly fits with 2020 Bangalore riots , definition is used as on Riot. Branstarx3 (talk) 01:55, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
• Agree conditionally per nominator purposed as most realiable source used that term. 114.125.249.239 (talk) 02:42, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
• Agree support the nom in this regard as the sources mostly depict it as violence and we have to comply with them. For example that I can say here about the title of the most recent incident 2020 Czech Republic apartment fire was moved to 2020 Bohumin apartment fire by referring to the BBC source before being finally changed to 2020 Bohumin arson attack. Abishe (talk) 10:06, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
•  Disagree This is a case of riot and not violence. What Branstarx3 has mentioned is the correct nomenclature. — Preceding unsigned comment added by YoloSCIS (talk • contribs) 14:44, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
•  Disagree with the proposed change in title. --Invisible Lad (talk) 17:45, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
•  Disagree The title should contain Riots. Because it was a planned act of creating chaos publicly. Violence would have been a better word if it was a clash between two groups. -Vijeth N Bharadwaj 06:04, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

It's pure speculation if it was planned or not. Reliable secondary sources are also mostly calling it violence rather than a riot, and specifically mention clashes between mobs and the police. From when did we stop using secondary sources and started determining article content or for the matter the title on the basis of personal analysis? Tayi Arajakate _Talk 06:33, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

•  Disagree with the renaming based on the definitions of a riot. --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 07:13, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

•  Disagree : the event should to be named riot as per definition. And about news sources, they are mixed, beside this, every act of riot (including the recent 2020 Delhi riots) has been called "violence" by a large section media. Manasbose (talk) 08:13, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

That's inaccurate, the page you are comparing this one to has sources which almost unanimously and explicitly call it a riot whereas in this case the most commonly used term is "Bangalore violence". Tayi Arajakate _Talk 08:32, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

• REDACTED: For security reasons.
  • Eatcha, seems completely unrelated and contrary to what English WP:RS say. SerChevalerie (talk) 11:20, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
• Agree per nom suggested. 182.1.58.45 (talk) 11:35, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

•  Disagree Even if some sources have went with the term violence, there should be consistency of the word across articles and it should be used as defined in the trusted dictionaries or Misplaced Pages. Joshikamal (talk) 15:28, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
•  Disagree Seems to be what many RS are calling it.Slatersteven (talk) 15:42, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
•  Disagree There are multiple articles with the name "riots" in their name. We should not change this for the sake of consistency. Cwarrior (talk) 15:47, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
•  Disagree There are many articles in Kannada media clearly mentioning this as riots.--Pavanaja (talk) 04:44, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
• Agree. Both words have a similar meaning, but violence is more related to this case. Since, the Muslim mobs have burnt down the police stations, already 3 policemen were brutally killed and over 80 were injured.

Hence the word "violence" comes into this picture Sumit Waskar (talk) 06:18, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

•  Disagree: I don’t think that the difference between “violence” and “riots” is large enough to justify a page move. Many reliable news agencies, including AFP, have called it a “riot”.— Vaibhavafro  14:00, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
•  Disagree Violence is a generic word which can also mean violent action of a single person. While, riot which is more specific. Simple google definition of riot is 'a violent disturbance of the peace by a crowd'. This is more suitable in context of this article. Since, we have RS mentioning both, we should stick to the term which is more precise. Also, those suggesting move to violence should quote RS saying that this was not riot. Unless there is a reliable source saying that this was not riot, change is not justified. Sachin.cba (talk) 14:33, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
• Comment Violence is a general word, I think riot is more appropriate here. Most sources seems to use both.

Articles with significant coverage	Publications	Terminology used
Bengaluru riots: India Today trolled for doxxing Congress MLA's nephew	The Free Press Journal	“…resulted in riots in the IT city…”
A timeline of the riots at DJ Halli and KG Halli	The Hindu	“Rioting, where as many as 2,000 people…”
Bengaluru Riots:  Prohibitory orders extended until Tuesday	United News of India	Headline event described as ‘Benguluru Riots’, justified in the body by describing the assailants as ‘rioters’
Bengaluru riots: War of words with Facebook pal 'triggered' offensive post	Deccan Herald	“…triggered the worst riots..”
Bengaluru riots: Accused dies in hospital	Bangalore Mirror	Event described as ‘Benguluru Riots’, Justified in the body by describing the assailants as ‘rioters'
Karnataka govt indicates Bengaluru violence was pre-planned	Mint (newspaper)	‘“The riots which lasted a few hours…”
3,000 rioters came, burnt house, vehicles: Karnataka MLA	Tribune India	“…riot broke out…”
Bengaluru violence: Another accused dies, toll now four	The Indian Express	Assailants described as ‘rioters’
Bengaluru violence: How rioters launched guerrilla-like attack	The Times of India	Assailants described as ‘rioters’
‘We live as brothers, sisters’ — Muslims form human chain to save temple amid Bengaluru riots	ThePrint	Assailants described as ‘rioters’; Headline describes event as 'riots'

- BhaskaraPattelar (talk) 11:33, 16 August 2020 (UTC)

I'll add the relevant links to the listing, although a few notes I'd avoid using The Times of India and the link that's attributed to the Bangalore Mirror is from the Telegraph and is solely quoting officials. Tayi Arajakate _Talk 13:16, 16 August 2020 (UTC)

•  Disagree riots is most appropriate. violence is very broad category. and this was a riot. also, other article like delhi one, says riot. ❯❯❯   S A H A 19:51, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
•  Disagree - riots is most appropriate. Violence is a very broad category and this was a riot. Other articles like the delhi riots, also use the word "riot" in the title. As Brainstarx3 says, "A riot is a form of civil disorder commonly characterized by a group lashing out in a violent public disturbance against authority, property or people. And this correctly fits with 2020 Bangalore riots , definition is used as on Riot."—Dr2Rao (talk) 13:57, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

Let's stick to WP:NEWSORG

@Tayi Arajakate, Karthikndr, Branstarx3, Rsrikanth05, and Manasbose: Per WP:NEWSORG we should start using more international sources in the article. They all seem to refer to it as "violence"; we should stick to what the reputed sources say, not to "Misplaced Pages definitions" (or personal opinions, for that matter). Other articles which are named as riots (e.g. 2020 Delhi riots) have multiple international sources stating them to be riots, hence the nomenclature for those. (That being said, if these same agencies start calling it a riot in, say, a week or more, we should revert to calling it a riot; but point being that we still stick to what reputed third-party international sources say.) And remember, this WP:CONSENSUS discussion is not a vote, it's about weighing in Misplaced Pages's core policies and making a decision. SerChevalerie (talk) 14:15, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

International sources are again mixed here, we see some calling it riots and then some calling it violence. It could have been easy if it was one directional. Hence I'm afraid we might have to consider the argument under the move request. Then again we all know how both domestic and international sources operate. Personally, I'll consider the definition of riots and violence as mentioned in Misplaced Pages then elsewhere. Riot is defined as, A riot is a form of civil disorder commonly characterized by a group lashing out in a violent public disturbance against authority, property or people. while violence is merely defined as "the use of physical force so as to injure, abuse, damage, or destroy". Concluding, we should stick to riots. -- ♪Karthik♫ ♪Nadar♫ 15:46, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

In either case, most sources are calling it "violence" (or even protests in some cases) with only a minority calling it "riots". If we are to rely on the higher quality sources then violence would be the adequate term. For instance, if you see above and go through the articles of Reuters, Associated Press, NYT, WaPo, The Independent or BBC, they all refer to it as violence and make no use of the term "riots". DW News and Newsweek are two decent sources which do refer to it as riots along with Gulf News and SCMP which imo are somewhat less reputable. The same would applies if we assess domestic press as well, more or less. Tayi Arajakate _Talk 16:43, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

I am not sure how you came up with a list of "reputed" sources. One of the sources The Independent mentioned by you is cited as untrustworthy in many forums. There is no list of reputed/unreputed sources anyone will be able to agree on. The best course of action is taking facts with giving wire feeds precedence(Reuters, AP) if they have reported it and maintaining consistency over articles on usage of terms. The events being described fit the definition of riots very well, otherwise every riot can be described as violence itself. Even a war can, for that matter. Joshikamal (talk) 18:13, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

Please read the guidelines on reliable sources and original research. Firstly, I shouldn't have to state this again and again, but original research of any kind such as personal analyses of terms can not be used for content in articles and for pretty good reasons, otherwise it'd be no different from "forums" which one should know to not trust for obvious reasons i.e anyone can make anything up. The opinions of individual editors regarding definitions have no weight when news organisations do not seem to be supporting those opinions.

Only reliable secondary sources can be used for articles, now its a different matter if you don't want to trust certain sources although know that most of these sources have already been extensively discussed and despite what you might believe people who want to develop an encyclopedia do in fact come to agreements.

That said, the point that you raised on wire feeds on the other hand can still be applied but then there's almost unanimity in using "violence" over "riot" from such sources, for instance if you go through the Reuters and AP articles, they do not use the term "riot" at all. In fact the AP article separately mentions "communal riots in the national capital" and yet does not call this one a riot. Tayi Arajakate _Talk 19:34, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

There isn't unanimity certainly. News publications who have used feeds from AFP have used the term riots like SCMP or DW. There are several others but I think the two examples suffice as they clearly cite the wire feeds they are using. Since there is divergence on the usage of the term even among wire feeds which are supposed to be almost "neutral". I would go with the definition/usage of the actual words and precedence here. Violence is too broad which describes anything from 1:1 physical assault to war. Joshikamal (talk) 21:17, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

Even if AFP used the term riot, which you have not actually shown to be the case (news orgs can still use different terms from their feeds). The majority of agencies still don't call it a riot, WP:COMMONNAME does not require unanimity, only the most commonly used name. Tayi Arajakate _Talk 22:55, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

AFP doesn't seem to have a public feed. Considering most of their feed users have used it, it would have come from AfP feed, highly unlikely that media publications carrying feed are going to insert the term riot there. I never said there has to be unanimity, you mentioned unanimity, I was debunking that. The same ] you are linking to also cites even if reliable sources have frequently used a term, a better term can be used to remove ambiguity. Since riot has been used by reliable sources and it most accurately describes the solution, it would be more appropriate to use that here. Joshikamal (talk) 00:05, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

If the AFP feed is not publicly available then we can not comment on what it says now can we? From what one can observe, agencies that have a public feed are not referring to it as riots. I don't know about DW but SCMP does have a tendency to exaggerate negative events related to India. Not to mention, both of them cite multiple feeds so they can absolutely editorialise them in terms of their understanding or outlook.

2020 Bangalore riots and 2020 Bangalore violence are also both unambiguous with regards to what it's referring to, it's not like "violence" is being used in isolation of everything else. It is in fact relatively inappropriate to use the term riot for a incident which goes nowhere near the scope and scale of riots that generally occur in India, making the term fairly pov and is also likely why the predominant coverage from news media is not referring to it as a riot when they would otherwise do so at the first occasion.

Furthermore, it's not as if BBC and NYT are in conflict such that we can relegate a more common term in preference of another term, its BBC and NYT in conflict with DW and SCMP, where the former are also supported by a predominant dis-inclusion of the term riots in international press as well as in domestic press. Tayi Arajakate _Talk 00:50, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

There are plenty of other sources which have just used AFP and they have used riot to describe it. I think we are going around in circles at this point with no agreement.

Regarding you disparaging SCMP on its India bias and holding up NYT as some shining beacon of truth. Do remember, NYT is no Breitbart or OpIndia but it certainly is not also in anyway neutral and factual. Remeber their coverage of WMD. Also, NYT has an anti India bias which has been quite obvious in their subtext or theme of the articles. They mocked ISRO of all organisations. Joshikamal (talk) 16:37, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

That tabloid article you linked itself states "The intent of the cartoonist, Heng Kim Song, was to highlight how space exploration is no longer the exclusive domain of rich, Western countries."

If you think sources like the The New York Times (RSP entry) or The Independent (RSP entry) are unreliable please take it to the reliable sources noticeboard. Tayi Arajakate _Talk 16:59, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

Sure, go and attack the source rather than the content. Here is a *reputed* source(BBC) talking about the same. It is far easier to say, I was joking when you find out your crass humour does feel insulting, specially when it is carried by a "respected" news publication.

That whole RS list is extremely biased towards Western publications which is fair considering this is the English Misplaced Pages but acts as a poor barometer for coverage of issues related to a country like India. Also, that reputation might very well be earned with coverage of articles related to West but really doesn't translate to their lack of context with things related to India, I would rather prefer high quality local projects like 'The Print' be preferred, but such is the travesty. Joshikamal (talk) 17:36, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

Yes, a source which quotes twitter users and concludes its statement with a meme gif is a tabloid source. The BBC article on the other hand so much as says that the NYT apologised for the cartoon which people on facebook found offensive, what's the big deal?

And yeah.. we can use high quality local projects like ThePrint, I've no qualms. But let's be honest, isn't this cherrypicked just for the sake of the article title? Because in terms of local projects, ThePrint is pretty equivalent to The Quint and The News Minute; all of them are new media founded by veterans of print or broadcast journalism. If we use high quality domestic sources, we end up in the same situation with a majority of sources preferring the term "violence" with some outliers using the term "riots".

Look if you can't agree with the established consensus on sources, I can't engage in a constructive discussion with you other than by directing you to the relevant noticeboard. Please continue it on the reliable sources noticeboard if you have to. I'm not going to engage further if this has to boil down to questioning the reliability of sources which are otherwise considered reliable. Tayi Arajakate _Talk 18:29, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

Sure, they apologized after an outcry. The insensitivity and lack of understanding should have been apparent to them while publishing it, it wasn't though. The thing is, that image made it very apparent what subtext of a lot of their articles carry. I will definitely debate the usage of NyTimes in articles related to India on even the Reputed Sources boards.

Regarding, why Print? I wasn't cherry picking it. It just happens to be one of the publications I follow as I am aware about the ideological biases of its editor, Shekhar Gupta quite well which makes it easier for me to follow news. Him being anti establishment and liberal(not the Twitter one) also is a nice touch to me. I can't comment on other two you mentioned as I haven't followed them well. You are right about one thing that I had mentioned that this conversation is going in circles. Final note on this, would be again me restating as I have before that it is not the majority opinion, it is what the facts seem to convey and to keep consistency across Misplaced Pages. Joshikamal (talk) 19:00, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

Tayi Arajakate, It is in fact relatively inappropriate to use the term riot for a incident which goes nowhere near the scope and scale of riots that generally occur in India, Can you provide WP:RS to justify this statement? Just want to check. BhaskaraPattelar (talk) 07:19, 16 August 2020 (UTC)

BhaskaraPattelar, Take a look at AP's rendition for one. Tayi Arajakate _Talk 07:23, 16 August 2020 (UTC)

Tayi Arajakate, No, that does not answer the question. I am not just talking about this incident, since you are alluding to some kind of 'Riot Scale' that help easily categorise riots into 'riots' and 'not-riots'. Please, tell me what WP:RS parameters you are using to making such a claim. You also mentioned 'scale' and 'scope', can you define what you mean by that? Is this WP:OR, or do you have source that have studied riots in India? BhaskaraPattelar (talk) 07:39, 16 August 2020 (UTC)

The policy on no original research applies to original research done for the sake of including content in an article, not for analysing whether something might be in violation of other policies if that's what you're trying to imply here. Tayi Arajakate _Talk 08:44, 16 August 2020 (UTC)

Okay, I see you still haven't answered the question. I did not imply anything, just wanted to confirm that it was your own opinion. I will take it that you don't have an WP:RS source backing up your claim. BhaskaraPattelar (talk) 10:03, 16 August 2020 (UTC)

It's an opinion based on the coverage in reliable sources but no, if you are asking whether a reliable source explicitly supports it then no, I've not encountered one yet. Tayi Arajakate _Talk 10:08, 16 August 2020 (UTC)

It is also based on what one might call common sense, projecting an incident which lasted for 3-4 hours, was localised in three specific spots, did not involve targeting on a ethno-religious basis and where the only handful casualties were among the aggressors themselves to be the equivalent as the incidents of the 2020 Delhi riots or even the 2017 Northern India riots does bring up a question of POV.

On a sidenote, in regards to the argument that this would somehow maintain consistency over usage of terms then that's inaccurate. For instance, the 2018 Bhima Koregaon violence is much more comparable in terms of its coverage. Tayi Arajakate _Talk 11:05, 16 August 2020 (UTC)

Furthermore, using[REDACTED] definition is an example of original research. If I remember correctly[REDACTED] articles can not be used as sources for anything on other[REDACTED] articles. Tayi Arajakate _Talk 16:47, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

Tayi Arajakate, yep. See WP:NOTSOURCE. SerChevalerie (talk) 18:35, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

Ok, see. Definition of riot from reputed dictionary Joshikamal (talk) 18:58, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

Bangalore or Bengaluru

• There are more reliable sources using Bengaluru. Why we are ignoring the name of place and debating over whether it's riot or violence? Even in the above table more reliable sources use Bengaluru. I didn't edit the table, links were selected by others. // Signature 15:49, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

  Eatcha, Can we do this one by one? After the "riot" or "violence" discussion is over, we could initiate another move request for the city name if required. Tayi Arajakate _Talk 16:04, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

301 is bad for SEO. Redirecting multiple times will result in less views. // Signature 16:12, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

That really does not matter for Misplaced Pages for the most part. Also bots usually fix double redirects if that's the concern. Tayi Arajakate _Talk 16:34, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

I'm leaving this article alone. I'll never edit this article and the talk page again. // Signature 18:30, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

Discussion

• Name changed long time ago. More reliable sources are using Bengaluru. Per WP:NEWSORG we should use Bengaluru. Of course we will ignoring WP:NEWSORG if we don't use Bengaluru. // Signature 15:49, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
• Agree lets change this to Bengaluru - but we gotta wait for the "riots vs violence" discussion to conclude. -- ♪Karthik♫ ♪Nadar♫ 16:42, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
•  Disagree per WP:COMMONNAME. See Bangalore, which is the article title, not "Bengaluru" (redirect). SerChevalerie (talk) 18:37, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
•  Disagree per WP:COMMONNAME and basis arguments referred in various move requests in Bangalore article. -- ♪Karthik♫ ♪Nadar♫ 18:58, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
• Agree Official name is Bengaluru. The article title has to be changed to reflect that.--Pavanaja (talk) 04:50, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
• Agree. Before deciding on riot or violence, the place name to be corrected as Bengaluru in the article title and body. That is the correct native and official name.It can be seen that Newsmedia reports also use same. --VikasHegde (talk) 05:12, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
• Agree I agree to change the title of article and Bangaluru is official name --Arpitha05 (talk) 05:23, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
•  Disagree per COMMONNAME. Using Bengaluru will make it inconsistent with Bangalore city article . --Ab207 (talk) 15:56, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
•  Disagree Bengaluru is same as WP:COMMONNAME Bangalore so no name redirect Branstarx3 (talk) 00:57, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
• Agree. Those who are against are misapplying COMMONNAME policy. It is written as Bengaluru violence/riot in Every. Single. Source., including NYT, The Hindu etc. So, the common name of this specific incident has the word Bengaluru not Bengalore. So, depending on the result of the above discussion, it should be either 2020 Bengaluru violence or 2020 Bengaluru riot. Regards, TryKid  01:57, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
•  Disagree the city article is named as bangalore. so, keep that. ❯❯❯   S A H A 19:51, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
•  Disagree if you want to have it switched to Bengaluru, this isn't the place to do it. Talk: Bangalore would be better; it would be good to have consistency and I would vote for changing to Bengaluru because WP:COMMONNAME has shifted to Bengaluru.TheKaloo (talk) 19:42, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

Comment I now requesting move of the name Bangalore to Bengaluru in that city talk page, For those who agree/disagree with this move of riot/violence, please use all argument in that page because it was related to this RM. 110.137.186.235 (talk) 23:31, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

• Agree The official name is Bengaluru. The article title has to be changed to reflect that. TryKid is right in saying, "Those who are against are misapplying COMMONNAME policy. It is written as Bengaluru violence/riot in Every. Single. Source., including NYT, The Hindu etc. So, the common name of this specific incident has the word Bengaluru not Bengalore. So, depending on the result of the above discussion, it should be either 2020 Bengaluru violence or 2020 Bengaluru riot."—Dr2Rao (talk) 13:42, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
•  Disagree We use common name, not official.Slatersteven (talk) 13:44, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

Every single source except this one ].Slatersteven (talk) 14:14, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

Poorly sourced? Probably not.

These reverts don't justify why the following content was poorly sourced:

"The mob also looted and vandalised other houses in the locality."

"In Meerut, Uttar Pradesh, the police booked a man, allegedly a past associate of the Samajwadi Party, on charges of "disturbing communal harmony" after he announced a bounty on the head of the nephew." — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cwarrior (talk • contribs) 15:35, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

• The first one is poorly sourced and is already adequately covered with other sources.
• For the second one you have not engaged further at Talk:2020 Bangalore riots § Add a little more content in Aftermath before making the addition. Tayi Arajakate _Talk 16:36, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

• Can you please elaborate on why is it poorly sourced? The current discussion does not describe whether the mob only attacked the legislature and family or other houses as well.
• I will add more details about the second in the discussion above. However, note that you mentioned "poorly sourced" as a reason for both. Cwarrior (talk) 04:34, 16 August 2020 (UTC)

  Do you tend to read only half a edit summary? The first line is poorly sourced because not only it is sourced from The Times of India and that too in a vague and misleading manner, the article in the The Times of India states that a neighbor's was attacked while your edit gives an impression that multiple other houses were. Tayi Arajakate _Talk 05:11, 16 August 2020 (UTC)

Here's another source for the statement that the mob vandalized and robbed other houses as well. Cwarrior (talk) 17:33, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

References

1. Aug 13, Petlee Peter / TNN / Updated:; 2020; Ist, 08:03. "Bengaluru violence: Family of 5 hid inside toilet for 3 hours to escape mob | Bengaluru News - Times of India". The Times of India. Retrieved 2020-08-15. {{cite web}}: |last2= has numeric name (help)CS1 maint: extra punctuation (link) CS1 maint: numeric names: authors list (link)
2. "Bengaluru violence: Meerut bounty announcer booked". The Hindu. Special Correspondent. 2020-08-14. ISSN 0971-751X. Retrieved 2020-08-14.{{cite news}}: CS1 maint: others (link)
3. Aug 13, ByPragna L. KrupaPragna L. Krupa / Updated:; 2020; Ist, 08:01. "The Dark Night: 'We were robbed, attacked by mobs'". Bangalore Mirror. Retrieved 2020-08-21. {{cite web}}: |last2= has numeric name (help)CS1 maint: extra punctuation (link) CS1 maint: numeric names: authors list (link)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 16 August 2020

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

It very generically mentioned as 'mob' when credible evidences exists that tis 'muslim mob', one such reference comes from a international daily whose link is given below.

https://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2020/08/12/business/ap-as-india-deadly-clashes.html?searchResultPosition=6 Avbhanda (talk) 13:01, 16 August 2020 (UTC)

We were discussing this and this was decided upon to say they were Muslim, mob is harder to justify.Slatersteven (talk) 09:35, 17 August 2020 (UTC)

To editor Avbhanda: thank you very much for your suggestion; however, this appears to be an issue that needs the input of other involved editors, so...  Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit extended-protected}} template. P.I. Ellsworth  ed.  19:44, 17 August 2020 (UTC)

its perfectly fine to delibrate within CLOSED space, while we wait to enrich the OPEN Misplaced Pages platform ... 23:16, 21 August 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Avbhanda (talk • contribs)

Things which aren't explicitly mentioned

1. Issue started with, some muslim guy putting vulgur Hindu god post on Facebook. 2. Facebook post was circulated, which invited theses ppl in front of MLA house. Sanjeev4ui (talk) 10:32, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

1. has been shown to be fake, 2, you need a source for this.Slatersteven (talk) 10:35, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

Detainee / Arrest Count

The total detention count is now 385. A smaller number is used in the infobox as well as the article text. Cwarrior (talk) 17:30, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

References

1. "Bengaluru riots: Corporator's PA detained for links with SDPI members; detentions increase to 385". Deccan Herald. 2020-08-19. Retrieved 2020-08-21.

Span of 2 days

As per WP:RS and as mentioned in the article riots took place on the late night of August 11 from around 10 PM and the early hours 12 AM to 6 AM of 12 August. I do not know if people lack education in the time and date, but post mid night always means the start of a new day. The timeline was given to only August 11, I fixed it to August 11 and 12 as the situation already mentioned long before I even edited this was mentioned to last up to the early hours of August 12. Dilbaggg (talk) 13:14, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

That depends on if by two days you mean two separate dates or a 48 hour period.Slatersteven (talk) 13:15, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

Slatersteven Nevertheless local dates past mid night which you need to remember is when its 12 AM past is August 11 and August 12, do not break WP:OR and give local dates of the incident given in the WP:RS. Please learn the Eastern Time Zone, thank you. Dilbaggg (talk) 13:17, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

I am not 12 hours would not be two days, if it stated at 1am on the 11th and ended At 12 pm on the 12th that would be 2 days.Slatersteven (talk) 13:20, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

"Between 1 a.m. and 5 a.m., the police began clearing the streets while identifying and arresting those involved in the violence." Misquoting source is clear disruptive editing, and you are even removing references. Slatersteven Dilbaggg (talk) 13:22, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

When did it start and end?Slatersteven (talk) 13:23, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

Slatersteven Its clearly stated it started in the night of August 11 (around 10 PM) and continued to the early hours of August 12 ( 5 AM), the local end date is August 12, WP:RS says so, even the article ahd it before I even layed my hand, it is clear you are misquoting sources, removing references and trying to use your local UK time, in which it was August 11, but in India it happened between August 11 night to August 12 Dawn. Next time will be your WP:TRR violation. Let other editors other than us decide, they can CLEARLY see the local date was between August 11 and 12. Dilbaggg (talk) 13:27, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

Which does not even mean 12 hours, let alone 2 days.Slatersteven (talk) 13:28, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

Ok you can remove 2 days, but the dates should be as it really is August 11 to August 12, removing the 2 days mention, but it occurred in those calendar dates. Slatersteven Dilbaggg (talk) 13:30, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

Also your source only says "but an uneasy calm prevailed on the morning of August 12", it does not say that rioting continued into the morning (see wp:v). Do you have a source that says that rioting continued in to the 12th?Slatersteven (talk) 13:32, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

"Between 11:00 p.m and 12:30 a.m, a group of Muslim youths also formed a human chain around the local temple near DJ Halli station to protect it in case of any escalation. " Between 1 a.m. and 5 a.m., the police began clearing the streets while identifying and arresting those involved in the violence. These two lines alone shows it continued up to August 12. Regardless I know you are trying your best to help this article and I respect that, you have contributed 90% times better than me, I agree with almost everything you added but the dates are clear per all news reports, WP:RS everything, August 11 and August 12. It continued up to the early hours of August 12, the calm finally happened in the morning, but violence happened till dawn, aka 5 AM. Thank you for this discussion. Slatersteven Dilbaggg (talk) 13:38, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

Is the police action part of the riot? Of course not, police action counts as the aftermath of the event. The situation was completely under control by 1am of 12 August as per Quint. And anyway, most RS explicitly say the riot occurred on 11 August, you don't need to do calculations for it; that would be WP:OR. Regards, TryKid  13:45, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

Also demos and riots are not the same thing. Please read wp:or.Slatersteven (talk) 13:47, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

The riots as per WP:RS ended as the police cleared them from the street which was by 5 AM definitely police clearing out rioters to calm the situation is part of the riots, and long before I even edited it was stated violence continued past 12 AM. Cramming everything into August 11 which isn't doing as per WP:RS is what is WP:OR violation. Dilbaggg (talk) 13:48, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

@Dilbaggg: no. Reliable sources explicitly give the date of the riot as 11 August. In new organisations, day names are used instead of dates and so many say "Tuesday night". Tuesday here refers to 11 August. You've only presented your own calculations for this "12 August" date, no reliable sources. I'm reverting, please give reliable sources and not original research/synthesis before reverting me. Regards, TryKid  13:55, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

Besides sources withinn the article Multiple sources not included also exist citing riots in the the early hours of August 12.

Quote:

"Triggered by an online post, a violent mob rampaged through Bengaluru's Pulakeshi Nagar on Tuesday (August 12) night and vandalized two police stations and the residence of Congress MLA Akhand Srinivas Murthy whose nephew allegedly shared a social media post against Prophet Mohammad Saheb"

https://zeenews.india.com/india/bengaluru-violence-a-pre-planned-conspiracy-that-just-needed-a-spark-to-explode-2302369.html

I urge Western editors not to mix up their time line with Eastern Zone. Sources clearly state most of the incidents happened on the night of August 12. And do not accuse of false WP:OR violation, WP:Harassment that is, next time learn what reliable sources is other than your personal; view that it ended in August 11 User:TryKid, I am the one using sources, you are the one stating it ended on August 11 despite absolutely 0 sources saying it did. Sources say it ended in August 12 thats what matters, not your opinion. Dilbaggg (talk) 13:58, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

Tuesday was the 11th, Wednesday was the 12th.Slatersteven (talk) 14:02, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

Also even if this source is right, it still only says one night (the night of the 12th).Slatersteven (talk) 14:03, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

@Dilbaggg: the person who was accusing us of "lacking education" now posts Zee News source whose editors do not even have access to a calendar. Open the calendar on your mobile phone, and look at what the day was on August 12. August 12 was Wednesday, not Tuesday. I'm not a Western editor, as my user page says I'm fully Indian. Zee News is usually reliable, but never trust a report that comes without a solid byline of a real person. Regards, TryKid  14:05, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

Regardless you reverting my edit without reaching a consensus was inappropriate. There are numerous other sources I can give that cites the riots ended in August 12, but there are 0 sources that it ended in August 11. As per TRR I have to wait 24 hours to make the article accurate again, but you people can research yourself and reach the conclusion start date night of August 11 and end date early hours of August 12. I keep this discussion halted for 24 hours until TRR expires. Dilbaggg (talk) 14:11, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

Read wp:ONUS, its is down to you to convince us. If you revert again I will report you for edit warring.Slatersteven (talk) 14:14, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

I have provided actual sources (which also existed long before I touched the article) that riots ended in August 12, you failed to provide single source that it ended in August 11. Again WP:Harassment, I already said I will not revert until TRR expires (24 hours later). I respect your dedication to the article but the correct timeline shall be provided hopefully. Dilbaggg (talk) 14:18, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

You still haven't provided a single link that explicitly says the riot occurred on 12 August (except the Zee News link, which only mentioned 12 August because of a likely typo). Apart from the Quint source I linked above, there's The Hindu, Outlook, Hindutan Times and others which say "Tuesday night", meaning "11 August night". There are two editors (me, Slatersteven) that disagree with you (and you alone). You can't simply revert back after 24 hours. That would be gaming the system and wiki-lawyering. Also, replying to your claims on the talk page isn't harassment. Stop baseless accusations. Regards, TryKid  14:20, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

wp:3rr is not a right, even if you make only 1 revert a day it is is the same thing 15 times its an edit war. wp:brd is quite clear, you now need to convince us, that means you do the work. That means you provide a source that says (explicitly) the riots continued into the 12th.Slatersteven (talk) 14:21, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

On your revert to my edit you removed a WP:RS I added that clearly stated August 12 violence was reported, which was pretty disruptive, and here again is another source that says riots happened on August 11 and August 12, the early hours of August 12 12Am to 5 Am riots indeed were reported. Source: ]. You have failed to provide a single source that states the riots ended on August 11. Regardless I have seeked Misplaced Pages:Third opinion. Dilbaggg (talk) 13:39, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

Ban looms on SDPI

I am new here and so, I thought it is better to ask. This article says a ban on the SDPI looms. Should that be added to this article or the article on the SDPI?—Dr2Rao (talk) 13:34, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

If it becomes a ban one line would suffice.Slatersteven (talk) 13:38, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

• Misplaced Pages controversial topics
• Misplaced Pages articles that use Indian English
• All unassessed articles
• C-Class Crime-related articles
• Low-importance Crime-related articles
• WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography articles
• C-Class Death articles
• Low-importance Death articles
• C-Class Disaster management articles
• Low-importance Disaster management articles
• C-Class Discrimination articles
• Low-importance Discrimination articles
• WikiProject Discrimination articles
• C-Class Firefighting articles
• Low-importance Firefighting articles
• WikiProject Firefighting articles
• C-Class Hinduism articles
• Low-importance Hinduism articles
• C-Class India articles
• Low-importance India articles
• C-Class India articles of Low-importance
• C-Class Karnataka articles
• High-importance Karnataka articles
• C-Class Karnataka articles of High-importance
• WikiProject Karnataka articles
• C-Class Indian history articles
• Low-importance Indian history articles
• C-Class Indian history articles of Low-importance
• WikiProject Indian history articles
• WikiProject India articles
• C-Class Islam-related articles
• Low-importance Islam-related articles
• WikiProject Islam articles
• C-Class law articles
• Low-importance law articles
• WikiProject Law articles
• C-Class Law enforcement articles
• Low-importance Law enforcement articles
• WikiProject Law Enforcement articles
• C-Class Religion articles
• Low-importance Religion articles
• WikiProject Religion articles
• C-Class sociology articles
• Low-importance sociology articles
• Misplaced Pages semi-protected edit requests
• Misplaced Pages edit requests possibly using incorrect templates
• Requested moves