Jump to content

Talk:Cow vigilante violence in India

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Ab207 (talk | contribs) at 16:29, 31 May 2020 (Proposed merge with Bhartiya Gau Raksha Dal). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.


Vandalism - Dates and ruling party changed

Page is being vandalized to show dates prior to 2014 and different ruling party. Can edits be protected? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.238.132.222 (talk) 17:55, 9 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The copyright violation tool Earwig [1] is indicating a large ammount of violation within the article. I will be attempting to clean this problem up by rewording the suspected passages over the next few days. The tag on the page will be removed once this is completed. Regards Hughesdarren (talk) 12:58, 21 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The offending text has now been edited satisfactorily. There is still a block quote from Christophe Jaffrelot which is setting Earwig's detector off, but apart from that it seems that the problem has been rectified. The copyvio tag will be removed from the article page shortly. Regards. Hughesdarren (talk) 13:14, 21 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 25 May 2019

Adding an incident of cow vigilante violence in India that happened in May 2019

A couple and two men were thrashed by a group for allegedly carrying beef in an autorickshaw at a village in Madhya Pradesh. In a video of the incident shot by an eyewitness on a mobile phone, the woman was seen being hit repeatedly with a slipper on her head, covered with a piece of cloth, as she curled up on the gravel and took the blows in silence from the attacker.[1] Analyzer21 (talk) 07:30, 25 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Analyzer21:. Updated. Thanks for the info.--Nessie (talk) 14:49, 25 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ "On Video, Woman Among 3 Thrashed over Beef Rumour in Madhya Pradesh".

Targeted Harrasment

This page must be deleted as this is a clear cut vendetta against Hindus. Raazankeet (talk) 14:37, 2 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Raazankeet: can you be specific? --Nessie (talk) 15:33, 2 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It is not. Zezen (talk) 20:43, 15 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 16 August 2019

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Moved to "Cow vigilante violence in India". There was consensus to move the page and this seemed the most appropriate title, including earlier violence in India but excluding violence in other countries. (non-admin closure) Cwmhiraeth (talk) 13:00, 25 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]



Cow vigilante violence in India since 2014Cow vigilante violenceWP:NAMINGCRITERIA says that a title should be no longer than necessary to identify the article's subject and distinguish it from other subjects. WanderingWanda (talk) 21:46, 16 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Proposed merge with Bhartiya Gau Raksha Dal

The near-entire corpus of coverage about this organisation stems from the locus of vigilante lynching. A merge is sought per WP:NOPAGE. WBGconverse 14:51, 11 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Absent any objection within the next 48 hours, I will execute the merge. WBGconverse 16:12, 21 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Biased lead and missing info about victims

The title of this article is Cow vigilante violence in India and the first sentence justify that cow is sacred and is venerated. Rather it should be on directly on Cow vigilante violence in India not on Cow but on violence. This is looking like justifying the violence.

Secondly, when there is separate heading and detailed info about preparators of the violence then the article must address who are victims and what is their background? Thirdly, I am adding this which throws light on the background.

While India has a fairly wide Cow Protection Act that bars the slaughter of female cows and calves, many areas have permitted slaughter of bulls and bullocks for centuries. Hindu religion has no doctrinal proscriptions against the consumption of beef in particular, although it has borrowed heavily from Jainism in the last century, arguing that the concept of ahimsa (nonviolence) forbids such slaughter and consumption of beef. Violence is exacted upon those who would dare eat beef—notably Muslims and lower castes—further politicizing the issue. [1]. I hope this will satisfy neutral editors.ScholarM (talk) 14:01, 26 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The existing first sentence of the article looks fine as it is to me -- it would be odd not to mention from the outset the justification for the violence.
"Violence is exacted upon those who would dare eat beef" seems rather flowery wording to me. What wording does the cited source use for this fact? MPS1992 (talk) 18:14, 26 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ Gittinger, Juli L. "The Rhetoric of Violence, Religion, and Purity in India’s Cow Protection Movement." Journal of Religion and Violence (2017).

I have tried adding details of newer incidents, but my edits are being reverted.

Since there is no specific law in India which defines "Cow Vigilantism", the cases which are highlighted by the media being labelled as "Cow Lynching" have been discussed here. On the same basis I added 3 more incidents which occured during October and November to the list but these edits were reverted on the basis of Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing However the same rulebook mentions that Limited close paraphrasing is appropriate within reason, as is quoting, so long as the material is clearly attributed in the text. So I don't see the reason for the reverts. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Guglusharma (talkcontribs)

Again, please sign your comments so that it is visible who said what when. Anyway, it wasn't just close paraphrasing, it was an outright copyvio. Supplanting parts of it with especially poor English, is no better. Please do better. Best thing you can do is not to paraphrase at all and just write your own original prose. El_C 02:50, 23 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]