This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Mohsin Sheikh murder article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
While the biographies of living persons policy does not apply directly to the subject of this article, it may contain material that relates to living persons, such as friends and family of persons no longer living, or living persons involved in the subject matter. Unsourced or poorly sourced contentious material about living persons must be removed immediately. If such material is re-inserted repeatedly, or if there are other concerns related to this policy, please see this noticeboard. |
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() |
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
None of the sources say that murder was carried out during protests. So, please, justify here before reverting me. Edmondhills ( talk) 07:58, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
There are breaking news coming in every hour and we should not add them to this article in a rush, nor forward opinions based on such news in a rush. The article severely lacks WP:TONE. Jyoti ( talk) 09:02, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
User:Edmondhills you have reverted twice( 1, 2) with different objections. First you said in your edit comment this political issue shouldn't be in lead, pls add in later part. to which I said do it instead of revert. Next your objection is This is not even clear, not published in multiple sources and doesn't belong to the lead. I don't think I need to provide multiple source but I provide one more here for your personal satisfaction, the article need not be cluttered and why is it not deserving in its place, can you please move it to where you would want it to be and then perhaps we can have more meaningful discussion? Or best is we wait for few days and then you add the summary? I am okay with that. Jyoti ( talk) 09:47, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
User:Edmondhills you have undone an earlier . I am redo`ing it. Kindly discuss per WP:BRD. Verifiability does not guarantee inclusion. Jyoti ( talk) 17:14, 11 June 2014 (UTC)
Discussion closed here. Waiting on rough consensus in the RFC by Edmondhills. -- Jyoti ( talk) 02:25, 14 June 2014 (UTC)
User:Edmondhills, you have removed a tag saying it is not necessary. For the time being, ignoring that the 'quote' itself is undue; you are attributing it to "According to a senior police officer" which itself is a WP:WEASEL! -- Jyoti ( talk) 17:20, 11 June 2014 (UTC)
You have failed to show how is the tag not needed, kindly put back the tag or still better remove the entire 'quote' -- it is not a 'quote' in the first place! -- Jyoti ( talk) 02:23, 14 June 2014 (UTC)
Per this discussion. -- Jyoti ( talk) 06:02, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
User:Jyoti.mickey please refrain from making WP:OR like you did here [7] which also falls under undue weight. The text you inserted is not proved but claim made by the alleged accused himself so stop putting original researches. Also, stop bullying with Verifiability does not guarantee inclusion. Edmondhills ( talk) 07:11, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
This content is backed by two WP:SECONDARY and is also necessary for WP:NPOV. Unless there is a compelling reason to discard this it deserves mention. The wording can be discussed though but outright deletion is biased. -- Jyoti ( talk) 02:21, 14 June 2014 (UTC)
Why Category:Hindutva is being removed repeatedly from the article? Please, explain. Edmondhills ( talk) 08:02, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
The article has been fully protected five days per WP:AN3#User:Edmondhills reported by User:Jyoti.mickey (Result: Protected). Protection may be lifted if agreement is reached. EdJohnston ( talk) 02:06, 13 June 2014 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
There is an incident of hate SMS circulated among the alleged perpetrators reported by several mainstream media like OneIndia, Hindustan Times, Caravan magazine, CNN-IBN, ABP [10], [11], [12], [13], [14], [15], [16], [17], [18], [19], [20], [21] etc. I added it here [22] but removed here [23] as undue weight but I believe not as it made headlines itself so seeking for a resolution via RFC. Edmondhills ( talk) 08:32, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
We can expand this article and rename it as 2014 Pune clashes. Because, there is something extra other than this Pune techie murder case. here: [24] & [25] - Vatsan34 ( talk) 04:20, 14 June 2014 (UTC)
Meanwhile Desai has denied that his outfit had anything to do with the murder and said, "We understand that circulating derogatory pictures is a cyber crime but the problem cannot be solved by killing innocent persons." [1] -- Jyoti ( talk) 05:44, 15 June 2014 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Mohsin Sheikh murder article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
While the biographies of living persons policy does not apply directly to the subject of this article, it may contain material that relates to living persons, such as friends and family of persons no longer living, or living persons involved in the subject matter. Unsourced or poorly sourced contentious material about living persons must be removed immediately. If such material is re-inserted repeatedly, or if there are other concerns related to this policy, please see this noticeboard. |
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() |
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
None of the sources say that murder was carried out during protests. So, please, justify here before reverting me. Edmondhills ( talk) 07:58, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
There are breaking news coming in every hour and we should not add them to this article in a rush, nor forward opinions based on such news in a rush. The article severely lacks WP:TONE. Jyoti ( talk) 09:02, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
User:Edmondhills you have reverted twice( 1, 2) with different objections. First you said in your edit comment this political issue shouldn't be in lead, pls add in later part. to which I said do it instead of revert. Next your objection is This is not even clear, not published in multiple sources and doesn't belong to the lead. I don't think I need to provide multiple source but I provide one more here for your personal satisfaction, the article need not be cluttered and why is it not deserving in its place, can you please move it to where you would want it to be and then perhaps we can have more meaningful discussion? Or best is we wait for few days and then you add the summary? I am okay with that. Jyoti ( talk) 09:47, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
User:Edmondhills you have undone an earlier . I am redo`ing it. Kindly discuss per WP:BRD. Verifiability does not guarantee inclusion. Jyoti ( talk) 17:14, 11 June 2014 (UTC)
Discussion closed here. Waiting on rough consensus in the RFC by Edmondhills. -- Jyoti ( talk) 02:25, 14 June 2014 (UTC)
User:Edmondhills, you have removed a tag saying it is not necessary. For the time being, ignoring that the 'quote' itself is undue; you are attributing it to "According to a senior police officer" which itself is a WP:WEASEL! -- Jyoti ( talk) 17:20, 11 June 2014 (UTC)
You have failed to show how is the tag not needed, kindly put back the tag or still better remove the entire 'quote' -- it is not a 'quote' in the first place! -- Jyoti ( talk) 02:23, 14 June 2014 (UTC)
Per this discussion. -- Jyoti ( talk) 06:02, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
User:Jyoti.mickey please refrain from making WP:OR like you did here [7] which also falls under undue weight. The text you inserted is not proved but claim made by the alleged accused himself so stop putting original researches. Also, stop bullying with Verifiability does not guarantee inclusion. Edmondhills ( talk) 07:11, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
This content is backed by two WP:SECONDARY and is also necessary for WP:NPOV. Unless there is a compelling reason to discard this it deserves mention. The wording can be discussed though but outright deletion is biased. -- Jyoti ( talk) 02:21, 14 June 2014 (UTC)
Why Category:Hindutva is being removed repeatedly from the article? Please, explain. Edmondhills ( talk) 08:02, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
The article has been fully protected five days per WP:AN3#User:Edmondhills reported by User:Jyoti.mickey (Result: Protected). Protection may be lifted if agreement is reached. EdJohnston ( talk) 02:06, 13 June 2014 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
There is an incident of hate SMS circulated among the alleged perpetrators reported by several mainstream media like OneIndia, Hindustan Times, Caravan magazine, CNN-IBN, ABP [10], [11], [12], [13], [14], [15], [16], [17], [18], [19], [20], [21] etc. I added it here [22] but removed here [23] as undue weight but I believe not as it made headlines itself so seeking for a resolution via RFC. Edmondhills ( talk) 08:32, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
We can expand this article and rename it as 2014 Pune clashes. Because, there is something extra other than this Pune techie murder case. here: [24] & [25] - Vatsan34 ( talk) 04:20, 14 June 2014 (UTC)
Meanwhile Desai has denied that his outfit had anything to do with the murder and said, "We understand that circulating derogatory pictures is a cyber crime but the problem cannot be solved by killing innocent persons." [1] -- Jyoti ( talk) 05:44, 15 June 2014 (UTC)