Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hindu Janajagruti Samiti

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep. Black Kite (talk) 16:21, 23 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hindu Janajagruti Samiti[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

Hindu Janajagruti Samiti (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

A minor fringe group with lack of detailed coverage. The group has not done or achieved anything remarkable. the Deccan Herald described this group as an "obscure ... small band of fanatics" Walrus Ji (talk) 18:55, 27 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 17:35, 27 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 17:35, 27 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Hinduism-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 17:35, 27 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Kindly list a few remarkable ones, because I could not find. Walrus Ji (talk) 18:55, 27 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
[1], [2] etc for starters. Though these are not profiles of the organisation itself, but there are just too many mentions in WP:RS to pass GNG.ChunnuBhai (talk) 06:09, 29 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the links. As you admit yourself, these are not significant coverage or profiles of the organisation, the criteria of significant coverage for WP:GNG is not met here. Trivial coverage and passing mentions are not enough to claim the notability of the organisations. Please see for yourself the criteria explained at WP:Notability (organizations and companies)#Primary criteria. It lacks the coverage needed for its own article. Walrus Ji (talk) 09:37, 29 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy delete Not notable with the press coverage. Making threats does not entitle an entity to notability or by extension an encyclopedia article. Vikram Vincent 06:52, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - news reports are not just passing mentions and if you click the "books" link at top of this page then you will see more refs to them. That one news source at one time described them as obscure is not a reason to delete when in fact there are numerous reports of them over a reasonably lengthy period and in various contexts. - Sitush (talk) 11:54, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I have reviewed the books too before nominating and they are all passing mentions of this org. --Walrus Ji (talk) 14:51, 12 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
You seem to be saying everything is a passing mention. I wonder if you understand the term? When a lot of reliable sources refer to the HJS in various contexts and describe what it is, the mentions may not be thousands of words but are nonetheless sufficient for our purposes. There are plenty of mainstream sources referring to them and it is reasonable to suppose that a reader of any one of those sources might want to delve further, which is a part of the reason Wikipedia exists. It is so long since I commented here without receiving a response from you that I nearly missed it, sorry. If you respond further, please try to ping me. - Sitush (talk) 19:34, 13 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Have you seen this interview? - Sitush (talk) 19:47, 13 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Sitush:, yes I understand and there is no need to attack me. Your link is an interview of the org leader. WP:Notability (organizations and companies)#Secondary sources clarifies that Interviews of executives are primary sources and (I quote from that link:) "Primary sources cannot be used to establish notability.". Org notability is lacking for an article. Perhaps a paragraph about the org in article Sangh Parivar should suffice. --Walrus Ji (talk) 01:26, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I apologise if you feel under attack. You have less than 500 edits here, all since September, and it is quite unusual in my experience to see someone like you with such professed knowledge of arcane aspects of Wikipedia policies and guidelines. However, I think you are running before you have learned to walk. For example, GNG is sufficient in its own right and the main purpose of NORG is to prevent the project from being abused by PR campaigns etc. There is no sense in which that Caravan piece could be considered promotional in nature, nor most of the news stories - they make it very obvious to any uninvolved person (such as me, who neither lives in India nor professes a religious or political creed) that the HJS comprises a bunch of extremist idiots. But extremist idiots are no more censored on Wikipedia than the more mainstream conformists. The HJS was described as obscure in 2010 but we are now a decade on and it has been mentioned by many independent sources. What actually is your objection here? - Sitush (talk) 06:06, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think reading and understanding GNG and ORG requires deep knowledge. Both are mostly common sense. My objection is listed in the opening statement. The world is full of idiots and many extreme ones at that. Their work/impact/achievement matters to consider them for an article. Based on what I have seen so far, I think this group has been inconsequential, as a result of which it has lack of multiple examples of "Significant coverage" in reliable media. Hence in my opinion it fails both GNG and ORG. I can see that you disagree with my opinion, and I can live with that.--Walrus Ji (talk) 06:35, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
An organisation whose attempts at censorship, promotion of religious bigotry and alleged connection to acts of violence etc, all and more of which have been reported by a multitude of national mainstream media outlets, is scarcely "inconsequential". It has been around since 2002 and reported since at least 2010. - Sitush (talk) 07:44, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep I believe there is enough coverage to keep.--Blurz (talk) 00:53, 3 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
User:Blurz was recently created --Walrus Ji (talk) 14:51, 12 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Well, they did make an edit on 20 October. How are you defining "recent"? Any account newer than yours? - Sitush (talk) 19:39, 13 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep They have some degree of notoriety in connection with the assassination of the journalist and activist Gauri Lankesh,[[3]] [[4]] [[5]], which itself was a notable politically influenced murder. [[6]] The Hindu Janajagruti Samiti are relevant in the context of Right-wing Hindu fanaticism and extremism. The article should be kept, and fleshed-out more. — Preceding unsigned comment added by KJS ml343x (talk • contribs) 03:01, 3 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Enough coverage. Just need to write in a neutral point of view as such organizations are 'sensitive'. Dwain09877 (talk) 06:47, 4 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
This account was created four days ago. Vikram Vincent 10:32, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Dwain09877: I beg you to please present those sources that prove detailed coverage, as explained very clearly on WP:NORG. @KJS ml343x: Thanks for sharing the links instead of empty words. All three of those link are about an under investigation murder case with only passing mentions of accusation. There is a different article about the murder case. Walrus Ji (talk) 14:12, 4 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Walrus Ji: Thank you, good point. I will try to post a couple of other articles that I hope would be more salient. Cheers, and regards KJS ml343x (talk) 01:55, 6 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Missvain (talk) 01:57, 5 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete There are hundreds of such organizations in India. Be careful while listing them on our beloved wikipedia. Yadav0281 (talk) 07:40, 6 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Above account was less than an hour old when they !voted. Obviously unfamiliar with AfD procedure. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 14:35, 6 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • speedy Delete only 300 volunteer and its my first time hearing about this "fascist" organisation so not much notable or has much coverage ill quote Walrus Ji these are exactly what i think

>A minor fringe group with lack of detailed coverage. The group has not done or achieved anything remarkable. the Deccan Herald described this group as an "obscure ... small band of fanatics" — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sungpeshwe9 (talk • contribs) 13:55, 8 December 2020 (UTC) [reply]

User banned for sockpuppetry. Greyjoy talk 14:17, 12 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Missvain (talk) 03:13, 13 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]


Source Significant? Independent? Reliable? Secondary? Pass/Fail Notes
[7] Red XN Green tickY Question? Green tickY Red XN It is not really about the organization.
[8] Green tickY Red XN Red XN Red XN Red XN Org’s website
[9] Red XN Green tickY Green tickY Green tickY Red XN Only mentioning in passing: "In September 2007, for instance, it resulted in the arrest of activists of belonging to this movement and to the arrest of other activists belonging to another offshoot of the RSS, the Hindu Janajagruti Samiti (Committee for the Hindu Renaissance). "
[10] Red XN Green tickY Green tickY Green tickY Red XN Only mentioning in passing: "The proposed screening of a film on painter M.F. Husain was postponed indefinitely by the organisers of the 42nd International Film Festival of India (IFFI), Goa 2011 on Sunday after right-wing groups like the Hindu Janajagruti Samiti (HJS) threatened an agitation. ‘
[11] Red XN Green tickY Green tickY Green tickY Red XN Only mentioning in passing: "Right-wing organisations such as the Vishwa Hindu Parishad, the Bajrang Dal, Sri Rama Sene, Hindu Janajagruti Samiti, and others."
[12] Red XN Green tickY Green tickY Green tickY Red XN Only mentioning in passing x 2: "The Jesuit-run centre...had withdrawn three paintings...following a complaint to the police by the obscure Hindu Janajagruti Samiti." and "the Janajagruti claimed that..." Again, not really talks about the org.
[13] Red XN Question? Question? Green tickY Red XN Only mentioning in passing once as one of the org’s.
[14] Red XN Question? Question? Green tickY Red XN Only mentioning in passing once: "to attend the All India Hindu Convention organized by Hindu Janajagruti Samiti (HJS) on Sunday."
[15] Red XN Question? Question? Green tickY Red XN Only mentioning in passing once: " Addressing the media, representatives of groups under the banner of Hindu Janajagruti Samiti (HJS) called the Saturday violence as pre-planned."
[16] Red XN Green tickY Green tickY Green tickY Red XN Only mentioning in passing once: "Amol Kale, former Pune convenor of the Sanstha-affiliated Hindu Janajagruti Samiti, has been named as the prime accused ."
[17] Red XN Green tickY Green tickY Green tickY Red XN Only mentioning in passing such as: "Ramesh Shinde, national spokesperson of the Hindu Janajagruti Samiti."
Total qualifying sources 0
There must be multiple qualifying sources to meet the notability requirements

Two sources [18] and [19] were dead for me. In summary: None of the references with exception of the Org's website actually provide any significant coverage of the Org IMHO. Kolma8 (talk) 17:40, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • The Times of India recently restructured its website (as also did The Hindu). Those articles will still exist on the site under a new url, and should be at the Wayback Machine under the original url. I am on mobile which makes it a pain to fix these things, but I can assure you that the citations were valid and therefore still are. -Sitush (talk) 18:33, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • One of those two links is here. I used the Archive link at bottom of the ToI website to find it. I am unsure about the apparent obsession with NORG here. Surely GNG is sufficient when it has had so many mentions in the national media etc and clearly is not a flash in the pan. - Sitush (talk) 18:46, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think you may also have missed the sources referred to in this discussion but not yet in the article, one of which seems to be an in-depth interview. - Sitush (talk) 21:32, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Hindu_Janajagruti_Samiti&oldid=995922645"