Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tabrez Ansari lynching

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. Sandstein 18:04, 26 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Tabrez Ansari lynching[edit]

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

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

This article is just propaganda of anti-hindu people. This received media attention only in July where incident happened and again in September during inquiry. I do not think wikipedia is news portal. This lynching is not major crime and it is written in very poor interest like propaganda. This article is written like story. This should be deleted at any cost. If some wants to add then add details like why this happened like Tabrez was doing theft of bike. This is not here. This is one sided propaganda. I request admins of Wikipedia to just delete it. Jai Bajrangbali. Jai Shri Ram. Bharat Mata Ki Jai. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bajarangbali ki jai (talk • contribs) 15:59, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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 Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia 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}}.

This gained enough traction amd media attention. And FYI this account was made just 12 min ago but somehow he knows wikipedia rules like how to put article under deletion and othersEdward Zigma (talk) 16:07, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per WP:GNG. There's good coverage, and not just from July. [1][2][3][4][5]. More in the article. Article can be improved, but that is no reason for deletion. WP:BLP applies per WP:BDP. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:21, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 16:41, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Keep - This incident was heavily reported by media and still any case proceedings gets duly reported by media. This incident was most talked and one of the most brutal and merciless incident which has it's own place. As per WP:GNG, it can be allowed on wikipedia.Edward Zigma (talk) 18:16, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. This is not a routine news story and was covered by the media worldwide. Clarityfiend (talk) 20:34, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - the incident itself was sadly not that notable, but the worldwide reaction to the attack, and the way politicians from several parties used it to inflame tensions, made it more notable. TimTempleton ^(talk) ^(cont) 21:19, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep and move Subject is notable enough to be covered by international media, but should be renamed to Death of Tabrez Ansari to reflect the Wiki standard of neutrality. There were in fact many of such deaths, to which future merger may be more suitable.UaMaol (talk) 00:45, 20 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This wasn't a death as a mob was invovled in this. So this is termed as lynching and thebsame way it was reported everywhere else. Next future merger has no significane as daily MURDER doesn't prompt Prime Minister of the country to show grief.Edward Zigma (talk) 03:43, 20 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If the individual in question was killed, then a death had occurred without question. On Wikipedia, the convention for cases where the event of an individual is more notable than the individual themselves, "Death of...", "Murder of...", "Killing of...", "Disappearance of...", etc. are used. Even if he was lynched, it would be more appropriate to have the article entitled "Death of..." not only to reflect this, but because of the presumption of innocence (see WP:BLPCRIME). A Merger with an article encompassing all recent events or as suggested below would probably be more appropriate for this. UaMaol (talk) 10:15, 20 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Then better convention would be Lynching of Tabrez Ansari as this is case of lynching, as wikis conventional naming. And no other lynching article is merged there, coz this is page about incident itself which has it's own background, reasoms, case proceedings which are duly reported by media. Edward Zigma (talk) 14:09, 20 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

What article would that be? Violence against Muslims in India only has "Major incidents". I don't think any of the Category:Lynching deaths in India articles are mentioned there. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:20, 20 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete and redirect to violence against Muslims in India. The article is based on chasing headlines and looks like someone had written one story with high POV and sympathy for the victims. Here are some points for which articles must be deleted:
1. Apart from GNG, we see WP: LASTING and WP:EVENT to have article about it. This article has almost no lasting effect apart from coverages like what is happening in court and police. To have encyclopaedic value, lasting is required. Media is hungry for TRP and they are giving coverages.
2. We also see this article is POV fork and chasing headlines like saying VHP is saffron body, which lead to uproar, his uncle visited him, as it is mentioned there in sources. This is written in fancy and in POV style.
3. Neutral version of this article is not available, so it is better to delete it after merging to list of violence against muslim in India.
4. Article is not balanced even. Article doesn't cover any points from accused like subject was allegedly stealing bike, police officers have given some other judgement and then some other. But their details have not been given.
5. Lastly, Wikipedia is WP:NOTNEWS to cover news here. Article at its best fails notability and just chasing headlines. So, I vote for delete.-Krishna's flute (talk) 01:55, 20 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Answer- I will try to answer all your problems in this-
1. This article has lasting significance because this incident triggered nationwide protests and it was not only a simgle event.
2. There is nothing like chasing headlines. What happened is written and properly cited. There is no POV because I researched deep in to the article, and cited the sources. That's why you have to read the sources. There may be single POV left but alnost all of what is writtem is from BBC reporting on the incident. See even BBC reported this incident. Which clearly shows this was not some everyday lynching. I can ensure almost everythimg and every lline written in the article is from a well cites source
3. The article is written as it was. May be somethings left out , but we are working on it.The article shows what happened nothing more nothing less.
4. and at last you says, this is nnot news. But I want you to think that your daily news doesn't prompt prime minister of the country to show grief on that. But tthis article does.

This incident was lynching and you ccan check that from any citation provided. You can google that too. This incident was not a murder as a mob was involved in it. So no reason to call it murder. This article has its standlalone significance. This incident can be to other pages too. But if you think this is not lynching them please check the cited articles or do your own research. The title was made as this incident was reported in news and media houses. I did not add a single POV on this. Everything is from the sources. But even if anything left out, we will work on that.Thank you.Edward Zigma (talk) 03:40, 20 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Just because few politicians gave reactions is not enough to have Wikipedia article. And what I am seeing from article is the article has high one sided view. And creator should read bludging on process before commenting on each opposite vote. -Krishna's flute (talk) 15:39, 20 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not replying to you, but wamt to ask you that just because a few politicians react means Prime Minister of India is just a few politician?

And since you said one sided then let me calrify that almost every line is the article has citation and proof. Edward Zigma (talk) 05:00, 21 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comment- This is very long discussed in media. This incident is lynching. There is no reason to tag it as death. It was not like 2-3 people were involved. There was arrest of 11 people and many cops got suspended. Video itself shows mob. Then how could we deny that it's not lynching. This incident was reported and discussed and already tagged as lynching.Edward Zigma (talk) 03:08, 20 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails NEVENT. Also, the article needs to be started from scratch for merge with another article. Present article contains commentary and opinions. Sankoswal (talk) 03:56, 20 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Strong keep- Per WP:PRESERVE and WP:INDEPTH. ∯WBG^converse 10:42, 20 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep easily passes our WP:GNG criteria with the amount of international coverage recieved. The links posted above and in the article are sufficient to demonstrate notability hence I am not reposting the same. --DBig Xrayᗙ 11:21, 20 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 10:37, 21 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 10:37, 21 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - obviously. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 18:34, 21 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, meets WP:GNG and WP:EVENT as has been covered by numerous state, national, and international independent sources over a period of time. in addition to those listed by editors above, there is from the Australian Broadcasting Corporation "Muslim man dies after being beaten for hours, forced to chant Hindu slogans" that ties this in with the apparent increase in religious intolerance/violence in India since the 2014 election, and from NDTV ""Jharkhand Not Lynchistan": Chief Minister Counters Opposition Tag" that discusses the state political machinations related to this death. Coolabahapple (talk) 22:45, 21 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - plainly notable based on significant and ongoing coverage of the lynching and murder, and equally plainly not propaganda as we define it based on PM Modi (a known Hindu nationalist) speaking in parliament about it. Bearian (talk) 20:40, 22 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - needs cleaning up, its not clear when and where the death was caused - perhaps we don't know yet. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 22:49, 23 November 2019 (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.