Talk:2011 Indian anti-corruption movement

No criticism

please add a criticism section detailing the jan lok pal bill to supersede the constitution. http://ibnlive.in.com/news/jan-lokpal-bill-undermines-democracy-experts/148609-3.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.161.251.36 (talk) 17:59, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

i agree (ANNA 24 GHANTE CHAUKANNA).. anna does not represent majority indian view..majority oppose corruption ..but majority like me nauseate at the idea of "ADOPT MY LAW OR WILL ALLOW NO OTHER LAW" stand of anna and co. ..intolerance to others view breeds disaster.. soon some terrorist may fast to split india into balkans for tv coverage if this "fast blackmail" aimed against the constitution succeeds!! i advise anna to vote and advise people to vote "only" for those who will take "only" his extreme view point "word for word". till then he must shut up..parliament is supreme...parliament enacts laws..and that should not be based on his group's whims!!but on majority law maker's approval!! if you disapprove , show your worth in next elections!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.193.44.154 (talk) 12:23, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

Please have discussion according to wiki policies.No personal opinion please.Adding a whole new section would void wiki policy which says that a separate section of criticism would create undue

advantage.Though it can be added in whole article.--abhishek (talk) 12:54, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

I too agree that Anna Hazare's "My jan lok pal or rubbish any other lok pal bill" attitude is intolerance to all elected representative's view (people's parliament rubbished). Indian print media can be biased but not wikipedia. So, add pitfalls of 2011 protests or atleast make it a point that just because many people joined , it does not have majority indian population's approval. No true india will want our constitution to be discarded. Our Election Commission and Supreme Court monitor our elections and elected representatives represent us, indians. Any other hooligan group creating anarchy on unreasonable demands based on impatience in elected democracy needs criticism. Else India's end is near.. coup d 'etat is very near.. India's collapse will be celebrated as some colour revolution.117.193.59.27 (talk) 13:14, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

We are specifically not permitted to criticise. If you can find reliable sources that present a balanced criticism then they can be included but should be integrated into the existing content. There is far too much poor work going on with this article as it is, without adding more. - Sitush (talk) 13:19, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

It i of great importance to be unbiased while writing in a public forum like wikipedia. Pleas ensure that the views expressed by several different 'civil society' on this issue needs to be put up, if at all that is required. For example, there is no mention about the alternative proposals given by Aruna Roy. There are several people who object, including me, the Jan lokpal and I find it very hypocritical to say that all the protesters are supporting it. I hope these things are corrected and wiki does not become an another propaganda platform where people try to show up their view as the right view.? Unknown editor or 117.193.59.27

Aruna Roy has also been criticized for coming up with a similar bill like that of team Anna and also after the public support for Anna has swollen. She has also been criticized for being pro-govt and anti-Anna. This also must be there if Aruna Roy's criticism of Anna need to be added.Politicalpandit (talk) 12:36, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

Narendra Modi's Letter

Its unwise to put Modi's letter here on this page The letter was purely written out of political purposes and more importantly

We have to mantain a stricter size for the page...and keep it was well edited as possible...so that all readers dont feel its too long and over-written

PLUS - If tommorw, more poltiicians write similar letters to Mr Hazare, We cannot put them all

Also Amitabh Bachan went on to give a paragraph long view of Hazare - we didnt put that - nor did we put comments of notable Indian stars of bollywood (in many contextx these people are more world renowned and in fact more known in India than Narendra Modi..but thats my view

So please no letter of Modi--Pranav (talk) 18:42, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

True. How does "Narendra Modi lashing out at Manmohan Singh" find mention in the "timeline" ? The article has a section on "non-partison nature" of the protests and the protesters unwillingness to allow politicians hijack it. Then, calling Barkha Dutt controversial and pro-Sonia Gandhi, without any verifiable source is malicious and misleading. Danishctc (talk) 10:20, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

Baba Ramdev

Details of Baba Ramdev's agitation may be added here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.244.138.33 (talk) 04:58, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Suggesting that Bharat Swabhiman Yatra be mentioned here, the Ramlila Maidan protest being a part of it. ..असक्तः सततं कार्य कर्म समाचर | असक्तः हि आचरन् कर्म.. Humour Thisthat2011 09:04, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Images requiered of Ramlila Ground/ Baba Ramdev

Someone please get images of Ramlila Ground and Ramdev Baba's protest since the page Ramlila ground protests has now been merged in to it. There are only images of Lokpal Bill protest of Anna.Jethwarp (talk) 04:24, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

Current event

This article is a current event, can the same template be added???? Karthik Nadar (talk) 05:29, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

 Already done Before I read this! Avenue X at Cicero (talk) 16:56, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

RTI activist death

In infobox someone has cited a lin which claims that a RTi activist shot dead,cause of involvement in 2011 Indian anti-corruption movement.No newspaper or reputated new channel has said that.It is known that she was RTI activist and found shot dead outside her house.But nobody has said that both thing ar connected. some links http://www.thehindu.com/news/states/other-states/article2361776.ece?homepage=true http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/RTI-activist-on-way-to-Anna-protest-shot-dead/articleshow/9629320.cms --abhishek (talk) 09:53, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

I think its pretty safe to believe that the activist was shot dead because of her involvement. She was going to the Boat Club to attend an anti-corruption drive when she was shot. Even if not, we can write it as alleged because that is something we cannot confirm nor deny. Avenue X at Cicero (talk) 12:50, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

Also, many refs say that her anti-corruption campaign and wildlife protection campaign may have hurt a few vested interests. Avenue X at Cicero (talk) 13:02, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

Also consider, she was on her way to protest meet(read the second line in Times of India link). Karthik Nadar (talk) 13:12, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

== Proposal: This article uses British English ==

(I was unable to find a template or standard box, but I think I've seen such a thing elsewhere in WP.)

So far we have (at least): centred, publicised, organised, "a large police force lob tear gas shells".

Evidence against British English: "the government desires"; criminalization; probably more.

Comments? -- Jo3sampl (talk) 00:42, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

My error -- this article uses Indian English, and is so labelled. Can we make the labelling more prominent? Thanks -- Jo3sampl (talk) 00:47, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

I agree with your point.But her death seems to happen because of RTI activism not of her support to this movement.No official person from police or this movement has said that she was dead because of her participation in this movement. Additionally she needs to be mentioned here because of involvement in RTI compaigning,there are lot many.Please don't mingle two different things.--abhishek (talk) 05:58, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

August protests

Please note that calling the following lines ("watered down, toothless" bill drafted by the government ) from the August protests section sound slanted and non neutral. We are here to provide a neutral point of view of the movement. Shyamjayan (talk) 05:54, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

It is not a violation of the NPOV policy as the concerned remark is in inverted commas, meaning it is quoted. Avenue X at Cicero (talk) 09:31, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

The quote is from a non-neutral source, and the rhetorical language of the quote is non-neutral per se, so it does breach WP:NPOV. This is especially the case when the quote is not qualified as a criticism and is instead portrayed as one of the statements of fact. Herein lies one of the ironies of WP:NPOV, we cannot use non-neutral language even when we all know that it is clearly true. Deterence ^Talk 11:52, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

August Protests section - not well documented

In contrast to the April protests - which I did contribute alot to - we need a timeline of protests for the august section too. I am busy but once I m free i will definitely do that. I request active editors to update the article. Keep in mind WP:NOTNEWS, but do add in names of industrialists, social workers (aruna roy,etc), bollywood stars (at least the major ones)..who have come out in support of the bill. We have to show the reservations that some of these prominent figures have - like the Infosys chief who belives UID is a way to tackle corruption , so hope you can present all that. Additionally, the support and the rallies being organised from Jammyu to Kerala and from ahmedabad to guwahati - is also an important aspect - so list out the various places where protests are bing held in a paragraph. The fact that farmers, Khap panchayats, lawyers of various courts, etc are supporting has to also be mentioned. The shutting down of various markets is also a fact we will have to put forth. Dabbawalas too - 1st off in 100 years - that has to go down.. So all i m saying is sticking to neutraility we have to update the august section. Oh yes we do need a better CRITICISM section. and a better debate section - many do belive PM should not fall under the ambit, and the judiciary should go into a strong Judicial accountability bill. BJP spokesperson has hinted they are willing to get PM under the ambit of the Lokpal with safeguards, so all those views - which will effect the movement, and the bill itself, have to be presented in a brief, concise and well referenced manner. The corrupt, insensitive, arrogant, adamant government has chalked out a strategy to neutralise the agitation of IAC. The police will swoop after midnight on Ramlila ground. Arrest all the activists & take them miles away from the boundaries of the city, in the fields, in all directions. They will hammer them with Lathis, break their bones & make them run in all directions for life. This has been the way of handling agitations by Congress governments & Sharad Pawar, Vilasrao Deshmukh have mastered this art. They have been consulted & hence this strategy surely appears to be drawn out. The Anna team may become physically handicapped for life. --Pranav (talk) 12:43, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

Aim is to create an independent watchdog, laws against corruption already exist

Isnt the aim of these protests and the Lokpal Bill to establish an independent anti-corruption watchdog? Laws against corruption have existed for a long time and didnt prevent corruption. Can we change this article to say what's different about these protests is they seek to establish the Lokpal. Tri400 (talk) 02:33, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

Insertion of unrelated material

Note that the text below has no apparent connection to the anti-corruption movement. It diminishes the integrity of this serious popular and political effort when it is used to make baseless claims about unrelated companies:

"Mar 2011 The Bain India incident, involving a global board-level disclosure of HR corruption at MNC Bain India, backed by philanthropist Dr. N.D. Melgiri (cousin to Infosys Foundation's Sudha Murthy)[23][24]"

References do not support the connection to the movement. Section has been flagged as WP:SYNTHESIS.

NJmeditor (talk) 10:12, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

File:Anna Hazare New Delhi.jpg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Anna Hazare New Delhi.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests December 2011 What should I do? Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 12:30, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Promotion to A-Class Article

I believe this article should be promoted to A Class. It covers the topic well, is well written and well research, has many sources and inline references, and have supplemental media such as pictures. I believe it meets the criteria for A Class. Does anyone agree? Biglulu (talk) 08:37, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Request to Merge 2011 Indian anti -corruption movement with 2012 Indian 2012 anti-corruption movement.

Pls Merge 2011 and 2012 "Indian anti-corruption movement" . ThinkingYouth (talk) 16:36, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

Do not merge 2011 Indian anti-corruption movement and 2012 Indian anti-corruption movement article because other are separate with timeline and different-different progress between movement. GKCH (talk) 09:02, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

Timeline

List-based articles are deprecated and the timeline here is basically a list. To a large extent, we are repeating ourselves. Once I've shifted all of the copyright violations etc (there are quite a few), I propose to merge the timeline into the prose that precedes it. Does anyone have any rational objections to this? - Sitush (talk) 19:18, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

Vandalism by BGWHITE

Hello all,

Some person BGWHITE changed all my edits [1] writing Removal of sourced material

"Near" Jantar Mantar

It is impossible for protests "at" Jantar Mantar. It is protected astronomical structure of Archelogical surve of India. This protest happens 1.4 km {0.9 miles} away at Jantar Mantar lane.

52 city protest

It is removed because there is no sources {{cn | date=September 2014}}

8 February 2011

Anjan Dutta-Gupta case is a USA case, nothing to do with subject of article which is about INDIAN movement.

1 March 2011

Rajat Gupta case is also USA case, nothing to do with subject of article which is about INDIAN movement.

28 March 2011

This is a USA comedy spoof recreation of 1940's Dandi March for submitting memorandum to long dead persons submitted a memorandum to Mahatma Gandhi to save the country from corruption. Not tata (talk) 06:41, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

Hmmm. A "new" editor accusing an admin of vandalism on an article plagued by sock/meatpuppets. Not too hard to see how this is going to go. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 07:01, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on 2011 Indian anti-corruption movement. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20120124011307/http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics/nation/it-is-an-attack-on-democracy-bjp/articleshow/8732357.cms to http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics/nation/it-is-an-attack-on-democracy-bjp/articleshow/8732357.cms

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 23:48, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on 2011 Indian anti-corruption movement. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110610190548/http://www.hindustantimes.com/Anna-to-fast-in-support-of-Baba-Ramdev/Article1-706052.aspx to http://www.hindustantimes.com/Anna-to-fast-in-support-of-Baba-Ramdev/Article1-706052.aspx
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110717083939/http://in.news.yahoo.com/cpi-m-deplores-police-action-against-ramdev-092500684.html to http://in.news.yahoo.com/cpi-m-deplores-police-action-against-ramdev-092500684.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:06, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on 2011 Indian anti-corruption movement. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110724120152/http://www.usindiafriendship.net/viewpoints1/Indias_Rising_Growth_Potential.pdf to http://www.usindiafriendship.net/viewpoints1/Indias_Rising_Growth_Potential.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110606112149/http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/17/52/39452196.pdf to http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/17/52/39452196.pdf
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.hinduonnet.com/fline/fl2125/stories/20041217001704400.htm
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://in.news.yahoo.com/cpi-m-deplores-police-action-against-ramdev-092500684.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:17, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

Recent reverts

I have reverted several attempts at removing content made recently by Ramesh8888. They've switched from making about 10 edits to articles about dairy cattle to coming here and taking out swathes of stuff. That is rather unusual behaviour and, of course, this article has a long history of contention. I've asked Ramesh8888 to discuss their proposals here, both in my revert edit summaries and on their own user talk page. Being a new user, perhaps they are unaware that they even have such a page. - Sitush (talk) 21:09, 2 October 2018 (UTC)

This latest removal is typical of the sort of argument that was deployed by people listed at WP:LTA/IAC. They confused a non-notable organisation called India Against Corruption (the article was deleted, if my memory is correct) with the subject of this article, which is about the general anti-corruption protests etc that happened at the time. As such, the issue of repatriating so-called "black money" was relevant and was sourced in the body. I think it still is. - Sitush (talk) 21:26, 2 October 2018 (UTC)

To clarify my note above, the India Against Corruption article was usurped at some point by the LTA, who claimed that the name referred specifically and only to something connected with the Hindustan Socialist Republican Army. It was messy. - Sitush (talk) 23:00, 2 October 2018 (UTC)

Page has been restored to the last stable version before the recent contretemps. 103.30.142.163 (talk) 05:54, 4 October 2018 (UTC)

And I have reverted you. Editing while logged out is not going to either reduce the scrutiny of your contributions nor obviate the requirement that you discuss before mass deleting stuff that has been here for ages. - Sitush (talk) 06:02, 4 October 2018 (UTC)

Anyone can edit wikipedia. So stop removing stable content. What precisely did you imply by Editing while logged out is not going to (either) reduce the scrutiny of your contributions 103.30.142.163 (talk) 06:28, 4 October 2018 (UTC)