Talk:Dowry death

cite claim

Original article stated that: "This is one of the factors of sex-selective abortion and infanticide in the country." Please cite sources for this claim. - Just zis  Guy, you know? ^[T]/_[C] (W) AfD? 09:59, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

Redirection needs to be removed

The redirection of Dowry death article to Bride burning is not correct. Bride burning is only a small percentage of Dowry deaths. A large percentage of dowry deaths are due to suicides by women, who are unable to handle the toture associated with dowry demand by husband or her in-laws. Indian National Crime Bureau lists dowry deaths as a crime[1] and it does not list a crime category called Bride burning. The statistics of "reported" Dowry deaths in India are available, where as there are no reliable citations mentioning the exact number of Bride burnings. We can correct this by merging Bride burning to Dowry death and expanding it to cover other categories of dowry deaths in the article on Dowry death.Newageindian 06:09, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

I have created an independent article on topic by removing the merge to Bride burning. Newageindian 19:36, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

There is no need to merge Bride burning article to dowry deaths even though "Bride burning" is a small subset of dowry deaths. Given the publicity and attention bride burning has received in media in last 20 years, an independent article on the topic is a must. Newageindian 12:23, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Request for contributions

Dowry death is a very important topic on "Violence Against Women"(VAW) in south Asia. This needed an independent article. Bride Burning is only a subset of Dowry Deaths as most dowry deaths occure due to suicides by women. I will expand this article in next 2 weeks. I request all the editors to go through citations and contribute to this article. Newageindian 19:39, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

I have added couple of additional links to the articles related to dowry deaths and also statistics of various categoies of dowry deaths(suicides by hanging, by burning, murder by poisoning etc). Newageindian 12:21, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Unreferenced

I'm tagging this article as unreferenced. Please improve this article by verifying its claims using reliable sources--Cailil ^talk 01:00, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Please do it yourself the next time, google is your friend. Frankly i dont see the need to refernce it , If you feeling too lazy tell us where do you want a citation needed thingy :)—Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.214.75.140 (talk • contribs) 22:07, 1 December 2007

It's up to the editor adding material to reference it (see WP:PROVEIT) if they can't it will be removed. Google is not your friend - this article must be verified from reliable sources - if it's not from a reliable source it goes. In the case of this article whole sections are unreferenced - adding {{fact}} would create excessive markup, a single page template is more desirable (see WP:CUR)--Cailil ^talk 23:03, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

SIF?

The article gives undue prominence to the views of an organisation called SIF which claims that dowry deaths are myths. Now, if you live in Indian society, you know that dowry and dowry deaths are common. Why this viewpoint is stressed so much?220.227.207.220 (talk) 08:44, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Agreed - fundamentally there is a problem with this page and others that mention that organization. These pages are being used to promote that organization. If you look at the 'references' here they are all links to SIF or SIF affiliates ('mynation', 'protect Indian family' etc). This is a violation of wikipedia policy (WP:ADVERT)--Cailil ^talk 21:57, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Stubbified

I've stubbified this page as in it's previous form there were 3 problems: a) sourcing; b) advertising; and c) structure. IMHO this page should either be merged to Dowry or Indian Dowry Law at least until it can be rewritten as a article that conforms to WP:V, WP:NOT, WP:NOTE and WP:NOR--Cailil ^talk 18:13, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

misuse of law

    if a woman is dies due to illness her parents knowing this fact duely participates in her crimination they do not complain to police or demand for postmortam as they know about her illness after one month they launch a f.i.r is this justify  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 101.215.28.210 (talk) 12:35, 12 August 2012 (UTC) 

breakdown by religion?

Who are these women (and girls) in South Asian who are being murdered and driven to suicide?

Dowry can mean two very distinct things, gifts give by a bride's family (common among Hindus) and gifts given to or promised the bride herself (required in Islam).

It seems unlikely that Muslim husbands and their families are murdering wives and pressuring them for more dowry gifts because such gifts are in fact, as I said, given to the bride herself or held back as kind of divorce insurance.

India has the second largest population of Muslims in the world, and many Hindus live in Pakistan and Bangladesh.

So is it only Hindus who are practicing dowry killings? Are other religious groups doing it?

76.19.63.222 (talk) 20:05, 13 January 2014 (UTC) Michael Christian

Article is too vague

Something the article never makes clear is what, exactly, is done to the brides, and how the groom and/or his family expects that this will result in a higher dowry. Some explanation of what exactly is happening would improve the article. 76.193.19.132 (talk) 15:34, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 8 external links on Dowry death. 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/20140620023952/http://ncrb.nic.in/CD-CII2012/Statistics2012.pdf to http://ncrb.nic.in/CD-CII2012/Statistics2012.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130129164006/http://ncrb.nic.in/CD-CII2011/Statistics2011.pdf to http://ncrb.nic.in/CD-CII2011/Statistics2011.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141108002609/http://www.sachet.org.pk/web/page.asp?id=293 to http://www.sachet.org.pk/web/page.asp?id=293
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141109202405/http://www.dhakacourier.com.bd/?p=4592 to http://www.dhakacourier.com.bd/?p=4592
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/tehranbureau/2010/08/selected-headlines-202.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121005192604/http://www.un.org/en/documents/charter/preamble.shtml to http://www.un.org/en/documents/charter/preamble.shtml
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120303114220/http://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/cescr.htm to http://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/cescr.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071006005130/http://ncrb.nic.in/crime2005/cii-2005/CHAP3.pdf to http://ncrb.nic.in/crime2005/cii-2005/CHAP3.pdf

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) 13:13, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Dowry death. 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/20110628215223/http://ncrb.nic.in/cii2008/Statistics2008.pdf to http://ncrb.nic.in/cii2008/Statistics2008.pdf%26Page%3D17
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140312003405/http://www.popcouncil.org/pdfs/ayp0102.pdf to http://www.popcouncil.org/pdfs/ayp0102.pdf
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/ccpr.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141108092436/http://www.globalfundforwomen.org/impact/media-center/news-releases/45/157 to http://www.globalfundforwomen.org/impact/media-center/news-releases/45/157

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) 16:20, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Dowry death. 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/20141107213644/http://pide.org.pk/pdr/index.php/pdr/article/viewFile/1235/1208 to http://pide.org.pk/pdr/index.php/pdr/article/viewFile/1235/1208

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) 18:32, 17 September 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Dowry death. 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/20141108100328/http://www.hrw.org/news/2012/01/23/india-disappoint-year-human-rights to https://www.hrw.org/news/2012/01/23/india-disappoint-year-human-rights
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130603074440/http://www.vday.org/bride+death to http://www.vday.org/bride+death

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) 14:08, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

Misleading information on religious factors contributing to dowry deaths

I've noticed that under the religious factors headline, there is a sentence stating that dowry practices are much more common in Hindu/Sikh communities than other religious communities. This is nothing more than a nonsensical fabrication which is not even supported by any evidence in the source that it cites. Can it please be removed? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Krao212 (talk • contribs) 00:29, 12 August 2020 (UTC)

There's a somewhat offhand mention in the source how bride burning (which is AFAIK a sub-set of dowry death) "has obviously spread from Hindus and Sikhs to other groups." This is IMO insufficient to support that dowry death is more common in Hindu/Sikh communities and there is no support at all for "particularly around Punjab, Haryana, Delhi, Rajasthan and Uttar Pradesh." IMO the paragraph is not well supported and should be removed or tagged with "citation needed" or "failed verification". Sjö (talk) 16:15, 12 August 2020 (UTC)

Proofreading

Sorry I don’t have the time or knowledge to do much right now, but I think this article needs to be proofread. I’ve only read the through the first section so far, but I think we have to check for good punctuation. Also, I think the sentence starting with “For context,” sounds unencyclopedic.

Thank you to whoever reads this. I don’t mean to be rude at all; I just want to improve the article. Cheers :) NotFromMarkkleeberg (talk) 01:17, 1 April 2024 (UTC)