Talk:Umar Khalid

Related to "Assassination attempt" and usage of the word - assassination

@Kautilya3: The heading "Assassination attempt" and the paraphrasing of the line "he narrowly escaped an assassination attempt" I think is misleading. Yes, he was attacked, but can it be called an "Assassination attempt"? Currently four sources have been used - 2 from TOI, 1 from Indian Express and 1 from CPJ. The Indian newspapers do not use the word "assassination". Even TOI uses "allegedly attacked" in the source used TOI source
But CPJ does - CPJ uses strong language and has clear bias (positive bias but bias nevertheless) so in a way CJP is a good source to use in the aspect that the event happened, but biased in the way in narrates that event and uses language. (Is attempt to murder and attempt to assassinate the same??? Hubris at play?).
Any suggestions how to go about this? DiplomatTesterMan (talk) 22:30, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

A police case has been registered under "attempt to murder". So, I think "assassination attempt" is fine. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 22:40, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

Edit conflict - you have already replied but i was typing this so just want to add it.

Also, a point I would just like to note is that what the attackers said after the attack should not be the basis of what the attack was. Even they didn't use the word "assassinate" in their video released Video Link, they haven't said they tried to "shoot" him, they just take responsibility for it, (adjusting a mad dog). They could have just being doing it for publicity themselves. The attackers have been arrested, but not charged as yet... were shots fired on not? did the gun jam or not?... the police investigation is still going on as far I can tell from the sources. I hope this also supports the reason why I think the word "assassination" is misleading and should not be used. DiplomatTesterMan (talk) 22:50, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

@DBigXray: I would just like to take a second opinion. What do you think? Is the usage of the word "assassination" ok? DiplomatTesterMan (talk) 22:55, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

Hi DTM, thanks for the ping. I fully understand your concern here. (I personally believe yes, his gun jammed most likely, he chickened out less likely cuz he wouldnt have thrown his gun, anyway this is of no significance to the topic, thist is for police to decide) as far as the article is concerned, such an incident is treated in general in other articles also, as an assassination attempt. Since you would like to see media sources using the word "assassination", here are some of the links.[1][2][3][4][5] cheers and regards. --DBigXrayᗙ 23:04, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply Kautilya3 and DBigXray. Valid points. Sigh. DiplomatTesterMan (talk) 23:14, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

references to Burhan Wani

Hello IP User:182.58.232.88, as I said in my edit summary revert per WP:BLP violation with unreliable primary source Facebook. and WP:NOTNEWS There is no proof that he actually said those things that you are trying to repeatedly add into the article. in such cases such controversial items cannot be added into the article. Please self revert or share your evidence. --DBigXrayᗙ 10:26, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

I don't think it is a WP:BLP issue because it has been reported by a reliable source. But, since he removed it "hours later", it would be WP:UNDUE and certainly WP:NOTNEWS. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 10:34, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

Thanks K3 for your kind reply. It seems that the IP User:182.58.232.88 has ignored my calls on his page for discussion and the IP has reverted you and now the article has been semi protected. lets wait if he responds now. --DBigXrayᗙ 15:08, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

The sourcing issue appears to have been fixed, but I'm also a little concerned about whether this is due weight: most political figures make comments at some point that are seized upon and magnified by the news media, and mentioning them is typically not appropriate. Vanamonde (talk) 15:20, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

Actually, pretty good sources are saying that he indeed said those things - [6] , [7] ...--Adamstraw99 (talk) 15:52, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

Adamstraw99 The main point here is he has already deleted the said statement, meaning he has retracted the statement. Now its only masala for news websites, who will grab some TRPs from it. it cannot be included in this article per WP:UNDUE and WP:NOTNEWS as folks above have rightly pointed out. regards. --DBigXrayᗙ 19:02, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

@Kautilya3: I would like to draw a parallel between how the Burhan Wani part is being left out from Umar Khalid's wikipedia page, whereas the Kanhaiya Kumar's "Other controversies" section has similar things which have stayed. What is the difference between those two headings (Statements alleging human rights violations by the Indian Army, Alleged threatening of a female student) in Kanhaiya's page staying and being given such a large room on his page, and the Burhan Wani lines for Khalid not even given one or two lines on the wiki page. Why does WP:UNDUE and WP:NOTNEWS work on this page and not there? (I have just tagged Kautilya for a reply but anyone can reply of course :) ) Thank you. DiplomatTesterMan (talk) 07:53, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

DiplomatTesterMan this discussion needs to go on Kanhaiyaa talk page, not here. And yes, its UNDUE i have removed the entire section now. regards. --DBigXrayᗙ 09:34, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

@DBigXray: Well I had put it here because I was trying to justify adding the Burhan Wani part to Khalid's page using Kanhaiya's page as a reference, but now that the information has been removed from that page too I have no similar comparison so this discussion ends here lol. Thanks for the reply. Cheers :) DiplomatTesterMan (talk) 09:47, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

LoL, it is easy to understand why some people are adding such UNDUE things. Unfortunately for them, wikipedia cant be allowed to further such causes. cheers. --DBigXrayᗙ 09:50, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

This section at Kanhaiya Kumar is certainly not Twitter masala. One was a political speech and another, a piece of misconduct, which seems to have been upheld by the University. One can argue about the weight given to them of course, but they are not little things blown out of proportion. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 10:13, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

being a politician, Kanhaiya is expected to say something everyday it will find way into the papers but not everything has to be recorded in his BIO, the misconduct case was also overblown out of proportion by some.--DBigXrayᗙ 10:33, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

@Winged Blades of Godric: Hi. The changes you made on the Kanhaiya page (14:39, 25 September 2018‎) partly stem from this discussion. I am talking about that page here because of the parallel I had drawn above and whether or not in a similar manner Burhan Wani statements made by Umar Khalid should be allowed on his wiki page or not. Please could you give you opinion of whether the Burhan Wani matter and statement made by Umar Khalid should get one or two lines on his wikipedia page or not. Adamstraw99 had placed two proper sources for the matter being considered. Thank you. Regards. DiplomatTesterMan (talk) 15:10, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

Removing reference of he being booked under IPC UAPA

Why the reference of he being booked under IPC UAPA by Delhi Police is removed? Is stating facts not allowed on Wikipedia anymore? Please see the reference and news below and bring back the info https://theprint.in/india/delhi-police-books-umar-khalid-jamia-students-under-uapa-for-northeast-delhi-violence/406259/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Allah117 (talk • contribs) 14:00, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

"Booked" means named in an FIR, which simply triggers an investigation. Not worthy of mention. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 10:52, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 10 August 2020

Request to change the phrasing of line 4 from "convicted terrorists" to "Kashmiri separatists Afzal Guru and Maqbool Bhat." to provide proper context since "terrorist" as a term is too broad. 101.118.58.146 (talk) 19:29, 10 August 2020 (UTC)

 Done. Changed to "convicted Kashmiri separatists". ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 04:55, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

Remove section Span of "crimes"

What crime has he been convicted of? Stop spreading lies through such pages! Pyummat (talk) 04:38, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

Removal of Human Rights Activist

None of the sources said that he was a human rights activist. Recent charges on Khalid in the involvement of the Delhi Riots also fractures the basic definition of Human rights defender. He was caught in planning the riot which killed more than 4000 people. Removal of the same would be meaningful. Jenos450

Jenos450, for someone who has repeatedly cited BLPCRIME in removing critical material from the articles of other political figures, you are playing very fast-and-loose with it here. Your comment is a BLP violation. Strike it, please, or provide sources which demonstrate that statement very clearly. Vanamonde (Talk) 15:18, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 14 September 2020

umar khalid is a communist 49.36.137.251 (talk) 13:54, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. – Thjarkur (talk) 13:59, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 14 September 2020

Info box criminal should be removed... what crime has he committed? Cruzex100 (talk) 17:33, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

 Done @Cruzex100: It was added in the article on 12 June 2020 and remained unnoticed. Fixed as of now. Thanks. ─ The Aafī (^talk) 18:26, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

Umar Khalid

He is not a "Human Rights Activist". Period PuluBaddy (talk) 08:17, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

PuluBaddy, are you same as User:Pulkitraina2608? ChunnuBhai (talk) 11:34, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

see also section

ChunnuBhai The see also section contained people also accused under UAPA and linked to the anti-CAA protests. Why do you think the edit was "unconstructive"? Vikram Vincent 13:25, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

Vincentvikram, Umar Khalid's primary identity is not "anti-CAA protester charged with UAPA". may be my edit summary was less appropriate here, however Meeran Haider and Ishrath Jahan are not at all important pages to be linked with Umar Khalid. ChunnuBhai (talk) 15:08, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

ChunnuBhai Umar has several identities and hence not just the ones I used but other people could be added to the See Also section. Your opinion is as good as mine :-) Vikram Vincent 15:20, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

Vincentvikram, i suggest open this edit for discussion and get to consensus. I have put my opinion here, lets wait for others's opinion too. ChunnuBhai (talk) 15:23, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

Keep this link here of other notable arrests under UAPA Unlawful_Activities_(Prevention)_Act#Notable_arrests_made_under_the_Act Vikram Vincent 03:42, 2 February 2021 (UTC)

There has been no activity here so reinstating the see also section. Vikram Vincent 15:52, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Vincentvikram, no consensus has been reached here. please read WP:TALKDONTREVERT on how to achieve consensus. there are various ways suggested in above article to gather opinions. please dont unilaterally revert changes. You may open RFC too if you want a wider discussion. ChunnuBhai (talk) 07:47, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

ChunnuBhai please read WP:Silence. I waited 8 days before reverting. Your first revert summary was unconstrutive edits which had no meaning. Your follow up on the talk page added equally no useful value either. So I'll wait for a day or two and then revert the See Also section. Vikram Vincent 08:02, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

And I think you need to read up a bit on when an RFC is needed and this is not one. Vikram Vincent 08:03, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

ChunnuBhai Let's try it this way. Who do you think should be in the See also section? Vikram Vincent 08:09, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Vincentvikram,

• I dont think a See Also section is compulsory for a BLP. Many articles (BLP or otherwise do not have it).
• Even if a See Also section is made for a BLP, it may not be always a "who" but also a question of "what" can be added.
• My discomfort is that by ONLY adding UAPA accused (who are relatively unknown and may be AfD candidates themselves) , you may be attempting to establish primary identity of Umar Khalid as a UAPA accused, I see that you have already added a relavant line to the lead of the article.
• Primary identity of Umar Khalid still remains as an activist, and an accused in JNU case. a line about UAPA accused in the lead is still fine. a whole section is already there on 2020 arrest.

ChunnuBhai (talk) 08:23, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

ChunnuBhai Your points are noted though my motivation need not be questioned. Whether it is compulsory or not is not the question once there are editor(s) who see a need. So the more relevant question from your points would be Who/What do you think should be in a See also section for this bio? Vikram Vincent 09:40, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Latest News

Delhi anti-Hindu riot accused Umar Khalid, Actor Deep Sidhu, accused in the Republic Day violence case, gets bail, People’s life, capital pride again at risk.

Interpreting videos

I reverted a whole series of edits by Sk2905, but upon cross-checking, I found a video aired by Aaj Tak of a demonstration at JNU. I don't see either Umar Khalid in the video nor the newscast mention his name. What is going on? -- Kautilya3 (talk) 15:30, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

Lol. It was from 2016. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 15:32, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

There is a need to quote the slogans of Umar Khalid

To get the right context of Umar Khalid Activism, there is a need to quote the slogans he chanted - Afzal Hum Sharminda he. Tere Kaatil Zinda He. Afzal Guru referred here was a Islamic Terrorist involved in the Pakistan backed terrorist attack on the Parliament in 2001. 171.76.87.80 (talk) 09:55, 17 January 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 12 February 2024

I would like to request the removal of the current cover photo on Umar Khalid's Wikipedia page, as it includes another person along with Umar Khalid. I suggest replacing it with a photo of Umar Khalid alone. Ahte.04 (talk) 05:53, 12 February 2024 (UTC)

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{Edit semi-protected}} template. M.Bitton (talk) 17:11, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

Request to Replace Profile Picture due to Privacy Concerns

Please replace the current profile picture with a new image that only features Umar Khalid, to address privacy concerns involving other individuals visible in the existing photo. This change would align with Wikipedia's guidelines on the biographies of living persons and respect for privacy. Ahte.04 (talk) 09:27, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

There is no image in Wikimedia Commons that only features Umar Khalid. Charliehdb (talk) 09:56, 21 April 2024 (UTC)