Talk:Narendra Modi

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articleNarendra Modi has been listed as one of the Social sciences and society good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
On this day... Article milestones
DateProcessResult
January 22, 2014Good article nomineeNot listed
March 15, 2017Good article nomineeListed
July 8, 2017Good article reassessmentKept
On this day... Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on September 17, 2020, and September 17, 2022.
Current status: Good article


The airstrike[edit]

Why are we only using a biased media like Washington post for the claiming that the Airstrike failed? Washington post is biased and clearly against India. Why is Wikipedia this biased against India? 103.218.133.35 (talk) 08:03, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:RSP and WP:WAPO. Citation for the claim also includes The Round Table (journal) btw. — hako9 (talk) 18:54, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Right bro 2001:4490:888:C1D2:0:0:0:1 (talk) 13:13, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 19 May 2024[edit]

2405:201:A423:B03D:5DBB:7067:FEDE:A02D (talk) 01:59, 19 May 2024 (UTC)Modi didn't reduce spending on public welfare programs and he didn't abolish or destroy labour and environmental laws.This is a straight up lie.[reply]
 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Note that there are multiple references confirming welfare cuts in the economy section, and citations about environmental cuts in the environment section. Jamedeus (talk) 02:49, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 20 May 2024[edit]

He was also portrayed in Film ARTICLE 370 alongside Amit Shah Jainsanyam08 (talk) 17:18, 20 May 2024 (UTC) Jainsanyam08 (talk) 17:18, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. M.Bitton (talk) 19:21, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Modi is considered complicit by (whom) in the 2002 Gujarat riots?[edit]

Brought some clarity by adding few words for this line in the lead.

Modi administration is considered complicit (by whom) in the 2002 Gujarat riots?


https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Narendra_Modi&diff=prev&oldid=1225087357 BlackOrchidd (talk) 08:49, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Considered complicit not just by the scholars but also by the court of India who handed punishments to some BJP members and also handed punishments to the members of other Sangh Parivar organisations like Bajrang Dal who operated under the command of the then BJP government in centre. Capitals00 (talk) 12:20, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
1. Supreme counrt of India rejected modi governments role in gujarat riots[1]
2. Centre was rulted by UPA and not BJP during that time Afv12e (talk) 18:41, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There are a good number of Sangh Parivar members who are out of jail now because they have spent their time in jail. For a name, look at those Bilkis Bano convicts who are currently missing.[1][2]
It was BJP government in centre when the riots happened in 2002. Capitals00 (talk) 02:05, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
1. Does arresting someone belongs to BJP party spent their time in jail makes Modi administration is considered complicit ?
2. Modi administration was in the state power
By whom Modi administration is considered complicit (by whom) in the 2002 Gujarat riots? Afv12e (talk) 18:26, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Indian court or International court of justice or UN or anybody has said that - Modi administration is considered complicit in gujarat riots.
This is like saying : Person A has been responsible for killing person B , even though NO courts in the world has ever said a verdict like that.
Then how can someone come up and say that person A killed B ? Afv12e (talk) 18:32, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Please read WP:YESPOV, and also read the scholarly sources cited for that statement. Vanamonde93 (talk) 20:16, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It is stupid to say that Wikipedia relays on 'scholarly articles’ on crime and convictions , completely going against what courts of the world has given the verdict.
For crimes and convictions how can you rely on ‘scholarly articles‘ and not on the court verdicts? Afv12e (talk) 13:05, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
For one thing, because an entire government is never tried by a court; the court cases were for individuals. Secondary sources are the only ones who can meaningfully analyze the broader patterns. But in any case, you are expressing a problem with our policies on sourcing, and you need to raise that at WP:VPP, or the talk page of a specific policy. Vanamonde93 (talk) 16:21, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Verdicts of courts in a country don't invalidate what reliable sources have written about it. And on wikipedia, we go by what reliable sources say. — hako9 (talk) 18:09, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
ok, then can we mention that :
Modi administration is considered complicit in the 2002 Gujarat riots by various scholarly articles while Indian court invalidate this
This would clear the confusion of by whom? Afv12e (talk) 01:24, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Won't happen because court considers Modi administration to have illegally helped the criminals involved in these riots.[3] Capitals00 (talk) 03:18, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Aljaseera source says : Not done by modi's administration during the riot, but Gujarat government after that. Even though in Centre modi is in power, it was Gujarat state government who did that.
How come action after the riot, which was not during modi at state government responsible to say that 'Modi administration is considered complicit in the 2002 Gujarat riots' ? Afv12e (talk) 03:51, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Reliable sources suggest that Modi was behind the riots. Wikipedia is not bound to accept what Indian courts are saying. GrabUp - Talk 09:50, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Indian courts have no jurisdiction to invalidate reliable sources on wikipedia and they have better things to do. You seem to not understand how wikipedia works. — hako9 (talk) 09:29, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 25 May 2024[edit]

Can you add this in the lead ?

He initiated and oversaw the world's largest toilet-building program under the Swachh Bharat Abhiyan (Clean India Mission), significantly improving sanitation and public health across the country [2][3][4] Afv12e (talk) 01:47, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Can't, especially due to significant corruption involved in this entire project. The lead already notes that Modi "Modi began a high-profile sanitation campaign". Capitals00 (talk) 03:19, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
how come corruption has anything to do with the above sentence highlighting improving sanitation and public health across the country. The above sentence never said it was 100% corruption free. In india no projects are corruption free! Afv12e (talk) 03:54, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 25 May 2024[edit]

Can you add this in the lead ?

He, has been instrumental in developing the country's road infrastructure, overseeing the construction of a record number of roads and highways during his tenure. Compared to the previous United Progressive Alliance (UPA) government, the Modi administration has significantly accelerated highway construction. Data from the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways indicates that the average road construction rate has increased from 11.67 km per day under the UPA to 36.5 km per day under the Modi government[5][6]. This unprecedented growth in road infrastructure has not only improved connectivity across the country but has also driven economic development and reduced travel times significantly. Afv12e (talk) 01:51, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mainly done by private companies. What you are citing are godi media sources. You should read third-party sources. You can see read this for now. Capitals00 (talk) 03:20, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
you can see fact check here, not 200% but by 148% increased
https://scroll.in/article/1025904/fact-checking-modi-governments-claims-of-record-infrastructure-growth-in-the-past-eight-years Afv12e (talk) 04:00, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Capitals00 can you add now? Afv12e (talk) 16:16, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It requires consensus to add these. GrabUp - Talk 16:37, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 25 May 2024[edit]

can you add this in lead?

Narendra Modi's strategic foreign policy enabled India to secure significant quantities of discounted Russian oil during the Russia-Ukraine war, despite international sanctions against Russia. This move not only provided economic relief to India but also highlighted Modi's adeptness in navigating complex geopolitical landscapes.[7][8][9][10][11] Afv12e (talk) 02:25, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing impressive. Under Modi administration, India has been mainly selling the oil they purchased to Europe at record levels and those involved in the process are private companies. Now we are in 2024, the situation is no longer the same.[4] Capitals00 (talk) 03:21, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
so what? it was a economic relief to India. It was a huge diplomatic success despite international sanctions against Russia.
Yes we are in 2024, why did in the lead added past years covid and CAA protests ? Afv12e (talk) 04:02, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Because CAA protests really happened unlike the non-existing example of some exceptional foreign policy which you are claiming for the Modi government. Abhishek0831996 (talk) 07:51, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I quote the references Afv12e (talk) 16:11, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@RegentsPark I kindly request you to look at these edit requests submitted Afv12e (talk) 16:18, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Afv12e: I don't see consensus for adding this to the article. RegentsPark (comment) 16:25, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

References