Revision as of 15:25, 8 October 2022 editVanamonde93 (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Checkusers, Oversighters, Administrators80,781 edits Reverted 1 edit by 2409:4050:E8F:8D3A:0:0:9B4B:1507 (talk): Rv seeming testTags: Twinkle Undo← Previous edit |
Revision as of 18:30, 2 February 2023 edit undoYoonadue (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users1,085 edits New section- Disputed cause : Undue for first lead paraNext edit → |
Line 23: |
Line 23: |
|
We have multiple secondary and tertiary works on the event. cc: {{U|Vanamonde93}} ] (]) 12:53, 18 August 2022 (UTC) |
|
We have multiple secondary and tertiary works on the event. cc: {{U|Vanamonde93}} ] (]) 12:53, 18 August 2022 (UTC) |
|
:Not just the lead, but yes. In fact I'd say the lead comes closer to reflecting what scholarly sources say than the rest of the article. I expect to be quite active on Misplaced Pages in the next few weeks; I'd be happy to chip in, though I've a few things to catch up on. <span style="font-family:Papyrus">] (])</span> 14:18, 18 August 2022 (UTC) |
|
:Not just the lead, but yes. In fact I'd say the lead comes closer to reflecting what scholarly sources say than the rest of the article. I expect to be quite active on Misplaced Pages in the next few weeks; I'd be happy to chip in, though I've a few things to catch up on. <span style="font-family:Papyrus">] (])</span> 14:18, 18 August 2022 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
==Disputed cause: Undue for first lead para== |
|
|
I recently removed writer Barbara D Metcalf's citation from the very lead and fixed the wording accordingly. This is what has been quoted from her book: |
|
|
{{tq|"The cause of the initial fire has not been determined, but it was almost certainly not deliberately set by Muslims on the station platform, as Hindus frequently alleged."}} |
|
|
|
|
|
Basically, she has completely rubbished an Indian High Court order. How can she be considered a ] for this page and why shouldn't her quote be considered ] for ]? Saying that the cause is disputed in the very first para of lead is like endorsing the highly dubious Banerjee commission report which was dismissed by the court. So, the wording "allegedly perpetuated by a Muslim mob" is fine here. The term "allegedly" makes it ] as we are using this term despite clear court order against the Muslim mob on the basis of eye-witness records. ] (]) 18:29, 2 February 2023 (UTC) |
I recently removed writer Barbara D Metcalf's citation from the very lead and fixed the wording accordingly. This is what has been quoted from her book:
"The cause of the initial fire has not been determined, but it was almost certainly not deliberately set by Muslims on the station platform, as Hindus frequently alleged."
Basically, she has completely rubbished an Indian High Court order. How can she be considered a WP:RS for this page and why shouldn't her quote be considered WP:UNDUE for WP:Lead? Saying that the cause is disputed in the very first para of lead is like endorsing the highly dubious Banerjee commission report which was dismissed by the court. So, the wording "allegedly perpetuated by a Muslim mob" is fine here. The term "allegedly" makes it WP:NPOV as we are using this term despite clear court order against the Muslim mob on the basis of eye-witness records. Yoonadue (talk) 18:29, 2 February 2023 (UTC)