Talk:Narendra Modi
Warning: active arbitration remedies The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. This article is related to India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan, which is a contentious topic. Furthermore, the following rules apply when editing this article:
Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. Restrictions placed: 13 April 2021 |
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Narendra Modi article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21Auto-archiving period: 7 days |
This page is not a forum for general discussion about Narendra Modi. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about Narendra Modi at the Reference desk. |
This article is written in Indian English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, analysed, defence) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
Narendra 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. | ||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
This page is about a politician who is running for office or has recently run for office, is in office and campaigning for re-election, or is involved in some current political conflict or controversy. For that reason, this article is at increased risk of biased editing, talk-page trolling, and simple vandalism. |
This level-5 vital article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information. |
This article has been viewed enough times in a single week to appear in the Top 25 Report 6 times. The weeks in which this happened: |
Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 30 July 2024
[edit]This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Edit the education/alma matter of this person. He is uneducated 142.198.58.24 (talk) 14:39, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
- The degrees, as well as a controversy regarding the degrees, are all well cited. RegentsPark (comment) 18:59, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
- he is well educated. What proof do you have that he is uneducated. Even I can say that Rahul Gandhi is uneducated and has a fake degree . Don't make stupid claims without proofs . 2405:201:4001:4863:AD97:9E7B:F17A:9F72 (talk) 10:48, 28 September 2024 (UTC)
Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 28 September 2024
[edit]This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
The Balakot airstrike was a success and Pakistan hid the evidence ( according to their own people ) and media was censored . The shooting down of F-16 was also true with Pakistan hiding the proof. Why are we using sources like The Washington Post , which is too biased towards India( due to their racist nature towards Indians). 2405:201:4001:4863:AD97:9E7B:F17A:9F72 (talk) 10:44, 28 September 2024 (UTC)
- 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. Charliehdb (talk) 10:49, 28 September 2024 (UTC)
Include criticism for maintaining silence on Manipur, Ladakh
[edit]https://thewire.in/politics/narendra-modi-talked-about-the-manipur-violence-but-did-he-really
The Manipur issue is not included anywhere in the article. Nor are any criticisms present for him maintaining silence on Ladakh issue. Requesting moderators to fix that. Caesarian Cobol (talk) 13:56, 29 September 2024 (UTC)
- Anywhere? The article does say "
Modi has been criticised for his lack of reaction towards the violence
" and "Modi has been criticised for maintaining silence over ceding about 2,000 sq km land to China since June 2020
". Ratnahastin (talk) 01:58, 30 September 2024 (UTC)- @Ratnahastin when we are talking about ethnic violence(Manipur), it's unfair to sum it up in a line. An expansion is in order.
- Ladakh issue isn't about China and china only. Sonam Wangchuk hasn't been mentioned. Nor how he was turned a deaf ear after several days making it the longest protest since Mahatma Gandhi Caesarian Cobol (talk) 02:57, 30 September 2024 (UTC)
- I was mentioning that the article does not ignore these aspects and has mentioned them. You can propose the wording or edit the article yourself per WP:BOLD. Ratnahastin (talk) 03:02, 30 September 2024 (UTC)
- @Ratnahastin I cannot edit the article as it seems to be protected. Caesarian Cobol (talk) 03:05, 30 September 2024 (UTC)
- I also mentioned that you can "propose the wording". Consider doing that. Ratnahastin (talk) 03:08, 30 September 2024 (UTC)
- @Ratnahastin I'm for favour of expanding these one liners to a paragraph atleast so as to include proper coverage. I'm not sure what you expect when you ask me to "propose the wording". Still I'll try giving my two cents.
- Instead of just Modi has received criticism for his stance in Manipur whatever, we could make a dedicated section for Manipur violence, and take a collaborative approach to report on this complex issue.
- For Ladakh criticism is virtually non-existent with a one liner.
- It cannot be done by me, I don't have the editing rights, for those of who do, consider adding these parts. Caesarian Cobol (talk) 03:31, 30 September 2024 (UTC)
- any updates? Caesarian Cobol (talk) 19:01, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- I also mentioned that you can "propose the wording". Consider doing that. Ratnahastin (talk) 03:08, 30 September 2024 (UTC)
- @Ratnahastin I cannot edit the article as it seems to be protected. Caesarian Cobol (talk) 03:05, 30 September 2024 (UTC)
- I was mentioning that the article does not ignore these aspects and has mentioned them. You can propose the wording or edit the article yourself per WP:BOLD. Ratnahastin (talk) 03:02, 30 September 2024 (UTC)
- @Caesarian Cobol: what Ratnahastin is saying is you should propose the exact wording you'd like to see in the article and, assuming there are no objections, someone will modify the article appropriately. Be sure to include citations (see WP:RS). Expecting that someone will collect references and figure out the exact text is often expecting too much. You think it should be added so it is best if you do the leg work as well!RegentsPark (comment) 19:57, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
G20 consensus and Pakistan policy
[edit]Hello all,
This post is regarding my edit : where I mention about G20 consensus and Pakistan policy.
G20
Proposed edit: "India's leadership at the 2023 G20 Summit focused on consensus-building, inclusiveness, and promoting solutions despite geopolitical tensions. While the absence of leaders like Putin and Xi raised concerns, India successfully navigated the situation. Modi and his team worked through extensive negotiations to achieve consensus on divisive issues, notably the Russia-Ukraine conflict. Experts were of the view that Modi’s leadership emerged as a counterbalance to China’s influence, as India sought to enhance cooperation with both the developing world and the West. Xi’s decision not to attend further isolated China, allowing India and other leaders to shape the summit’s direction".
There was some concern by @Black Kite regarding the language of the edit, particularly that it might come across as promotional. However, the phrasing aligns with the conclusions drawn from credible sources. For instance, The Atlantic, a publication known for its analysis, reflects the views of experts on the matter. I have also attached more sources that state the same. However, please let me know how we could include this information in the article.
Pakistan Policy
Proposed edit: "Under Modi, India employed a set of policies aimed at diplomatically pressuring Pakistan, using geopolitical diplomacy. One of the moves by Modi’s government was raising the issue of Balochistan. In his Independence Day speech in August 2016, Modi explicitly mentioned Pakistan’s human rights violations in Balochistan, Gilgit, and Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK). India sidelined the SAARC, in which Pakistan plays a key role, and instead focused on BIMSTEC. By excluding Pakistan from this regional grouping and focusing on countries like Bangladesh, Nepal, Bhutan, and Sri Lanka, India managed to limit Pakistan’s regional influence. India’s successful maneuvering resulted in the postponement of the 19th SAARC summit in 2016, as multiple nations pulled out in solidarity with India. India's diplomatic pressure led to listing of Masood Azhar, the leader of Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM), as a global terrorist in United Nations in May 2019, despite China’s previous oppositions. India worked to cripple Pakistan's economy by leveraging international financial institutions. The Financial Action Task Force (FATF) placed Pakistan on its grey list for failing to combat terrorist financing, hampering Pakistan's ability to secure foreign investment and aid. Additionally, India lobbied the International Monetary Fund (IMF) to hold Pakistan accountable for its economic mismanagement and support for terrorism, which further worsened Pakistan’s economic standing"
The concern raised by @Black Kite was about the JSTOR source - published by World Affairs: The Journal of International Issues - where the first line states "Pakistan is meddling in Kashmir." I am confused to understand whether this initial statement affects the reliability of the source or if the journal itself is not acceptable for our purposes. It would be helpful to clarify what the specific issue is with this source.
Let’s collaborate to understand the objections and find a version of the information that reflects everyone’s viewpoints. We can work together to ensure the content is balanced, fact-based, and acceptable to all.
Thanks! SpunkyGeek (talk) 15:40, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- The sources used are not fit for purpose. The link you provide isn't to The Atlantic, a respected publication, but to the "Atlantic Council", a non-profit of unknown reliability. The JSTOR link is to a journal article whose grammar is so poor it casts serious doubts on its reliability. The language of the proposed edits is also seriously inappropriate; it presents as fact several claims whose veracity isn't known, and uncritically repeats government statements not supported by secondary sources. And the points of actual substance are so minor that most do not belong in the overview article at all, being more appropriate to the article about Modi's foreign policy. Both these proposals are non-starters. Vanamonde93 (talk) 15:51, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 15 October 2024
[edit]This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
2409:40F4:12E:50DB:B48A:B19D:5244:805C (talk) 12:06, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
I request that you should add honorific suffix that he is a mp of india and PM
- Not done Can't add honorifics per WP:NCIN and MOS:HON policies. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 12:48, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
- Wikipedia articles that use Indian English
- Wikipedia good articles
- Social sciences and society good articles
- Biography articles of living people
- Active politicians
- GA-Class level-5 vital articles
- Wikipedia level-5 vital articles in People
- GA-Class vital articles in People
- GA-Class biography articles
- GA-Class biography (politics and government) articles
- High-importance biography (politics and government) articles
- Politics and government work group articles
- WikiProject Biography articles
- GA-Class India articles
- Top-importance India articles
- GA-Class India articles of Top-importance
- GA-Class Gujarat articles
- Top-importance Gujarat articles
- GA-Class Gujarat articles of Top-importance
- WikiProject Gujarat articles
- GA-Class Indian politics articles
- Top-importance Indian politics articles
- GA-Class Indian politics articles of Top-importance
- WikiProject Indian politics articles
- WikiProject India articles
- GA-Class politics articles
- High-importance politics articles
- WikiProject Politics articles
- GA-Class Veganism and Vegetarianism articles
- Low-importance Veganism and Vegetarianism articles
- WikiProject Veganism and Vegetarianism articles
- Articles copy edited by the Guild of Copy Editors
- Wikipedia controversial topics
- Pages in the Wikipedia Top 25 Report