Talk:2011 Delhi bombing

Merger proposal
I propose that September 7,2011 Delhi High Court Blasts be merged into 2011 Delhi bombing. I think that the content in the September 7,2011 Delhi High Court Blasts article can easily be explained in the context of 2011 Delhi bombing, and the 2011 Delhi bombing article is of a reasonable size in which the merging of Foo will not cause any problems as far as article size or undue weight is concerned. Adhir Kirtikar - Everything is Possible... The Impossible just takes longer... (talk) 09:26, 8 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Be bold. Go ahead and do it. Mar4d (talk) 09:39, 8 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Merge September 7,2011 Delhi High Court Blasts into 2011 Delhi bombing. Karthik Nadar (talk) 09:56, 8 September 2011 (UTC)


 * After seeing the 2011 Delhi bombing, I also thought to merge the September 7,2011 Delhi High Court Blasts article with the first one! That is why I did not updated the September 7,2011 Delhi High Court Blasts. I support to merge it. - Biswarup Ganguly (talk) 11:52, 8 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Redirect: Instead merging, redirecting September 7,2011 Delhi High Court Blasts to 2011 Delhi bombing will be a better option. Karthik Nadar (talk) 12:23, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

Vandal alert
This looks like vandalism, but I don't know how to fix. Please fix ASAP. onyx 321 09:44, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

Article blanking
Can any administor look into this edit: 449111402, of this current article 2011 Delhi bombing blanking done recently by a IP user:120.56.181.53, regards --Omer123hussain (talk) 09:51, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

I made it ok! Karthik Nadar (talk) 09:57, 8 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks.--Omer123hussain (talk) 10:06, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of September 7,2011 Delhi High Court Blasts
I propose that September 7,2011 Delhi High Court Blasts should be deleted. Randor1980 (talk) 12:43, 8 September 2011 (UTC)
 * support as its not per MOS dates. though one should request it there with a tag so the bots/admins can knowof it.Lihaas (talk) 01:57, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

Restored sourced information
Restored the sourced edit No. 449139366, which was removed by IP: 117.213.34.109 and User:Rdavi404 had tagged a template, be informed that the source is live see this source or | here.--Omer123hussain (talk) 19:57, 8 September 2011 (UTC)
 * The source cited is pointing to a different Rediff article than the one you mention. I will update.--RDavi404 (talk) 22:05, 8 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks, --Omer123hussain (talk) 00:05, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

Request for Semi Protection
Can some admin semi protect this page temporarily? Or can someone please write up a request on the WP: RPP page? Its a current event, and as such is prone to possible vandalism by unregistered users.Batram (talk) 12:53, 9 September 2011 (UTC)
 * itll only be approved if there IS considereable vandalism.
 * but this article doesnt seem to be changing much recently (and its utter crap to be on the main page)Lihaas (talk) 01:58, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

Cat: Islamic Terrorism?
According to what I can perceive from the current investigations that are on into the blast, the government hasn't come out openly and said that either this group is responsible for the attack or this one is not. Essentially, the responsibility for the attack hasn't even been pinned down to a particular cause, let alone a group

I was just wondering, how is this event categorized under Islamic terrorism ? Does it actually follow the norms laid down as per WP: NPOV and WP: Cat.

Shouldnt we better remove this category until we can substantially prove it was a particular group? Batram (talk) 09:56, 11 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Agreed. WP:SOFIXIT Pascal (talk) 19:29, 12 September 2011 (UTC)
 * I Agree too.--Omer123hussain (talk) 03:43, 13 September 2011 (UTC)