Talk:2020 Bangalore riots/Archive 2

Requested move 12 August 2020

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. 

The result of the move request was: Not moved. Consensus favours keeping current name. (non-admin closure) Vpab15 (talk) 12:19, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

2020 Bangalore riots → 2020 Bangalore violence Imv, violence would be the more appropiate name per WP:COMMONNAME according to which the "the name that is most commonly used as determined by its prevalence in a significant majority of independent, reliable English-language sources" should be used. An analysis of the articles used by various reliable sources (in this case news orgs) show that the term "riots" for this incident is rather conservatively used, whereas "violent protests" or "violence" are much more common. Tayi Arajakate Talk 16:08, 12 August 2020 (UTC) —Relisting.  Steel1943  (talk) 22:26, 24 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Comment Are you sure you want to run this as an RfC (which typically expires after 30 days) instead of the more specific requested move which gets reviewed after seven days? Zindor (talk) 17:08, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * , I suppose I can convert it to a move request. Tayi Arajakate  Talk 17:44, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * It would make more sense. Good luck with the discussion. Regards, Zindor (talk) 17:51, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * ✅, conditional on what news reports and other sources in the next few days say. SerChevalerie (talk) 18:30, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * International reports are so far calling it "violence" too (see the NYT report cited above, which is based on a report by AFP). I say we give these more weight than the indigenous publications, per WP:NEWSORG. SerChevalerie (talk) 20:02, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Why should NYT report be more credible than a report by a local publication like 'ThePrint' which called it a riot? Regardless, facts remaining same based on the author and initial reporting, a particular term can get used more than the other. To be unbiased on this, a better course of action is to take the facts from reports of trusted sources and apply the wording as they had been applied in the past across Wikipedia articles to keep consistency. Joshikamal (talk) 15:36, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
 * - as per Wikipedia's definition on Riot vs Violence. -- ♪Karthik♫ ♪Nadar♫ 19:04, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia is not a reliable source. For definitions you may consider citing standard dictionaries. Bubka42 (talk) 10:12, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support – Riot is a loaded term and most often violates NPOV on Wikipedia. As shown above, violence has the benefit of being the COMMONNAME and is neutral as an added bonus. --- C &amp; C ( Coffeeandcrumbs ) 23:14, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose per Karthik. Also, the Times of India and Newsweek too call it a riot. Emperor of India (talk) 23:43, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Wouldn't really call ToI a reliable source on this kind of issue, I've otherwise added Newsweek to the list. Tayi Arajakate  Talk 01:26, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
 * ToI is totally reliable and is one of the leading news agency of India since 181 years as on The Times of India Branstarx3 (talk) 01:52, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Times of India isn't a news agency, its a newspaper and it has deep rooted issues with paid news, covert advertisements and a pro ruling party bias, contentious topics like this is exactly where it should be avoided.  Tayi Arajakate  Talk 02:18, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Not trusting TOI is your POV. If that's the case, DW and Gulf News calls it riots (both are international). Domestic one, Indian Express calls it riots. -- ♪Karthik♫ ♪Nadar♫ 13:04, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Not trusting ToI is not just my POV, I've linked the RSP entry for a reason. The Indian Express article doesn't even mention the word riot anywhere in the body of its article, its singular mention in the subheading is likely for SEO purposes. DW is already present in the list and sure I'll add Gulf News but that's hardly a quality international source. Tayi Arajakate  Talk 14:31, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Ohh dude, regarding the Indian Express article, just check the into. I'm sure CTRL + F (riot) would help you. Great work on updating the list. :-) -- ♪Karthik♫ ♪Nadar♫ 14:50, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I did do that, its mentioned once in the sub-heading and never in the body as I already said. That's the sole usage of the term riot in pretty much every article by the Indian Express btw. For example, none of the following articles mention it as a riot whether in the heading, subheading or in the body of the article.
 * Bengaluru MLA’s house attacked over ‘derogatory post by relative’
 * Police probing role of SDPI in Bangalore violence Tayi Arajakate  Talk 15:44, 13 August 2020 (UTC)


 * A riot is a form of civil disorder commonly characterized by a group lashing out in a violent public disturbance against authority, property or people. And this correctly fits with 2020 Bangalore riots, definition is used as on Riot. Branstarx3 (talk) 01:55, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
 * ✅ conditionally per nominator purposed as most realiable source used that term. 114.125.249.239 (talk) 02:42, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
 * ✅ support the nom in this regard as the sources mostly depict it as violence and we have to comply with them. For example that I can say here about the title of the most recent incident 2020 Czech Republic apartment fire was moved to 2020 Bohumin apartment fire by referring to the BBC source before being finally changed to 2020 Bohumin arson attack. Abishe (talk) 10:06, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
 * This is a case of riot and not violence. What Branstarx3 has mentioned is the correct nomenclature. — Preceding unsigned comment added by YoloSCIS (talk • contribs) 14:44, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
 * with the proposed change in title. --Invisible Lad (talk) 17:45, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
 * The title should contain Riots. Because it was a planned act of creating chaos publicly. Violence would have been a better word if it was a clash between two groups. -Vijeth N Bharadwaj 06:04, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
 * It's pure speculation if it was planned or not. Reliable secondary sources are also mostly calling it violence rather than a riot, and specifically mention clashes between mobs and the police. From when did we stop using secondary sources and started determining article content or for the matter the title on the basis of personal analysis? Tayi Arajakate  Talk 06:33, 14 August 2020 (UTC)


 * with the renaming based on the definitions of a riot. --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 07:13, 14 August 2020 (UTC)


 * : the event should to be named riot as per definition. And about news sources, they are mixed, beside this, every act of riot (including the recent 2020 Delhi riots) has been called "violence" by a large section media. Manasbose (talk) 08:13, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
 * That's inaccurate, the page you are comparing this one to has sources which almost unanimously and explicitly call it a riot whereas in this case the most commonly used term is "Bangalore violence". Tayi Arajakate  Talk 08:32, 14 August 2020 (UTC)


 * REDACTED: For security reasons.
 * , seems completely unrelated and contrary to what English WP:RS say. SerChevalerie (talk) 11:20, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
 * ✅ per nom suggested. 182.1.58.45 (talk) 11:35, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

Hence the word "violence" comes into this picture Sumit Waskar (talk) 06:18, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Even if some sources have went with the term violence, there should be consistency of the word across articles and it should be used as defined in the trusted dictionaries or Wikipedia. Joshikamal (talk) 15:28, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Seems to be what many RS are calling it.Slatersteven (talk) 15:42, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
 * There are multiple articles with the name "riots" in their name. We should not change this for the sake of consistency. Cwarrior (talk) 15:47, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
 * There are many articles in Kannada media clearly mentioning this as riots.--Pavanaja (talk) 04:44, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
 * ✅. Both words have a similar meaning, but violence is more related to this case. Since, the Muslim mobs have burnt down the police stations, already 3 policemen were brutally killed and over 80 were injured.
 * : I don’t think that the difference between “violence” and “riots” is large enough to justify a page move. Many reliable news agencies, including AFP, have called it a “riot”. &#8212;&#x202F; Vaibhavafro &#x202F;&#128172; 14:00, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Violence is a generic word which can also mean violent action of a single person. While, riot which is more specific. Simple google definition of riot is 'a violent disturbance of the peace by a crowd'. This is more suitable in context of this article. Since, we have RS mentioning both, we should stick to the term which is more precise. Also, those suggesting move to violence should quote RS saying that this was not riot. Unless there is a reliable source saying that this was not riot, change is not justified. Sachin.cba (talk) 14:33, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment Violence is a general word, I think riot is more appropriate here. Most sources seems to use both.
 * {| class="wikitable"

!Articles with significant coverage !Publications !Terminology used - BhaskaraPattelar (talk) 11:33, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Bengaluru riots: India Today trolled for doxxing Congress MLA's nephew
 * The Free Press Journal
 * “…resulted in riots in the IT city…”
 * A timeline of the riots at DJ Halli and KG Halli
 * The Hindu
 * “Rioting, where as many as 2,000 people…”
 * Bengaluru Riots:  Prohibitory orders extended until Tuesday
 * United News of India
 * Headline event described as ‘Benguluru Riots’, justified in the body by describing the assailants as ‘rioters’
 * Bengaluru riots: War of words with Facebook pal 'triggered' offensive post
 * Deccan Herald
 * “…triggered the worst riots..”
 * Bengaluru riots: Accused dies in hospital
 * Bangalore Mirror
 * Event described as ‘Benguluru Riots’, Justified in the body by describing the assailants as ‘rioters '
 * Karnataka govt indicates Bengaluru violence was pre-planned
 * Mint (newspaper)
 * ‘“The riots which lasted a few hours…”
 * 3,000 rioters came, burnt house, vehicles: Karnataka MLA
 * Tribune India
 * “…riot broke out…”
 * Bengaluru violence: Another accused dies, toll now four
 * The Indian Express
 * Assailants described as ‘rioters’
 * Bengaluru violence: How rioters launched guerrilla-like attack
 * The Times of India
 * Assailants described as ‘rioters’
 * ‘We live as brothers, sisters’ — Muslims form human chain to save temple amid Bengaluru riots
 * ThePrint
 * Assailants described as ‘rioters’; Headline describes event as 'riots '
 * }
 * Assailants described as ‘rioters’
 * Bengaluru violence: How rioters launched guerrilla-like attack
 * The Times of India
 * Assailants described as ‘rioters’
 * ‘We live as brothers, sisters’ — Muslims form human chain to save temple amid Bengaluru riots
 * ThePrint
 * Assailants described as ‘rioters’; Headline describes event as 'riots '
 * }
 * Assailants described as ‘rioters’; Headline describes event as 'riots '
 * }
 * }
 * I'll add the relevant links to the listing, although a few notes I'd avoid using The Times of India and the link that's attributed to the Bangalore Mirror is from the Telegraph and is solely quoting officials. Tayi Arajakate  Talk 13:16, 16 August 2020 (UTC)


 * riots is most appropriate. violence is very broad category. and this was a riot. also, other article like delhi one, says riot.  ❯❯❯  S A H A   19:51, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
 * - riots is most appropriate. Violence is a very broad category and this was a riot. Other articles like the delhi riots, also use the word "riot" in the title. As says, "A riot is a form of civil disorder commonly characterized by a group lashing out in a violent public disturbance against authority, property or people. And this correctly fits with 2020 Bangalore riots, definition is used as on Riot."&mdash;Dr2Rao (talk) 13:57, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
 * User:ArnabSaha said it best, riot is far more specific than violence. Violence is too general. Inter&#38;anthro (talk) 22:01, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

Let's stick to WP:NEWSORG
Per WP:NEWSORG we should start using more international sources in the article. They all seem to refer to it as "violence"; we should stick to what the reputed sources say, not to "Wikipedia definitions" (or personal opinions, for that matter). Other articles which are named as riots (e.g. 2020 Delhi riots) have multiple international sources stating them to be riots, hence the nomenclature for those. (That being said, if these same agencies start calling it a riot in, say, a week or more, we should revert to calling it a riot; but point being that we still stick to what reputed third-party international sources say.) And remember, this WP:CONSENSUS discussion is not a vote, it's about weighing in Wikipedia's core policies and making a decision. SerChevalerie (talk) 14:15, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
 * International sources are again mixed here, we see some calling it riots and then some calling it violence. It could have been easy if it was one directional. Hence I'm afraid we might have to consider the argument under the move request. Then again we all know how both domestic and international sources operate. Personally, I'll consider the definition of riots and violence as mentioned in Wikipedia then elsewhere. Riot is defined as, A riot is a form of civil disorder commonly characterized by a group lashing out in a violent public disturbance against authority, property or people. while violence is merely defined as "the use of physical force so as to injure, abuse, damage, or destroy". Concluding, we should stick to riots. -- ♪Karthik♫ ♪Nadar♫ 15:46, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
 * In either case, most sources are calling it "violence" (or even protests in some cases) with only a minority calling it "riots". If we are to rely on the higher quality sources then violence would be the adequate term. For instance, if you see above and go through the articles of Reuters, Associated Press, NYT, WaPo, The Independent or BBC, they all refer to it as violence and make no use of the term "riots". DW News and Newsweek are two decent sources which do refer to it as riots along with Gulf News and SCMP which imo are somewhat less reputable. The same would applies if we assess domestic press as well, more or less. Tayi Arajakate  Talk 16:43, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I am not sure how you came up with a list of "reputed" sources. One of the sources The Independent mentioned by you is cited as untrustworthy in many forums. There is no list of reputed/unreputed sources anyone will be able to agree on. The best course of action is taking facts with giving wire feeds precedence(Reuters, AP) if they have reported it and maintaining consistency over articles on usage of terms. The events being described fit the definition of riots very well, otherwise every riot can be described as violence itself. Even a war can, for that matter. Joshikamal (talk) 18:13, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Please read the guidelines on reliable sources and original research. Firstly, I shouldn't have to state this again and again, but original research of any kind such as personal analyses of terms can not be used for content in articles and for pretty good reasons, otherwise it'd be no different from "forums" which one should know to not trust for obvious reasons i.e anyone can make anything up. The opinions of individual editors regarding definitions have no weight when news organisations do not seem to be supporting those opinions.
 * Only reliable secondary sources can be used for articles, now its a different matter if you don't want to trust certain sources although know that most of these sources have already been extensively discussed and despite what you might believe people who want to develop an encyclopedia do in fact come to agreements.
 * That said, the point that you raised on wire feeds on the other hand can still be applied but then there's almost unanimity in using "violence" over "riot" from such sources, for instance if you go through the Reuters and AP articles, they do not use the term "riot" at all. In fact the AP article separately mentions "communal riots in the national capital" and yet does not call this one a riot. Tayi Arajakate  Talk 19:34, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
 * There isn't unanimity certainly. News publications who have used feeds from AFP have used the term riots like SCMP or DW. There are several others but I think the two examples suffice as they clearly cite the wire feeds they are using. Since there is divergence on the usage of the term even among wire feeds which are supposed to be almost "neutral". I would go with the definition/usage of the actual words and precedence here. Violence is too broad which describes anything from 1:1 physical assault to war. Joshikamal (talk) 21:17, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Even if AFP used the term riot, which you have not actually shown to be the case (news orgs can still use different terms from their feeds). The majority of agencies still don't call it a riot, WP:COMMONNAME does not require unanimity, only the most commonly used name. Tayi Arajakate  Talk 22:55, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
 * AFP doesn't seem to have a public feed. Considering most of their feed users have used it, it would have come from AfP feed, highly unlikely that media publications carrying feed are going to insert the term riot there. I never said there has to be unanimity, you mentioned unanimity, I was debunking that. The same WP::COMMONNAME you are linking to also cites even if reliable sources have frequently used a term, a better term can be used to remove ambiguity. Since riot has been used by reliable sources and it most accurately describes the solution, it would be more appropriate to use that here. Joshikamal (talk) 00:05, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
 * If the AFP feed is not publicly available then we can not comment on what it says now can we? From what one can observe, agencies that have a public feed are not referring to it as riots. I don't know about DW but SCMP does have a tendency to exaggerate negative events related to India. Not to mention, both of them cite multiple feeds so they can absolutely editorialise them in terms of their understanding or outlook.
 * 2020 Bangalore riots and 2020 Bangalore violence are also both unambiguous with regards to what it's referring to, it's not like "violence" is being used in isolation of everything else. It is in fact relatively inappropriate to use the term riot for a incident which goes nowhere near the scope and scale of riots that generally occur in India, making the term fairly pov and is also likely why the predominant coverage from news media is not referring to it as a riot when they would otherwise do so at the first occasion.
 * Furthermore, it's not as if BBC and NYT are in conflict such that we can relegate a more common term in preference of another term, its BBC and NYT in conflict with DW and SCMP, where the former are also supported by a predominant dis-inclusion of the term riots in international press as well as in domestic press. Tayi Arajakate  Talk 00:50, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
 * There are plenty of other sources which have just used AFP and they have used riot to describe it. I think we are going around in circles at this point with no agreement.
 * Regarding you disparaging SCMP on its India bias and holding up NYT as some shining beacon of truth. Do remember, NYT is no Breitbart or OpIndia but it certainly is not also in anyway neutral and factual. Remeber their coverage of WMD. Also, NYT has an anti India bias which has been quite obvious in their subtext or theme of the articles. They mocked ISRO of all organisations. Joshikamal (talk) 16:37, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
 * That tabloid article you linked itself states "The intent of the cartoonist, Heng Kim Song, was to highlight how space exploration is no longer the exclusive domain of rich, Western countries."
 * If you think sources like the The New York Times or The Independent  are unreliable please take it to the reliable sources noticeboard.  Tayi Arajakate  Talk 16:59, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Sure, go and attack the source rather than the content. Here is a *reputed* source(BBC) talking about the same. It is far easier to say, I was joking when you find out your crass humour does feel insulting, specially when it is carried by a "respected" news publication.
 * That whole RS list is extremely biased towards Western publications which is fair considering this is the English Wikipedia but acts as a poor barometer for coverage of issues related to a country like India. Also, that reputation might very well be earned with coverage of articles related to West but really doesn't translate to their lack of context with things related to India, I would rather prefer high quality local projects like 'The Print' be preferred, but such is the travesty. Joshikamal (talk) 17:36, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes, a source which quotes twitter users and concludes its statement with a meme gif is a tabloid source. The BBC article on the other hand so much as says that the NYT apologised for the cartoon which people on facebook found offensive, what's the big deal?
 * And yeah.. we can use high quality local projects like ThePrint, I've no qualms. But let's be honest, isn't this cherrypicked just for the sake of the article title? Because in terms of local projects, ThePrint is pretty equivalent to The Quint and The News Minute; all of them are new media founded by veterans of print or broadcast journalism. If we use high quality domestic sources, we end up in the same situation with a majority of sources preferring the term "violence" with some outliers using the term "riots".
 * Look if you can't agree with the established consensus on sources, I can't engage in a constructive discussion with you other than by directing you to the relevant noticeboard. Please continue it on the reliable sources noticeboard if you have to. I'm not going to engage further if this has to boil down to questioning the reliability of sources which are otherwise considered reliable. Tayi Arajakate  Talk 18:29, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Sure, they apologized after an outcry. The insensitivity and lack of understanding should have been apparent to them while publishing it, it wasn't though. The thing is, that image made it very apparent what subtext of a lot of their articles carry. I will definitely debate the usage of NyTimes in articles related to India on even the Reputed Sources boards.
 * Regarding, why Print? I wasn't cherry picking it. It just happens to be one of the publications I follow as I am aware about the ideological biases of its editor, Shekhar Gupta quite well which makes it easier for me to follow news. Him being anti establishment and liberal(not the Twitter one) also is a nice touch to me. I can't comment on other two you mentioned as I haven't followed them well. You are right about one thing that I had mentioned that this conversation is going in circles. Final note on this, would be again me restating as I have before that it is not the majority opinion, it is what the facts seem to convey and to keep consistency across Wikipedia. Joshikamal (talk) 19:00, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
 * , It is in fact relatively inappropriate to use the term riot for a incident which goes nowhere near the scope and scale of riots that generally occur in India, Can you provide WP:RS to justify this statement? Just want to check. BhaskaraPattelar (talk) 07:19, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
 * , Take a look at AP's rendition for one. Tayi Arajakate  Talk 07:23, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
 * , No, that does not answer the question. I am not just talking about this incident, since you are alluding to some kind of 'Riot Scale' that help easily categorise riots into 'riots' and 'not-riots'. Please, tell me what WP:RS parameters you are using to making such a claim. You also mentioned 'scale' and 'scope', can you define what you mean by that? Is this WP:OR, or do you have source that have studied riots in India? BhaskaraPattelar (talk) 07:39, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
 * The policy on no original research applies to original research done for the sake of including content in an article, not for analysing whether something might be in violation of other policies if that's what you're trying to imply here. Tayi Arajakate  Talk 08:44, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Okay, I see you still haven't answered the question. I did not imply anything, just wanted to confirm that it was your own opinion. I will take it that you don't have an WP:RS source backing up your claim. BhaskaraPattelar (talk) 10:03, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
 * It's an opinion based on the coverage in reliable sources but no, if you are asking whether a reliable source explicitly supports it then no, I've not encountered one yet. Tayi Arajakate  Talk 10:08, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
 * It is also based on what one might call common sense, projecting an incident which lasted for 3-4 hours, was localised in three specific spots, did not involve targeting on a ethno-religious basis and where the only handful casualties were among the aggressors themselves to be the equivalent as the incidents of the 2020 Delhi riots or even the 2017 Northern India riots does bring up a question of POV.
 * On a sidenote, in regards to the argument that this would somehow maintain consistency over usage of terms then that's inaccurate. For instance, the 2018 Bhima Koregaon violence is much more comparable in terms of its coverage. Tayi Arajakate  Talk 11:05, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Furthermore, using wikipedia definition is an example of original research. If I remember correctly wikipedia articles can not be used as sources for anything on other wikipedia articles. Tayi Arajakate  Talk 16:47, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
 * , yep. See WP:NOTSOURCE. SerChevalerie (talk) 18:35, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Ok, see. Definition of riot from reputed dictionary Joshikamal (talk) 18:58, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
 * , Take a look at AP's rendition for one. Tayi Arajakate  Talk 07:23, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
 * , No, that does not answer the question. I am not just talking about this incident, since you are alluding to some kind of 'Riot Scale' that help easily categorise riots into 'riots' and 'not-riots'. Please, tell me what WP:RS parameters you are using to making such a claim. You also mentioned 'scale' and 'scope', can you define what you mean by that? Is this WP:OR, or do you have source that have studied riots in India? BhaskaraPattelar (talk) 07:39, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
 * The policy on no original research applies to original research done for the sake of including content in an article, not for analysing whether something might be in violation of other policies if that's what you're trying to imply here. Tayi Arajakate  Talk 08:44, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Okay, I see you still haven't answered the question. I did not imply anything, just wanted to confirm that it was your own opinion. I will take it that you don't have an WP:RS source backing up your claim. BhaskaraPattelar (talk) 10:03, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
 * It's an opinion based on the coverage in reliable sources but no, if you are asking whether a reliable source explicitly supports it then no, I've not encountered one yet. Tayi Arajakate  Talk 10:08, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
 * It is also based on what one might call common sense, projecting an incident which lasted for 3-4 hours, was localised in three specific spots, did not involve targeting on a ethno-religious basis and where the only handful casualties were among the aggressors themselves to be the equivalent as the incidents of the 2020 Delhi riots or even the 2017 Northern India riots does bring up a question of POV.
 * On a sidenote, in regards to the argument that this would somehow maintain consistency over usage of terms then that's inaccurate. For instance, the 2018 Bhima Koregaon violence is much more comparable in terms of its coverage. Tayi Arajakate  Talk 11:05, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Furthermore, using wikipedia definition is an example of original research. If I remember correctly wikipedia articles can not be used as sources for anything on other wikipedia articles. Tayi Arajakate  Talk 16:47, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
 * , yep. See WP:NOTSOURCE. SerChevalerie (talk) 18:35, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Ok, see. Definition of riot from reputed dictionary Joshikamal (talk) 18:58, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Ok, see. Definition of riot from reputed dictionary Joshikamal (talk) 18:58, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

Bangalore or Bengaluru

 * There are more reliable sources using Bengaluru. Why we are ignoring the name of place and debating over whether it's riot or violence? Even in the above table more reliable sources use Bengaluru. I didn't edit the table, links were selected by others. // Signature 15:49, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
 * , Can we do this one by one? After the "riot" or "violence" discussion is over, we could initiate another move request for the city name if required. Tayi Arajakate  Talk 16:04, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
 * 301 is bad for SEO. Redirecting multiple times will result in less views. // Signature 16:12, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
 * That really does not matter for Wikipedia for the most part. Also bots usually fix double redirects if that's the concern. Tayi Arajakate  Talk 16:34, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm leaving this article alone. I'll never edit this article and the talk page again. // Signature 18:30, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

Discussion

 * Name changed long time ago. More reliable sources are using Bengaluru. Per WP:NEWSORG we should use Bengaluru. Of course we will ignoring WP:NEWSORG if we don't use Bengaluru. // Signature 15:49, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
 * ✅ lets change this to Bengaluru - but we gotta wait for the "riots vs violence" discussion to conclude. -- ♪Karthik♫ ♪Nadar♫ 16:42, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
 * per WP:COMMONNAME. See Bangalore, which is the article title, not "Bengaluru" (redirect). SerChevalerie (talk) 18:37, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
 * per WP:COMMONNAME and basis arguments referred in various move requests in Bangalore article. -- ♪Karthik♫ ♪Nadar♫ 18:58, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
 * ✅ Official name is Bengaluru. The article title has to be changed to reflect that.--Pavanaja (talk) 04:50, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
 * ✅. Before deciding on riot or violence, the place name to be corrected as Bengaluru in the article title and body. That is the correct native and official name.It can be seen that Newsmedia reports also use same. --VikasHegde (talk) 05:12, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
 * ✅ I agree to change the title of article and Bangaluru is official name  --Arpitha05 (talk) 05:23, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
 * per COMMONNAME. Using Bengaluru will make it inconsistent with Bangalore city article . --Ab207 (talk) 15:56, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Bengaluru is same as WP:COMMONNAME Bangalore so no name redirect Branstarx3 (talk) 00:57, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
 * ✅. Those who are against are misapplying COMMONNAME policy. It is written as Bengaluru violence/riot in Every. Single. Source., including NYT, The Hindu etc. So, the common name of this specific incident has the word Bengaluru not Bengalore. So, depending on the result of the above discussion, it should be either 2020 Bengaluru violence or 2020 Bengaluru riot. Regards, TryKid&thinsp;[dubious – discuss] 01:57, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
 * the city article is named as bangalore. so, keep that.  ❯❯❯  S A H A   19:51, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
 * if you want to have it switched to Bengaluru, this isn't the place to do it. Talk: Bangalore would be better; it would be good to have consistency and I would vote for changing to Bengaluru because WP:COMMONNAME has shifted to Bengaluru.TheKaloo (talk) 19:42, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment I now requesting move of the name Bangalore to Bengaluru in that city talk page, For those who agree/disagree with this move of riot/violence, please use all argument in that page because it was related to this RM. 110.137.186.235 (talk) 23:31, 24 August 2020 (UTC)


 * ✅ The official name is Bengaluru. The article title has to be changed to reflect that. is right in saying, "Those who are against are misapplying COMMONNAME policy. It is written as Bengaluru violence/riot in Every. Single. Source., including NYT, The Hindu etc. So, the common name of this specific incident has the word Bengaluru not Bengalore. So, depending on the result of the above discussion, it should be either 2020 Bengaluru violence or 2020 Bengaluru riot."&mdash;Dr2Rao (talk) 13:42, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
 * We use common name, not official.Slatersteven (talk) 13:44, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

Every single source except this one [].Slatersteven (talk) 14:14, 24 August 2020 (UTC)


 * The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.