Talk:2020 Jawaharlal Nehru University attack/Archive 1

Name change
, who asked for it, did you have any discussion with the user on it??? the page move summary showing, "JNU is ambiguous" which is a false narrative, whole India recognise the university as JNU and all realiable sources call it JNU attack, Jawaharlal Nehru University actually creates ambiguity as there multiple J.N.University there in India. Second I don't see the requirement of the removal of year. Third 2020 JNU Attack is collectively a noun, the name of the incident, just like 2018 Russia World Cup. Dey subrata (talk) 17:29, 22 January 2020 (UTC)
 * , no i didnt. User:Jim Michael please explain the move.  D Big X ray ᗙ  17:38, 22 January 2020 (UTC)
 * JNU is clearly ambiguous, because there are 7 entries on that dab page. It's not even the only JNU in India - there are 2 others on the dab page. Even if it's the most well-known in India, this is a worldwide encyclopedia & most of the world don't think of this university when they see JNU.
 * I removed the year because with the full name in the title, there is no need for it.
 * I uncapitalised the first letter of attack, because it's not a proper noun; we don't use capitals for attack/bombing/shooting etc. in our titles, for example September 11 attacks, Oklahoma City bombing, 2017 Las Vegas shooting.
 * Our articles about attacks at universities usually include the full name, including: Garissa University College attack, Bacha Khan University attack, 2016 Ohio State University attack, Aleppo University bombings & American University of Afghanistan attack. Jim Michael (talk) 17:46, 22 January 2020 (UTC)
 * , Thanks for the kind reply. I do agree with the capitalisation, and also with removing the unnecessary dab. I dont agree with the full form. I would prefer "JNU attack" because there are no attack cases for others. I dont think anyone will be surprised if searching JNU attack brings up this page. The examples above are not apple to apple comparison because the acronym is not as popular as in JNU case. Ohio state university attack was not reffered to as the OSU attack by the media. but in JNU case it was.  D Big X ray ᗙ  18:50, 22 January 2020 (UTC)
 * If JNU's primary meaning were Jawaharlal Nehru University, JNU would/should redirect to it.
 * Is it solely/primarily the Indian media who refer to it as the JNU attack - or do the media in other countries often do so? Jim Michael (talk) 18:58, 22 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes, see these international media examples.  -- D Big X ray ᗙ  19:16, 22 January 2020 (UTC)


 * Every reliable sources/citations of India and world call it JNU attack. Here some examples JNU attack....by The Hindu, JNU students....by the Economic Times, Jnu attack...by The Live Mint. We always take name of incidents by what history and sources call it. History and sources will never call it Jawahalal Nehru University attack but JNU attack. Secondly as I said, it not JNU but Jawaharlal Nehru University (disambiguation) will create ambiguity. I am also ok with the "Attack" into "attack" seeing the consistency of other articles. Dey subrata (talk) 20:21, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

Google hits for Jawaharlal Nehru University attack (4,050) versus JNU attack (1,150,000). You don't argue with numbers of that magnitude! -- Kautilya3 (talk) 20:26, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

Year in title

 * Kautilya3 Thanks for sharing your valuable opinion. What are your thoughts about the year 2020. Everyone other than Dey subrata thinks year is unnecessary disambiguation and Dey did not give any reason.  D Big X ray ᗙ  20:52, 22 January 2020 (UTC)
 * I prefer "2020" to be there. See the 2016 Ohio State University attack and other links given on that page. I think it is proper to name these kind of attacks with a time stamp. Otherwise they would look major historical events that are unique in history, sort of like the Atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 21:11, 22 January 2020 (UTC)
 * PS: I couldn't edit this section for some reason. Possibly the "archive" template misbehaving. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 21:11, 22 January 2020 (UTC)
 * I did not face any problem, but I have split a subsection for this.
 * WP:NOYEAR covers this well, and leaves to upto the editors to decide. Indeed this is a unique historical event as there seems to be no other notable attack on JNU throughout history and the reliable sources also dont use the year. In future if we have another notable, attack on JNU then it will make sense to use the 2020 dab. -- D Big X ray ᗙ  21:20, 22 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Providing that there have not been any other notable attacks at any place which is known as JNU, the year is extraneous & should be removed. The discussion above was closed far too soon. There are 3 aspects to this move: a) whether or not to include the year; b) the initialism or the full name & c) the capitalisation of the first letter of attack. Whilst there is consensus for the abbreviation & uncapitalising the a, there's not a consensus for reinstating the year. Jim Michael (talk) 21:32, 22 January 2020 (UTC)
 * JNU attack is a very small scale attack and its not an attack like Jallianwala Bagh massacre which are notable and unique in history. Such attacks are without year because, are very well know to people and 100 years from now also people will remember which makes them unique. But this is not the case about JNU, one need to add years to make it specific and for future references. I would ask to keep the year with it. Here is another example of year with name 2001 Indian Parliament attack, 2016 Uri attack. Dey subrata (talk) 21:39, 22 January 2020 (UTC)
 * , I think it will be remembered 100 years from now. I cant think of any such attack in any college in India since independence (70 years). So yes, I think this is historic. And we should get rid of the year. Do you have any other strong opinions against it ?  Parliament attack also does not need the year. Uri needs the year since it is a warzone due to terrorism. multiple attacks have happened. anyway lets discuss on this article and not on WP:OSE  D Big X ray ᗙ  21:47, 22 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes, it's unusual. Although no-one was killed, it wasn't small-scale. There were many attackers & victims, as well as interest in it by the media & public. Jim Michael (talk) 21:52, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

Don't you think it will make more specific about the event. There will be redirects after all. And we should not go after the 2001 Parliament attack now, I have just given example that there are pages with year, books are written on 2001 parliament attack and recent news about the DSP Jammu also calling 2001 Parliament attack. Thats why saying, its more specific to take years. I don't see any harm. Dey subrata (talk) 22:02, 22 January 2020 (UTC)
 * , Please read WP:NOYEAR again if you haven't. Lets talk about the benefits and not harm. what are the benefits. Using the title that reliable media are using makes the title easier to find. Please will generally search for "Attack in JNU" or "JNU attack"  and that is expected per WP:COMMONNAME. If there are more than one event in a place then there is no choice, but we have a choice here.  D Big X ray ᗙ  22:06, 22 January 2020 (UTC)
 * There was an attack in Lamu County, Kenya on the same day. It was created as 2020 Camp Simba attack, but, after a talk page discussion, it was moved to Camp Simba attack. Jim Michael (talk) 22:14, 22 January 2020 (UTC)
 * There is after all events happened JNU sedition row. So for future reference and make it specific its more logical to use the "2020". I wish there will never such event even in future in any institutions in India. Dey subrata (talk) 22:23, 22 January 2020 (UTC)
 * You call that a discussion ?? Secondly, it should be with year as its a war zone attack. That not a discussion at all. Dey subrata (talk) 22:29, 22 January 2020 (UTC)
 * , yes, but it was not a violent attack. it was more of a controversy. This is still a unique incident of an attack that too on a premier institute done with a political motive to distract people from CAA protests.  D Big X ray ᗙ  22:27, 22 January 2020 (UTC)
 * See this name with "JNU attack" is relevant only to this year, in future it will ultimately be called as "2020 JNU attack" without that 2020, it really looks odd. Better rechange to "Attack on JNU" rather than "JNU attack" if the year is not added. Dey subrata (talk) 22:37, 22 January 2020 (UTC)
 * , yes, it is a good example of a community consensus. the Move discussion are well advertised by a bot and on WP:RM page, and it got consensus. we should use the same as an example here, and drop the year for now. If in future something happens then we can add the year.  D Big X ray ᗙ  22:38, 22 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Lets wait for more users to add their thoughts. Better to wait for a while. Dey subrata (talk) 22:45, 22 January 2020 (UTC)
 * The JNU row wasn't an attack. There has only been 1 notable attack there & only 1 at Camp Simba - hence neither need the year in their titles.
 * There isn't a minimum number of contributors needed for consensus.
 * The usual format for our articles is [location] attack. Attack on is far less common. Jim Michael (talk) 22:53, 22 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Jim Michael and Dey subrata, as you requested, we have waited for a while now. Since no stronger arguments were made in support of keeping the year while good points were made to drop it, I suggest, we can now move the page tomorrow.  D Big X ray ᗙ  19:31, 26 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Providing that there have been no other notable attacks at any place known as JNU, the year should be removed from the title. Jim Michael (talk) 19:49, 26 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Fine......!!! DBX and JM you may proceed. Dey subrata (talk) 01:03, 27 January 2020 (UTC)
 * ✅. Page moved, thanks for the kind response.  D Big X ray ᗙ  09:40, 27 January 2020 (UTC)

Moved again
This article has been moved again, without discussion. Jim Michael (talk) 03:45, 22 March 2020 (UTC)

Where to add
Where to add this Court asked ATR from Delhi Police.... 1, 2, 3 and Delhi Police admit they saw mob attacking students – but failed to act.. 4, 5, for this we have to re-write some parts. Dey subrata (talk) 18:37, 3 February 2020 (UTC)
 * , it can be added as a new subsection under investigation. But I think we can add a new section "Trial" and include it there as court was involved here and police did not do this on its own.  D Big X ray ᗙ  19:10, 3 February 2020 (UTC)


 * I think this the same case of "petition to preserve evidence", so the whole section to be brought under Investigation section. What do you say?? Dey subrata (talk) 20:02, 3 February 2020 (UTC)


 * Not the same petition, its another plea by Professor Sen (the professor injured) 1. Dey subrata (talk) 20:10, 3 February 2020 (UTC)


 * check the section added, is it ok to you, or shall we move it or change it? Dey subrata (talk) 21:00, 3 February 2020 (UTC)

Edits at ABVP
Can the editors of this page review the edits being made to Akhil Bharatiya Vidyarthi Parishad? Thanks. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 15:07, 4 April 2020 (UTC)


 * Such POV pushing may continue if you keep only "According to JNSU". An additional line should be mentioned, like: "later leaders of ABVP confessed and it was also found out through sting operation and investigative journalim", so no other user may think of removing it or modify. Dey subrata (talk) 16:28, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
 * I agree. Just stating JNUSU claims without saying what RS say is quite pointless. Can you add some content and sources there? Thanks. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 16:39, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Added a line with citations, you can modify it. Dey subrata (talk) 17:06, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

The violent clash at Periyar Hostel has not been included in the article.
According to various media reports 1, 2 the violence occurred in two phases in JNU. One was attack on Periyar hostel which started at 3.45 where students belonging to left organizations attacked common students. This was the time when first call to police control room was made. Here's how the events unfolded. Various visuals of attack at Periyar hostel are also available on the web. Why is it not being included in the article? Is report by a government agency only valid when it succumbs to a certain ideologue? --YoloSCIS (talk) 07:25, 6 May 2020 (UTC)
 * First no "violent" clash at Periyar at that time by report and secondly, the article is about the masked mob attack which almost killed people. Secondly, these reports are made on video which claimed by some media to be an attack where Aishe Ghosh believed to be seen which came out to be false instead. It would be violation of WP:NPOV and WP:OR. Dey subrata (talk) 08:51, 6 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Firstly, there WAS a violent attack at Periyar Hostel. White washing of events won't help. Students not belonging to left orgs were admitted to hospital.'The students claimed that when they reached Periyar hostel, where “several ABVP students live”, stones were thrown at them from inside. “This led to a clash which died down in about an hour. I saw a group beating up an ABVP student. Some people went into the hostel as well,”' Testimonial by a student. Secondly, the article is about Jawaharlal Nehru University Attack which occurred in two steps. First at Periyar Hostel and second at Sabarmati Hostel. This article says "Students from Left groups attacked Periyar Hostel. The faces of several students were muffled. Some members, including the JNUSU president, were identified. A specific room was targeted." Third, even the official twitter account admitted it was Aishe Ghosh in the video. . A simple google search would have shown that indeed it was Ms. Ghosh with the masked goons at Periyar hostel. Also, video of a person named Chunchun Kumar pelting stones at Periyar hostel at daytime were also released. These are important details to mention and should be mentioned. Currently this article seems like a press release by the students union which is detrimental to the integrity of Wikipedia. Please make the article more balanced and do not remove such essential details which clearly bring out the partake of left in the violence. WP:FIXBIAS --YoloSCIS (talk) 17:00, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Go by WP:TLDR and stop WP:GASLIGHT. A simple google search will show you 1000s of fake news. The article written after going through every citations and citations added in the article describe well enough what happened. The article is about masked mob attack that came from outside the campus which was organised through whatapp group. Clashes between the two group always happened but not such attack and it has been well included. No left group people attacked hostel there is no evidence of it and there is no video showing Aishe ghosh attacking any hostel. Not a single citation able to give evidence of it. So, stop this POV pushing And Republic tv is biased per RSN, so don't add it again here. Dey subrata (talk) 18:06, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Wow! First, you denied Aishe Ghosh was at all present with masked men. You could not do a google search to verify that. Now you come up with pathetic excuse of WP:TLDR! . I had hoped better from a guilded wikipedia editor. It was an attack at Periyar hostel. Several articles mention it. You would find it only if you could be "neutral" but seems you are not! Read WP:EDITORINTEGRITY Alas but Wikipedia is not your personal diary so you don't get to decide what is credible or not and neither what goes here! Please don't bully me! You need to check WP:INTREF --YoloSCIS (talk) 17:02, 8 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I still deny that Ghosh was present with masked men to attack any hostel, because there is no evidence of it. Its utterly bizzare that Aishe Ghosh hammered her own own head and almost got killed by herself, and the video that you are suggesting I've seen that a lot, except that there no other video, and that video does not tell me what you are saying, period. Republic is biased "per RSN", period. So, before bringing another false accusation on me, like "bullying you", "making wikipedia personal diary", "I'm deciding what source is credible when I already told you its per RSN", "I'm not neutral", you just crossed the line now, so think twice because next time you will end up replying at WP:ANI. Along with these accusation, I've also seen some of your edits at the ABVP article, and you POV pushing continued there too, so be careful what you are saying and doing and what not. This would be my last reply here, enough of your POV pushing. Dey subrata (talk) 21:10, 8 May 2020 (UTC)