Talk:Bharatiya Janata Party/Archive 9

Illiberalism
I noticed my well-sourced addition of illiberalism as an ideology gets removed without any good reason. Please give a good reason before you remove such things. And personal opinions doesn't count only scientific research or other good sources counts. --PJ Geest (talk) 19:01, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Well, research pertaining to politics and philosophy is referred as "academic" or "scholastic" and not scientific at all. Secondly, the source from V-dem you are referring to is measuring parties on a scale "Illiberalism" index measuring and comparing their liberal, illiberal, authoritarian and democratic tendencies within the left-right political spectrum. Since it doesn't even try to imply illiberalism as an ideology, I can say that you were misrepresenting source. Also further, inclusion of an ideology in infobox & lead requires an academic concensus about party's leaning towards that ideology undisputedly in widespread sources. Aman Kumar Goel (Talk) 17:42, 8 March 2021 (UTC)

Why So Brief on Historical 2019 Win?
Hi. This article, in addition to numerous other examples of a seeming reluctance to portray BJP victories in their proper light, lists the historic victory of the BJP's second consecutive electoral victory with the paltry single sentence: "In 2019, the BJP won the general election with a majority." Was not this the first time ever for a non-Congress party to win consecutive terms? Did the BJP not only increase its party majority, but the NDA coalition also increased its majority as well? Why so loathe to mention such historical FACTS, except through a perceived leftist/pro Congress/anti BJP bias on the part of the writers? 125.174.218.87 (talk) 13:48, 20 March 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 19 April 2021
Please add File:Green Saffron Flag.jpg as flag in the infobox of this article.119.160.119.67 (talk) 19:15, 18 April 2021 (UTC)
 * ❌. Could you show that this flag is the "offical" flag of the party? ◢  Ganbaruby!   (Say hi!)

it is the variant version of bjp's official party flag without its election symbol. Since the party's flag with its election symbol which got deleted previously therefore it can be used to reperesent the party's flag inslstead of official flag. Here is the photo of the bjp's flag in air File:BJP FLAG.jpg in which you can see above mentioned flag picture is very similar as I mentioned it got deleted many times on Wikimedia commons previously therefore above mentioned can serve party flag instead of it in the article. Although if anyone can upload BJP's flag on Wikipedia here locally please do so as it can fall under Template:PD-ineligible-USonly license tag as it only consist of simple geometric shapes and simple lotus symbol which is commons property. Here is the link to Google's cached version of previously deleted flag file if anyone can upload it again in svg format please do so or if anyone has concerns about this suggestion then please use above mentioned flag as I have given explaination now.119.160.119.67 (talk) 07:51, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
 * ❌. Please go beyond a mere picture and show through WP:RS that either flag is in use by the party itself. IF the flower one is the "offical" one, go ahead and upload it locally with PD-ineligible-USonly. ◢  Ganbaruby!   (Say hi!) 08:07, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Here is one of the reliable source in which you can see the official party flag clearly is in its use.119.160.119.67 (talk)
 * ❌. That flag is in yet another style. If there's not one "official" design in use by the party, then the current logo is sufficient. ◢  Ganbaruby!   (Say hi!) 09:28, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 27 April 2021
Can anyone add File:71-715457 bjp-logo-hd-image-co.jpg as flag in the infobox of this article.119.160.116.85 (talk) 06:45, 27 April 2021 (UTC)


 * ❌ Please see the discussion above Semi-protected edit request on 19 April 2021. -- DaxServer (talk) 12:28, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 00:56, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Shri Tirath Singh Rawat official portrait, 2019.jpg

Araga is a contry — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.215.41.188 (talk) 01:44, 15 May 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 27 May 2021
Change to Brahmin Janata Party Dharmanath Jain (talk) 06:49, 27 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: Vandalism -- DaxServer (talk) 09:34, 27 May 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 20 June 2021
Party Positions : Right wing Change it to Party position : Center-Right Achhainsaan (talk) 12:45, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. -- DaxServer (talk) 13:45, 20 June 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 27 June 2021
The word "which" in the 'Ideology and Political Positions', marked by asterisks here-

The BJP favoured, and later enacted[132][133][134] the abrogation of Article 370 of the Constitution of India, *which* granted a greater degree of autonomy to Jammu and Kashmir in recognition of the unusual circumstances surrounding its accession to the Indian Union.[59]

section should be changed to "that", as the current syntax creates ambiguity as to whether the Article provided greater autonomy, or its abrogation did. DhruvPanday (talk) 14:46, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion: You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 09:54, 4 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Dr Himanta Biswa Sarma (CM).jpg

Chenge in rajya sabha leader
Chenge rajya sabha leader vecant Kaustubhkul (talk) 10:36, 6 July 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 6 July 2021
Kaustubhkul (talk) 10:34, 6 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Red question icon with gradient background.svg 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. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 11:44, 6 July 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 6 July 2021
Kaustubhkul (talk) 10:33, 6 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Rajya sabha leader = vecant

Vecant Kaustubhkul (talk) 10:33, 6 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Red question icon with gradient background.svg 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. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 11:45, 6 July 2021 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion: You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 11:38, 9 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Pushkar S Dhami.jpg

Semi-protected edit request on 10 August 2021
Mouthpiece Kamal Sandesh is an Indian magazine. It is the national mouthpiece of the Bharatiya Janata Party. Prabhat Jha is the Editor of Kamal Sandesh from September 2006. Sanjeev Kumar Sinha is currently serving as the assistant editor from September 2006. https://www.bjp.org/en/kamalsandesh 120.59.27.187 (talk) 03:29, 10 August 2021 (UTC)


 * Red question icon with gradient background.svg 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. "Mouthpiece" may also be a contentious label, and thus might fail to have a neutral point of view. — Lauritz Thomsen (talk) 04:37, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for speedy deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for speedy deletion: You can see the reasons for deletion at the file description pages linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 18:08, 14 August 2021 (UTC)
 * BS.Bommai.jpg
 * Suvendhu Adhikari.jpg

Semi-protected edit request on 12 September 2021
The Bharatiya Janata Party (pronounced [bʱaːrtiːjə dʒənta paːrʈi] (About this soundlisten); transl. Indian People's Party; abbr. BJP) is now the major political party in India, having totally trounced the Indian National Congress on all fronts. Nirmalcp (talk) 06:20, 12 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Red question icon with gradient background.svg 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. ◢  Ganbaruby!   (talk) 06:57, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

Legislative presence bloat
This article includes wildly excessive detail in the sections on legislative membership. This is supposed to be an article about the party, not a directory of its leadership. I have, as a first step in dealing with this, pruned the list of deputy prime ministers (there's been only one, covered in the prose); the list of deputy chief ministers (this is not a post consequential enough to maintain a dynamic list in the overview article); and the list of other legislative leaders (likewise, inconsequential). Vanamonde (Talk) 21:50, 29 December 2021 (UTC)

Having Objection
Hi! I am observing that this article is against BJP and being edited by anti-BJP supporter. For ex.-take this-https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Bharatiya_Janata_Party&type=revision&diff=1056995240&oldid=1056976920. And this-https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Bharatiya_Janata_Party&type=revision&diff=1062011358&oldid=1062008870. Doesn't it smells wrong and Bias. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2409:4064:508:ED9E:E9CD:C1A:66B6:CC4F (talk) 10:07, 30 December 2021 (UTC)


 * No, they don't. Edit summaries are quite clear. — DaxServer (talk) 11:18, 30 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Not actually, Not really, there are unnecessary sentences about democratic backsliding {to keep it in line with pages from other global parties that do not discuss allegations of backsliding in the title}. I have seen good source material being removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2409:4064:508:ED9E:E9CD:C1A:66B6:CC4F (talk) 12:31, 30 December 2021 (UTC)

Proposal to change first sentence
The first sentence must be changed to "The Bharatiya Janata Party is a right-wing, Hindu Nationalist party in India" to match other religious parties like Bangladesh Jamaat-e-Islami

Sources for Hindu Nationalist

Sources for right wing

Manoharjanna3 (talk) 14:29, 9 January 2022 (UTC)


 * Oppose What you are saying is already in the first paragraph. Other parties like Bangladesh Jamaat-e-Islami or even the Christian parties of the US are described in the first line as "so and so religion party" and it is because they are officially so. Their party constitution, title, symbol, or membership criteria explicitly states that it is a religious party. Although BJP has a misnomer name which translates to "Indian People's Party", it is still its official name. Its application form says that the prospective member shall adhere to "positive secularism". Except the colour scheme, there is nothing Hindu in its logo. Its top officebearers lie to their own souls with their soft-spoken secular rheotoric. That is why it is better to not give verdict in the first line; but rather do that in the second or third but within the first paragraph. To speak in a different way, the Republican Party (United States) was the party of Lincoln who is the icon of egalitarian, libertarian values but we know what the Party today is. The Party radically changed with change in their leaders whose admission was not regulated strictly to adhere to the adjectives of egalitarianism, libertarianism. Same is the case with the BJP, as far it is doesn't restrict any admissions explicitly on the basis of "right-wing Hindu Nationalism", it is subject to change over time and thus not be the first adjective. I might be refuted because this is just after my small observation in the trend of Party pages on Wikipedia at a glance. Appu (talk) 15:24, 9 January 2022 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion: You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 13:55, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
 * CM Dhami (Mirrored).png

Edit on 12th January 2022
kindly explain what you want to edit, and provide relevant sources... You have made two similar edits in the past where the source provided was completely different from the material introduced into the article. Kindly discuss those issues here. Captain Jack Sparrow (talk) 10:56, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your attention. In fact, I am trying to tell the truth about the difficult position of Muslims in India in recent years, and I try to bring the content to the article with more and more credible sources.(talk) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aye1399 (talk • contribs) 07:00, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 28 January 2022
The new name of this party is Bharatiya Jasoos Party. Blahmana (talk) 15:32, 28 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 15:35, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

Scholarly dispute over "conservatism"
This wiki page says that the BJP supports "social conservatism," but articles such as this one from JStor (https://www.jstor.org/stable/26916353?seq=1#metadata_info_tab_contents) argue that the BJP, as a Hindu nationalist party, is distinct from Hindu conservatism. I think the article should be edited to reflect this nuance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shivj80 (talk • contribs) 16:05, 25 January 2022 (UTC)


 * There are plenty scholarly sources that say the BJP is soc. con. or Modi is soc. con, widely perceived to be so.  Fowler&amp;fowler  «Talk»  20:51, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

Translation Error
The "Bharatiya Janata Party" translates to Indian People Party. (Indian People's Party is translation of "Bharatiya Janata Ki Party" in Hindi). Should it be changed? --  Manasbose   (talk &#124; edits) 14:33, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Valid point, translations seems to be confusing. It could have been Indian Peoples Party. Still we need to check with experinced editors. I would like to invite    -- 25 CENTS VICTORIOUS  🍁 20:23, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Not really. Britannica has: Bharatiya Janata Party political party, India Alternate titles: BJP, Indian People’s Party. Translations are not literal. If Britannica is correct, it means that the possessive is implied in the Indian language construction whether because in common parlance it is not needed or because it (involving a separate word without contraction) would not be euphonic. It may be related to rules of combination (sandhi) inherited from Sanskrit.  Fowler&amp;fowler  «Talk»  20:36, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
 * I don't think grammar is what people are thinking of when party names are chosen. "Indian People Party" doesn't sound meaningful to me; it's fairly clear the idiomatic translation should be "Indian People's Party"; and that is in fact what reliable sources seem to prefer. At the moment I can't find a source that translates this as "Indian People Party". Vanamonde (Talk) 20:39, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
 * I believe Ki is implied in Bharatiya Janata Party, so don't see why Indian People's Party would not be correct. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 08:22, 11 March 2022 (UTC)

GA Status
The current situation of the article does not meet GA status, because it's having many unsourced sections. Someone look after it, otherwise it will get fail if it brought under admin attention.-- 25 CENTS VICTORIOUS 🍁 16:46, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 04:53, 5 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Pushkar Singh Dhami.jpg

Edit request
I would like an edit request for the BJP page.—-Produda (talk) 20:03, 8 April 2022 (UTC)

Adding Centre-Right to Right
I feel like it would be more accurate to list the BJP as Centre-Right to Right. Similar parties (such as the People's Action Party, Tories, ect.) are listed as Centre Right, but there is also Islamophobic sections of the party (the party is officially secular), which also makes it Right. The party is officially against caste and religious discrimination ("[BJP's] driving force is national approach to all issues rising above caste and religion.": https://www.bjp.org/philosophy) and the current Prime Minister, Modi, also referred to Muslims as "sisters" and fought against the triple talak (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uyv30ZIr6Yc), but there are also extremists in the party such as Yogi (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cIBm2voGIvA). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Omgaddad (talk • contribs) 22:08, 12 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Reliable WP:SECONDARY sources have been cited for "right-wing". You need to provide similar sources for "center-right". Your own opinions or BJP's self-representations are of no consequence whatsoever. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 22:29, 12 May 2022 (UTC)
 * I was basing my statement off another source used in the Wikipedia page "List of political parties in India", which is:
 * https://www.jagranjosh.com/general-knowledge/left-and-right-wing-politics-1602678118-1 (Tertiary Source)
 * I was not basing this off my own personal opinion. Although, this is all based on if you accept this other Wikipedia source as acceptable. I found another article to what seems like a more left-leaning source, but it is still an opinion page:
 * https://www.jagranjosh.com/general-knowledge/left-and-right-wing-politics-1602678118-1 (Secondary Source)
 * And if you check the official party constitution and it's website, it's pretty moderate, and often times sounds like the talk of a left wing party. The party is secular and it's official party constitution states:
 * "The party aims at establishing a democratic state which
 * guarantees to all citizens irrespective of caste, creed or sex, political,
 * social and economic justice, equality of opportunity and liberty of
 * faith and expression."
 * Of course, I will not disagree with you. My judgement might blind me, and I want some feedback. I believe it's clear that the party is officially very much Centre-Right, but it's more Right-Wing when it comes to social issues, therefore pointing to my request of making it "Centre-Right to Right", or even "Centre-Right to Far Right" if you see it fit. Omgaddad (talk) 03:36, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
 * I meant to say "Is BJP really a "Right-Wing" Party?" for the second source, but it won't send Omgaddad (talk) 03:38, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Just checked that the source comes from a right wing website. I was mistaken. Omgaddad (talk) 03:39, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
 * This is essentially a blog post. It is in no way comparable to the peer-reviewed journal articles that have been cited for "right-wing". -- Kautilya3 (talk) 13:26, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
 * If that's so, then I suggest you change the other article. Thank you. Omgaddad (talk) 03:32, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
 * I still encourage a note be made regarding the party constitution somewhere in the article Omgaddad (talk) 03:32, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Adding BJP and Religious minorities
It seems necessary to add this title to the article. Given that there are many resources on this subjectAye1399 (talk) 14:17, 8 June 2022 (UTC) https://foreignpolicy.com/2021/12/30/india-religious-minorities-under-attack-christian-muslim-modi-bjp/ https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/oct/04/india-christians-living-in-fear-claims-forced-conversions

Semi-protected edit request on 26 June 2022
Change the number of Lok sabha seats from 301 to 303 Purushottam Sinha (talk) 10:57, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 11:05, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 26 June 2022 (2)
2409:4042:E07:A32:F2FA:A37A:D30A:9DD9 (talk) 16:31, 26 June 2022 (UTC) Edit bjp mps in loksabha
 * Red question icon with gradient background.svg 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. Cannolis (talk) 18:08, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

Adding far-right to BJP political position
The BJP are far-right since they are islamophobic and anti-Christian at times, and they have a large hard-right faction — Preceding unsigned comment added by Produda (talk • contribs) 17:42, 9 April 2022 (UTC)


 * Please provide reliable sources before changes to the article can be made. CollectiveSolidarity (talk) 20:43, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
 * There are several academic sources which link the BJP and RSS to Fascism; or proto-facism or UR-Facism
 * https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0268580920937226?casa_token=cmWkLdJ5En0AAAAA%3AV0Z-ya1PmHtL8m8YxaoezUiVIo6HAYfcx0VOmuFGXOQEUmwdmbGCSP8PR1EP3gtVZMocScMwb5lOmg
 * https://www.jstor.org/stable/44166046?casa_token=O7AJ6Z1cpLUAAAAA%3AP_K-JKIoNEL1haWrvWOG0Mw4l6XwwhqO2NrEnstg4cbGYp7qD93IDjANyLXvBYeDPN8GI1TzznBUdvS_zL_09wdSWbA1LA7iQGTHDLjDBQg3J5NsxlU4&seq=1
 * https://www.jstor.org/stable/3517631?casa_token=0RHWWe9-oPYAAAAA%3ArF7RjsDPDD_LLjIe2TjuSUhrsNFAJ01Z32sd2wyQMqiqZM8xTmxVvRP6NsdRTtAtjwq6UBpX_vCVGbjS82Gxx8OfWAfg6sj3qx4ZSlS8gqpTU_OiHtPK&seq=1
 * https://www.jstor.org/stable/4399339?casa_token=6q6fwSBhTs8AAAAA%3AzIipOMY2QLoY6qeACDuHApuq_cFEoJV71MO9eMmvVcU6BuZ4O6fcAaPz-u4G2saspyZKlzzIv3GpeLLJO56H-3PS0kCBtvfdgdoXfO9ZFZ9FmSOZQplM&seq=1
 * https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0,5&q=BJP+fascism
 * I do find it curious that not a single mention of the word Fascism exists on the Wikipedia page; since there are many extremely reliable, peer-reviewed academic journals written on this topic. Now one can disagree to the extent of the accuracy of this label, but the evidence for and against should be presented on the page. Even the linked pages for Hindutva and the RSS clearly state their association with Fascism Chomskywala (talk) 07:17, 4 July 2022 (UTC)
 * The infobox is meant to be a quick summary for users. Since the issue you raised is not mentioned in the text of the article, it is therefore not mentioned in the infobox.


 * I suggest that you write a draft a paragraph for the article on the issue (complete with citations). You could then post it here for discussion, or you could post it in the article. A sandbox page is a good temporary home whilst you are drafting your paragraph. -- Toddy1 (talk) 07:32, 4 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Toddy1; I've provided sources which were requested by the previous editor; but I do not currently have the time to draft a paragraph comparing the arguments against for for the BJP being classified as far-right or fascist. However, I do believe one of the more active editors should consider adding in a caveat about how political scientists do consider the BJP to share the qualities of fascist politics. Chomskywala (talk) 18:48, 5 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Do not worry. The BJP will not go away.  Drafting a paragraph can wait until you have time to do it. -- Toddy1 (talk) 21:13, 5 July 2022 (UTC)

Background color rendering support
I noticed the wikitable in Lok Sabha seats section (even i have noticed some other articles with same problem) that the background colour is not rendering when article download in PDF format. Is there any problems with the source code ? MaxA-Matrix (talk) 11:07, 21 July 2022 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion: You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 18:52, 28 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Manik Saha.jpg

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion: You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 14:08, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
 * UHM Amit Shah.jpg

World's largest party
The lead for the Chinese Communist Party's Wikipedia page mentions that it is the second largest party in the world by membership, after the BJP. It seems reasonable to add this fact to to this article's lead as well - being the largest political party by membership, not just in India but in the world, is noteworthy. 92.20.159.78 (talk) 23:42, 9 October 2022 (UTC)

Fascism
Fascism should be added in the ideology as BJP and RSS multiple times shown there intrest against minorities in India like Muslim, Christine, Sikhs, Buddhist and Adivasis. Saurabh Dhanke (talk) 16:20, 21 October 2022 (UTC)


 * Unnecessary as Hindutva is already present. Vif12vf/Tiberius (talk) 20:04, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

The most significant development in the national security domain since Independence
This edit 18:45, 7 March 2023 added some text (shown in green below) to an existing paragraph:
 * The Modi government considers national security to be one of their key focuses and has implemented many long-standing defence reforms. In August 2019, the Modi government established the post of the Chief of Defence Staff (CDS) to ensure better coordination between all three services, a reform that was widely requested after the 1999 Kargil War. The Department of Military Affairs was also established and put under the CDS. Retired Admiral Arun Prakash called it “the most significant development in the national security domain since Independence.” Modi has also pushed for the indigenization and privatization of the defence production sector, as well as promoting the export of Indian-made arms to smaller countries.

The edit summaryDo not delete without consensus was unacceptably bad. Edit summaries are meant to describe the edit. Nevertheless, the edit was a valid edit. Given the experience of the United Kingdom, one might question the wisdom of the change. But it is perfectly reasonable to quote the opinion of an expert as to the significance of the change. -- Toddy1 (talk) 19:11, 8 March 2023 (UTC)


 * It is perhaps worth adding that the text was originally added on 6 November 2022 by a different editor with an entirely acceptable edit summary. It was removed on 7 March 2023 and again on 8 March 2023 with the edit summary rv POV pushing. It is a significant change, though not necessarily a wise one. -- Toddy1 (talk) 19:28, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Indeed, the edit-summary in question is directly contrary to policy, as written at WP:ONUS. I don't believe the quote merits inclusion; this is the highest-level summary of that policy. Also, the summary itself is rather poor, as it doesn't say what the government did aside from creating a new position. A rewrite is warranted. Vanamonde (Talk) 19:49, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
 * I also wonder about the inclusion. The quote fine in general, but I'm not sure if the personal view of a single retired admiral in entirely due in a top-level summary. You'd want an analysis summarizing multiple similar views if anything. Iskandar323 (talk) 04:10, 9 March 2023 (UTC)

GA status
There are some slightly eyebrow raising aspects to this page as a body of content currently rated as having GA status, not least the narrowness of its coverage, which sits at odds with the GA requirement for breadth of coverage. There is extraordinarily little discussion of BJP policy in certain areas: there is mention of economic policy, but no mention of fiscal or monetary policy, or even anything to do with the currency, despite the government's extremely repercussive demonetization program. These are less omissions and more glaring deficiencies in coverage. It more broadly seems somewhat sanitized for a political party quite so steeped in perpetual controversy as the BJP. The word 'controversy' only appears twice on the page: once to say the BJP didn't do something controversial, and another in regards to a Supreme Court controversy. So that is zero counts of controversy for the BJP, when a simply Google Scholar search throws up various specific policy initiatives that have been described as controversial, not least in the realms of, yes, specifically monetary policy, foreign policy, and policy towards minorities. The word minorities is, incidentally, also mentioned only a single time. All in all, some rather yawning content gaps. Iskandar323 (talk) 17:43, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
 * We are not supposed to identify particular acts as "controversy". We can only summarize the relevant events that directly concern the political party.
 * If you feel that any important coverage about this organisation has been missed then you are free to add it here.
 * I don't see any concern over "GA status". Aman Kumar Goel (Talk) 17:52, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
 * The third criteria of WP:GACR, "broad in its coverage", is what I have doubts over, setting aside the secondary question of whether, if this page is lacking in controversial areas, there may be certain issues of balance to contend with. Iskandar323 (talk) 18:06, 7 March 2023 (UTC)


 * FWIW, this page became a GA before demonetization; I've tried to keep it updated since, but obviously it's in government at the moment, coverage is frequent, and avoiding NOTNEWS is also tricky. That said: "controversy" is a particularly useless term in a political article. Everything a political party does causes controversy. It's uninformative. Also; many of the signature initiatives of the BJP have fairly decent articles; copying over some content should be quite easy, and I see no reason to challenge the GA status. Vanamonde (Talk) 15:20, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
 * It's pretty hellaciously out of date then. The demonetization was 2016, over half a decade ago, and only a year after its last review. Now that you mention it, post-2014 there seem to be a few 2019 history notes, but that's about it. Iskandar323 (talk) 15:26, 9 March 2023 (UTC)