Talk:Bipin Rawat

TopYaps
TopYaps' 'about us' page states: "We track ideas, stories, and trends to build and promote the best-tailored content for our audiences". It's clearly a user-generated source with no editorial oversight. So, it can't be used here. - NitinMlk (talk) 20:05, 25 July 2017 (UTC)

Bipin Rawat education early life
1. NDA and IMA donot go simultaneously. There's an error. 2. Please confirm father's rank from Army records. There's no record of Lt Gen Lachu singh Rawat. 3. There's no record of Kishan Parmar MLA either. Donot quote newspapers, please quote government gazette. 116.68.74.111 (talk) 01:10, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

1987 Sino-Indian skirmish
@User:Ranban282 Thank you for catching. Indeed, Rawat could not be a Colonel during the 1987 Sino-Indian skirmish because in the section of Rank history, it is clear that He was captain that time. What should be done? Remove the entire section until more reliable source are found or just remove the Rank colonel? In absence of a good source (a book may be), I think it would be better to remove the entire sub-section. Venkat TL (talk) 07:23, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

I have changed it to Captain, which matches the 'dates of rank section', and is referenced to the Gazette of India. I'll let others take a call on how reliable that and other references in the 1987 skirmish sub-section are. Ranban282 (talk) 07:29, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Rawat's caste
Some one added caste information. And tabloid sources picked them up. See WP:CIRCULAR. Arunib had removed this caste info, once already.

Once removed, instead of making consensus about the. RS6784 started edit warring to put it into the article without generating a consensus about sourcing. Among the 2 WP:TOI links in this diff, the first does not even mention the caste information. and the second WP:TOI link appears to be a mirror. If you think this content should be included then you will have to present reliable sources and create WP:CONSENSUS. Jagran and WP:TOI are not reliable sources. Venkat TL (talk) 09:32, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Instead of making consensus, you are repeatedly removing not just one but multiple news sources claiming that all of them are mirrors. You did not provide any proof of it, all of them are reputed media channels of India.Shanusar (talk) 11:25, 9 December 2021 (UTC)


 * @Shanusar as you can read at WP:BURDEN, "All content must be verifiable. The burden to demonstrate verifiability lies with the editor who adds or restores material," WP:TOI and Jagran are not reliable sources. You have for the second time restored the disputed content in violation of WP:BRD. Please self revert and generate consensus first. Venkat TL (talk) 11:54, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
 * No response from Shanusar or other editor who added this content. I have removed it again as it is dubious info sourced from Wikipedia mirrors. Indiatvnews link is a clear copy of Wikipedia article. WP:TOI is unreliable. Jagran too. It should not be restored without making consensus first. Venkat TL (talk) 06:15, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
 * First you were removing ToI article saying its unreliable, later when other articles are also provided from multiple news source, you start claiming everyone is mirror. Also you probably didn't see the additions made on the article, apart from ToI there is one article from Free Press Journal and one more from India TV News. All reputed. Although Jagran also mentions the same but it is not sourced here for now. Apart from these 4 articles all mentioning Rajput, there is one more by http://India.com news and this article is from 2016 so it can't be a mirror. I will give link below. There is one more by a lesser known news called Bharat times which mentions him as born in Chauhan Rajput family which is not mentioned on wikipedia so its source is different and not mirror. https://www.india.com/news/india/lt-gen-bipin-rawat-appointed-new-army-chief-what-you-should-know-about-him-1711287/ https://eng.bharattimes.co.in/smriti-shesh-who-was-general-bipin-laxman-singh-rawat-posted-in-the-same-unit-where-father-was-posted-india-times-hindi-news-henrys-club/ Shanusar (talk) 07:16, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Self revert what you did on Bipin Rawat page, you are doing edit war as you made many reverts which is against wiki rules. One more source from 2016 so it can not be mirror image. This source is cited on this same page and not only this but multiple news sources used on this page. All different 8 sources agree with one point. https://news.webindia123.com/News/Articles/India/20161217/3015239.html Shanusar (talk) 08:16, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Biographies of living persons Categorization/Ethnicity, gender, religion and sexuality These two links above explain the higher bar needed for such information. These bars are not met. I note that Rawat has not self identified himself in any of the sources you are presenting. You need to provide a more reliable source than news sites. Please refer Military history books or the subject's biography. On top of all these points, these unreliable sources are presenting conflicting information. You are trying to add Garhwali Rajput. Your links India.com says "Rawat Rajput". Bharattimes says "Chauhan Rajput". It is obvious that these unreliable sources are making speculations about his caste. If Rawat has self identified himself somewhere, or filed in some military affidavit, then that source should be presented. Until then Wikipedia should not take sides into this caste dispute among these newspapers. The article is currently on the mainpage and such dubious information cannot be put into the article. I will not self revert. You can ask an admin to revert it for you. Venkat TL (talk) 08:48, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Garhwal is area. Just like Punjabi Brahmin doesn't mean Punjabi as caste but area. His surname is Rawat and all the sources (these are reputed news paper) mention him as Rajput. First link is about living person, he is not living anymore. These same sources are cited in this page. There is no biography written sir so how can i bring biography. So lets make a consensus on Rajput Shanusar (talk) 09:08, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
 * If that is the case, when (if at all) this information is added again, please do make sure to use commas (ie . . . Hindu, Garhwali, Rajput family). By the way, only the 'Rajput' part is disputed right? Then why were 'Hindu' and 'Garhwali' removed? The above source says, "Rawat was born in Pauri in now Uttarakhand state in a Hindu Garhwali family". I am not sure if 'Gulf News' is a reliable source or not, but most sources seem to agree about him being born in a Hindu family of the Garhwali people. Rockcodder (talk) 09:14, 10 December 2021 (UTC); edited 09:26, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
 * I agree with you Rockcodder, Hindu Garhwali, Rajput family can be written with comma.Shanusar (talk) 09:55, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Garhwal is already mentioned as birth place. Ethnic tags need to pass a higher bar. Read the links I posted. Venkat TL (talk) 09:19, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Shanusar I am strongly objecting to add such tags. We are supposed to strictly follow WP:CAT/R and avoid adding any kind of improperly sourced controversial information especially on a high visibility page. Venkat TL (talk) 10:01, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Shanusar, please do not make any reply, before you read the links I posted. You have not read it that is why you are making such wrong claims. WP:BDP makes it clear that this policy applies to "recently died" and still you claim it is not applicable. Either you have not read, or you failed to understand. If there is no self identification in a reliable source, then nothing can be added until such a source becomes available. How do you know He identified with the Rajputs, like many Indians, he might be against Caste system. Unless he has self identified, we cannot put any such caste material. Venkat TL (talk) 09:18, 10 December 2021 (UTC)


 * Venkat TL, I read that, it is clearly written that this is generally not applicable for who died recently, and only through consensus this policy can be agreed upon for such people There is not consensus on such thing, you are clearly selectively quoting from policy to suit your narrative.Shanusar (talk) 09:45, 10 December 2021 (UTC)


 * It is clear to me that BLP is applicable here. If you believe WP:BLP is not applicable on this Bipin Rawat, then you should get a confirmation at Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard. If you believe that I am making selective quotes from policy then also you can make a case at Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard. Good luck. Venkat TL (talk) 09:53, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
 * these are 7 sources which mentions him rajput two of them from 2016 and one other has mention Chauhan Rajput a subclan hence its source is not wiki as wiki didn't mention chauhan ever. You are making everyone bogus and unreliable while all these news are reputed and used regularly on wikipedia. Besides all if wrong, how can all wrong can agree on same thing when they are not mirrors. Above that there is no dispute like some source claiming his caste as something else hence its not even disputed. Shanusar (talk) 10:47, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Biographies_of_living_persons/Noticeboard Venkat TL (talk) 14:26, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Please tell me you have said that we can not put controversial info. What is controversy there over my edit or info which I added. According to you 7 reputed news agencies of India are not reliable and good source but your own words an thinking are. Where is controversy, provide the"reliable" source for that or revert it back. I tried to make consensus with you over a common info from 7 sources but you declared all of them unreliable when some of them are already accepted on the same page. Why didn't you removed them but this only. Out of all information of 7 sources you find only this info unreliable. that speaks volume about your intentions. You come in msg and intimidate me about edit war when I just two edit whereas you are regularly vandalizing the edits without any source. I have given link of all the sources and some of them are still used in some other edits on the same page. Why are you after my edit only. This does not make any sense. I am again asking you to make consensus on the common info.Shanusar (talk) 07:04, 11 December 2021 (UTC)
 * @Shanusar I have summarized the problems below for you. Hope this helps.
 * BLP applies to recently dead people. According to WP:CAT/R a self identification with a particular caste is needed to mention Rawat's caste.
 * Rawat has not identified his caste in any interview or autobiography book/document/affidavit. If you can present such a source, we can use that source.
 * These newspapers you listed have not mentioned the source of their information about Rawat's caste.
 * These sources you listed are making contradicting claims, some say Garhwali Rajput, Rawat Rajput" and "Chauhan Rajput". Why they are not using one correct caste. Which is correct? who will decide.
 * These sources are not considered reliable, some of them are WP:CIRCULAR Venkat TL (talk) 07:23, 11 December 2021 (UTC)
 * sir, garhwahli, rawat, chahuhan are clan. Rawat actually is his surname also. The caste is "rajput" all the source mention it. Second BLP do not apply to person declared dead by official gov. source and I don't think there is any controversy over that. I asked you that I will remove Garhwal as you say it is not clear about his clan so lets change it but The caste is clear there as all source can not be wrong some of them were of 2016. I am ready to make changes.  If this sources are not reliable then why they are used in same page for other edits. You are picking only one edit.
 * can you provide reliable source that is caste is different or any other claim being made. So I again request you to please make revert and make changes according to our consensus. People should know complete info about him.Shanusar (talk) 07:47, 11 December 2021 (UTC)
 * @Shanusar, Rajput is a collection of castes, that is how Wikipedia article on Rajput starts. None of the 5 problems I listed are resolved. So we cannot call this dispute as resolved. If an unreliable source is used incorrectly, start a new thread at the bottom and raise the concern, so that the source is removed. Dont use poor source as excuse to add more disputed content to the article. People are free to read those newspapers to read about his caste. Venkat TL (talk) 08:05, 11 December 2021 (UTC)
 * sir Rajput is a particular caste is well known but it is clear that you have ill intention and calling all the sources as wrong when same sources are used in the same page. Would you like to explain why the same source is used in same page if that is unreliable. Wiki tales the history of rajput origin, not its present condition. In present Rajput is one caste only. Some of most reputed news paper of India are poor source. People can read everything about him in paper than why wiki page is created but now it is clear that your intention are not good that is why even after given multiple sources which makes it clear you are not ready to make consensus. You are making excuses after excuses and wrong narration. First you were saying about the clan part and asking for source for caste and now you giving excuses that rajput is not caste. Read full article of wiki. It talks how rajput caste created not what it is now.Shanusar (talk) 08:32, 11 December 2021 (UTC)
 * @Shanusar "Rajput is one caste only." Really? Tell me how many castes exist in India? Venkat TL (talk) 08:38, 11 December 2021 (UTC)
 * the discussion is not how many and on rajput caste. Do not try to change the topic after getting caught red handed.Shanusar (talk) 08:54, 11 December 2021 (UTC)
 * @Shanusar, I am not changing the topic. If you believe Rajput is one caste only. Then you will say that there are only 4 castes in India. That is not correct and you either lack the knowledge about Caste system in India or you are deliberately making false claims to promote a particular caste as a caste advocacy group. As for Rawat, bring an interview of Rawat where he identifies with a particular caste and this dispute will be over. Venkat TL (talk) 09:03, 11 December 2021 (UTC)
 * sir I thing you do not understand caste here is clear. Rajput is one caste among many not four. The four are varna not caste but this topic is not related to it. And certainly as he is dead I do not require to bring his interview. Secondary sources are enough and they are provided. It is different thing that you are not ready to accept the leading news agencies not on but 7 as not good and reliable and bringing un related argument and continuously changing stand and reason, argument.Shanusar (talk) 09:14, 11 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Rawat has given countless interviews in his long life. If your claim is correct, you should be able to corroborate your claims with a source quoting Rawat on his caste. If in his entire lifetime of 60+ years Rawat did not mention his caste anywhere, then Wikipedia cannot mention his caste. The so called secondary sources are providing multiple conflicting information about his caste. see my comment above with 5 points. Venkat TL (talk) 09:25, 11 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Rawat has given interviews according to his post not on his personal life. there was no need for him to discuss his own life but wiki page has given section for this. and moreover I have seen other pages where such sources are used on same topic. Dalbir Singh Suhag, Karambir Singh, Qamar Javed Bajwa in these pages also caste is mention and with same sources- news media article only. you say people have to specify their caste but these also have not done that. Wiki allows it as these two pages exit and with same info. Shanusar (talk) 11:38, 11 December 2021 (UTC)
 * If there is no mention of his caste by Rawat anywhere, then we need not mention it. As mentioned in WP:BLP it is better to not give any information, than to give wrong/unverified information. I have removed unsourced information from other pages. Venkat TL (talk) 11:58, 11 December 2021 (UTC)

Birthplace
He was born in Uttarakhand. But Uttarakhand was not when he was born. Uttarakhand was formed in 2000. So to mention that, please add he was born in Uttarakhand, then part of Uttar Pradhesh 2401:4900:6135:3D37:A4B7:8B90:F1E3:3119 (talk) 14:03, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

NPOV tag
I've put up the tag because the article is essentially written as a CV and contains subjective comment which is not NPOV. The subject seems clearly an important one, but the article needs substantial re-writing to come up to Wikipedia standards. For example, the description of the MONUC action in the DRC, and the note that North Kiva stabilised, appears nonsense to anyone who knows anything about the Kivus. It certainly requires justification or balancing. This applies to many other aspects of the article. Emmentalist (talk) 10:41, 10 December 2021 (UTC)


 * @Emmentalist I do not dispute your observation. I am working to improve the neutrality. That said these issues are not major and can be improved by folks working on this page like Rockcodder and Aumnamahashiva. The page is currently on the mainpage, so I have removed it as this is not a GA page and issues are not insurmountable. Please make consensus. Venkat TL (talk) 10:47, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
 * I have copy edited to fix the MONUC Section. Please point out if you believe I missed something. Venkat TL (talk) 10:55, 10 December 2021 (UTC)


 * Thanks, @Venkat TL that's much better on the Monusco part. To be clear, I don't argue that the general didn't do a good job in the DRC but just that the Kivus really didn't get stabilised then or ever. If anything, the integration of the rebels into the FARDC actually made it worse. That wasn't his fault, though and I have met plenty of great Indian troops in Eastern DRC. I agree it's best to take tag off. All the best, Emmentalist (talk) 11:21, 11 December 2021 (UTC)


 * @Emmentalist, thanks for agreeing with my edits. Yes I understand your point about tone and I thank you for raising the concern on the talk page. Since you know more about MONUC section, if you find some important bits can be added, then please point out here or even better add them yourself. If there are reliable sources discussing Rawat's work and critically examining it, then it must be added. This article has improved a lot in the last few days. The tone has been changed from promotional to neutral. It is still far from perfect WP:GOOD ARTICLE but it will reach there eventually with your and everyone's help. Venkat TL (talk) 12:09, 11 December 2021 (UTC)

Military career is missing in the lead
Following MOS:LEAD his elaborate Military career needs to be summarized in 2-3 paragraphs in the lead. Please help. Venkat TL (talk) 12:43, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

Insurgent
Insurgent literally means a person fighting against a government or invading force; a rebel or revolutionary. How does this violate WP:NPOV? Is it because the accusation of him being a stone pelter wasn't proven? Rockcodder (talk) 12:56, 10 December 2021 (UTC)


 * You are calling him insurgent. You are expected to provide source here on the talk to support your claim. Where si the source? It is sourced and undisputed that he is Kashmiri. Venkat TL (talk) 13:13, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

Middle name in the lead
I don't think his middle name is Laxman Singh? It was first added by an IP [1 ] on 5 December 2021. This name was later removed by @Hemant Dabral stating that unlike the Gujarati/Marathi naming convention, It's not the custom to add father's name as middle name among Garhwali people. However it was later added again by @Handoto [2 ]without any RS. All the RS who use this name are WP:CIRCULAR. I couldn't find any RS who uses this name before December 2021. Eevee01(talk) 14:57, 10 December 2021 (UTC)


 * Remove immediately, until the time when, a reliable source that is not WP:CIRCULAR is available for the said claim. Putting such names is in fact WP:BLP violation. Venkat TL (talk) 15:10, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
 * @Wikipedian India Please see the above discussion. Eevee01(talk) 07:05, 12 December 2021 (UTC)


 * I have added references that states that his full name is Bipin Laxman Singh Rawat. Wikipedian India (talk) 07:14, 12 December 2021 (UTC)


 * @Wikipedian India, you have to stop Edit warring. See WP:CIRCULAR. WP:WION is not reliable. Is his name written like this in any official document? If no, then we cannot mention it. See the first comment on the top. Venkat TL (talk) 07:23, 12 December 2021 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your efforts Wikipedian India (talk) 09:09, 12 December 2021 (UTC)

Chairman of the Chiefs of Staff Committee
@SuperWIKI Your edits to the succession table for "Chairman of the Chiefs of Staff Committee" on Bipin Rawat article were unsourced and inappropriate. Factual Error was the right reason to revert them. I have corrected the table at Chairman of the Chiefs of Staff Committee to clearly mention the gap. Venkat TL (talk) 08:15, 16 December 2021 (UTC)
 * @VenkatTL I understand the reason for the reversions, being that my additions were factually inaccurate. I deny, however, that my intention was to vandalize. For these purposes, I should have added a source (multiple even) to explain my edits. At the base, Gen Naravane did not directly succeed Rawat as Chairman of the Chiefs of Staff Committee, but assumed the position after the office of Chairman was restored until a new CDS can be appointed. We could use the s-start template (as compared to the older Succession box template) instead to mention that Naravane became Chairman of the Chiefs of Staff Committee after Rawat in 2021, but does not succeed Rawat. After all, the office was abolished, but as of 15 December 2021 there is now someone after Rawat as Chairman. We could take this approach that the office was abolished but restored with Naravane as Chairman.


 * This, however, I need to inquire further. Is Naravane acting Chairman of the Chiefs of Staff Committee, or is officially the 58th Chairman? That would affect the way we approach his occupancy in the Chairman of the Chiefs of Staff Committee page, as an acting occupant would not be officially numbered as 58th. SuperWIKI (talk) 08:32, 16 December 2021 (UTC)
 * @SuperWIKI, please refer to Template:uw-error2. You were not accused of vandalism. Regarding the table. I think saying Vacant Post abolished and then giving a name is contradicting. I believe this contradiction is better discussed on the CCSC page. The reader is better served by adding a link to the list of CCSC. The titles like General etc are not added to succession tables. Venkat TL (talk) 08:40, 16 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Then I assume I should remove the ACM part from Dhanoa? That was already in the succession table before I added my edits. SuperWIKI (talk) 08:42, 16 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Yes. You can remove the Titles wherever you see in the succession tables. They are unnecessary clutter. Venkat TL (talk) 08:46, 16 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Done. SuperWIKI (talk) 08:57, 16 December 2021 (UTC)

Quote from a reliable source to support my contributions: The Chief of Defence Staff, apart from being the head of the Department of Military Affairs, will also be the Permanent Chairman of the Chiefs of Staff Committee. . . . As the Permanent Chairman of Chiefs of Staff Committee, CDS will perform the following functions:. .. Meaning that CDS General Bipin Rawat was Chairman of the COSC until his demise. Rockcodder (talk) 21:08, 9 January 2022 (UTC)


 * The post of CoSC Chairman will be abolished after the formation of the office of the CDS which will be responsible for coordinating amongst all the three armed forces.
 * The post of CoSC Chairman will be abolished after the formation of the office of the CDS which will be responsible for coordinating amongst all the three armed forces.
 * After the creation of the post of Chief of the Defence Staff, the post of CSC was abolished, but now it has been revived on a temporary basis.
 * @Rockcodder Take a look at the quotes. This should be explained in the text in the article body at CCSC article. The infobox should not give misleading information. Venkat TL (talk) 05:49, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
 * So news articles are given more value than press releases from the government? The press release from the PIB clearly states that the CDS will be the Permanent Chairman of the Chiefs of Staff Committee. How can the CDS be the permanent Chairman of the COSC if the said position was abolished? My contributions to the infobox are not misleading as per the information provided in the PIB press release. The Chairman COSC article explains it as such:- Until 2020, the chairmanship of the COSC was held in rotation by the senior-most service chief until his retirement, and the arrangement was found to be unsatisfactory. When the post of the Chief of Defence Staff (CDS) was established, its holder was also made the permanent chairman of the Chiefs of Staff Committee (COSC).  In the absence of the CDS, a temporary Chairman of the Chiefs of Staff Committee may be appointed. Following the death of the late CDS Bipin Rawat in a helicopter crash in December 2021, General Manoj Mukund Naravane assumed the temporary role of Chairman COSC until such time a new CDS is appointed.
 * There are other sources which quote the press release and/or provide the same information. Such as: "The Chief of Defence Staff, apart from being the head of the Department of Military Affairs, will also be the Permanent Chairman of the Chiefs of Staff Committee," the defence ministry said.It further read that “The Chief of Defence Staff, apart from being the head of the Department of Military Affairs, will also be the Permanent Chairman of the Chiefs of Staff Committee. . . . ".The Chief of Defence Staff, apart from being the head of the Department of Military Affairs, will also be the Permanent Chairman of the Chiefs of Staff Committee. He will act as the Principal Military Adviser to Defence Minister on all tri-Services matters.
 * Rockcodder (talk) 08:09, 10 January 2022 (UTC)


 * @Rockcodder All the sources are saying that the function of the COSC post has been merged with CDS. The fact that COSC has been abolished is reliably sourced. Instead of arguing over this technicality in infobox, please spend your precious time in explaining this matter in the COSC article. Venkat TL (talk) 08:15, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
 * It is quite clear that all the sources indicate that the person serving as Chairman COSC, serves in an ex officio capacity as CDS. This does not mean that the posts have been merged or abolished. The person serving as the CDS also serves as the Secretary, Department of Military Affairs. Does this mean that Secretary DMA has been merged with CDS? No right? Similarly, the person serving as the CDS also serves as the Chairman COSC. Please try to understand that one person can wear multiple caps in such systems. My intention here is not to 'argue over technicalities in the infobox' but to simply present facts. And the fact is that General Rawat served as Chairman COSC until 8 December 2021 and was succeeded by General Naravne on 15 December 2021. And as stated above, this matter has already been explained in the Chairman COSC article. Rockcodder (talk) 08:32, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
 * It appears from your silence that you no longer object to this change. If you do still object, please let me know why within the next three days. Rockcodder (talk) 17:21, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
 * @Rockcodder thank you for the ping. I did not see your last reply. I completely understand the situation. Look I am telling you again and again that we should not make out own conclusions and stick to whatever reliable sources are publishing. WP:SYNTH prohibits it. Please read. There are no source that said Rawat was COSC on 8 Dec 2021. All sources say, he was CDS. So I am continuing my objections, until we have a reliable source to support the changes you are proposing to make in the succession box. Venkat TL (talk) 18:58, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Please take a look at this...
 * It is a matter of profound grief that Gen Bipin Rawat, PVSM, UYSM, AVSM, YSM, SM, VSM, ADC, the first Chief of Defence Staff and Permanent Chairman of Chiefs of Staff Committee (COSC) has passed away in a tragic helicopter crash.
 * This should be enough to show that General Rawat was Chairman COSC at the time of his passing (8 December 2021), shouldn't it? Rockcodder (talk) 20:28, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
 * @Rockcodder Thank you for this source. I had not seen this before. So now we have a case of WP:CONFLICTINGSOURCES. Some reliable secondary sources (news sites) saying abolished. 1 Primary source saying He was Permanent COSC. We need to follow the community consensus in handling this conflicting source situation. I sincerely believe this conflict should be explained on COSC article. As for your proposal to update, the Succession table in Bipin Rawat page, I think we should leave it the way it is right now. The reader gets the right info that the functions of COSC were merged with CDS and there was no need to appoint another COSC, with CDS now created. Venkat TL (talk) 20:45, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Two of the three sources cited by you above, like most other sources with conflicting reports on this, were published before the government published details of the CDS post. Meaning that they can be kept aside by virtue of preferring up-to-date sources. By the way, not 1 but 3 primary sources (the Press Information Bureau press release, the Integrated Defence Staff 'Adieu' post and the News Service Division, All India Radio report) and other secondary sources state that the CDS was also permanent Chairman COSC. And as for the statement, "there was no need to appoint another (Chairman) COSC"; following the sudden and unexpected demise of General Rawat, there was a need to appoint another Chairman COSC. A need that was fulfilled following the appointment of General Narawane as Chairman COSC. So General Narawne has to be mentioned as General Rawat's successor. And even WP:CONFLICTINGSOURCES states "If the issue is a simple matter of fact (e.g., a birth date) but cannot be resolved, this can be reported by presenting the apparently most plausible choice in the text while adding a footnote with the alternatives". We can mention 8 December 2021 as the term end date while adding a note which states something along the lines of "Some secondary sources (news reports) state that General Rawat's tenure as Chairman COSC lasted only until 31 December 2019 but primary sources (from the government and the armed forces) state that General Rawat tenure as Chairman lasted until his demise on 8 December 2021". Rockcodder (talk) 05:27, 14 January 2022 (UTC)

Proposal 1:

Proposal 2:

Rockcodder I am fine with either of these 2 versions. If you agree, feel free to update the box with any of the two. If you disagree, please present your preferred version along with the footer. Venkat TL (talk) 05:52, 14 January 2022 (UTC)


 * The above versions are my preferred compromise versions for both the infobox and the succession table as it shows that General Rawat served as Chairman COSC in his capacity as Chief of Army Staff and then continued to serve but in his capacity as Chief of Defence Staff. I can't agree with your versions as in my opinion the date '31 December 2019' and the statement 'Office merged with Chief of Defence Staff' are factually incorrect. So, what say you? Rockcodder (talk) 07:04, 14 January 2022 (UTC)

Proposal 3:

Rockcodder I find double boxes, confusing for the reader. I have merged them. This is my third and final proposal, I have included your concerns for dates. Hope you will agree. If you still disagree then we will have to wait for other editors to share their preferences. Venkat TL (talk) 07:33, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Happy with how it looks now? Rockcodder (talk) 08:59, 14 January 2022 (UTC)


 * Rockcodder, yes, I agree with both succession table and infobox. Please proceed and update the article. Thanks for the discussion. Venkat TL (talk) 09:08, 14 January 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 24 February 2023
Mention Alma Mater - St.Edward’s School, Shimla Ally265 (talk) 14:33, 24 February 2023 (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) 14:49, 24 February 2023 (UTC)