Talk:Khalid Azim

Doubtful words
This article uses some expressions that may introduce doubt into this article when it is not warranted, nor supported by sources. For example: These are just two wording issues in this article leap out at me upon reading it. Another includes citing the sections of the Indian Penal Code by number, rather than the describing those offences. I understand that this might be a source problem, with poor quality reporting, but Wikipedia's readers are not lawyers and cannot be expected to have a copy of the Indian Penal Code handy, so the sections numbers for the charges should be described in understandable terms. Translating penal code section numbers into words that describe those offences is not original research, particularly when each section has an accompanying heading that describes the offence concerned. - Cameron Dewe (talk) 04:28, 23 October 2023 (UTC)
 * "... including serious offenses like murder, ..." - The Indian Penal Code exhaustively codifies (serious) offences. An offence either IS murder or it is NOT murder. The same goes for the other offences on the list. There is no need for introducing doubt this way. Be concise and simply say "... including murder, ..." I doubt that readers will be astonished by omitting to mention that murder is a serious offence, as are the other crimes on the list, they are crimes after all.
 * "... allegedly attacked and killed ..." - The way this reads it sounds like the fact the brothers were killed is in doubt, when it is not. Not only is it not supported by the source, the facts are not in doubt either. As the brothers were shot and killed at point blank range in front of news media cameras, and the accompanying police, there should be no doubt the brothers are dead. If there are allegations to be made, then it is about how far the conspiracy to kill the brothers extends. Omit allegedly.