Talk:Nanavati-Mehta Commission

Tehelka expose
The Tehelka expose about Pandya's statements regarding the Nanavati-Shah commission need to be added as well. Kanga Roo in the Zoo (talk) 15:09, 17 March 2014 (UTC)
 * @KRZ that would be my bad, I thought I'd added it, I'll work on that. Feel free to do the same. Vanamonde93 (talk) 17:12, 17 March 2014 (UTC)

Recent move
WP:COMMONNAME would indicate that "Nanavati-Shah commission" is the correct title; google, google scholar, Jstor, as well as an academic search engine I have access to, all pull up more results for NS rather than NM. Unless there is a significant NPOV violation with the old name, it should be moved back. Vanamonde93 (talk) 16:32, 1 November 2014 (UTC)
 * , a response would be appreciated, I do not want to move war with you....Vanamonde93 (talk) 17:10, 2 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Since shah was replaced with Mehta it did become Nanavati-Mehta. Its the new/current name that has indeed caught up in published sources . Imagine Kolkata and Calcutta, there may be more reference to Calcutta but the new name is Kolkata and will eventually catchup. --AmritasyaPutra T 02:26, 3 November 2014 (UTC)
 * That may seem to be logical, but the search engines don't bear that out; limiting the searches to things post-2008, when Shah was replaced by Mehta, still yields more results for Nanavati-Shah commission. Vanamonde93 (talk) 03:39, 3 November 2014 (UTC)


 * A Google search for "Nanavati-Mehta commission" returned about 45,700 results.
 * It reflects the name of the two people who worked on the report and this is appropriately explained in the lead.
 * Old name Nanavati-Shah commission appropriately redirects here. --AmritasyaPutra T 04:50, 3 November 2014 (UTC)
 * And a search for Nanavati Shah commission yields 89,100 results. On google scholar, NS post-2008 still gets 18; NM gets 4. See WP:COMMONNAME. Vanamonde93 (talk) 05:02, 3 November 2014 (UTC)
 * And of course it redirects here; I created the page at NS commission, it was moved here, and the old title was kept as a redirect, per procedure. The fact that it redirects here shows nothing. Vanamonde93 (talk) 05:17, 3 November 2014 (UTC)
 * A Google search for "Nanavati Mehta commission" within double quotation marks returns 1,24,000 results and "Nanavati Shah commission" in the similar manner returns 4590 results.
 * In addition to points raised by AmritasyaPutra : Justice Mehta has been a part of the commission for a larger period of time. The interim report bore Justice Shah's signature and the coming final report shall also bear his signature. It is preferable and logical to refer the commission by its existing composition.--Mohit Singh (talk) 13:24, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

External links modified (February 2018)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Nanavati-Mehta Commission. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.hinduonnet.com/thehindu/2002/03/07/stories/2002030706110100.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130119002050/http://liveindia.tv/india/states/special-court-convicts-31-in-godhra-train-burning-case/ to http://liveindia.tv/india/states/special-court-convicts-31-in-godhra-train-burning-case/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 22:50, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

"Combat law"
Is there a way to access this source - "Iyer, SH (May–June 2008). "Babu Bajrangi's bail and Gujarat riot probe". Combat Law. 7 (3): 16–19"? This citation appears to be incomplete or unclear. — Nearly Headless Nick   {c}  14:19, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

Critique
1 TrangaBellam (talk) 14:05, 26 January 2023 (UTC)