Talk:Narendra Modi/Archive 17

Rephrasing
"His administration also introduced the Citizenship Amendment Act, which resulted in widespread protests across the country."

I believe adding a little bit of context to this statement is necessary to provide a balanced view. Opinions welcome.

"His administration also introduced the Citizenship Amendment Act which was brought in to provide Indian Citizenship to persecuted minorities from Pakistan, Bangladesh, Afghanistan and Myanmar who came to India before 2014 seeking refuge, resulted in protests across the country" — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bmmanjesh (talk • contribs) 18:19, 10 January 2021 (UTC)

New image request for the page
I think the File:PM Narendra Modi.jpg is the best image that can be used for the article because this is the official image. So, can I use it ? INDV100 (talk) 08:14, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
 * , please read WP:CONSENSUS. A discussion regarding the infobox image already exists and the general view there was to use the current image. You can find that discussion here. If you want to start another RfC discussion please do so but do not make changes to the image until you have said consensus.  Pro lix 💬 17:45, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

I support the image recommended by INDV100 Bmmanjesh (talk) 18:23, 10 January 2021 (UTC)

Revert addition of text which is factually incorrect.
Additon of text on 4th Feb'21 by Jonmaxras is not factually proven or correct. This addition reflect one's own thought not a proven fact. Please revert changes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AyushVerma 185 (talk • contribs) 18:44, 8 February 2021 (UTC)


 * @User:Jonmaxras did not add any text that day, he just linked a page to democratic backsliding. Chariotrider555 (talk) 19:00, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 8 February 2021
The following below needs to be removed & deleted but it has no factual evidence & it's an opinion. How come Wikipedia allows such editing?

Please change This

"Following his party's victory For The Second Time in the 2019 general election, his administration revoked the special status of Jammu and Kashmir, As Promised By Him And His Party In Their Election manifesto. His administration also introduced the Citizenship Amendment Act, which resulted in widespread protests across the country. The Reason Being The Misunderstanding By The Majority-Minority That Their Citizenships Would Be Revoked(Although No Such Provisions Were Visible On The Draft Of The CAA). Described as engineering a political realignment towards right-wing politics, Modi remains a figure of controversy domestically and internationally over his Hindu nationalist beliefs and his alleged role(Which Was Later On i.e in 2013 Considered Baseless Charge, By The S.I.t Of The Supreme Court Of India) during the 2002 Gujarat riots.[f] Under Modi's tenure, India has experienced A Very Minute democratic backsliding But A Very Big Economic And Self Dependence Boom.[g]"

CHANGE TO

"Described as engineering a political realignment towards right-wing politics, Modi remains a figure of controversy domestically and internationally over his Hindu nationalist beliefs and his alleged role during the 2002 Gujarat riots, cited as evidence of an exclusionary social agenda.[f] Under Modi's tenure, India has experienced democratic"

Stop with this opinion nonsense, you want to write OPed. Go write for MSM or on your blog. Ertraze (talk) 19:01, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

Why are people writing Opinion as facts or proven theories. Delete the entire paragraph.. ..  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chary mm (talk • contribs) 01:28, 9 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Wikipedia adheres to a neutral point of view (NPOV), which means representing fairly, proportionately, and, as far as possible, without editorial bias, all the significant views that have been published by reliable sources on a topic.Chariotrider555 (talk) 19:05, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

WP:ETHNICTY
As per WP:ETHNICITY we are not suppose to mention the subject's ancestry in the lead. IMO we have to remove the mention of Gujarati from the there. Pinging for opinions. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 12:07, 10 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Agree. I note that the pronunciation of his name in IPA should be English, not an imagined "Gujarati."  I will shortly replace it with IPA-en and change the ogg file to one of Modi pronouncing his own name.  I will extract it from somewhere (I hope).   Fowler&amp;fowler  «Talk»  17:31, 10 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the changes, I was referring to this line → "Born to a Gujarati family in Vadnagar..." - in the second para of the lead. IMO the "Gujarati family" part should be removed as per WP:ETHNICITY. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 17:48, 10 February 2021 (UTC)
 * "Gujarati" is not an ethnicity. It's ok include country/region of origin. — kashmīrī  TALK  00:36, 11 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Gujarati is indeed an ethnicity. Chariotrider555 (talk) 01:33, 11 February 2021 (UTC)
 * "Gujarati" in the lead links to the ethnicity. The country of origin is India which is already mentioned in the lead sentence. I believe the sentence need to be framed as "Born in Vadnagar, he was introduced to the RSS....". That is remove the "to a Gujarati family" part. Pinging . - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 06:55, 11 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I don't think I'm familiar enough with the subject matter to comment on this, and I'll defer to others. —  Newslinger  talk   06:58, 11 February 2021 (UTC)
 * I don't have much opinion on this. He was born to a Gujarati family seems to be a fact that's uncontroversial enough. I think it's in a bit of a grey area in terms of policy, the lead doesn't explicitly call him a "Gujarati" or a "Gujarati Indian" and is more in relation to the paragraph on his birth and early life. India is a large country and one's familial background can give more context to a biography. Although I don't think this is such an important detail per se that it must be included in the lead. Tayi Arajakate  Talk 23:23, 11 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Mahatma Gandhi article doesn't mention his ethnicity, nor in Manmohan Singh, either. The second para does link to the ethnic article. According to WP:ETHNICITY, Ethnicity, religion, or sexuality should generally not be in the lead unless it is relevant to the subject's notability. Is Modi's ethnicity relevant for his work or he is notable for his ethnicity? The Gandhi and Singh articles only mention their place of birth. The mention of ethnicity in this article lead is a rarity in Wikipedia. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 08:33, 12 February 2021 (UTC)
 * One could argue that his Gujarati background is relevant to his notability due to much of his political career being in Gujarat politics, Gandhi or Singh in comparison were never exclusively involved in a specific state. Mahatma Gandhi's article also seems to mention his religious background in a similar context (Born in a Hindu family), which makes sense due to his philosophy being mostly derived from Hinduism.
 * But as I said, I think this is in a grey area and if someone wants to remove it, I am indifferent towards it. The lead already mentions that he was the Chief Minister of Gujarat. Tayi Arajakate  Talk 15:08, 12 February 2021 (UTC)
 * An argument like that can be presented for every regional politician. I do not think only being involved with politics in Gujarat (or any region) does qualify the lead to highlight his Gujarati heritage. That kind of distinction should go to pages like Bal Thackeray, a person who advocated for the interest of Marathi people specifically. On the flipside, there are people like Rajinikanth. In a situation like this, following the rule strictly is the only way out IMO. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 16:06, 12 February 2021 (UTC)
 * An argument like that can be presented for every regional politician. I do not think only being involved with politics in Gujarat (or any region) does qualify the lead to highlight his Gujarati heritage. That kind of distinction should go to pages like Bal Thackeray, a person who advocated for the interest of Marathi people specifically. On the flipside, there are people like Rajinikanth. In a situation like this, following the rule strictly is the only way out IMO. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 16:06, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

Gujarati on WP had until now offered a dictionary definition of "Gujarati." I have now brought it in line with the other similar labels Tamil, Marathi, Kannada (disambiguation), Oriya, Telugu, Assamese. (I had to fix Bengali as well.)  The only reasonable page Gujarati would refer to is Gujarati people, which is an ethnolinguistic group. I also checked some of the other prime ministers of India. None have such ethnic designations (though Manmohan Singh's was pussyfooting around his birth in Pakistan (as if we all know what Gah is) and Vajpayee's has Hindu Brahmin family (I'm not sure caste is allowed anymore)). And Rajiv Gandhi and Indira had such cosmopolitan upbringings that it is not clear what their ethnic designation would be. So, all in all, I'd remove "Gujarati," but add some encyclopedically useful information about Vadnagar. Fowler&amp;fowler «Talk»  21:36, 12 February 2021 (UTC)
 * I've taken the bold step of fixing it.  Fowler&amp;fowler  «Talk»  21:53, 12 February 2021 (UTC)
 * And I support it, for the sake of WP:ETHNICITY. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 05:34, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 22 February 2021
remove "Under Modi's tenure, India has experienced democratic backsliding.[g]" Ifyouarebadtheniamyourdad (talk) 08:23, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

This discussion was closed on 4 January 2021 with consensus that democratic backsliding should be included. Why are you now opening a new section to rehash the discussion?

Extended protection
This article needs extended protection. There is always vandalism despite the fact that this is semi protected. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kimjongundprk4life (talk • contribs) 10:26, 14 March 2021 (UTC)

Administration being complicit in 2002 riots
The line on the 2002 riots and the administration read "His administration has been considered complicit in the 2002 Gujarat riots, or otherwise criticised for its handling of it. A Supreme Court-appointed Special Investigation Team found no evidence to initiate prosecution proceedings against Modi personally"

Which implies, 1. That there is academic consensus that his administration is complicit, 2. the qualifier "to initiate prosecution proceedings" implies there was evidence but not enough to initiate proceedings.

I have edited this to "Several commentators describe his administration as complicit or criticize its handling of the 2002 Gujarat riots. A Supreme Court-appointed Special Investigation Team found no evidence against Modi personally."

Which corrects the implications that 1. Several commentators describe the complicity (and not an academic consensus), and 2. The SIT did not find evidence against Modi, without the qualifier "to initiate prosecution proceedings" that makes factually incorrect implications.Nolopassaro99 (talk) 08:50, 19 March 2021 (UTC)


 * I am going to revert it, due to there is an academic consensus. If you find to dispute that, you must be able to cite enough high quality academic sources to counter the previously established statements. WP:SOURCETYPES states that "academic and peer-reviewed publications, scholarly monographs, and textbooks are usually the most reliable sources". They take precedence over court statements. Chariotrider555 (talk) 13:36, 19 March 2021 (UTC)


 * WP:RS/AC says "A statement that all or most scientists or scholars hold a certain view requires reliable sourcing that directly says that all or most scientists or scholars hold that view". None of the so-called high quality academic articles you are quoting make the statement that "directly says that all or most scientists or scholars hold that view". So, no, there is no academic consensus. Nolopassaro99 (talk) 14:10, 19 March 2021 (UTC)


 * To add another point, you cannot decide if it is academic consensus based on four or five articles in journals (again, not all of those cited are even peer-reviewed). Academic condensus must be stated in a reliable source. Nolopassaro99 (talk) 14:17, 19 March 2021 (UTC)


 * I have reverted your edits. Nolopassaro99 (talk) 14:18, 19 March 2021 (UTC)


 * The only source that quotes consensus is Page 51, of Martha Nussbaum, in her 2009 book says "The outcome of the Modi case shows that there is by now a broad consensus that the Gujarat violence was a form of ethnic cleansing, that it was in many respects premeditated, and that it was carried out with the complicity of the state government and officers of the law." This does not show any references to this and is also outdated, WP:SOURCETYPES, since it was published in 2007 before the court proceedings and related investigation, so it should not take precedence. Also, WP:RS/AC talks about how "Review articles, especially those printed in academic review journals that survey the literature, can help clarify academic consensus.", although this is not a topic of pure science, some review is needed to establish consensus, one single source quoting consensus without any sourcing or review cannot be considered "academic consensus". Nolopassaro99 (talk) 16:45, 19 March 2021 (UTC)


 * You haven't read or responded to 's statement. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 16:52, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 18 March 2021
Create the new "Public profile" section and Move Personal life, Approval ratings, State honors and Other honors sections. 122.171.129.62 (talk) 10:30, 18 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Please get consensus for this change to article structure before requesting an edit. Thanks ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 11:08, 18 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Marking this as answered. Not sure why the IP re-enable this request here. ~  Aseleste  (t, e &#124; c, l) 10:49, 21 March 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 20 March 2021
In "Governance and other initiatives", please remove the following paragraph (it is being POV-pushed by a single editor called Veej, despite being reverted multiple times, and has barely any relevance to the article) :

During parliamentary Zero Hour on 19 September 2020, tribal rights advocate Mohan Delkar MP raised the issue of abuse and persecution by UT Administrator Praful Khoda Patel, appointed by PM Narendra Modi, "as part of a conspiracy" claiming he was "denied the right to address the people of the region as an MP". Praful Patel’s father was an RSS leader and Narendra Modi often visited him ith Patel described as "extremely close to Shri Narendra Modi". Mohan Delkar complained of his plight directly to PM Modi in two letters on 18 December 2020 and 31 January 2021 stating "We are going through extreme mental torture. Kindly understand the gravity of the situation and intervene immediately. Give directions to the local authorities and, if possible, time to meet so that I can narrate my miseries to you." . Abhinav Delkar states that his father Mohan travelled to Delhi to meet with PM Modi asking for help. On 12 February 2021 during a Lok Sabha Privileges Committee hearing Mohan Delkar announced, "If harassment to me is not stopped, then I would be left with no option but committing suicide". Delkar's complaints were acknowledged but no further response was given nor action taken. On 22 February 2021 Mohan Delkar was found dead, hanging in a Mumbai hotel leaving a 15 page suicide note holding politicians and administrative officials responsible for "injustice", "insult" and "bias" meted out to him and specifically named Praful Khoda Patel. 183.83.147.181 (talk) 10:11, 20 March 2021 (UTC)


 * ✅ removed the para. The above has been removed before too. Please do not add again. You may want to go through WP:CONSENSUS once. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 13:52, 20 March 2021 (UTC)

So §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ chose to delete every single word I added to this page without any meaningful discussion, nor addressing a single point I made whilst trying to engage with editors. This is not how Wikipedia works. Should you disagree, please let's discuss Veej (talk) 02:01, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
 * , Please note that have already addressed your points above. Its your turn to show how this all is related to Modi directly. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 03:58, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Also, lets not forget that you are trying to push similar content on multiple pages like Sunil Kumar Singh (politician), Amit Shah, Om Birla, Praful Khoda Patel. You are also trying to sensationalize the topic by creating article of a non-notable at Abhinav Delkar, who (just like you) is only blabbering things everywhere. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 04:05, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

March 2021
User talk:Independent contrib recently removed text relating to Mohanbhai Sanjibhai Delkar from Narendra Modi page stating "Removing unsourced news. This isn't daily news update page". You may have done this in error as multiple sources state that Delkar contacted Modi begging for assistance before his suicide. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on User talk:Veej Veej (talk) 13:21, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

It is irrelevant to how Modi governs India. Unless his name is in the sucide note, blaming him for the sucide, you cannot add it. Rather, you should add this to the page of the deceased MP--YoYoRockNRoll (talk) 10:08, 15 March 2021 (UTC)


 * I agree, unless the subject's name (Modi) is directly mentioned in the source(s), we are not supposed to write his name, which will constitute original research. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 11:03, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

Agreed. The connection between Modi and the suicide is not shown clearly enough. The harasser Praful Khoda Patel was appointed to the administrator role by Modi giving him the power to harass Delkar. Modi and Patel are "extremely close" and have a long standing connection dating back to Patel's father, an RSS leader. In 2010 Modi had elevated first time MLA Patel to Home Minister of Gujarat until Patel lost the next election. Delkar pleaded for help from Modi in a meeting and two separate letters. Modi chose not to act upon these pleas but instead protect his friend Patel. On that basis, Modi had made a governance decision which led to the death of the most prominent Tribal rights advocate in the country. I'll rewrite the paragraph to make the link clearer. This is a notable story, its particularly relevant to Modi and is encyclopaedic information. The link between Delkar's death and Modi is not original research imagined by myself. It is made in all of these news articles:

https://www.indiatoday.in/india/story/mohan-delkar-suicide-wrote-to-pm-modi-amit-shah-congress-1779099-2021-03-14

https://www.hindustantimes.com/cities/mumbai-news/delkar-wrote-to-pm-modi-amit-shah-and-ls-speaker-says-maharashtra-congress-101615659106128.html

https://theprint.in/india/father-met-modi-shah-but-got-no-assurances-son-of-mp-who-killed-himself-in-mumbai/621176/

https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/mumbai/mumbai-sawant-says-modi-shah-let-delkar-die/articleshow/81488286.cms

https://www.nationalheraldindia.com/india/before-suicide-delkar-frantically-sought-help-from-pm-home-minister-ls-speaker

https://indianexpress.com/article/cities/mumbai/before-suicide-delkar-wrote-to-pm-amit-shah-multiple-times-says-congress-7227262/

https://indianexpress.com/article/cities/mumbai/maharashtra-govt-announces-sit-to-probe-delkar-death-7221571/

https://www.thehindu.com/news/cities/mumbai/delkars-suicide-note-names-ut-administrator-deshmukh/article34031848.ece

https://www.telegraphindia.com/india/congress-releases-letters-of-dead-mp-seeking-help-from-narendra-modi/cid/1809429

https://www.freepressjournal.in/mumbai/mumbai-independent-mp-mohan-delkars-suicide-due-to-persecution-by-bjp-leader-and-central-officers-alleges-congress

https://www.news18.com/news/politics/dadra-and-nagar-haveli-mp-mohan-delkars-body-handed-over-to-family-day-after-his-death-in-mumbai-hotel-3464753.html

https://www.mid-day.com/mumbai/mumbai-news/article/pm-narendra-modi-ignored-mp-mohan-delkar-s-pleas-for-help-maharashtra-congress-23163600

https://react.etvbharat.com/english/national/state/maharashtra/maharashtra-congress-pm-ignored-mp-mohan-delkar-pleas-for-help/na20210313212853901

https://www.newindianexpress.com/nation/2021/feb/26/congress-demands-judicial-inquiry-into-death-of-dadra-and-nagar-haveli-mp-mohan-delkar-2269410.html

https://www.sify.com/news/did-pm-ignore-mp-mohan-delkars-pleas-for-help-asks-maha-cong-ld-news-national-vdnpkuiggjhjf.html

https://www.siasat.com/maha-congress-pm-ignored-mp-mohan-delkars-pleas-for-help-2109422/

https://thedialogue.co.in/article/hQ3Ik1P1dJjdY4TlGmy6/mp-mohan-delkar-wrote-to-pm-modi-about-harassment--stress-pm-could-have-saved-him-congress

This is not an exhaustive list and only relates to English language articles. Veej (talk) 14:57, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

I went through your sources. None of them point to a direct involvement of Modi. Just today, another MP was found dead in his house. Should we start adding that too to Modi's page as the MP is from BJP and Modi too is from BJP? All politicians have links to many people. Unless Modis name is directly involved in the death (like how Amit Shah is involved in Ishrat Jahan), you cannot add this. I quote you: 'Modi chose not to act upon these pleas but instead protect his friend Patel. On that basis, Modi had made a governance decision which led to the death of the most prominent Tribal rights advocate in the country.' This is your personal opinion. Where is it written that 'Modi protected Patel'? Please do not add this paragraph unless it has got consensus from all admins/editors. There are thousands of theories linking various Indian politicians to the underworld, death etc. Should we start adding it? Please follow NPOV --YoYoRockNRoll (talk) 11:18, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

The suggestion that "direct involvement of Modi" is necessary for the Delkar story to be relevant to the Modi page is false. There has been a huge mediastorm surrounding the Delkar story and Modi's links. It is appropriate for the 25489 word Modi Wikipedia biography to have a short 244 word paragraph (<1%) neutrally stating the facts surrounding this story. After somebody reads the headline "PM ignored MP Mohan Delkar’s pleas for help" they should be able look to the Modi page for the factual basis. The point made re other MP suicide falls into False equivalence and is not relevant because there isn't a mediastorm linking Ram Swaroop Sharma's suicide to Modi. If Sharma had made multiple pleas to Modi about harassment from Modi's friend, threatened suicide in parliament because of harassment from Modi's friend and then there was a mediastorm about his suicide and Modi's links afterwards, then yes, a brief paragraph about the facts of the link may be appropriate. When I wrote above (14:57 15 March 2021) of Modi protecting his friend Patel instead of hearing Delkar's pleas, I'm sorry if this caused misunderstanding. I was summarising the Delkar/Patel/Modi link made in multiple media sources rather than stating my own opinion. The tone of the Delkar paragraph is neutral however. It's important to consider the politically embarrassing but small Delkar paragraph on the context of the fawning and huge Narendra Modi section which starts Modi was named the "Best Chief Minister". Wikipedia biographies of major political leaders, and PM biographies in general tend to be littered with controversies and misjudgements - see Boris Johnson. Boris certainly has not attracted less national and international criticism than Modi. An overall neutral tone for the biography of a professional politician requires inclusion of relevant political embarrassments as well as political successes. The deletion of the Delkar paragraph justified using logical fallacy hence I'm returning the paragraph. Veej (talk) 14:06, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

This Veej editor seems to have a suspicious level of interest in this Mohan Delkar person. Ever since this sleeper account was reactivated, a massive portion of his edits are related to this Mohan Delkar person, and he seems intent on plastering Mohan Delkar's name all over Wikipedia if possible. I don't know much about Mohan Delkar, but this Veej account is somewhat strange - WP:SAP is ringing very loud. 183.83.147.181 (talk) 09:23, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Well this is absurd. I'm attacked for being an ordinary busy person. Conveniently ignoring the fact that I edit a wide variety of pages. This criticism from an anonymous account. Veej (talk) 01:56, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

No, you have mainly edited related to Mohan Delkar since your account was reactivated. How do we know if that was a different person before and a new one now? 183.83.147.181 (talk) 11:41, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

Content removal
Did you even bother to read or go through the edit summary before reverting. Per WP:CSECTION guideline sections titled "Controversies" etc. are to be avoided especially in bios (the degrees are mentioned in the Early life and education section and related information should go there no need for additional sections; not to mention the degree "controversy" has already been discussed on this Talk a multitude of time with no merit for inclusion). Coming to the "In popular culture" section, the info added is already there in the Awards and recognition, there is no need for duplicating the same info in a new section. Gotitbro (talk) 08:21, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

I agree with you on one of these issues. I couldn't spot the film bit in that section and it didn't look relevant in that section either. Thus i added that content In popular culture section. However, I Still don't agree with you on removal of Controversies section.

Can you Please look into this matter ???

Public profile
Move Personal life, Approval ratings, State honors and Other honors sections to Public profile.

Bhakts
Create the “followers” section and add a subsection especially for “Bhakts”.


 * Just no. I have extensively addressed this at Talk:Godi media. The term is a vaguely interesting factoid that does not fit anywhere on Wikipedia. Wilhelm Tell DCCXLVI converse &#124; fings wot i hav dun 19:14, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
 * You addressed about the article 'Godi media', not about this article. Now, please explain how this section would not fit anywhere in this article. 122.167.46.82 (talk) 09:29, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Alright, so where do you think it will fit? As I clearly mentioned there, you have, at best, only two sentences which are wiki-worthy. Wilhelm Tell DCCXLVI converse &#124; fings wot i hav dun 10:37, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Start with this article by creating a section for followers. 122.167.46.82 (talk) 15:29, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
 * I feel it is unnecessary as blind defenders of every government exist. BJP has 'bhakts', INC has 'chamchas' etc. It is a pejorative term irrelevant to the page on Modi. The article on Godi Mediais relevant as it is a documented effort by MSM to tilt the discourse towards BJP, which is ethically incorrect. Twitter trolls do not deserve a mention. --YoYoRockNRoll (talk) 14:52, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

List of things named after Narendra Modi
Create the "List of things named after Narendra Modi" section and add Narendra Modi Stadium.122.182.236.51 (talk) 14:35, 8 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Create the new "Public profile" section, add a subsection for "List of things named after Narendra Modi" and move "On 24 February 2021, the largest cricket stadium in the world at Ahmedabad was renamed as the Narendra Modi Stadium in his honour by the Gujarat Cricket Association. " 122.171.129.62 (talk)

Gratitudes
The picture of PM Narendra Modi has been engraved on the top panel of SKI’s Satish Dhawan Satellite (SDSat) to show solidarity and gratitude for the PM's Aatmanirbhar Bharat initiative and space privatization. 122.182.236.63 (talk) 14:41, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Yeah, who cares? Are we going to list all places where his subordinates have placed his pictures? He'd lose with Queen Elizabeth II anyway. — kashmīrī  TALK  15:52, 14 March 2021 (UTC)

False statements
Create the "False statements "subsection and list some Modi Lies.
 * I don't understand what do you mean by 'Modi Lies'. If you are talking about unfulfilled promises or fearmongering, I am sorry to say but it is done by nearly every politician of all ideological spectrums. This is not a diary of Modi where we will have to sit and cross check the validity of his statements given during rallies. Same thing applies in context of Rahul Gandhi too.Read--YoYoRockNRoll (talk) 14:45, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Should this be included in the Early Life section: https://www.ndtv.com/india-news/pm-narendra-modi-in-dhaka-one-of-my-first-protests-was-for-bangladeshs-liberation-2399769 Shubhrajit Sadhukhan (talk) 13:13, 27 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Shuddhabrata Sengupta writes in the paragraph of his A Sataygrah and Asatyagraha: Narendra Modi and the Liberation of Bangladesh article, "It is also being being claimed that Modi actually wrote this in Sangharsh Maa Gujarat, a book published in 1978. However, native Gujarati speakers who have read the 2000 edition of the book (available as a PDF on Modi’s web page report that the book makes no mention of this, even though ‘imprisonment in Tihar Jail due to participation in Bangladesh Satyagraha’ is mentioned, in passing, as part of the then young author’s ‘achievements’ in the short author’s bio note printed on the back cover." 122.171.51.0 (talk) 14:16, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Check if a Tihar jail record exists, otherwise move to the new "False statements" section. 122.171.51.0 (talk) 14:19, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Now you can proceed. 122.171.129.140 (talk) 14:15, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

Controversies
Consider restoring Controversies section. 122.171.51.0 (talk) 14:30, 30 March 2021 (UTC)


 * As far as I remember, I had simly rephrased the statement. A line or 2 can be rather added to his Personal Life section.--YoYoRockNRoll (talk) 14:56, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Only a line or 2? Restore any way122.171.129.140 (talk) 14:59, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Why don't you build List of Controversies of Narendra Modi using1, 2, 3, 4 and other links.122.171.129.140 (talk) 14:59, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

Views
Section is missing or not exists.122.179.93.198 (talk)

Opinions
Section is missing or not exists.122.179.93.198 (talk)

Criticism
Section is missing or not exists.122.179.93.198 (talk)

Legacy
Section is missing or not exists.122.179.93.198 (talk)

Descendants
Section is missing or not exists.122.179.93.198 (talk)

Influences
Section IS missing or not exists.122.179.93.198 (talk)

Others
Planning more? List here. 122.179.93.198 (talk)

Democratic backsliding

 * James Traub, Can Biden Get Tough With America’s Friends?, Foreign Policy, 5 February 2021.

-- Kautilya3 (talk) 20:07, 9 February 2021 (UTC)
 * This discussion was closed on 4 January 2021 with consensus that democratic backsliding should be included. Why are you now opening a new section to rehash our closed discussion? I remind you that according to Wikipedia's policy WP:CCC, proposing to change a recently established consensus can be disruptive. NedFausa (talk) 20:15, 9 February 2021 (UTC)
 * I will be putting enough quotes from reliable sources here, so that people know why it has been included. You can suit yourself whether you want to read it or not. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 20:25, 9 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Why are you doing this? I see no purpose other than disruption. NedFausa (talk) 20:28, 9 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Nothing much. You see, these editor gangs need to satisfy their own guilty conscience, hence elaborate rituals like maintaining a farce of neutrality are needed. That's all. 183.83.146.194 (talk) 13:36, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 9 April 2021
he is not 2nd non congress-y for PM. There were charan singh, 1976 PM, etc come on RashmikantT (talk) 17:34, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Dont ruin the knowledge RashmikantT (talk) 17:35, 9 April 2021 (UTC)


 * ❌ Modi is the second non-Congress PM to win two consecutive terms. Please see the history here - List of prime ministers of India -- DaxServer (talk) 19:49, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Incorrect picturisation and factual error.
The para given on the page requires to be amended.

"Described as engineering a political realignment towards right-wing politics, Modi remains a figure of controversy domestically and internationally over his Hindu nationalist beliefs and his alleged role during the 2002 Gujarat riots, cited as evidence of an exclusionary social agenda.[f] Under Modi's tenure, India has experienced democratic backsliding.[g]"

The facts : 1. Modi is absolved by the highest court of the Land. The Supreme Court appointed Special Investigation Team (SIT) has given a clean chit to Mr Modi in 2012. Enough references are available. Ref: BBC report "India Gujarat Chief Minister Modi cleared in riots case Published10 April 2012" Therefore the reference to the 2002 riots to be removed or it should be stated that he has been cleared of all charges. 2. The last line regarding "backsliding" is an absurd statement. The Democracy Index report which makes that statement is no authority to classify India and The USA as flawed democracy. While India is the Largest democracy and has maintained its democratic status for the last 72 years, the USA is the world's oldest democracy. And both the countries will remain democracies. Rharipanth (talk) 16:29, 9 February 2021 (UTC)


 * The article already states that the SIT cleared Modi of wrongdoing. Several reliable sources support the statements that you quote above. Remember that Wikipedia adheres to a neutral point of view, which means representing fairly, proportionately, and, as far as possible, without editorial bias, all the significant views that have been published by reliable sources on a topic. To remove content supported by reliable sources would be considered pushing a certain point of view, which is against Wikipedia policies. Chariotrider555 (talk) 16:44, 9 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Saying "His administration has been considered complicit" clearly reeks of editorial bias. If it is truly neutral, it would say, several commentators consider his administration complicit while the Supreme Court appointed Special Investigation Team (SIT) has given a clean chit.Nolopassaro99 (talk) 12:48, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

Even this has to be corrected. What are the evidences of narendra modi’s education. There are no proofs that modi is educated at all. He has got fake degrees. He has shown computer printed degrees however there were no computer in india that time and all the degrees used to be hand written then from where he got computer printed degrees. Really shame. So please remove his education as there are no true evidences of his educational background. Pranay85singh (talk) 13:41, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 18 April 2021
What are the evidences of narendra modi’s education. There are no proofs that modi is educated at all. He has got fake degrees. He has shown computer printed degrees however there were no computer in india that time and all the degrees used to be hand written then from where he got computer printed degrees. Really shame. So please remove his education as there are no true evidences of his educational background. Pranay85singh (talk) 13:44, 18 April 2021 (UTC)


 * ❌ No sources were provided. -- DaxServer (talk) 15:40, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

Consensus for Time magazine readers' poll
Taken from the Awards section. This is actually an online poll that the magazine holds every year before the editors of the magazine decides who is awarded the title "Person of the Year". This is easily confused and is often mistakenly considered as the Person of the Year that Time selects, This is a readers' poll and would always reflect a populist survey.

I propose to remove this poll from the article. What are the arguments to keep it? Is it noteworthy despite not being the actual Time's Person of the Year title? -- DaxServer (talk) 16:24, 18 April 2021 (UTC)
 * I suggest rephrasing:  §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 10:04, 19 April 2021 (UTC)


 * These are online polls which are subject to manipulation and coordination. Completely UNDUE. Of zero encyclopedic value. Snooganssnoogans (talk) 12:33, 19 April 2021 (UTC)


 * I completely agree that online polls are of no encyclopaedic value. Plus the reader’s poll is itself not noteworthy. I support the removal.defcon5 (talk) 13:13, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 20 April 2021
Please put the official portrait of the article File:Prime Minister of India Narendra Modi.jpg, even if the pic is outdated but it is useful to use official portrait for head of the government. TTP1233 (talk) 07:37, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
 * ❌ The "official" picture is not an improvement to the article, since as you pointed out, it's outdated. Ferkjl (talk) 08:37, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 22 April 2021
There are some grammatical errors in introduction. Plus he is PM now and then CM significance wise, keep that in mind whilst some sentences in intro is true but not clicking. Unnecessary links like 14th PM not necessary and the time can be abridged to make less confusing 106.66.227.175 (talk) 04:27, 22 April 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) 10:48, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 22 April 2021 (2)
Modi is chairman of PM CARES kindly mention that in intro 106.66.227.175 (talk) 04:31, 22 April 2021 (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) 10:48, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

Please correct wrong details
What are the evidences of narendra modi’s education. There are no proofs that modi is educated at all. He has got fake degrees. He has shown computer printed degrees however there were no computer in india that time and all the degrees used to be hand written then from where he got computer printed degrees. Really shame. So please remove his education as there are no true evidences of his educational background. Pranay85singh (talk) 13:37, 18 April 2021 (UTC)


 * Provide RSes to back your claim. W. Tell DCCXLVI converse &#124; fings wot i hav dun 04:41, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 5 May 2021
He is a terrorist 2603:9001:2F0C:CB9A:407E:33E:66AE:9F57 (talk) 22:38, 5 May 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.	Chariotrider555 (talk) 23:04, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

Pronunciation
user:Uanafala whose MO in India- and Pakistan-related articles is generally one of displaying impoliteness in the furtherance of his eccentric POV has changed the pronunciation of the d's in Modi's name to the English d. We don't pronounce Francois Mitterand on WP in literal English as Frank-oys (or France-oys) Mitter-and. So why are we bestowing this special discourtesy on Modi? If an Indian IPA needs to be used, I'm happy to do so. But that needs to be settled here. Fowler&amp;fowler «Talk»  13:00, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
 * This has already been discussed at Help_talk:IPA/English. – Uanfala (talk) 13:11, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Obviously, it has not; a few self-styled experts have been expounding on matters they have misunderstood, trying to make a science of what is an art. The goal is to make it easy for an English speaker to pronounce the "d" in Modi's name without making them a laughing stock to Indian listeners and also without throwing an undecipherable Hindi- or Gujarati-IPA book at them. Meanwhile, thanks for edit-warring and confirming my general assessment of you. Fowler&amp;fowler  «Talk»  14:37, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
 * You may have a point in there somewhere (though you do seem to be doing your absolute best to prevent people from seeing it). If there's any underlying problem with the English pronunciation, then it's the fact that it's English. It will be perfectly reasonable to drop it and instead provide the pronunciation in Hindi. That's up to the editors of this article to decide. Once the language is chosen, however, the IPA transcription should make sense in that language (that's not so difficult to do really – properly formatted IPA pronunciations typically generate a link to the corresponding IPA key: just follow that link and make sure the pronunciation makes sense within the system outlined there; that way you'll avoid having people to "expound" matters for you). – Uanfala (talk) 20:16, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

His intro is made lengthy
He is prime minister, he was in RSS when he born could be added under early life BUT NO... RashmikantT (talk) 20:03, 8 May 2021 (UTC)


 * @RashmikantT I don't think anyone is born into RSS. One might say, one is born into a _(religion/caste)_ family. It's neither royalty that one is when they are born. -- DaxServer (talk) 20:07, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

His intro is made lengthy without NO reason. I am not saying he is born is RSS. Lol(pls take it lightly) I think intro could be reduced one i mentioned was example RashmikantT (talk) 20:09, 8 May 2021 (UTC)


 * Technically, he is still an RSS pracharak. The RSS only "loaned" him to the BJP.
 * More seriously, this is a biography page and covers all his life. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 23:38, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 11 May 2021
Atharv Bakshi (talk) 13:51, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

Pls open the edit

Ok Atharv Bakshi (talk) 13:51, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Full-protection-shackle-no-text.svg Not done: requests for decreases to the page protection level should be directed to the protecting admin or to Requests for page protection if the protecting admin is not active or has declined the request. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 13:56, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 16 May 2021
Atharv Bakshi (talk) 14:27, 16 May 2021 (UTC) Pls Enable the Edit

Okay Atharv Bakshi (talk) 14:28, 16 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: this is not the right page to request additional user rights. You may reopen this request with the specific changes to be made and someone will add them for you. Run n Fly (talk) 14:40, 16 May 2021 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on Narendra Modi 18 May 2021
"Change paragraph 5.8 Democratic backsliding to be a opinion. The statement is an assertion". Next line cites evidence. Include "some" before scholars" 24.130.2.116 (talk) 15:03, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: The democratic backsliding is well sourced, and there is no reason to add WP:WEASEL words. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 15:18, 18 May 2021 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 19 May 2021
I want add chowkidar & Vishwaguru before his name — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2409:4043:2D02:9BA2:0:0:A909:6E04 (talk) 14:58, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 23 May 2021
Hello, Can anyone Please change the infobox image of Mr. Modi to this one

with caption as Official Portrait of Narendra Modi

This image is there from quite sometime now, before a vandal changed it again recently (4 hours ago), It requires consensus to change image of a famous individual, so as of now revert it back to one I suggested.

Please do it soon. Thank you very much.2402:8100:216C:BCFE:8420:148F:C67E:397C (talk) 07:08, 23 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done  Zoozaz1 talk  15:28, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 4 June 2021
Hello can anyone please change recently installed blurry poor quality lead image of Modi to this one which his Official portrait from 2014 as image is there from last month or so it required a consensus to change it.

with caption as Official Portrait of Narendra Modi

2 persons can't decide a consensus. Thanks. 2402:8100:2168:A0B9:6210:4339:B28F:EFB (talk) 16:42, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: three people agreed above - voice your opinion there, not here. Elli (talk &#124; contribs) 17:52, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the template. The image has already been changed multiple times, and this image does not appear to have any issues (it's not blurry for me). I think it should be left at the most recent official portrait unless consensus is established that it should be changed.  Ben  ❯❯❯  Talk  17:56, 4 June 2021 (UTC)

Mention of Covid-19 pandemic in lead
Modi has been prime minister during the COVID-19 pandemic in India, and his government has received significant criticism about how the pandemic in India was handled. I believe this is significant enough to be included in the lead. Similar lines are present in the lead sections of Donald Trump and Jair Bolsonaro.

Sources can be found within the article itself, but I am including some here:


 * Sources about the pandemic in India in general (almost every such source, if comprehensive enough, includes remarks about the Modi government's handling of the crisis):
 * Sources about Modi's image during the pandemic:
 * 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) 11:13, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Sorry if it wasn't clear. The change I want is a sentence in the lead section regarding the pandemic. For example, "The Modi government has been criticised for it's handling of the Covid-19 pandemic in India."--$ufyan (talk) 06:01, 10 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the template. Run n Fly (talk) 15:15, 10 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Should I make a new section for the consenus? Thanks to the both of you for responding btw :) --$ufyan (talk) 16:20, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 13 June 2021
"Change reduced spending on healthcare and social welfare programmes to In its first term to ' the Modi government, credited with launching the world’s largest government-funded health insurance scheme, Ayushman Bharat, increased the health allocation by an average of over 20 per cent with every Budget. This was way ahead of the preceding UPA-II administration led by Manmohan Singh, where the annual hike hovered in the neighbourhood of 12 per cent ".

"Change Under Modi's tenure, India has experienced democratic backsliding to  Prime Minister Narendra Modi is the best prime minister India has had to date, said 44 per cent of respondents in India Today’s ‘Mood Of The Nation’ (MOTN) survey released "

"Change Described as engineering a political realignment towards right-wing politics, Modi remains a figure of controversy domestically and internationally over his Hindu nationalist beliefs and his alleged role during the 2002 Gujarat riots, cited as evidence of an exclusionary social agenda.[g] to Modi’s popularity ratings overtook his own previous best, with 69 per cent calling him ‘outstanding or good’ in the January 2017 MOTN survey. " Silentbuddha92 (talk) 07:17, 13 June 2021 (UTC)


 * @Silentbuddha92 Regarding change #2 "... best prime minster India has had to date, ..." ❌ based on MOTN survey has a consensus to be removed. See "Consensus for "Best PM" MOTN poll" section above. -- DaxServer (talk) 10:41, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
 * @Silentbuddha92 Regarding change #3 ❌ POV push removing sourced content replacing it with ratings from questionable survey. -- DaxServer (talk) 10:44, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the template. Regarding #1 about Ayushman Bharat. -- DaxServer (talk) 11:01, 13 June 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. —Community Tech bot (talk) 17:39, 3 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Narendra Modi 2021 (cropped).jpg

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 15 June 2021
There has been a fraudulent edit in this Wikipedia page of Prime Minister of India. His photo has been removed and derogatory content has been added in the introduction part. Kindly look into it and make necessary changes Deepak00406 (talk) 17:48, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
 * It is unclear what change you are seeking in the article. Please be specific (e.g., change "X" to "Y") and please provide reliable sources if necessary.--RegentsPark (comment) 18:28, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

COVID-19 leadership
This article is in dire need of significantly more coverage of his leadership and decisions amid COVID-19 pandemic (with neutral coverage-the negative should not be whitewashed). SecretName101 (talk) 05:50, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
 * There is barely any mention of it, I've proposed that it be mentioned in the lead section here. I also think there should be a subsection about the Covid-19 pandemic in the "Prime Minister" section. --$ufyan (talk) 13:07, 19 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Seconded. This information along with the Indian vaccination program against covid 19 (mismanagement and subsequent response by govt to address this) should be added under the "Prime minister" section.

Image
If Wikipedia is to use an official portrait for Modi, then it makes no sense to use an image from 2014 rather than his official portrait from this year. Now that he looks older among other reasons Lochglasgowstrathyre (talk) 12:41, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Ah, yes. I too support this image. Main reason is his long beard. - 117.196.186.77 (talk) 17:39, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
 * I agree, and have swapped in the 2021 portrait. — Goszei (talk) 17:05, 3 June 2021 (UTC)

There is an image which is Modi's official portrait and also the latest. So can you give the consent for using the image in this page ? VNC200 (talk) 02:20, 5 July 2021 (UTC)


 * @VNC200 The image you uploaded to Commons is not compatible to be uploaded to Commons. Please see the deletion nomination page for rationale. -- DaxServer (talk) 08:43, 5 July 2021 (UTC)

New image
Now that File:Prime Minister Shri Narendra Modi official portrait, 2021.jpg has been deleted i suggest these two images would be good replacements





Lochglasgowstrathyre (talk) 16:19, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Done Chandan Kanti Paul (talk) 14:42, 23 June 2021 (UTC)


 * I have done the first one Chandan Kanti Paul (talk) 14:49, 23 June 2021 (UTC)


 * @Chandan Kanti Paul I had to revert your edits, as there was no consensus on which image to use. (Comment: The two images were tagged with GODL-India license and was not reviewed). -- DaxServer (talk) 15:47, 23 June 2021 (UTC)


 * I support the first one, as the nominator of those two, but why cant an adminstrator review the image? Lochglasgowstrathyre (talk) 02:37, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Narendra Modi 2021 (cropped).jpg has been reviewed by an administrator on Commons, so I have implemented it in the article. — Goszei (talk) 04:22, 2 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Seems alright, what is the dispute over it? Tayi Arajakate  Talk 05:00, 2 July 2021 (UTC)

Consensus for "Best PM" MOTN poll
What is the consensus on the text below:

This text (from edit) has been recently subject to edit war and involved a user @Peter ParkerJSR108 (latest message from an administrator and administrator's noticeboard). Despite this, what is the authenticity of this Mood of the Nation (MOTN) poll text? Is it noteworthy? Is there a consensus to keep or remove it in the article?
 * I would agree with you. This is yet another poll from Mood of the Nation (MOTN). The source cited is dead and the archive is also dead. There is another source on the India Today website. I assume the link was changed but no redirect was set. About 12,000 readers were across the nation, similar to the one from 2018, 2019. I have removed the claim.
 * -- DaxServer (talk) 15:58, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

You removed this poll too. Hahah! Then they say Wikipedia editor gangs are not biased. That other guy removed that times person of the year thing too.Do one thing delete the whole article. Im done with this biased website. Peter ParkerJSR108 (talk) 13:01, 19 April 2021 (UTC)


 * Instead of repeated personal attacks followed by rage-quitting, you can try speaking reasonably. W. Tell DCCXLVI converse &#124; fings wot i hav dun 04:39, 30 April 2021 (UTC)


 * You do realise that there is no such thing as Wikipedia editors gang right? Anyone can edit Wikipidea as long as they follow the guidelines. --ShellPandey (talk) 11:57, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

Determining whether a sample size is good or not is not based upon a mere ratio of the sample to the population size. Kindly read Sample_size_determination. For a very large population size (eg. 900 mil), wanting a 95% confidence level with a 1% margin of error, the minimum required sample size is 9604. Therefore a survey of 12,000 people very much confirms to the acceptable sample size. 94.231.255.203 (talk) 14:50, 2 July 2021 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 7 July 2021
Hello Wikipedia community; This current infobox image of Mr. Modi is really crap to be fair and more importantly it's nominated for deletion again, therefore I request to please change his image to this one. Enough of these issue of nomination of deletion again & again.


 * File:Prime Minister of India Narendra Modi.jpg with caption as Official Portrait of Modi, 2014


 * File:Narendra Modi - 02.JPG with caption as Modi in 2013

Please do this soon, my preference is second one from 2013 as it is far more face centric. 2402:8100:2163:FF24:DA7F:4BDB:57B2:749C (talk) 03:49, 7 July 2021 (UTC)


 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the template. You may initiate a discussion below. By the looks of the deletion request right now, though, it does not look like there is consensus for the image to be deleted.  TG  HL ↗  🍁 05:21, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 7 July 2021 (2)
Change the current photo to the Official Photograph of the Hon'ble Prime Minister of India. Deepak00406 (talk) 05:24, 7 July 2021 (UTC)


 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done for now: I can imagine many photos were official at one point or another. Do you have a specific file on Wikimedia Commons to use? Thanks,  TG HL ↗  🍁 05:30, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 9 July 2021
Hello Wikipedia community; This current infobox image of Mr. Modi is really crap to be fair and more importantly it's nominated for deletion again, therefore I request to please change his image to this one. Enough of these issue of nomination of deletion again & again. Plus this is also not a traditional depicton of Modi.


 * Prime Minister of India Narendra Modi.jpg with caption as Official Portrait of Modi, 2014


 * Narendra Modi - 02.JPG with caption as Modi in 2013

Please do this soon, A file nominated for deletion should never be preffered for infobox, same image has also been deleted twice. 2402:8100:2164:D8F9:621B:8B2:9091:CA7D (talk) 01:48, 9 July 2021 (UTC)


 * As a note, the nominator nominated it for deletion without explaining why it has copyright problems. Also, the nominator changed the current one to the 2014 image without consensus twice . Upon reversion, the nominator moved to Commons and nominated it for deletion, despite the image being reviewed. -- DaxServer (talk) 08:33, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the template. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 11:33, 9 July 2021 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 12 July 2021
Add Narendra Modi’s name in either Gujarati or Hindi in addition to the English transliteration of his name. Most other world leaders all have this present in their Wikipedia page. 122.172.187.219 (talk) 09:03, 12 July 2021 (UTC)
 * ❌ as per WP:NOINDICSCRIPT - we do not use any Indic scripts in the lead or infobox of our India-related articles - Arjayay (talk) 09:08, 12 July 2021 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 13 July 2021
It's changed 120.89.104.190 (talk) 14:58, 13 July 2021 (UTC) You must also cite reliable sources to back up your request, without which no information should be added to, or changed in, any article. - Arjayay (talk) 15:06, 13 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: as you have not requested a specific change in the form "Please replace XXX with YYY" or "Please add ZZZ between PPP and QQQ".

Fowler&fowler's list of third-party newspaper stories on the Modis' marriage
A very workable tradition has been established in some other contentious South Asia-related pages, (e.g. 2020 Delhi riots, 2019 Balakot airstrike, 2019 India–Pakistan border skirmishes), one of using third-party sources. "Third-party" means foreign newspapers published in liberal democracies especially ones which do not have a demonstrated bias in the topic of interest. Thus in this instance stories from India's neighboring countries in South Asia (Pakistan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka) are not preferred, nor those from China, Russia, or countries from West Asia (including Israel). Stories with bylines (i.e. accompanied by the reporter's name) are always preferred, especially if the reporter has reported from the region of the topic. I have scoured the newspaper sources about the Modis' marriage and this is what I found. Please do not change the list. You are always welcome to add your own in the discussion section below. As the list is long, I have collapsed it; the quotes are in small font. It is hoped that this list will point to how we should report the marriage. On the age issue, my general impression is that the stories use either "teenage" for both or "18" or "17" for him and "17" (rarely "18") for her. "Child marriage" receives scant mention. Desertion or abandonment by the groom receives prominent mention. Receiving prominent interpretations were the following: he was forced to acknowledge the marriage by the new election filing regulations; until then he had been actively promoting his bachelor status and incorruptibility on account of having no immediate family to serve as a beneficiary of corruption; the ideals of the Hindu nationalist organization, the RSS, which values celibacy, were thought to have played a significant role in the desertion. Fowler&amp;fowler «Talk»  13:41, 27 July 2021 (UTC) Updated  Fowler&amp;fowler  «Talk»  19:23, 27 July 2021 (UTC)
 * PS I have grouped the 27 sources under broad geographical regions. The list includes newspapers of record of several countries, including: United Kingdom, Ireland, United States, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Singapore and Hong Kong.  News agencies included are the three major ones: Associated Press, Agence-France Presse and Reuters.   Fowler&amp;fowler  «Talk»  20:41, 27 July 2021 (UTC)
 * PPS In case, any readers discern in my list a bias for the Anglosphere, I have added three newspapers of record from Continental Europe:
 * Le Monde (( French: “The World”) daily newspaper published in Paris, one of the most important and widely respected newspapers in the world.Britannica  )
 * Corriere della sera (( Italian: “Evening Courier”) morning daily newspaper published in Milan, long one of Italy’s leading newspapers, in terms of both circulation and influence, noted for its foreign coverage and its independence.Britannica  )
 * Die Welt (( German: “The World”) daily newspaper, one of the most influential in Germany and the only one of national scope and stature published in Bonn during that city’s time as West German capital.Britannica  )
 * This bumps up the number of third-party newspapers to 30; some of the others already included are:


 * New York Times ( morning daily newspaper published in New York City, long the newspaper of record in the United States and one of the world’s great newspapers.Britannica  )
 * Washington Post ( morning daily newspaper published in Washington, D.C., the dominant newspaper in the U.S. capital and usually counted as one of the greatest newspapers in that country.Britannica  )
 * Los Angeles Times ( morning daily newspaper founded (1881) in Los Angeles that in the 1960s began to develop from a regional daily into one of the world’s great newspapers.Britannica  )
 * The Globe and Mail ( daily newspaper published in Toronto, the most prestigious and influential news journal in Canada.Britannica  )
 * Toronto Star ( influential Canadian newspaper established in 1892 as the Evening Star by 25 printers who had lost their jobs in a labour dispute. ... Its outspoken opposition to Nazi policies in Germany made it the first North American newspaper to be banned from Nazi Germany.Britannica  )
 * Sydney Morning Herald ( daily newspaper published in Sydney, Australia’s oldest and one of its most influential papers.Britannica )
 * The Strait Times ( morning daily newspaper published in Singapore, generally recognized as one of the outstanding English-language papers of the Far East.Britannica  )
 * Economist ( weekly magazine of news and opinion published in London and generally regarded as one of the world’s preeminent journals of its kind. It provides wide-ranging coverage of general news and particularly of international and political developments and prospects bearing on the world’s economy.Britannica  )
 * Financial Times ( newspaper edited in London that traditionally had strong influence on the financial policies of the British government. Its paper version is printed Monday through Saturday throughout the world, and it is known as one of England’s superior newspapers.Britannica  )
 * The Independent ( politically independent daily newspaper founded in 1986 and published in London. The founders of The Independent ... believed that many of Britain’s educated and affluent citizens desired an objective source of daily news, one without the strong political biases of the country’s established newspapers. ... Renowned for its journalistic integrity,Britannica  )
 * The Daily Telegraph ( daily newspaper published in London and generally accounted, with The Times and The Guardian, as one of Britain’s “big three” quality newspapers. ... It takes a conservative middle-class approach to comprehensive news coverage.Britannica  )
 * The Times ( daily newspaper published in London, one of Britain’s oldest and most influential newspapers. It is generally accounted, with The Guardian and The Daily Telegraph, one of Britain’s “big three” and has long been recognized as one of the world’s greatest newspapers.Britannica  )


 * I haven't included the Guardian ( formerly (1821–1959) The Manchester Guardian, influential daily newspaper published in London, generally considered one of the United Kingdom’s leading newspapers. ... The Guardian has historically been praised for its investigative journalism, its dispassionate discussion of issues, its literary and artistic coverage and criticism, and its foreign correspondence.Britannica  ) because it doesn't require a subscription and editors can look it up, but it should be pretty clear that the list is comprehensive, without an Anglo-centric bias.  Fowler&amp;fowler  «Talk»  22:04, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

United Kingdom and Ireland


















United States and Canada




























Australia, New Zealand and Fiji






Singapore and Hong Kong




Discussion and comments

 * Comment
 * Comment

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 14 August 2021
Hello Wikipedia community, can anyone please change infobox image of P.M Modi to the one I suggests as this one is not a regular traditional depiction of Mr. Modi, he usually remains beard less apart from this recent lockdown. with caption as Official Portrait of Modi, 2014


 * Narendra Modi - 02.JPG with caption as Modi in 2013

Please do this soon, Thanks 2409:4051:87:5CCC:5E3A:693C:C344:68F3 (talk) 03:04, 14 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the template. –– Sirdog9002 (talk) 03:42, 14 August 2021 (UTC)

No mention of Modi's rallies / gatherings leading to a worldwide spread of Covid / Delta variant?
Or did I miss this part? I searched the article for Covid and only mentions how he got a vaccine and trump gave him an award. News agencies have been talking about Modi's political gatherings were possible super-spreader event and had worldwide impact for a long time. Why is discussion of this worldwide impact not here? EDIT: This has been brought up before on the talk page! _____________________________________________ COVID-19 leadership This article is in dire need of significantly more coverage of his leadership and decisions amid COVID-19 pandemic (with neutral coverage-the negative should not be whitewashed). SecretName101 (talk) 05:50, 18 June 2021 (UTC)

There is barely any mention of it, I've proposed that it be mentioned in the lead section here. I also think there should be a subsection about the Covid-19 pandemic in the "Prime Minister" section. --$ufyan (talk) 13:07, 19 June 2021 (UTC)

@$ufyan: Seconded. This information along with the Indian vaccination program against covid 19 (mismanagement and subsequent response by govt to address this) should be added under the "Prime minister" section." ______________________________________________

63.146.82.250 (talk) 04:12, 16 August 2021 (UTC) (Please note my IP address in my signature is not unique to me and many other users on my ISPs network may be set up under same IP. This is my ISPs choice I have no control over it).

Edit request because of possible factual error in article
This is with regard to following assertion in the Narendra Modi article in 3.2.

"Muslim victims of the riots were subject to further discrimination when the state government announced that compensation for Muslim victims would be half of that offered to Hindus, although this decision was later reversed after the issue was taken to court"

While it is true that the state government announced half of the compensation but this discrimination was not technically on the basis of religion. It was on the basis of incident in which death happened. The people who died in Godhra train massacre were given 2 lakhs compensation while people who died in Post Godhra riots(irrespective of religion as per source) were given 1 lakhs. So, it was not a discrimination on the basis of religion but a discrimination on the basis of which of the 2 incidents led to the death.

Factpineapple (talk) 09:31, 7 September 2021 (UTC)Factpineapple

Source : - — Preceding unsigned comment added by Factpineapple (talk • contribs) 07:48, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

Template problem
At the bottom of the footer, some templates are not correctly displayed.--Hildeoc (talk) 13:10, 22 September 2021 (UTC)