Talk:Prashant Bhushan

Written like advertisement/POV/Biased
This article makes unreferenced claims about him being a strong supporter of clean judiciary &c. The person is controversial and this article is biased. There is no mention of him being allegedly involved in corruption, nepotism for which there are court cases going on against him. He acquired land flouting all norms at nominal prices at prime location which was widely reported by all media.

I am not making any changes because I feel that I might be biased against him and therefore it will be against wikipedia guidelines. I request a neutral person to remove unreferenced claims/original research and kindly add the section about controversy and alleged charges of corruption.

Also worth mentioning is that he has represented several terrorist who are accused of terror attack on Indian parliament, including but not limited to Afzhal Guru and that he has sued Indian Army for alleged HR violations. I believe this information was here sometime before and had been removed by his supporters. Kindly do the needful. THanks in advance for your help. --118.95.91.147 (talk) 15:15, 12 October 2011 (UTC)


 * You may have a bias, you may not. But what you can do is add a cn tag to the statements you feel need to be referenced. Either users will find references to support the statements, or the statements will be removed. In this way, you're not replacing the statements with something that may be biased the other way (which seems to be your concern), but merely highlighting statements that need proof. Adding the citations needed template also places the article into a cleanup category for articles needing references - and that might get extra eyes on the problem. Alternatively, you can specify here which exact statements need work, and we can have a look. UltraExactZZ Said~ Did 20:58, 12 October 2011 (UTC)


 * We have to be careful to avoid publishing potentially libelous assertions about a living person. Clearly Bhushan has made enemies, and they may be the source of malicious rumors. Rumors should not be reproduced.  However, if there are reliable independent sources (not blogs or opinion pieces) that back up these allegations of court cases related to corruption, nepotism, dodgy land deals etc., they should be added to the article. Or just add a link to the source in the "external links" section and another editor can add the content to the article. Given the prominence of the subject, if the court cases exist they will have been widely discussed in the mainstream media. Aymatth2 (talk) 13:40, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

Sentence structure
There is disagreement about the structure of one paragraph. Two variants:


 * A. ... Three youths entered his chamber in the Supreme Court, dragged him from his chair, slapped and punched him. Two escaped.  The third claimed to belong to an organisation called "Bhagat Singh Kranti Sena"...


 * B. ... Three youths entered his chamber in the Supreme Court, dragged him from his chair, slapped and punched him. Two of the perpetrators escaped, while the third claimed to belong to an organisation called "Bhagat Singh Kranti Sena"...

The objection to version A is that "Two escaped" is a fragment. In fact it is a short sentence ending a choppy and violent sequence: "entered - dragged - slapped - punched - escaped." The next sentence introduces a new concept - the organization to which the youths belonged. Merging the second and third sentences as in B: "Two of the perpetrators escaped, while the third claimed to belong..." is awkward since it seems to contrast "escaping" to "claiming". Presumably all three belonged to the organization, including those who escaped. Of course this is mostly just a question of personal preference. Some people do not like extremely short sentences. Some do. I do. Aymatth2 (talk) 01:56, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

Wrong Link
The text 'Krishna Iyer' wrongly links to the wikipedia page for playback singer Krishna Iyer. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.199.154.134 (talk) 10:21, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

Length/detail
This seems to be an overly-detailed article. Is it really not possible to ditch some of the stuff, almost all of which seems to be designed to show the subject in a good light? - Sitush (talk) 13:06, 3 February 2014 (UTC)


 * This is getting worse. I am going to leave a note at WT:INB. - Sitush (talk) 01:16, 5 December 2014 (UTC)


 * The legal activism section can be trimmed, it is in need of citations too. 1. "Dinakaran was later forced to resign." needs to be connected to his protest. 2. "The judges were forced to declare their assets and post it on the court websites." also requires it to be connected to his activism for bringing Judges under RTI -- presently it feels incomplete/incoherent. I think he is contesting elections shortly and this page will get increased traffic of viewers and editors alike. --AmritasyaPutra T 03:33, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 7 September 2020
BCI resolves to direct BCD to examine if Prashant Bhushan's tweets and contempt of Court Judgment may attract disciplinary proceedings Savithabarandbench (talk) 07:36, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Noted, I'll update the article once the Bar Council of Delhi has taken a decision on this. - Naushervan (talk) 08:17, 7 September 2020 (UTC)