Talk:Red corridor

bias
Article is full of bias for one political agenda and against another and reads like a India's nationalist party propaganda 96.31.190.97 (talk) 09:18, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

Hi 96.31.190.97. It may be so, but it would be helpful if you could point out specific instances of bias? Once you have done that, you should also back it up with some reliable sources (see WP:RS). If you can get that together, we can certainly add your contributions to the article. Your claim seems quite bizarre though - Naxalites seem to be by definition a terrorist group, and I can't seem to see any particular bias in the article. To allege propaganda without adequate proof is quite a claim (see WP:GF). John.k.newton (talk) 13:03, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

96.31.190.97 Multiple Indian parties across the spectrum have engaged in the same policy. You'll have to do a bit better than complaining about the right-wing. Naval Gazer (talk) 20:50, 19 November 2021 (UTC)

History merger needed
It appears that this page was originally titled Red Corridor (which I actually think is better) and was moved here via copy-and-paste. Because of this, I think a history merge is necessary. Charles Essie (talk) 04:27, 15 April 2021 (UTC)


 * @Charles Essie: Please see the instructions on Requests for history merge. ~ Aseleste  (t, e &#124; c, l) 14:39, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

Requested move 15 April 2021

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. 

The result of the move request was: No consensus to move. Reasonable doubt has been raised as to whether the "consistently capitalized in a substantial majority" of RS criterion of MOS:CAPS is satisfied here. (non-admin closure) Colin M (talk) 20:49, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

Red corridor → Red Corridor – It's a proper noun and the most common name (see Google Ngram Viwer). By the way, there also needs to be a history merge between them (see above). Charles Essie (talk) 20:22, 15 April 2021 (UTC) —Relisting. ~ Aseleste  (t, e &#124; c, l) 15:01, 23 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Your n-gram link is misleading, omitting "red corridor"; this plus "Red corridor" dominate "Red Corridor" (and many of these are not on topic, capped and lowercase both). Dicklyon (talk) 03:49, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
 * Support. It ain't just a red corridor. 98.143.65.225 (talk) 12:50, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Oppose – It appears that most sources don't cap this. Certainly not to the threshold in the MOS:CAPS guideline. Dicklyon (talk) 03:42, 18 April 2021 (UTC)