Talk:Tejasvi Surya

Discussion
The results are still not announced. Tejasvi is not yet a member of Parliament.

He is now...C1MM (talk) 15:52, 23 May 2019 (UTC)

Not the youngest MP
Some sources such as this falsely claim that Surya is the youngest MP to be elected. However, currently Chandrani Murmu holds this record. SerChevalerie (talk) 12:16, 29 May 2019 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion: You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 06:21, 9 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Tejasvi Surya.png

Fan point of view and resume style issues
I have tagged the article for FANPOV and resume. I found multiple exaggerations from what the source said and have fixed a couple. the article needs a complete overhaul and verification of what exactly the reliable source stated and the article would need to be copy edited appropriately based on the same. Please do not remove the tags without removing the issues-- D Big X ray ᗙ  07:37, 9 July 2019 (UTC)


 * I don’t see any exaggeration in this article now. FANPOV tag shall be removed. Sankoswal (talk) 15:12, 14 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Sankoswal, thanks for sharing your opinion and pinging me. I have not reviewed this article recently, I have seen, User:Harshil169 has been doing improvements here. Let him complete his efforts. Once he is done. I will review it again and if needed remove the tags, per WP:CONSENSUS-- D Big X ray ᗙ  15:41, 14 November 2019 (UTC)
 * , I have removed allegations of sexual section as separate heading. It doesn't make sense to me and was completely negative. Allegations can be best if included in appropriate section and I merged it in Life section because nothing lasting happened after it; neither it was some scandal nor conviction.
 * Please review the article. Most of the problems of templates have been solved. Pinging and  who also worked in this.--  Harshil want to talk? 14:28, 14 December 2019 (UTC)
 * I have specific concerns that I raised above, unless the sources are vetted and concerns fixed the article cannot be untagged. How is an incident where allegations of abuse where Womens commission is involved be termed as Personal life ? this is the kind of whitewashing that is found frequently on this page. And that is why the article is tagged. -- D Big X ray ᗙ  14:55, 14 December 2019 (UTC)
 * , See Vivek Agnihotri. Allegations are merged into section of his life. This is not whitewashing. And you didn't raise specific issues here. You just tagged and said complete overhaul needed which I did. Can you say how it is resume or fan POV right now when it includes criticism of him?  Harshil want to talk? 15:00, 14 December 2019 (UTC)
 * see WP:OSE, Please explain how this case is personal life ?
 * Secondly, Please provide me the diff of your comment where you stated that you overhauled the entire article, I seem to have missed that completely. Unless of course you are openly lying. -- D Big X ray ᗙ  15:07, 14 December 2019 (UTC)
 * , Let me raise issue at WP:BLPN because section of Vivek Agnihotri was addressed with help of many other editors.  Harshil want to talk? 15:13, 14 December 2019 (UTC)
 * It is humorous how instead of providing diffs to back up your lies, you move to another forum. Well you are free to open threads in whichever forum you like, but remember those threads cannot be used as a shortcut or to sidetrack the talk page discussion. The article was poorly written with blatant misrepresentation of sources, and each source needs to be verified and article needs to be copy edited in a WP:NPOV manner. silly theatrics and lies aren't going to help the article here. -- D Big X ray ᗙ  15:51, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

Ohh, please stop calling it as lies. I wasn’t even involved when these templates were put. I improved article, it’s your duty to call out what is wrong in it and to remove template.  Harshil want to talk? 17:27, 14 December 2019 (UTC)
 * I repeat, "Please provide me the diff of your comment where you stated that you overhauled the entire article, I seem to have missed that completely. Unless of course you are openly lying."-- D Big X ray ᗙ  17:30, 14 December 2019 (UTC)


 * I never commented in summary that I overhauled article but I rearranged the early life sections. I was the one who formed political views subsection under political career and all. You can visit history to know how much improvement I had done.  Harshil want to talk? 17:36, 14 December 2019 (UTC)
 * That is my point, nowhere did you said that you overhauled the entire article and yet you claim that the tags should be removed because you removed "a few" problems. well, unless someone comes along and does an entire overhaul and vets the refs and reviews the article in its entirety, the tags cannot be removed. I know you did not write this problematic article, but someone did and they falsified the sources. And that is why the tags exist. -- D Big X ray ᗙ  18:18, 14 December 2019 (UTC)
 * I find the article pretty neutral and I don't see any expression of exaggeration in the article now. FANPOV and resume tagged shall be revomed. Sankoswal (talk) 12:13, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Since the article is neutral now, FANPOV and Resume tag can be removed now. Sankoswal (talk) 13:40, 24 March 2020 (UTC)
 * , it is not, the issues still remain. The facts stated are all correct but the tone of the article is not proper. It needs a complete rewrite to comply with the standards. SerChevalerie (talk) 15:40, 24 March 2020 (UTC)

Hello, I have gone through the entire article and found it written pretty fine. It will be a bit helpful if you can specify the problem with tone with a couple of examples you want us to modify before I remove both of those tags. Please respond if you have issues so that we are able to reach concensus timely. Regards Aman Kumar Goel (Talk) 13:58, 7 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi, as mentioned, the article has the "resume" issue in the overall tone (look at the whole section since you asked for examples; the facts are simply stated and there is a lack of cohesion even in this small paragraph). Even if that can be fixed with a little quick (but efficient) copyediting, the "Fan POV" issue still remains because of multiple cases of exaggeration (eg some of which I removed here when I took a cursory glance at that specific section). As mentioned before in this thread, because of cases like this one, the whole article needs to be analysed and cross-verified against the WP:RS provided, for any factual inaccuracies or exaggeration otherwise. SerChevalerie (talk) 16:30, 7 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks for input. I will have an overview and will attempt an overhaul to connect sentences, remove puffery and replace existing sources with WP:RS soon. Regards Aman Kumar Goel (Talk) 17:13, 7 April 2020 (UTC)
 * , I would suggest that you begin with the removal of "resume" first, since that's easier to do (a bit of cohesion and rewording and we should be good to go). I'll help you out when possible. SerChevalerie (talk) 19:41, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I'll have a look again. Got busy in work and hence just forgot about article. Aman Kumar Goel (Talk) 03:02, 14 April 2020 (UTC)
 * No problem, we all have lives outside of Wikipedia. Stay safe during this pandemic. SerChevalerie (talk) 04:15, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion: You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 07:21, 29 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Tejasvi Surya.jpg

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion: You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 20:52, 30 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Tejasvi surya.jpg

How twitter noices are notable?
On the page Zomato, had said that twitter voices and trolling are not notable and man eating food it just trivial. Here, he is supporting coverage of backlash of Twitter as encyclopedic value on BLP which was covered by only two sources though. Directly quoting his own words No Twitter dramas dont count. This is as trivial as it can be. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia which covers WP:LASTING incidents and not a WP:NOTNEWSPAPER. Then how Twitter dramas here becomes notable here? I am pinging as I sought his opinion on talk page of Zomato too. I am totally confused that how twitter drama for Zomato (which was covered in 9 sources) was not notable and this (covered in only 2 sources) is considered as notable and has encyclopedic value? -- Harshil want to talk? 06:48, 7 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Also, one expert on Wikipedia once commented It is common to see new editors stressing more on WP:RECENTISM but over time you will be able to differentiate the wheat from the chaff. A thumb rule that you can appliy to gauge the importance of the incident is will someone want to read about it in a para or an article of its own 10-20 years down the line. This should help you. I am eager to know that how twitter backlash are not recentism and has encyclopedic value? -- Harshil want to talk? 06:53, 7 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: Following this [tweet and controversy surround it] and the announcement of his Lok Sabha candidature, Surya obtained a temporary injunction against 49 media outlets and social media platforms restraining them from publishing any "defamatory statements" against him. His tweet later resulted in a court order obtained by him not to publish against him. The information is in context of court order, not only about tweet backlash. Only tweet and backlash would have been removed as trivia. Hope it clarifies. -Nizil (talk) 07:05, 7 November 2019 (UTC)
 * If tweet sentences are unrelated to the court order, I would support its removal.-Nizil (talk) 07:10, 7 November 2019 (UTC)
 * those orders were for allegations of sexual harassment by woman, not for these tweets on Arab woman of 2015.— Harshil want to talk? 07:12, 7 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Then it should be OK to remove those sentences IMO.-Nizil (talk) 07:16, 7 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Still I’ll wait for comment of DBig. I found his behaviour completely confusing, he opposes content on Zomato because it was recentism but in the same hand, he supports similar content on Tejasvi. That’s why I’d pinged you yesterday on talk page of Zomato to know what the heck issue is. Maybe COI. — <i style="color:orange; font-family:Brush Script MT">Harshil </i>want to talk? 07:46, 7 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Your concern is very valid. Sankoswal (talk) 05:21, 14 November 2019 (UTC)

Possible copyright violations
This edit here by introduced more than 37% of copyright violations due to the copy paste of a quote. Ideally quotes should not be added to articles. See WP:COPYQUOTE. SerChevalerie (talk) 17:05, 14 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Give me some time. Will CE it.  <i style="color:orange; font-family:Brush Script MT">Harshil </i>want to talk? 17:30, 14 November 2019 (UTC)
 * , I have done the needful (see here). SerChevalerie (talk) 17:33, 14 November 2019 (UTC)
 * , thank you for the revdels. However, you missed out one. I have tagged the page once again with the problematic revision. SerChevalerie (talk) 16:38, 26 November 2019 (UTC)
 * , revision 926125420 has already been RevDeleted. The previous revision 926122853 (05:53, 14 November 2019) includes the copied content as a marked and cited quotation. It is therfore not a copyright violation, and does not need to be Revision deleted. The statement aboce that  is quite incorrect. Excessive quotes should not be used. Reasonably short quotes (which in my view this is), properly marked, cited, and attributed, are often essential to accurate reporting. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 17:01, 26 November 2019 (UTC)
 * , thanks for providing your valuable inputs. SerChevalerie (talk) 18:51, 26 November 2019 (UTC)

Sources to expand
Sources to expand -- D Big X ray ᗙ  07:28, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Abuse allegations section
This should not be changed to "controversies" as discussed on the WP:BLPN thread. Please instead contribute to the discussion there. – wallyfromdilbert (talk) 17:25, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
 * User:GuruduttRamaswamy please explain why you are removing a well sources section. These are WP:reliable sources. -- D Big X ray ᗙ  10:25, 14 February 2020 (UTC)

Please cite the reliable sources GuruduttRamaswamy (talk) 10:27, 14 February 2020 (UTC)
 * , The reliable sources are already added. Please look at the refs from the content you remvoed Hindu and Express are WP:RS  D Big X ray ᗙ  10:28, 14 February 2020 (UTC)

Please cite the sources. GuruduttRamaswamy (talk) 10:28, 14 February 2020 (UTC)
 * They have been cited already. Click and read them. Please do not remove it again or you may be blocked for wP:3RR violation.  D Big X ray ᗙ  10:30, 14 February 2020 (UTC)

As per WP:CSECTION, 'Allegation of abuse' sounds very negative. The section must be changed to 'Reception' as it is neutral. Sankoswal (talk) 17:02, 17 March 2020 (UTC)
 * , As per WP:CSECTION, Sections or article titles should generally not include the word "controversies". Instead, titles should simply name the event, for example, "2009 boycott" or "Hunting incident", which is currently done here. SerChevalerie (talk) 06:20, 18 March 2020 (UTC)


 * {| class="wikitable"

Mel Gibson, Kanye West#Controversies (with subsection titles "General media" and "Award shows")
 * "Controversy" section
 * For a specific controversy that is broadly covered in reliable sources. Various positions, whether pro or contra, are given due weight as supported by the sources. The topic of the controversy is best named in the section title (when there are distinct groups of controversies, the section title can be "Controversies", with subsection titles indicating what these are about).
 * Michael Collins Piper,
 * }
 * The above is from the same https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Criticism#Approaches_to_presenting_criticism page. The 'neutral' is allowing to present both legacies and controversies/criticism as well to allow every view sticking to merely present the facts. When one of the two is missing, it becomes a biased political material.
 * Loveall.human (talk) 16:45, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Unnecessary??????
User:Abhishek0831996 How is my content unnecessary??? Some Hindutva warriors don't want critical content about him. I understand, but how is this unnecessary?? It has reliable ccitations and was a major hit during the time. User:CambridgeBayWeather, is it unnecessary? 2402:3A80:51F:546D:0:4C:3138:C701 (talk) 16:08, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

Change 2021 Karnataka COVID hospital bed allotment scam to alleged hospital bed allotment scam
The allegations by Surya aren't proved yet. Why does this even deserve a section at all? He is not the suspect but the whistleblower. The only issue is that all the alleged scammers/mafias are Muzlims. -- 43.231.113.84 (talk) 17:23, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

There is an update on this now, who is clarifying this issue? 1. 07 May - The Karnataka High Court on Thursday orally directed Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP) to conduct an investigation into the COVID-19 bed scam in Bengaluru after allegations regarding the same were raised by BJP Member of Parliament and lawyer Tejasvi Surya.

2. Congress Congress seeks action against Tejasvi Surya, his MLA uncle after audio clip alleges ‘cash for vaccines’

3. Tejasvi Surya’s uncle, Ravi Subramanya caught in #VaccineCommissionScam bɑʁɑqoxodaraP (talk) 13:57, 4 June 2021 (UTC)

Rename Allegations of misconduct to Fake allegations by Congress party
The women who was reported to be harresed dropped the cases and claimed that she and Surya are friends. This is not allegation anymore but fake allegations by congress party to malign surya's progressive reputation. Also violates BLP issues. Jay Bheem, Namo Buddhay -- 43.231.113.84 (talk) 17:37, 8 May 2021 (UTC)


 * Allegations, by their very definitions, are not confirmed facts and not true. Furthermore, the article points out the information you point out (not sure if this was added before or after your comment. Even if the allegations turned out to be false (which you argue they are), they should still be mentioned under the section of Allegations of Misconduct (with more info exonerating the person if need be)

Net worth
I removed the net worth parameter from the infobox, as the parameter has now been deprecated. If anyone wants to add that content elsewhere in the article, you can find what I removed in this edit. Firefangledfeathers (talk) 18:42, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

Write all allegations under controversy section
Write all those allegations against him under single topic 'controversies'. Stop writing bias. Sanjay jha and misogynist alleged actor Siddharth aren't that credible to be mentioned in this article. ArjunYoddha (talk) 01:38, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia is being captured
This page clearly shows that Wikipedia is no more credible source of information. Complete bias... ArjunYoddha (talk) 01:43, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

Protests in Australia against Surya
In May 2022, he travelled to Australia to speak at a conference in Melbourne, but the conference was cancelled after calls for protests by human rights organisations. Australian Alliance Against Hate, a coalition of faith groups and academics had written to organizers about the event, asking them to withdraw their support for the event due to Surya's "deeply divisive and exclusionary ideology".

@LearnIndology what is your objection in removing this. This is an international event and deserves mention. Your edit summary of revert is not making sense. Venkat TL (talk) 16:23, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
 * He is making more news in his visit. Guardian also covered it. Venkat TL (talk) 16:19, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
 * More sources covering the incident added above.Venkat TL (talk) 07:13, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

Police book trespass case against Tejasvi Surya
"Osmania University police of Hyderabad registered a criminal case against BJYM national president and MP Tejasvi Surya over his visit to Osmania University campus during GHMC election campaign, following a complaint lodged by the university authorities.

Police invoked Section 447 (punishment for criminal trespass) of Indian Penal Code and Sections 21 and 76 of Hyderabad City Police Act against the MP from Karnataka."

Police book trespass case against Tejasvi Surya

Yet there is no mention in the article about the incident or the criminal case. Why? Venkat TL (talk) 16:41, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
 * I will reply to both sections.
 * Having a conference canceled in Melbourne has no effect on his career, just like this "complaint" has no effect. We will see if any of these items get coverage in the future, though its been nearly 2 years since the "trespass case" and it has got no coverage.  Abhishek0831996 (talk) 17:15, 1 June 2022 (UTC)


 * It seems you are ignoring/understating the coverage This incident has already received, including a response from Surya. Note that this are national newspapers and solid reliable sources.
 * A criminal case against a sitting MP is as important as it gets. If it has more coverage a new page would be needed to be created. Right now a section or subsection will suffice. Please explain your reason for omitting this incident from the article. Please dont mix different topics to avoid confusion. Venkat TL (talk) 17:25, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
 * I said though its been NEARLY 2 years SINCE the "trespass case" and it has got NO coverage. I don't consider initial news reports because we are writing encyclopaedia. Abhishek0831996 (talk) 17:44, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
 * You have not provided any Wikipedia policy based reason to remove these relevant information about a public person from the article. I disagree and believe both should be included. Please suggest how do we resolve this dispute? Venkat TL (talk) 18:35, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
 * See WP:UNDUE. I am sure you won't write about more than 1,000 FIRs against Rahul Gandhi in Assam alone, over a tweet. LearnIndology (talk) 10:16, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
 * @LearnIndology why not? Please add. I have read UNDUE. This is entirely due. Please explain how UNDUE applies, why you are supressing this information from being included into the article. Venkat TL (talk) 16:21, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
 * You never read WP:UNDUE and if you ever did then you won't even need this discussion! Falsely accusing me of "suppressing" the undue information while ignoring my point about Rahul Gandhi puts you in a bad light. LearnIndology (talk) 04:02, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
 * You made an inappropriate assumption saying that "wont write about Rahul Gandhi" and I replied "why not? please add" Did you not understand my response? I am saying YES go ahead, add it with reliable sources on Rahul Gandhi, there is no rule to stop/supress this information about public persons. Now stop this whataboutism and answer by what Wikipedia policy this is UNDUE. Venkat TL (talk) 06:51, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
 * See WP:UNDUE. I am sure you won't write about more than 1,000 FIRs against Rahul Gandhi in Assam alone, over a tweet. LearnIndology (talk) 10:16, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
 * @LearnIndology why not? Please add. I have read UNDUE. This is entirely due. Please explain how UNDUE applies, why you are supressing this information from being included into the article. Venkat TL (talk) 16:21, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
 * You never read WP:UNDUE and if you ever did then you won't even need this discussion! Falsely accusing me of "suppressing" the undue information while ignoring my point about Rahul Gandhi puts you in a bad light. LearnIndology (talk) 04:02, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
 * You made an inappropriate assumption saying that "wont write about Rahul Gandhi" and I replied "why not? please add" Did you not understand my response? I am saying YES go ahead, add it with reliable sources on Rahul Gandhi, there is no rule to stop/supress this information about public persons. Now stop this whataboutism and answer by what Wikipedia policy this is UNDUE. Venkat TL (talk) 06:51, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

Wrong information added
In last edit marked by Davemck, the details are wrong. He is not the incumbent Chief minister and nor did he start his current term as an MP on 8th december. His predecessor was Ananth Singh and not Siddharamaiah. Kindly correct the details. Thanks!

2406:7400:56:9D5C:455A:A2F4:894E:112E (talk) 20:01, 9 December 2023 (UTC)


 * ✅ Thanks for pointing that out. I somehow missed it. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 20:21, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Happy to help ! 49.207.228.211 (talk) 12:17, 10 December 2023 (UTC)