Removing notice of move discussion Tag: Reverted |
Chipmunkdavis (talk | contribs) Restored revision 1092247050 by Vice regent (talk): This is a talkpage Tags: Twinkle Undo Disambiguation links added |
||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{WikiProject India|class=C|importance=Low|history=y|politics=y|history-importance=Low|politics-importance=Low}} |
|||
{{Short description|Political fallout over divisive rhetoric}} |
|||
{{WikiProject Islam|Islam-and-Controversy=yes|class=C|importance=Low}} |
|||
{{redirect|Naveen Kumar Jindal|the former Indian member of Parliament|Naveen Jindal}} |
|||
{{Use Indian English|date=June 2022}} |
|||
{{Use dmy dates|date=June 2022}} |
|||
== Title articulation == |
|||
On 27 May 2022, [[Nupur Sharma (politician)|Nupur Sharma]], the then national spokesperson of the ruling [[Bharatiya Janata Party]] (BJP) made controversial remarks regarding the Islamic prophet [[Muhammad|Mohammed]] during a television debate.<ref name="wapo1" /> Later on 1 June 2022, Naveen Kumar Jindal, the then media head of the BJP [[Delhi]] unit, made a controversial social media post on the same subject. The two incidents led to widespread condemnation from Muslims within India and internationally.<ref name="wapo1">{{Cite news |title=Muslim nations slam India over insulting remarks about Islam |language=en-US |newspaper=Washington Post |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/muslim-nations-slam-india-over-insulting-remarks-about-islam/2022/06/06/ddad5700-e56c-11ec-a422-11bbb91db30b_story.html |access-date=2022-06-06 |issn=0190-8286}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |title=Strong condemnation of the blasphemy of the Holy Prophet by the Indian authorities of the Armed Forces The-PiPa-News |url=https://thepipanews.com/strong-condemnation-of-the-blasphemy-of-the-holy-prophet-by-the-indian-authorities-of-the-armed-forces-the-pipa-news/ |access-date=2022-06-06 |language=en-US}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |date=Jun 6, 2022 |title=Nupur Sharma Statement: Remarks against Prophet; BJP acts against 2 office-bearers Nupur Sharma and Naveen Zindal; Latest developments {{!}} India News - Times of India |url=https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/remarks-against-prophet-bjp-acts-against-2-office-bearers-latest-developments/articleshow/92027848.cms |access-date=2022-06-06 |website=The Times of India |language=en}}</ref> The Indian government responded by stating that the remarks did not reflect the government's position, and strong action was taken against those who made the remarks, with Sharma being suspended from the party and Jindal being expelled.<ref>{{Cite web |agency=Reuters |title=India's ruling party suspends official over comments about Islam |url=https://www.cnn.com/2022/06/06/asia/india-bjp-suspension-islam-comments-intl-hnk/index.html |access-date=2022-06-07 |website=CNN|date=6 June 2022 }}</ref><ref name="guardian1" /> However, communal tensions continued to rise, culminating in [[2022 Kanpur violence|violence in Kanpur]].<ref name=":3" />{{Dubious|date=June 2022|reason=The Kanpur violence was before the suspension of the duo.}}{{Tweet |
|||
| name = Naveen Kumar Jindal 🇮🇳 |
|||
| username = NaveenJindalBJP |
|||
| date = 1 June 2022 |
|||
| text = नबी के दुलारो से पूछना चाहता हूँ कि तुम्हारा नबी 53 वर्ष की आयु में 6 वर्ष की छोटी बच्ची आयशा के साथ शादी करता है फिर 56 वर्ष की आयु में 9 वर्ष की आयशा के साथ संबंध बनाता है... |
|||
First thought came to mind after reading article title was, what is 'BJP Muhammad'? Whether a – sign is needed in between 'BJP–Muhammad' Though I am not good enough in English grammar, IMHO, article title seem to need improvement with better articulation. |
|||
क्या वह संबंध बलात्कार की श्रेणी में नहीं |
|||
[[User:Bookku| Bookku, 'Encyclopedias = expanding information & knowledge']] ([[User talk:Bookku|talk]]) 02:51, 7 June 2022 (UTC) |
|||
आता..? |
|||
:{{re|Bookku}} this title is somewhat similar to [[Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy]]. Although in that case "Jyllands-Posten" is italicized. I don't think we can italicize "BJP" in this case.'''[[User:Vice regent|VR]]''' <sub>[[User talk:Vice regent|talk]]</sub> 05:17, 7 June 2022 (UTC) |
|||
| translation = I want to ask if your Prophet married a 6-year-old girl Aisha at the age of 53 and then had a sexual relationship with 9-year-old girl Aisha when he was 56 years old... Is that not classified as rape? |
|||
| lang = hi |
|||
| ID = 1531951723815632897 |
|||
| archive-url = http://web.archive.org/web/20220601105259/https://twitter.com/naveenjindalbjp/status/1531951723815632897 |
|||
| archive-date = 2022-06-01 |
|||
}} |
|||
::[[User:Bookku|@Bookku]] Why add BJP in the title? Can you explain it? [[User:ScriptKKiddie|ScriptKKiddie]] ([[User talk:ScriptKKiddie|talk]]) 01:44, 9 June 2022 (UTC) |
|||
==Background== |
|||
:::{{od}} |
|||
The controversy emerged amidst intensifying religious tensions in India. Many have accused India's ruling party, the [[Bharatiya Janata Party]] (BJP), of instigating violence through divisive rhetoric against the country's Muslim minority.<ref name=forbes>{{cite news|author=Siladitya Ray|title=India's Religious Tensions Spill Over As Middle Eastern Countries Condemn Comments About Islam|url=https://www.forbes.com/sites/siladityaray/2022/06/06/indias-religious-tensions-spark-diplomatic-row-after-ruling-partys-comments-about-prophet-muhammad--heres-what-to-know/?sh=5d6d9ce66730|work=[[Forbes]]}}</ref> In June 2022, the US [[Secretary of State]], [[Antony Blinken]], stated there were “rising attacks on people and places of worship" in India.<ref name=forbes/> India said the comments were "ill-informed".<ref name=cbcnews/> |
|||
:::{{Re|ScriptKKiddie}} {{Humor note}} Because some Wikipedians may not have good faith in BJP, hence such inclusion may not have been called {{dubious}} (End of humor note). Rationally speaking Wikipedians need to have consistency. Whether they are open to add criticism expressed by duo in this controversy to be added to [[Criticism of Muhammad|this criticism article]] and [[Criticism of the Quran|this criticism article]] as criticism by BJP ? Most probably they won't, but Wikipedia policies do not expect consistent approach across the articles. Hence some times such contradictions are okay, Idk, whether that is how some Wikipedians may have been thinking. [[User:Bookku| Bookku, 'Encyclopedias = expanding information & knowledge']] ([[User talk:Bookku|talk]]) 02:32, 9 June 2022 (UTC) |
|||
== Needs quotations == |
|||
In the run up to the controversy, communal tensions were elevated due to the [[Gyanvapi mosque|Gyanvapi mosque dispute]]. Scholarly sources agree that the mosque was built by Aurangzeb, and a pre-existing [[Shiva]] temple was demolished for its construction.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Asher |first=Catherine B. |date=May 2020 |title=Making Sense of Temples and Tirthas: Rajput Construction Under Mughal Rule |journal=The Medieval History Journal |volume=23 |issue=1 |pages=9–49 |doi=10.1177/0971945820905289 |issn=0971-9458 |doi-access=free}}</ref><ref>{{Cite book |last=Desai |first=Madhuri |title=Banaras Reconstructed: Architecture and Sacred Space in a Hindu Holy City |publisher=University of Washington Press |year=2017 |isbn=9780295741604 |id= |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=qWgmDwAAQBAJ}}</ref> While Hindus maintain that the temple existed at the site before the mosque, some Muslims claim such a shrine never existed.<ref name=lucente>{{cite news|title=Explainer: India BJP Party spokesperson's comments on prophet spark backlash|url=https://www.al-monitor.com/originals/2022/06/explainer-india-bjp-party-spokespersons-comments-prophet-spark-backlash|author=Adam Lucente}}</ref> Tensions surrounding this site have resulted in raucous debates on Indian TV channels.<ref name=cbcnews/><ref name=bbc1/> There had been rampant hate on social media surrounding the mosque controversy.<ref name=bbc1/> |
|||
The article needs the cited quotations that are ostensibly the basis for the article. Without them, these are vague, hearsay aspersions. [[Special:Contributions/172.58.102.208|172.58.102.208]] ([[User talk:172.58.102.208|talk]]) 04:29, 7 June 2022 (UTC) |
|||
== Comments about Muhammad == |
|||
On 27 May 2022, Sharma participated in a debate on the [[Gyanvapi Mosque]] dispute on the [[Times Now]] television channel. According to Sharma,<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.independent.co.uk/asia/india/bjp-prophet-muhammad-nupur-sharma-gulf-b2094698.html|title=Prophet Muhammad comments by officials from India's ruling party spark Gulf backlash|work=Independent|date=7 June 2022|accessdate=8 June 2022|first=Stuti|last=Mishra}}</ref> in response to remarks (perceived to be derogatory to [[Hindu]] god [[Shiva]]) by her opposition speaker and by many Muslim personalities on social media, she replied mockingly regarding [[Muhammad]] and the [[Aisha#Age at marriage|age]] of one of his wives, [[Aisha]], noting that Aisha was 6-years-old when married, and 9 when the marriage was consummated. |
|||
:{{Ping|Venkat TL}} after reading your {{dif|1092123869|edit}} summary ".. She was neither quoting nor citing anything in the debate. ..", I can't agree more with above IP that The article needs the cited quotations that are ostensibly the basis for the article. Do you have word to word original language plus English translation? If yes then please do quote, that will also help confirm your claims in the summary. Thanks |
|||
The [[Alt News]] co-founder Mohammed Zubair shared a video clip of her remarks on social media.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Mohammed Zubair's Tweet |url=https://twitter.com/zoo_bear/status/1530066557191131142 |access-date=2022-06-07 |website=Twitter |language=en}}</ref> Sharma later alleged that it was a "heavily edited and selected video", which was denied by Pratik Sinha, the other co-founder of Alt News. Sinha stated that it was unedited and also included a longer clip which showed the context.<ref name="Scroll 29 May"> |
|||
{{citation |title=FIR filed against BJP spokesperson Nupur Sharma for comments about Prophet Mohammad |newspaper=Scroll.in |date=29 May 2022 |url=https://scroll.in/latest/1024989/fir-filed-against-bjp-spokesperson-nupur-sharma-for-comments-about-prophet-mohammad}} |
|||
</ref><ref name="Wire 1 June"> |
|||
{{citation |title='Remarks on Prophet': After Thane, Hyderabad Police Files FIR Against BJP's Nupur Sharma |newspaper=The Wire |date=1 June 2022 |url=https://thewire.in/government/remarks-on-prophet-after-thane-hyderabad-police-files-fir-against-bjps-nupur-sharma}} |
|||
</ref> Times Now deleted the video of the programme from its [[Youtube channel]] the next day.<ref>{{cite news |title=Times Now deletes video of Navika Kuamr's debate, issues clarification amidst controversy over derogatory comments on Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) |work=Janta Ka Reporter 2.0 |date=28 May 2022 |url=https://www.jantakareporter.com/entertainment/times-now-deletes-video-navika-kuamrs-debate-issues-clarification-amidst-controversy-over-derogatory-comments-on-prophet-muhammad-pbuh/397937/}}</ref> Sharma stated that she had started receiving rape and death threats from people. She held Zubair responsible for those threats. Alt News denied any responsibility for the reaction from the viewers after watching the video clip.<ref name="Scroll 29 May"/><ref name="Wire 1 June"/><ref name="twitter thread">Pratik Sinha, [https://twitter.com/free_thinker/status/1530474189835993088 twitter thread], 28 May 2022.</ref> ''[[BBC News]]'' refused to publish the remarks, citing their "offensive" nature.<ref name=bbc1/> |
|||
:PS: Can we also ping the users who claimed she is citing from scriptures, to join in the discussion . IDK which user introduced the claims. |
|||
On June 1, Naveen Kumar Jindal, tweeted remarks perceived to be derogatory to Muhammad.<ref name="siasat">{{cite news|title=BJP suspends Nupur Sharma, expels Naveen Jindal amid global backlash|url=https://www.siasat.com/bjp-suspends-nupur-sharma-expels-naveen-jindal-amid-global-backlash-2342570/|date=2022-06-05}}</ref> After the tweet attracted backlash in the [[Arab world]], Jindal deleted the tweet and said he did not intend to demean any faith.<ref name="peninsula1">{{cite news|title=Delhi BJP leader suspended after inflammatory tweet causes wide discontent in Arab world|url=https://thepeninsulaqatar.com/article/05/06/2022/delhi-bjp-leader-suspended-after-inflammatory-tweet-causes-wide-discontent-in-arab-world|publisher=[[The Peninsula (newspaper)]]}}</ref> |
|||
:[[User:Bookku| Bookku, 'Encyclopedias = expanding information & knowledge']] ([[User talk:Bookku|talk]]) 09:38, 8 June 2022 (UTC) |
|||
==Police cases== |
|||
A police [[First Information Report|FIR]] (First Information Report) was registered against Sharma in [[Mumbai]] ([[Pydhonie]] Police Station) on the next day. She was accused of "hurting religious sentiments".<ref>{{citation |title=BJP's Nupur Sharma booked over remark on Prophet Muhammad |newspaper=The Free press Journal |date=29 May 2022 |id={{ProQuest|2671096342}}}} |
|||
</ref><ref>{{citation |title=Mumbai police book BJP spokesperson Nupur Sharma for remarks on Prophet |newspaper=The Indian Express |date=29 May 2022 |id={{ProQuest|2670791553}}}}</ref> A second FIR was registered in [[Thane]] (a suburb of Mumbai) on 30 May on the same grounds.<ref>{{citation |title=Maharashtra: Second FIR against BJP spokesperson over comments on Prophet Mohammed |newspaper=The Indian Express |date=31 May 2022 |url=https://indianexpress.com/article/cities/pune/maharashtra-fir-bjp-spokesperson-comments-prophet-mohammed-7943877/}}</ref> Another FIR was registered by the [[AIMIM]] leader [[Asaduddin Owaisi]] in Hyderabad, for using “abusive, false and hurtful” words against Muhammad and the Islam religion.<ref name="Wire 1 June"/> Several other FIRs were registered at other locations in the country.<ref name="Scroll 29 May"/><ref name="Wire 1 June"/><ref name="twitter thread"/> |
|||
:: We should only use [[WP:SECONDARY]] sources, assessed for [[WP:DUE]] weight, and avoid [[WP:OR]]. -- [[User:Kautilya3|Kautilya3]] ([[User talk:Kautilya3|talk]]) 11:52, 8 June 2022 (UTC) |
|||
Sharma's comments were also widely shared internationally on social media. By 4 June, "insult to Prophet Mohammed" was trending among the top 10 hashtags in all the countries of [[Gulf Cooperation Council]] (GCC) and Turkey.<ref name="Tribune West Asia"> |
|||
{{citation |title=Remarks against Prophet Mohammed: Did West Asia social media outrage force BJP to take action? |newspaper=The Tribune (Chandigarh) |date=5 June 2022 |url=https://www.tribuneindia.com/news/nation/remarks-against-prophet-mohammed-did-west-asia-social-media-outrage-force-bjp-to-take-action-401250}}</ref> |
|||
:{{od}} |
|||
==Kanpur violence== |
|||
:{{Re|Kautilya3}}, Though due to fear many people are not talking but my informal academic sources informed me off the record is |
|||
{{Main|2022 Kanpur violence}} |
|||
:a) The lady is correct or not is different matter but the lady had raised three critical points and quoted specific scripture for one of them during the debate. So edit summary of {{Ping|Venkat TL}} is most likely to be at least partially inaccurate. |
|||
On June 3, hundreds of Muslims protested the remarks in [[Kanpur]] after [[Friday prayers]].<ref>{{cite news|title=Clashes in Kanpur over 'insult' to Prophet Mohammed during TV debate|url=https://www.deccanherald.com/national/north-and-central/religious-body-demands-places-of-worship-act-be-scrapped-1115010.html|publisher=[[Deccan Herald]]}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|title=Blasphemous remarks: Hindu-Muslim clashes erupt in India|url=https://www.thenews.com.pk/print/963709-hindu-muslim-clashes-erupt-in-india|publisher=[[The News International]]}}</ref><ref name=":3">{{cite news |title=Kanpur Violence: At Least 40 Injured, Police Register 3 FIRs Against 500 People |url=https://thewire.in/government/violence-breaks-out-in-kanpur-as-police-muslim-protestors-clash |access-date=7 June 2022 |work=The Wire}}</ref> |
|||
:b) The rest of the two points are also most likely can be backed by scriptures though she did not quote. |
|||
:c) Logically speaking she was talking tit for tat, ready to open lines of criticism/ mocking if criticism/ mocking of Hindu icons continues, but what she quoted from scriptures as is without her own opinion so technically that constitutes criticism but does not constitute as hate speech not even as blasphemy as per my sources. |
|||
:Wikipedia needs to be neutral if any RS points out what she said matches to the scriptures then need to be taken note of in the article. You being a senior editor I hope you can understand the point. |
|||
:Thanks and warm regards [[User:Bookku| Bookku, 'Encyclopedias = expanding information & knowledge']] ([[User talk:Bookku|talk]]) 13:54, 8 June 2022 (UTC) |
|||
::@[[User:Bookku|Bookku]] as far as I remember She did not say that she was citing from Hadith, so it would be wrong for Wikipedia to say she was citing. If [[Godi media]] added things after it blew over and tried to explain/whitewash her statement, they should not be attributed to Nupur. We should be careful about this. [[User:Venkat TL|Venkat TL]] ([[User talk:Venkat TL|talk]]) 14:08, 8 June 2022 (UTC) |
|||
:{{Re|Venkat TL}} With due respect to you, tell me, Whether Mohammed Zubair and his Pratik Sinha are working for Godi/Modi media or what? Won't you at least do a primary check what is available in English and from Mohammed Zubair and Pratik Sinha? This is [https://twitter.com/free_thinker/status/1530474189835993088 Pratik Sinha twitter thread]. Don't use primary sources if you don't wish but at least cross check from sources which match your point of views or that of the opposition you support for or you do not want to do that too. |
|||
Hayat Zafar Hashmi, chief of Maulana Mohammed Ali (MMA) Jauhar Fans Association called for a bandh (shutdown) of local shops in protest of comments from Sharma. They also planned to take out a procession and called to shut down shops at parade market during which they were confronted with the members of Hindu groups as a result of which [[2022 Kanpur violence|clashes]] broke out.<ref>{{Cite web |first=Simer|last=Chawla |date=June 3, 2022 |title=Stone pelting in Kanpur amid calls to shut shops over BJP leader's remark, 2 injured |url=https://www.indiatoday.in/india/story/stone-pelting-kanpur-amid-calls-to-shut-shops-over-bjp-leader-nupur-sharma-remark-1957995-2022-06-03 |access-date=2022-06-07 |website=India Today |language=en}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |title=Riots in Kanpur over blasphemy during TV debate, 18 arrested |url=https://www.dailypioneer.com/2022/page1/riots-in-kanpur-over-blasphemy-during-tv-debate--18-arrested.html |access-date=7 June 2022 |work=The Pioneer |language=en}}</ref> |
|||
:[[User:Bookku| Bookku, 'Encyclopedias = expanding information & knowledge']] ([[User talk:Bookku|talk]]) 15:38, 8 June 2022 (UTC) |
|||
::Not sure what you are trying to discuss. Twitter is not a source. This page is not for off topic commentary. [[User:Venkat TL|Venkat TL]] ([[User talk:Venkat TL|talk]]) 15:48, 8 June 2022 (UTC) |
|||
::: It is not for on-topic commentary either. We can cite commentary, if it exists, but we can't engage in it ourselves. -- [[User:Kautilya3|Kautilya3]] ([[User talk:Kautilya3|talk]]) 16:16, 8 June 2022 (UTC) |
|||
::::Ok, thank you. @[[User:Bookku|Bookku]] please note. [[User:Venkat TL|Venkat TL]] ([[User talk:Venkat TL|talk]]) 16:35, 8 June 2022 (UTC) |
|||
:@ Venkat TL, I did not ask to use the twitter as source but just to confirm with the source persons you trust. That would render your edit summary ".. She was neither quoting nor citing anything in the debate. ..", at least partially inaccurate. Understanding that shall help you to give appropriate selection and weight to secondary sources if you have faith in encyclopedic value of neutrality, and I believe so in good faith. Cheers [[User:Bookku| Bookku, 'Encyclopedias = expanding information & knowledge']] ([[User talk:Bookku|talk]]) 16:20, 8 June 2022 (UTC) |
|||
The clashes occurred at Nai Sadak, Yateemkana and Parade area of Kanpur. During the clashes, the groups threw bombs and stones on each other.<ref name="Kanpur FIR">{{cite news |title=Kanpur Violence: Police Register 3 FIRs Against 1,000 Unknown Persons; All 55 Named Accused Muslim |url=https://thewire.in/law/kanpur-violence-police-register-3-firs-against-55-people-1000-unknown-person-named-as-accused |access-date=7 June 2022 |work=The Wire |date=4 June 2022}}</ref> |
|||
== |
== Artilcle blanking == |
||
On June 5, Nupur Sharma published an apology on Twitter but was suspended from the BJP, while Naveen Kumar Jindal was expelled from the party.<ref>{{citation |title=India's ruling party suspends official over comments about Islam |newspaper=CNN |date=6 June 2022 |url=https://edition.cnn.com/2022/06/06/asia/india-bjp-suspension-islam-comments-intl-hnk/index.html}}</ref> |
|||
{{u|LearnIndology}} please don't [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2022_BJP_Muhammad_remarks_controversy&diff=1091920019&oldid=1091919635 blank] the article. If you think its a POVFORK, please take it to AfD. I don't think this is a POV fork. What POV is this forking? This article is about the event and there is currently no other article on this event. [[Nupur Sharma (politician)]] article is about the person.'''[[User:Vice regent|VR]]''' <sub>[[User talk:Vice regent|talk]]</sub> 05:12, 7 June 2022 (UTC) |
|||
Police security was provided to Sharma and her family after she complained about receiving threats and harassment.<ref name="Police security">{{cite news |title=Suspended BJP Spokesperson Nupur Sharma Provided Security by Delhi Police |url=https://thewire.in/government/suspended-bjp-spokesperson-nupur-sharma-provided-security-by-delhi-police |access-date=7 June 2022 |work=The Wire |date=7 June 2022}}</ref> |
|||
:Stop edit warring to restore this content fork and discuss at [[Talk:Nupur_Sharma_(politician)#Notability]]. [[User:LearnIndology|LearnIndology]] ([[User talk:LearnIndology|talk]]) 05:22, 7 June 2022 (UTC) |
|||
::Per [[Wikipedia:Deletion policy|WP:DP]], "If the change (that is, blank and redirect) is disputed via a reversion, '''an attempt should be made to reach a consensus before blank-and-redirecting again'''." If you wish to actually discuss the issue, then please submit it for AfD. [[User:Mupper-san|Mupper-san]] ([[User talk:Mupper-san|talk]]) 05:43, 7 June 2022 (UTC) |
|||
*The article should be restored and should not be blanked. THEY ARE NOT SAME SUBJECT. One is a BIOGRAPHY, other is a NOTABLE INTERNATIONAL EVENT. @[[User:CapnJackSp|CapnJackSp]] and @[[User:LearnIndology|LearnIndology]] Please stop edit warring. Naveen Jindal cannot be discussed at Nupur Sharma's bio. International doplomatic situation cannot be discussed in detail at Nupur's Bio. {{cite news |title=Kanpur Violence: At Least 40 Injured, Police Register 3 FIRs Against 500 People |url=https://thewire.in/government/violence-breaks-out-in-kanpur-as-police-muslim-protestors-clash |access-date=7 June 2022 |work=The Wire}} Kanpur violence and its aftermath cannot be discussed here on Nupur's BIO ([[Nupur Sharma (politician)]]). The scope of the 2 articles are clearly different. [[2022 BJP Muhammad remarks controversy]] is the right place to elaborate the entire event. --[[User:Venkat TL|Venkat TL]] ([[User talk:Venkat TL|talk]]) 06:39, 7 June 2022 (UTC) |
|||
:CapnJackSp and @LearnIndology Once you have been reverted you cannot edit war, Take it to AfD if you dont like this article. [[User:Venkat TL|Venkat TL]] ([[User talk:Venkat TL|talk]]) 07:07, 7 June 2022 (UTC) |
|||
== International Reaction == |
|||
*I reduced content on [[Nupur Sharma (politician)]] and merged content from there here to avoid article duplication, as agreed by CapnJackSp and Venkat TL [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Nupur_Sharma_(politician)#Notability here]. [[User:LearnIndology|LearnIndology]] ([[User talk:LearnIndology|talk]]) 09:42, 7 June 2022 (UTC) |
|||
Five [[Arab nations]] have lodged official protests against [[India]]. [[Pakistan]] and [[Afghanistan]] also reacted strongly to the comments made by the two spokespeople.<ref>{{Cite news |title=Reactions to Blasphemy by BJP spokesperson |work=CBC NEWS |url=https://www.cbc.ca/amp/1.6479108}}</ref> Kuwait and Iran have also summoned the Indian envoys and gave them protest notes.<ref name=":0">{{citation |title=Qatar, Kuwait, Iran Summon Indian Envoys Over BJP Leaders' Remarks on Prophet Mohammed |newspaper=The Wire |date=6 June 2022 |url=https://thewire.in/diplomacy/qatar-summons-indian-envoy-seeks-govts-public-apology-over-bjp-leaders-remarks-on-prophet}}</ref> |
|||
*I created the [[2022 Kanpur violence]] after some of us agreed on talk page of Nupur article that it deserves its own article, just like [[2016 Kaliachak riots]] did. [[User:CapnJackSp|Captain Jack Sparrow]] ([[User talk:CapnJackSp|talk]]) 11:09, 7 June 2022 (UTC) |
|||
<!-- countries in Chronological order, First responders on top --> |
|||
== Refs == |
|||
The [[Government of Qatar]] summoned the Indian [[ambassador]] and asked for immediate condemnation and an apology for the remarks. The ambassador is reported to have replied that these were the views of "fringe elements" in India and in no way reflect the views of the Government of India.<ref>{{citation |title="Fringe Elements": India Dismisses BJP Leaders' Remarks On Prophet |newspaper=NDTV News |date=6 June 2022 |url=https://www.ndtv.com/india-news/qatar-nupur-sharma-views-of-fringe-elements-says-india-on-bjp-leaders-remarks-on-prophet-3040851}}</ref> |
|||
* [https://www.news9live.com/india/nupur-sharma-debate-fails-to-draw-vital-distinction-between-hate-speech-and-blasphemy-174762 Nupur Sharma debate fails to draw vital distinction between hate speech and blasphemy, Fahad Hasin, news9live] 6 June 2022 |
|||
A Qatari minister said, “Systematic hate speech against Islam in India... will be considered insult by 2 billion [[Muslims]].” Qatar's condemnation came amid the visit of India’s Vice President M. Venkaiah Naidu who met [[Qatari Prime Minister]] Sheikh Khalid Bin Khalifa Al Thani in Doha on Sunday. |
|||
* [https://www.ndtv.com/india-news/bjps-new-rules-for-leaders-joining-tv-debates-amid-prophet-comments-row-3045977?utm_source=newsshowcase&utm_medium=gnews&utm_campaign=CDAqEAgAKgcICjCPyf8KMMit-QIw25NV&utm_content=rundown BJP Draws The Line For Spokespersons After Prophet Comments Row, Akhilesh Sharma NDTV] June 07, 2022 |
|||
India’s Ambassador to Qatar Deepak Mittal said the comments "do not, in any manner, reflect the views of the [[Government of India]]. These are the views of fringe elements," said a spokesperson of the embassy. Mittal was summoned by [[Ministry of Foreign Affairs (Qatar)|Qatar's Ministry of Foreign Affairs]], which said it was "expecting a public apology and immediate condemnation of these remarks from the government of India". |
|||
* [[ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3gVj109lRkU|Newstrack With Rahul Kanwal: BJP Drawing A Line With Nupur Sharma's Suspension? Prophet Remark Row India Today Jun 6, 2022 ]] |
|||
"Allowing such Islamophobic remarks to continue without punishment, constitutes a grave danger to the protection of human rights and may lead to further prejudice and marginalization, which will create a cycle of violence and hate," [[Qatar]] said.<ref name=":0" /> |
|||
[[User:Bookku| Bookku, 'Encyclopedias = expanding information & knowledge']] ([[User talk:Bookku|talk]]) 08:25, 7 June 2022 (UTC) |
|||
=== Kuwait === |
|||
[[Kuwait]] demanded a "public apology for these hostile statements, the continuation of which would constitute a deterrent measure or [[punishment]] to increase [[extremism]] and hatred and undermine the elements of moderation".<ref name=":0" /> A Kuwaiti supermarket removed Indian made products in protest.<ref>{{cite news|title=Indian products pulled by Kuwait supermarket in row over Prophet remarks|url=https://www.scmp.com/news/asia/south-asia/article/3180641/indian-products-pulled-kuwait-supermarket-row-over-prophet|publisher=[[South China Morning Post]]}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|title=Kuwait supermarket pulls Indian products as row grows over Prophet remarks|url=https://www.france24.com/en/live-news/20220606-kuwait-supermarket-pulls-indian-products-as-row-grows-over-prophet-remarks}}</ref> |
|||
: As noted in the first ref, the "Shivling claim" was being mocked. That doesn't imply that Shivling was mocked, or that Lord Shiva himself was being mocked. The extrapolation drawn by the BJP supporters is not viable. -- [[User:Kautilya3|Kautilya3]] ([[User talk:Kautilya3|talk]]) 17:23, 8 June 2022 (UTC) |
|||
The Indian embassy in [[Kuwait]] said in a statement that the Ambassador had a meeting with the foreign office where "concerns were raised with regard to some offensive tweets by individuals in India.<ref>{{cite news|author=Mohammed Baleegh|title=Govt penalised culprits for offensive tweets against minorities: Indian embassy in Kuwait|url=https://www.siasat.com/govt-penalised-culprits-for-offensive-tweets-against-minorities-indian-embassy-in-kuwait-2342971/|date=2022-06-06|publisher=[[The Siasat Daily]]}}</ref> |
|||
== The ruling party == |
|||
The Grand Mufti of [[Oman]] called the remarks "insolent and obscene rudeness" by the official spokesperson of the BJP and characterized it as war against every [[Muslims|Muslim]]. He called for a boycott of all Indian products and confiscation of all [[India]]n investments in Oman.<ref name="Tribune West Asia"/> |
|||
{{u|Venkat TL}} "spokesperson of India's ruling ..." might be misconstrued to suggest that she represents India as part of the ruling party. |
|||
=== Pakistan === |
|||
Pakistani president [[Arif Alvi]] said "such comments were the reflection of a growing trend of [[Islamophobia]] in India, which is home to millions of Muslims."<ref>{{cite news|title=Pakistan slams BJP for remarks against Holy Prophet|url=https://www.dawn.com/news/1693382|publisher=[[Dawn (newspaper)]]}}</ref> Pakistan also issued a démarche to the Indian Charge d' Affaires in Islamabad.<ref name=":1">{{Cite web |date=2022-06-06 |title=Pakistan issues demarche to India over blasphemous remarks |url=http://tribune.com.pk/story/2360263/pakistan-issues-demarche-to-india-over-blasphemous-remarks-by-bjp-officials |access-date=2022-06-06 |website=The Express Tribune |language=en}}</ref> A statement issued by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs said that the Indian diplomat was summoned to convey Pakistan's categorical rejection and strong condemnation of the derogatory remarks.<ref name=":1" /> "He was told that these remarks are totally unacceptable and have not only deeply hurt the sentiments of the people of Pakistan but Muslims across the world".<ref>{{Cite web |title=Pakistan sends demarche to Indian diplomat over blasphemy against Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) |url=https://www.geo.tv/latest/420921-pakistan-issues-strong-demarche-to-indian-charge-d-affairs-over-blasphemy-against-prophet-pbuh |access-date=2022-06-06 |website=www.geo.tv |language=en}}</ref> |
|||
I will update the wording to below which should provide the context: |
|||
The [[Pakistan Armed Forces]]' media wing whilst stating its condemnation added: "The outrageous act is deeply hurtful and clearly indicates extreme level of hate against Muslims and other religions in India".<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-06-07/india-moves-to-minimalise-fallout-after-mideast-outrage-over-pro/101130996|title=India moves to soothe domestic and Mideast outrage over Prophet Mohammed comments|work=ABC News|date=7 June 2022|accessdate=7 June 2022}}</ref> |
|||
{{talkquote|On 27 May 2022, [[Nupur Sharma (politician)|Nupur Sharma]], the then national spokesperson of the '''ruling''' [[Bharatiya Janata Party]] (BJP), made controversial remarks regarding the Islamic prophet [[Muhammad|Mohammed]].}} [[User:Webberbrad007|Webberbrad007]] ([[User talk:Webberbrad007|talk]]) 09:50, 8 June 2022 (UTC) |
|||
:@[[User:Mar4d|Mar4d]] had added it. We leave that for the reader to decide. Yes she is the official spokesperson of the ruling party. I am fine with your proposed copy edit. [[User:Venkat TL|Venkat TL]] ([[User talk:Venkat TL|talk]]) 09:54, 8 June 2022 (UTC) |
|||
=== Afghanistan === |
|||
On 6 June, the interim [[Afghan government]] strongly condemned derogatory words against Muhammad by an official of the Indian ruling party.<ref name=":2">{{Cite news |agency=Press Trust of India |date=2022-06-06 |title=Saudi, Bahrain and Afghanistan condemn controversial remarks of BJP leader |work=Business Standard India |url=https://www.business-standard.com/article/current-affairs/saudi-bahrain-and-afghanistan-condemn-controversial-remarks-of-bjp-leader-122060601082_1.html |access-date=2022-06-07}}</ref> |
|||
== Al-Monitor write up - RS? == |
|||
The government’s spokesperson, [[Zabiullah Mujahid|Zabihullah Mujahid]], wrote on his [[Twitter]] handle: “The [[Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan]] strongly condemns the use of derogatory words against the Prophet of Islam (Peace be upon him) by an official of the ruling party in [[India]].”<ref>{{Cite news |last=Kakar |first=Javed Hamim |date=2022-06-06 |title=Kabul condemns blasphemous remarks of BJP official |language=en-GB |url=https://pajhwok.com/2022/06/06/kabul-condemns-blasphemous-remarks-of-bjp-official/ |access-date=2022-06-07}}</ref> |
|||
[https://www.al-monitor.com/originals/2022/06/explainer-india-bjp-party-spokespersons-comments-prophet-spark-backlash This] write up seems to better explain what happened: |
|||
He also said: “We urge the [[Government of India|Indian government]] not to allow such fanatics to insult the holy religion of Islam and provoke the feelings of [[Muslims]].<ref name=":2" /> |
|||
{{talkquote|'''What happened''': The controversy began with comments made by Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) spokeswoman Nupur Sharma on the TV station Times Now on May 27. Sharma was commenting on the Gyanvapi mosque controversy. The mosque in northeast India was built on the site of an earlier Hindu shrine. Some Islamists have reportedly claimed that there actually was no shrine at the site. During the TV segment, ''Sharma rhetorically asked if she should "mock" some parts of the Muslim holy book, the Quran. She specifically mentioned "flying horses," a likely reference to the buraq creature. She also brought up the Prophet Muhammad's marriage to Aisha, describing her as 9 years old at the time the marriage was consummated, according to local media.'' |
|||
===Other countries=== |
|||
Aisha’s exact age at the time of the marriage is unknown. Some scholars believe she was a child. Others have countered that she had reached puberty by time the marriage was consummated. Critics of Islam regularly cite Aisha’s age. |
|||
The [[UAE]]'s foreign ministry condemned what it called "the blasphemous remarks made by India’s ruling Bharatiya Janata Party’s spokesperson that insulted Prophet Muhammad (PBUH)".<ref>{{cite news|title=UAE condemns blasphemous remarks against Prophet Muhammad in India|url=https://gulfnews.com/uae/government/uae-condemns-blasphemous-remarks-against-prophet-muhammad-in-india-1.88407533}}</ref> UAE's decision to join other Muslim-majority countries in condemning the remarks was called "quite significant" by [[BBC News]], given the strength of the [[India-UAE relations]].<ref name=bbc1>{{cite news|title=Nupur Sharma: India's diplomatic woes over Prophet Muhammad row deepen|url=https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-61701908|publisher=[[BBC News]]|author=Vikas Pandey}}</ref> |
|||
''After Sharma’s comments, the Bharatiya Janata Party’s spokesman for the Delhi region Naveen Kumar Jindal accused Muhammad of rape in a tweet. Sharma later apologized, saying she was lashing out in response to insults to Hindus. For his part, Jindal subsequently deleted the tweet. The Bharatiya Janata Party, which is India’s governing party and espouses Hindu nationalism, has also suspended both of them. |
|||
Both incidents have caused outrage in India and led to communal violence.}} [[User:Webberbrad007|Webberbrad007]] ([[User talk:Webberbrad007|talk]]) 16:09, 8 June 2022 (UTC) |
|||
:I had added it, unfortunately it was [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2022_BJP_Muhammad_remarks_controversy&diff=1091944323&oldid=1091942867 removed]. I'll restore some of it. Please be [[WP:BOLD]] too.'''[[User:Vice regent|VR]]''' <sub>[[User talk:Vice regent|talk]]</sub> 20:12, 8 June 2022 (UTC) |
|||
== Page Title == |
|||
The [[Ministry of Foreign Affairs (Indonesia)|Indonesian Foreign Ministry]] condemned what it called "unacceptable derogatory remarks" regarding Muhammad.<ref>{{cite news|title=More nations condemn Prophet remarks even as Centre troubleshoots|url=https://www.indiatoday.in/india/story/uae-condemns-bjp-nupur-sharma-prophet-remarks-1959124-2022-06-06}}</ref><ref name=bbc1/> |
|||
Do not add BJP in the title as Entire party is not involved in the whole controversy; few members were involved and made controversial remark on Prophet Muhammad; expelled and got suspended from the ruling party in India. [[User:ScriptKKiddie|ScriptKKiddie]] ([[User talk:ScriptKKiddie|talk]]) 17:11, 8 June 2022 (UTC) |
|||
A member of the [[Maldives]]' [[People's Majlis|parliament]], [[Adam Shareef]] filed for a motion that called on the country's president to condemn the remarks about Muhammad. The motion was defeated with 10 votes in favour and 33 votes against.<ref>{{cite news|title=Maldives parliament rejects motion that sought condemnation of BJP leaders' remarks on Prophet|url=https://theprint.in/diplomacy/maldives-parliament-rejects-motion-that-sought-condemnation-of-bjp-leaders-remarks-on-prophet/985562/}}</ref> Later, the Maldives' government expressed "concern" over the remarks, but also welcomed BJP's action taken against the officials.<ref>{{cite news|title=UAE, Jordan, Maldives join list of nations condemning comments on Prophet|url=https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/uae-jordan-join-list-of-nations-condemning-ex-bjp-leaders-comments-on-prophet-101654527736890.html}}</ref> |
|||
:At the time of remarks, [[Nupur Sharma]] was a national spokesperson of the BJP. Additionally, BJP's expulsion itself shows that they have a role to play in this controversy.'''[[User:Vice regent|VR]]''' <sub>[[User talk:Vice regent|talk]]</sub> 20:11, 8 June 2022 (UTC) |
|||
::It seems an unclear opinion, not a fact! |
|||
Egypt's [[Al-Azhar mosque]], one of the leading institutions of learning in the Islamic world, condemned the remarks.<ref>{{cite news|title=Diplomatic storm over comments against the Prophet by India's ruling party officials|url=https://saudigazette.com.sa/article/621434|publisher=[[Saudi Gazette]]}}</ref><ref name=cbcnews>{{cite news|title=India facing accusations of blasphemy after top officials make insulting remarks about Islam, Prophet Muhammad|url=https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/indian-prophet-muhammad-muslim-1.6479108}}</ref> |
|||
Can you prove that the entire BJP is involved in this whole controversy? [[User:ScriptKKiddie|ScriptKKiddie]] ([[User talk:ScriptKKiddie|talk]]) 01:46, 9 June 2022 (UTC) |
|||
Dutch lawmaker [[Geert Wilders]], came out in support of BJP’s former spokesperson Nupur Sharma. Wilders, in a series of tweets, stated that Nupur Sharma’s statement about [[Muhammad]] were a fact and not false allegations.<ref>{{Cite web |title=नुपूर शर्मा ने पैगंबर पर गलत नहीं कहा, अरब देशों का तुष्टीकरण न करे भारत... डच सांसद की सलाह |url=https://navbharattimes.indiatimes.com/world/uae/dutch-lawmaker-geert-wilders-support-bjp-nupur-sharma-on-paigambar-muhammad-criticise-islamic-countries-boycott-india/articleshow/92050768.cms |access-date=2022-06-07 |website=Navbharat Times |language=hi}}</ref> |
|||
== Requested move 8 June 2022 == |
|||
==Indian government response== |
|||
The Indian government responded to international controversy by stating that the controversial remarks did not reflect government position but rather came from "fringe elements".<ref>{{cite news|title=More Muslim countries take exception to BJP leaders' derogatory remarks about Holy Prophet|url=https://www.dawn.com/news/1693454/more-muslim-countries-take-exception-to-bjp-leaders-derogatory-remarks-about-holy-prophet|publisher=[[Dawn (newspaper)]]}}</ref> The BJP removed both Sharma and Jindal and said "strong action has already been taken against those who made the derogatory remarks".<ref name=guardian1>{{cite news|title=Prophet Muhammad remarks embroil India in row with Gulf states|url=https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/jun/06/prophet-muhammad-remarks-embroil-india-in-row-with-gulf-states}}</ref> |
|||
{{requested move/dated|2022 Muhammad remarks controversy}} |
|||
On June 6, the Ministry of External Affairs called out the [[Organisation of Islamic Cooperation|Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC)]]’s “motivated, misleading, and mischievous” comments on India. MEA official spokesperson [[Arindam Bagchi]] while replying to media queries on the General Secretary of OIC’s statement said that the Government of India categorically rejected OIC Secretariat’s comments. The government of India categorically rejects OIC Secretariat’s unwarranted and narrow-minded comments. The Government of India accords the highest respect to all religions. “The offensive tweets and comments denigrating a religious personality were made by certain individuals. They do not, in any manner, reflect the views of the Government of India. Strong action has already been taken against these individuals by relevant bodies”, the statement added.<ref>{{Cite web |title="Narrow-Minded": India's Reply To Islamic Nations' Group Amid Gulf Fury |url=https://www.ndtv.com/india-news/islamic-nations-groups-remarks-on-prophet-controversy-unwarranted-and-narrow-minded-says-centre-amid-gulf-backlash-3041625 |access-date=2022-06-07 |website=NDTV.com}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |title=India rejects OIC's 'unwarranted & narrow-minded' comments: MEA |work=The Economic Times |url=https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/india/india-rejects-oics-unwarranted-narrow-minded-comments-mea/articleshow/92031183.cms |access-date=2022-06-07}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |others=PTI |date=2022-06-06 |title=India rejects OIC's comments over controversial remarks against Prophet |language=en-IN |work=The Hindu |url=https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/india-rejects-oics-comments-over-controversial-remarks-against-prophet/article65499818.ece |access-date=2022-06-07 |issn=0971-751X}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |date=June 6, 2022 |title='Narrow-minded': India's response to Islamic nations' group after row over BJP leader's Prophet remarks |url=https://www.indiatoday.in/india/story/narrow-minded-india-response-islamic-nations-group-oic-nupur-sharma-prophet-remarks-1958887-2022-06-06 |access-date=2022-06-07 |website=India Today |language=en}}</ref> India also responded to Pakistan's criticism by saying Pakistan's remarks were "absurd" given the persecution of minorities in Pakistan.<ref>{{cite news|title=Remarks on Prophet Mohammad: As criticism grows, India rejects OIC's comments as 'narrow-minded'|url=https://indianexpress.com/article/india/india-reponds-oic-comments-remarks-against-prophet-bjp-nupur-sharma-7955091/}}</ref> |
|||
[[:2022 BJP Muhammad remarks controversy]] → {{no redirect|2022 Muhammad remarks controversy}} – This was moved to this title once per the above comment (previous section), and undone as an "undiscussed move, see TP". Well the only discussion here was to justify the move, and there is no opposition stated. [[User:MB|<b style="color:#034503">MB</b>]] 17:43, 8 June 2022 (UTC) |
|||
==See also== |
|||
*[[International reactions to the Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy]] |
|||
*'''Oppose''' '2022 Muhammad remarks controversy' sounds as if this controversy is about the remarks made by Muhammad (PBUH). This is not correct. The entire controversy started due to comments of BJP spokesperson representing Party in a TV debate. Jindal was not in debate but he tweeted. (MB, you beat me in starting this thread) [[User:Venkat TL|Venkat TL]] ([[User talk:Venkat TL|talk]]) 17:55, 8 June 2022 (UTC) |
|||
==References== |
|||
*'''Oppose''' as that doesn't come close to defining the topic. Remarks about the Islamic prophet Muhammad are made pretty much all the time.'''[[User:Vice regent|VR]]''' <sub>[[User talk:Vice regent|talk]]</sub> 20:09, 8 June 2022 (UTC) |
|||
{{Reflist}} |
|||
'''Oppose''' and agree with the editors above. An alternative worth considering would be ''2022 Mohammad remarks controversy in India'' given that the international blowback has been via diplomatic channels to India and not to the BJP directly. [[User:Webberbrad007|Webberbrad007]] ([[User talk:Webberbrad007|talk]]) 21:33, 8 June 2022 (UTC) |
|||
[[Category:2022 in Indian politics]] |
|||
[[Category:2022 controversies]] |
|||
*'''Oppose''' If it happened in a vacuum then I'd be more amenable to the idea of distancing the BJP from the comments about Mohamed, that said it didn't happen in a vacuum, the BJP does use hindu nationalism to whip up support for elections, the comment itself is not fringe but fairly standard BJP rhetoric, and when compared with other rhetoric such as Modi's leading up to the Gujarat riots it actually, by BJP standards, comes off as being rather PC, what's more is that Nupur Sharma is or atleast was a BJP spokeswoman.[https://www.economist.com/asia/2022/05/14/how-narendra-modi-is-remaking-india-into-a-hindu-state][https://www.nytimes.com/2021/12/22/world/asia/india-christians-attacked.html] [[User:Alcibiades979|Alcibiades979]] ([[User talk:Alcibiades979|talk]]) 22:10, 8 June 2022 (UTC) |
|||
[[Category:Islam-related controversies]] |
|||
[[Category:Foreign relations of India]] |
|||
== Sharma's remarks == |
|||
[[Category:Islam in India]] |
|||
[[Category:Bharatiya Janata Party]] |
|||
{{u|Kautilya3}} can you explain [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2022_BJP_Muhammad_remarks_controversy&diff=1092213929&oldid=1092205465 this revert]? I tried to describe what Sharma said but you seem to have removed that. Given the controversy around Sharma's remarks, we owe it to our readers to write what she actually said.'''[[User:Vice regent|VR]]''' <sub>[[User talk:Vice regent|talk]]</sub> 02:43, 9 June 2022 (UTC) |
Revision as of 03:56, 9 June 2022
![]() | India: History / Politics C‑class Low‑importance | |||||||||||||||
|
![]() | Islam: Islam and Controversy C‑class Low‑importance | ||||||||||||
|
Title articulation
First thought came to mind after reading article title was, what is 'BJP Muhammad'? Whether a – sign is needed in between 'BJP–Muhammad' Though I am not good enough in English grammar, IMHO, article title seem to need improvement with better articulation.
Bookku, 'Encyclopedias = expanding information & knowledge' (talk) 02:51, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
- @Bookku: this title is somewhat similar to Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy. Although in that case "Jyllands-Posten" is italicized. I don't think we can italicize "BJP" in this case.VR talk 05:17, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
- @Bookku Why add BJP in the title? Can you explain it? ScriptKKiddie (talk) 01:44, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
- @ScriptKKiddie: [Humor] Because some Wikipedians may not have good faith in BJP, hence such inclusion may not have been called [dubious – discuss] (End of humor note). Rationally speaking Wikipedians need to have consistency. Whether they are open to add criticism expressed by duo in this controversy to be added to this criticism article and this criticism article as criticism by BJP ? Most probably they won't, but Wikipedia policies do not expect consistent approach across the articles. Hence some times such contradictions are okay, Idk, whether that is how some Wikipedians may have been thinking. Bookku, 'Encyclopedias = expanding information & knowledge' (talk) 02:32, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
- @Bookku Why add BJP in the title? Can you explain it? ScriptKKiddie (talk) 01:44, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
Needs quotations
The article needs the cited quotations that are ostensibly the basis for the article. Without them, these are vague, hearsay aspersions. 172.58.102.208 (talk) 04:29, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
- @Venkat TL: after reading your edit summary ".. She was neither quoting nor citing anything in the debate. ..", I can't agree more with above IP that The article needs the cited quotations that are ostensibly the basis for the article. Do you have word to word original language plus English translation? If yes then please do quote, that will also help confirm your claims in the summary. Thanks
- PS: Can we also ping the users who claimed she is citing from scriptures, to join in the discussion . IDK which user introduced the claims.
- Bookku, 'Encyclopedias = expanding information & knowledge' (talk) 09:38, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
- We should only use WP:SECONDARY sources, assessed for WP:DUE weight, and avoid WP:OR. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 11:52, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
- @Kautilya3:, Though due to fear many people are not talking but my informal academic sources informed me off the record is
- a) The lady is correct or not is different matter but the lady had raised three critical points and quoted specific scripture for one of them during the debate. So edit summary of @Venkat TL: is most likely to be at least partially inaccurate.
- b) The rest of the two points are also most likely can be backed by scriptures though she did not quote.
- c) Logically speaking she was talking tit for tat, ready to open lines of criticism/ mocking if criticism/ mocking of Hindu icons continues, but what she quoted from scriptures as is without her own opinion so technically that constitutes criticism but does not constitute as hate speech not even as blasphemy as per my sources.
- Wikipedia needs to be neutral if any RS points out what she said matches to the scriptures then need to be taken note of in the article. You being a senior editor I hope you can understand the point.
- Thanks and warm regards Bookku, 'Encyclopedias = expanding information & knowledge' (talk) 13:54, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
- @Bookku as far as I remember She did not say that she was citing from Hadith, so it would be wrong for Wikipedia to say she was citing. If Godi media added things after it blew over and tried to explain/whitewash her statement, they should not be attributed to Nupur. We should be careful about this. Venkat TL (talk) 14:08, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
- @Venkat TL: With due respect to you, tell me, Whether Mohammed Zubair and his Pratik Sinha are working for Godi/Modi media or what? Won't you at least do a primary check what is available in English and from Mohammed Zubair and Pratik Sinha? This is Pratik Sinha twitter thread. Don't use primary sources if you don't wish but at least cross check from sources which match your point of views or that of the opposition you support for or you do not want to do that too.
- Bookku, 'Encyclopedias = expanding information & knowledge' (talk) 15:38, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
- @ Venkat TL, I did not ask to use the twitter as source but just to confirm with the source persons you trust. That would render your edit summary ".. She was neither quoting nor citing anything in the debate. ..", at least partially inaccurate. Understanding that shall help you to give appropriate selection and weight to secondary sources if you have faith in encyclopedic value of neutrality, and I believe so in good faith. Cheers Bookku, 'Encyclopedias = expanding information & knowledge' (talk) 16:20, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
Artilcle blanking
LearnIndology please don't blank the article. If you think its a POVFORK, please take it to AfD. I don't think this is a POV fork. What POV is this forking? This article is about the event and there is currently no other article on this event. Nupur Sharma (politician) article is about the person.VR talk 05:12, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
- Stop edit warring to restore this content fork and discuss at Talk:Nupur_Sharma_(politician)#Notability. LearnIndology (talk) 05:22, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
- Per WP:DP, "If the change (that is, blank and redirect) is disputed via a reversion, an attempt should be made to reach a consensus before blank-and-redirecting again." If you wish to actually discuss the issue, then please submit it for AfD. Mupper-san (talk) 05:43, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
- The article should be restored and should not be blanked. THEY ARE NOT SAME SUBJECT. One is a BIOGRAPHY, other is a NOTABLE INTERNATIONAL EVENT. @CapnJackSp and @LearnIndology Please stop edit warring. Naveen Jindal cannot be discussed at Nupur Sharma's bio. International doplomatic situation cannot be discussed in detail at Nupur's Bio. "Kanpur Violence: At Least 40 Injured, Police Register 3 FIRs Against 500 People". The Wire. Retrieved 7 June 2022. Kanpur violence and its aftermath cannot be discussed here on Nupur's BIO (Nupur Sharma (politician)). The scope of the 2 articles are clearly different. 2022 BJP Muhammad remarks controversy is the right place to elaborate the entire event. --Venkat TL (talk) 06:39, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
- CapnJackSp and @LearnIndology Once you have been reverted you cannot edit war, Take it to AfD if you dont like this article. Venkat TL (talk) 07:07, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
- I reduced content on Nupur Sharma (politician) and merged content from there here to avoid article duplication, as agreed by CapnJackSp and Venkat TL here. LearnIndology (talk) 09:42, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
- I created the 2022 Kanpur violence after some of us agreed on talk page of Nupur article that it deserves its own article, just like 2016 Kaliachak riots did. Captain Jack Sparrow (talk) 11:09, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
Refs
- [[ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3gVj109lRkU%7CNewstrack With Rahul Kanwal: BJP Drawing A Line With Nupur Sharma's Suspension? Prophet Remark Row India Today Jun 6, 2022 ]]
Bookku, 'Encyclopedias = expanding information & knowledge' (talk) 08:25, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
- As noted in the first ref, the "Shivling claim" was being mocked. That doesn't imply that Shivling was mocked, or that Lord Shiva himself was being mocked. The extrapolation drawn by the BJP supporters is not viable. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 17:23, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
The ruling party
Venkat TL "spokesperson of India's ruling ..." might be misconstrued to suggest that she represents India as part of the ruling party.
I will update the wording to below which should provide the context:
On 27 May 2022, Nupur Sharma, the then national spokesperson of the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), made controversial remarks regarding the Islamic prophet Mohammed.
Webberbrad007 (talk) 09:50, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
- @Mar4d had added it. We leave that for the reader to decide. Yes she is the official spokesperson of the ruling party. I am fine with your proposed copy edit. Venkat TL (talk) 09:54, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
Al-Monitor write up - RS?
This write up seems to better explain what happened:
What happened: The controversy began with comments made by Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) spokeswoman Nupur Sharma on the TV station Times Now on May 27. Sharma was commenting on the Gyanvapi mosque controversy. The mosque in northeast India was built on the site of an earlier Hindu shrine. Some Islamists have reportedly claimed that there actually was no shrine at the site. During the TV segment, Sharma rhetorically asked if she should "mock" some parts of the Muslim holy book, the Quran. She specifically mentioned "flying horses," a likely reference to the buraq creature. She also brought up the Prophet Muhammad's marriage to Aisha, describing her as 9 years old at the time the marriage was consummated, according to local media.
Aisha’s exact age at the time of the marriage is unknown. Some scholars believe she was a child. Others have countered that she had reached puberty by time the marriage was consummated. Critics of Islam regularly cite Aisha’s age. After Sharma’s comments, the Bharatiya Janata Party’s spokesman for the Delhi region Naveen Kumar Jindal accused Muhammad of rape in a tweet. Sharma later apologized, saying she was lashing out in response to insults to Hindus. For his part, Jindal subsequently deleted the tweet. The Bharatiya Janata Party, which is India’s governing party and espouses Hindu nationalism, has also suspended both of them.
Both incidents have caused outrage in India and led to communal violence.
Webberbrad007 (talk) 16:09, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
- I had added it, unfortunately it was removed. I'll restore some of it. Please be WP:BOLD too.VR talk 20:12, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
Page Title
Do not add BJP in the title as Entire party is not involved in the whole controversy; few members were involved and made controversial remark on Prophet Muhammad; expelled and got suspended from the ruling party in India. ScriptKKiddie (talk) 17:11, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
- At the time of remarks, Nupur Sharma was a national spokesperson of the BJP. Additionally, BJP's expulsion itself shows that they have a role to play in this controversy.VR talk 20:11, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
- It seems an unclear opinion, not a fact!
Can you prove that the entire BJP is involved in this whole controversy? ScriptKKiddie (talk) 01:46, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
Requested move 8 June 2022
2022 BJP Muhammad remarks controversy → 2022 Muhammad remarks controversy – This was moved to this title once per the above comment (previous section), and undone as an "undiscussed move, see TP". Well the only discussion here was to justify the move, and there is no opposition stated. MB 17:43, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose '2022 Muhammad remarks controversy' sounds as if this controversy is about the remarks made by Muhammad (PBUH). This is not correct. The entire controversy started due to comments of BJP spokesperson representing Party in a TV debate. Jindal was not in debate but he tweeted. (MB, you beat me in starting this thread) Venkat TL (talk) 17:55, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose as that doesn't come close to defining the topic. Remarks about the Islamic prophet Muhammad are made pretty much all the time.VR talk 20:09, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
Oppose and agree with the editors above. An alternative worth considering would be 2022 Mohammad remarks controversy in India given that the international blowback has been via diplomatic channels to India and not to the BJP directly. Webberbrad007 (talk) 21:33, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose If it happened in a vacuum then I'd be more amenable to the idea of distancing the BJP from the comments about Mohamed, that said it didn't happen in a vacuum, the BJP does use hindu nationalism to whip up support for elections, the comment itself is not fringe but fairly standard BJP rhetoric, and when compared with other rhetoric such as Modi's leading up to the Gujarat riots it actually, by BJP standards, comes off as being rather PC, what's more is that Nupur Sharma is or atleast was a BJP spokeswoman.[1][2] Alcibiades979 (talk) 22:10, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
Sharma's remarks
Kautilya3 can you explain this revert? I tried to describe what Sharma said but you seem to have removed that. Given the controversy around Sharma's remarks, we owe it to our readers to write what she actually said.VR talk 02:43, 9 June 2022 (UTC)