Examples of Bias in Wikipedia

From Dharmapedia Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

This list covers a wide range of bias in the English Wikipedia website. Although Wikipedia claims to have credibility because anyone can edit it, in fact, the website represents the viewpoint of its most strident and persistent editors.

Wikipedia Newspeak® : List of Most biased wikipedia article titles[edit]

Wikipedia Newspeak® is the increasingly biased and limited vocabulary of Wikipedia. "Newspeak" is a term coined in George Orwell's 1984[3] to describe the vocabulary in a totalitarian society, in which words are crafted to control the mind.

For example, the term "Aryan invasion theory" exists on millions of sites, according to Google, but is censored as a legitimate term on Wikipedia. The Wikipedia police do not want anyone to think that it is a theory rather than fact.

  • Exodus of Kashmiri Hindus instead of Genocide of Kashmiri Hindus
    • The article's previous name was Ethnic cleansing of Kashmiri Hindus, but the anti-Hindu terror apologists didn't like that term.
  • Godhra train burning instead of Godhra train terror attack
    • The article whitewashes the anti-Hindu terrorism and is an exercise in massacre denial
  • Anti-Hindu sentiment instead of Hinduphobia
    • Wiki pravda refuses to name the article as Hinduphobia[4]
  • Insurgency in Jammu and Kashmir instead of Terrorism in Kashmir
    • Wikipedia's Terrorism apologists don't want to use the Terrorism word. But isn't it weird that their article on the Saffron terror hoax is not likewise called Saffron insurgency?
  • Allahabad instead of Prayagraj
    • Despite the fact that the official name is now Prayagraj (since 2018), the neo-colonial American Wiki Pravda platform refuses to call an Indian city by its official indigenous name. (The article has now been renamed in 2023, with a five year delay [1] [archive]. In similar cases in other countries, wikipedia has promptly renamed the article title to reflect the official name).
  • Indo-Aryan migrations instead of Aryan invasion theory
    • Wiki Pravda refuses to call it a theory or hypothesis (which it clearly is)
  • Love Jihad conspiracy theory instead of Grooming Jihad
    • In May 2023 (while the movie The Kerala Story was in the news), the title of the WikiPravda article was changed from Love Jihad to Love Jihad conspiracy theory after a "discussion" of a few hours (usually these discussions are running at least for an entire week)

Biased categories and templates[edit]

Examples of Bias[edit]

  1. The body of the Islamic terrorism[5] page opens with "Islamic terrorism" is itself a controversial phrase while the body of the article "Christianity and violence"[6] page opened with Juergensmeyer wrote, "It is good to remember, however, that despite its central tenets of love and peace, Christianity - like most traditions - has always had a violent side."[7]
  2. Wikipedia has refused to have an article on Sudden Jihad Syndrome despite a term discussed by multiple commentator including neoconservative academic Daniel Pipes and a column in the Washington Times.[8][9][10][11][12][13] and even refused to let an editor work on a draft for a rewrite of the article.[14]
  3. In late 2010 the article on Feminism presented Mohummad (the founder of Islam) as the first major feminist in the history of the world.[15]
  4. According to the Wikipedia article of 2012, Bangladesh was not conquered by the bloody military campaigns of Bakhtiar Khilji and Muhammad Bakhtiyar Khalji but peacefully converted by a saint, Hazrat Shah Jalal. [16]
  5. Films with a pro-Hindu message are listed under the category "Propaganda films" or listed as conspiracy theory movies (example: The Kashmir Files [2] [archive] [3] [archive] [4] [archive]). However, anti-Hindu films are never described as "propaganda" but are uncritically praised (examples [5] [archive]).
  6. Many of its articles on Christianity in India are propaganda projects set up to project a particular Christian world view. This is to be expected: the wiki editing system invites India’s cultural enemies, Christian missionaries and other western neo-colonialists, to propound their hostile, anti-Indian theories. Wikipedia is the perfect platform for Christian propaganda in India and is being used for that purpose with great effect in its Christianity in India project. This Wikipedia series even employs the symbol of a gold cross superimposed on a light blue map of India, a symbol that is highly offensive to the majority Hindu population who identify India as their mother and civilisational homeland. [17]

Hinduphobia[edit]

While Wikipedia promotes the propaganda term Islamophobia, and uses it to censor or whitewash sources, information and facts, Wikipedia at the same time claims that Hinduphobia does not exist.

Shri Jagannathan said: “Wikipedia has been captured by Left-illiberal forces inimical to any Indic voice. Only Hinduphobic voices control the narratives. I would like to appeal to all right-thinking people to stop patronizing or contributing to Wikipedia”.[18]

  1. Wikipedia renames Hinduism as Brahmanism [6] [archive]
  2. Wikipedia Anti-Hindu Manipulation at its finest. Literally hundreds of edits with the original version of bhajan Raghupati Raghav removed consistently, citing "No Sources" even though many were provided, and only showing the edited version by Gandhi that replaced Hindu Gods with Allah, Rahim, etc...[7] [archive]
  3. An editor who routinely censors anything that he believes represents "Islamophobia", such as facts about Islamic violence against women, or halal slaughter of animals, routinely makes hinduphobic claims, like that Hindus are responsible for river pollution ... [19]

Jai Shri Ram[edit]

  1. This is what @Wikipedia says: #JaiShriRam is used as a war cry for perpetrating communal atrocities on members of other faiths. Compare wikipedias articles for Allahu Akbar.[20]
  2. OpIndia reported on a wikipedia user who added an entire section to the article about ‘Jai Shree Ram’ that was titled ‘Usage’. In that, he has added the edit that says it has turned into a “murder cry”.[21]
  3. OpIndia reports on wikipedia: To essentially reduce the chant of Hindu reverence of Shri Ram to one that was “used by BJP during elections” is the ultimate insult to the faith of Hindus and is also deeply politically motivated. Further, the Wikipedia page also claims that the sacred chant of Jai Shri Ram is a ‘war cry’ that has been used to target Muslims in India. The Wikipedia page nowhere mentions that most of the cases where it was claimed by the media that Muslims were brutalised while Hindus chanted Jai Shri Ram turned out to be fake. Further, the brand a sacred chant for one community a ‘war cry’ is nothing but blatant Hinduphobia...[22]
  4. Just compare the pages of "Jai Shree Ram" with "Allahu Akbar".[23]

BLP, Biographies of living persons[edit]

The few BLPs of neutral or objective scholars that are not yet a POV mess are tagged with notices that declare that the article needs to be fixed (example [8] [archive]).

Even replies to criticism from the subject himself/herself are censored on wikipedia.

Anti hindu racism[edit]

Using smear words like Hindutva applied to Hindus

When the same happens about Muslims, it is complained:

"you repeatedly brought up a professor Brown's Muslim faith when trying to discredit him. An author's race, religion, gender, sexual orientation etc should never be a factor in their reliability. You questioned the reliability/neutrality of Muslim authors because they ""have a vested interest in trying to make their respective ideologies coherent and internally consistent."" [archive]

Christianity[edit]

The articles on the St. Thomas myth on wikipedia have been criticized by Ishwar Sharan and others for containing large amounts of pseudo-history, inaccuracies and falsehoods. [24] They disseminate Christian missionary propaganda and present myths as fact.

Islam[edit]

Islamic invasions[edit]

Hindupost reports : No wonder the HinduPost writer had difficulties in correcting the entry on Maharana Pratap, where one could insert the phrase “Reconquest of Mewar” only after much effort. The reader can himself try and insert well-known, well-supported facts on the page and see how soon these edits are reversed.[25]

Islamic iconoclasm and temple destruction[edit]

In the article Conversion of non-Islamic places of worship into mosques (this article documents the various non-Islamic places of worship which were converted to mosques), wikipedia users have removed the entire section on Ram Janmabhoomi from the article, and removed various other information on Hindu temples.[26]

There is an article for every mosque that was every destroyed, but only very rarely for destroyed temples. There is even the article "Demolition of the Babri Masjid" (in addition to the "Babri Masjid" article. There is no article about the demolition of a temple on wikipedia.

Riots[edit]

Noakhali genocide[edit]

OpIndia reported that the wikipedia page on Noakhali genocide, where Muslims massacred Hindus, was vandalised to show Muslims as victims.[27]

While this bias was reverted, because the vandalism was just a bit too obvious, many other biases in the same article and many other articles remain.

Godhra train burning terrorism[edit]

OpIndia reports: For example, in the Godhra Train burning article, which talks about Hindus being burnt alive by Muslims, an admin [archive] specifically removes edits that mentions the names of the ones convicted for burning Hindus alive. [28]

2020 Delhi Anti-Hindu Riots[edit]
  • https://twitter.com/lsanger/status/1301340344760578048 [archive] Larry Sanger on Twitter: "1/ I have learned that the people probably angriest at Wikipedia are Hindus. They are seriously upset that Wikipedia has, at least in their opinion, a thoroughly one-sided view of the Delhi Riots from last February, favoring the Muslims and blaming Hindus as instigators." / Twitter
  • There was a petition about the bias which said: In reality Hindus suffered badly from these riots , and one of the Hindu named Ankit Sharma was brutally murdered by a mob of different community in a nearby building owned by Tahir Hussain and was thrown in a nearby sewer ! Post Mortem report says he was stabbed by a sharp object more than 200 times ! [29]
  • Admins are whitewashing anti-Hindu violence and removing articles [archive] [9] [archive] [10] [archive] [11] [archive] from the template on Violence against Hindus in independent India (or removing the template from the articles). The very same admins are adding the templates of "Violence against Muslims in India" to articles on riots where the victims were both Hindus and Muslims (like 2002 Godhra riots, or 2020 Delhi riots) while removing the template about anti-Hindu violence. One admin writes: If someone added the other template (on anti-Hindu violence) it would be a problem, I agree [archive]. I do think the one you removed [archive] (about anti-Muslim violence) is needed, though. The Violence against Hindus template may be added as a reaction, but I don't think there will ever be consensus to keep it there; that's an argument that has been dealt with at other pages related to religious violence. [12] [archive]

Hindupost reports[30]:

Wikipedia editors’ bias against Hindus is an open secret. The riots in Delhi did not happen overnight – they have been in the work since December when Islamist mobs first resorted to violence in Seelampur, Jamia Nagar and other parts of Delhi. Other states like West Bengal, UP, Karnataka and UP also witnessed savage violence in name of anti-CAA protests in December. Hate speeches threatening every institution of our democracy – Parliament, Supreme Court – and warning of another partition have flooded all corners of the nation.
And over what? A law that offers refuge to some of the most brutally persecuted religious minorities that the whole world has callously ignored for decades. And a proposed national citizenship register program akin to what every civilized nation has in order to safeguard its territorial integrity and citizens’ rights vis a vis illegal aliens.
Islamists have formally announced their war against the Indian state through the anti-Hindu Delhi riots.

TFIPost reports that It is evident from the first line of the article that a certain whole community have been handed the victim card here and the Hindus are made the big-broody villain. The major bone of contention that many users have had with Wikipedia over the riots is assigning blame to the party privy of inciting the violence. The Wikipedia moderators have been very swift to pin the blame on BJP leaders like Kapil Mishra, Anurag Thakur, Parvesh Verma, and Abhay Verma but have been relatively mum on AIMIM’s Waris Pathan, so-called secular activist Harsh Mander, AAP’s henchman Tahir Hussain and even radio jockey Sayema[31].

TFI further reported:

When TFI earlier reported of Wikipedia’s biases, the article had at least a few mentions of Mohammed Shahrukh but as of today, the article does not have a single mention of the shooter’s name whereas Kapil Mishra’s name is routinely used in every sentence. The senior editor of the page, who is supposed to be politically neutral while editing and moderating content on Wikipedia, commented that if the man was a Hindu, media would not have focused on him, and there is no need to include more detail on the incident.
Wikipedia has dedicated an entire sub-topic of ‘Incitement of Violence’ on Kapil Mishra, it has completely omitted the role of AAP MLA Amanatullah Khan as the blame of the riots have been squarely been placed on Mishra’s ‘provocative’ speech on multiple occasions in the article. The moderator has even refused to entertain any mentions of the role of Amanatullah Khan. The article mentions the attack on a mosque in Ashok Nagar and shouting of “Jai Shri Ram” and “Hinduon ka Hindustan” slogans by the mobs, but have no reference to any attack by Muslims and anti-CAA mobs. On the other hand, while there are videos showing mob shouting “Nara e Taqbeer” and “Allahu Akbar”, but they find no place on the page... Wikipedia’s biased article on the riots drives the point home that leftists have infiltrated almost every notable institution to run their propaganda. [32]

OpIndia reported on many biases in the wikipedia article:

When one visits the page, the first image one sees is the photo of BJP leader Kapil Mishra, not an image of the riots. Kapil Mishra gets a separate section titled ‘incitement’ in the article, where he has been blamed for starting the riots...
Several editors on Wikipedia had asked to remove the Kapil Mishra’s photo from the article as he is not directly involved in the riots, and not proven guilty of any violence. But the senior editors, who have more rights then normal editors like preventing normal users from making edits in specific articles, overruled them, saying that he is the central figure in the riots. Being regular active users, senior users also develop personal coordination with Wikipedia administrators, who can block users from making edits in the website.
Interestingly, some people had reference to AAP leader Amanatullah Khan for his provocative speeches during anti-CAA riots earlier in Delhi and UP. But this was also removed by the moderators, claiming that although cases have been filed against Khan, those are not related to the North East Delhi riots.
On 24th, one anti-CAA protester had brandished a pistol and fired 8 shots towards pro-CAA protesters, who was identified as Mohammad Shahrukh. The Wiki page merely mentions him as a shooter, and does not even mention that he is from anti-CAA mob.
After the image of the Shahrukh firing had gone viral, anti-CAA activists had claimed he is pro-CAA, despite on the ground journalists who had posted the videos and images saying he was anti-CAA. Later high-resolution images had shown he was part of a mob which had several persons in skull caps. When other users wanted to include this information in the Wikipedia article, they were shot down by the moderator. The senior editor, who is supposed to be politically neutral while editing and moderating content on Wikipedia, commented that if the man was a Hindu, media would not have focused on him, and there is no need to include more detail on the incident.
The article mentions the attack on a mosque in Ashok Nagar and shouting of “Jai Shri Ram” and “Hinduon ka Hindustan” slogans by the mobs, but have absolutely no reference to any attack by Muslims and anti-CAA mobs. On the other hand, while there are videos showing mob shouting “Nara e Taqbeer” and “Allahu Akbar”, but they find no place on the page.[33]

In their next article about this bias, OpIndia reported:

During the anti-Hindu riots, several horror stories emerged. That of Ankit Sharma who was murdered by Islamists, Dilwar Singh Negi whose hands and legs were chopped off before he was burnt alive, Ratan Lal, a police officer killed during duty or even the fact that Hindu women said that Muslim mobs in Chand Bagh forced their minor daughters to take off their clothes and were sent back home naked. While the international media and media propagandists in India maliciously started branding the Delhi anti-Hindu riots into an anti-Muslim pogrom, a useful tool in spreading the propaganda was Wikipedia.

When one visits the page, the first image one sees is the photo of BJP leader Kapil Mishra, not an image of the riots. Kapil Mishra gets a separate section titled ‘incitement’ in the article, where he has been blamed for starting the riots.

Interestingly, some people had reference to AAP leader Amanatullah Khan for his provocative speeches during anti-CAA riots earlier in Delhi and UP. But this was also removed by the moderators, claiming that although cases have been filed against Khan, those are not related to the North East Delhi riots. On the 24th, one anti-CAA protester had brandished a pistol and fired 8 shots towards pro-CAA protesters, who was identified as Mohammad Shahrukh. The Wiki page merely mentions him as a shooter and does not even mention that he is from an anti-CAA mob.

After the image of Shahrukh, the firing had gone viral, anti-CAA activists had claimed he is pro-CAA, despite journalists on the ground who had posted videos and images saying he was anti-CAA. Later, high-resolution images had shown he was part of a mob that had several persons in skull caps. When other users wanted to include this information in the Wikipedia article, they were shot down by the moderator. The senior editor, who is supposed to be politically neutral while editing and moderating content on Wikipedia, commented that if the man was a Hindu, media would not have focused on him, and there is no need to include more detail on the incident.

The article mentions the attack on a mosque in Ashok Nagar and shouting of “Jai Shri Ram” and “Hinduon ka Hindustan” slogans by the mobs, but have absolutely no reference to any attack by Muslims and anti-CAA mobs. On the other hand, while there are videos showing mob shouting “Nara e Taqbeer” and “Allahu Akbar”, they find no place on the page.[34]

OpIndia in the same article then focused on the edits of one user in the article:

For example, he (a wikipedia user) refused to allow the Jaffrabad’s shooter’s name, identified as Shahrukh. He said such shootings happen often in riots and that Shahrukh was being singled out and named because he was a Muslim.

When the conversation revolved around the addition of Kapil Mishra as the sole ‘Lead Figure’ of the Delhi riots, he refused to add Waris Pathan’s speech as one of the instigators of the riots. He said that he could not find anything provocative in Waris Pathan’s speech. It is worthy to note here that Waris had openly incited mobs and said that 15 crores Muslims can overpower Hindus.

The user, Deepesh Raj, also claimed that Tahir Hussain, the AAP leader who led an Islamist mob that tortured and murdered IB sleuth Ankit Sharma was being framed.

Further, he says that Tahir Hussain cannot be mentioned until he is convicted by a court of law. It is pertinent to mention here that Kapil Mishra has been made the face of the riots based on nothing but propaganda. He also says that such “allegations” cannot be made against Tahir Hussain.

He further refuses to add Tahir’s name saying that just like other AAP leaders “despite being framed by the police” have been exonerated, Tahir might be too. And hence, his reference is not to be added.

In fact, he even says that Ankit Sharma, who was stabbed 400 times and was tortured to death “was not notable enough” to be mentioned in the Wikipedia article.

There are several other issues with the article. Like the crimes committed by Muslim mobs missing, the glaring bias and even him holding Ankit Sharma’s family responsible for “changing their statement” as if by force. This was in reference to the Wall Street Journal misquoting Ankit Shamra’s brother, Ankur Sharma. Ankur repeatedly asserted thereafter that he had never said that the murderers of his brother chanted Jai Shree Ram.

He removed the reference of Ishrat Janan, the Congress leader who has been arrested for inciting violence.[35]

2020 Bengaluru Anti-Hindu Riots[edit]

Opindia reports that Somebody asks (on the talkpage) why the religion of the rioters is not being highlighted properly in the Bengaluru article just like it was in the case of Delhi riots? The stock reply comes from other editors in the form of a question: Which (media) source clearly mentions the religion of the rioters? Are multiple third party sources stating the religion of the rioters?[36]

This highlights the problem that due to accusations of Islamophobia by the Islamophobia industry, the MSM hides and whitewashes essential facts. And due to either stupidity or cowardice of the Indian people, it gets away with it.

Ram Navami riots[edit]

The article claims Hindus have "weaponised" this Hindu festival, that Rama has been "weaponised" and that Hindus are the cause of the Hindu-Muslim riots and Muslims the only victims. [13] [archive]

Grooming Jihad[edit]

Hindupost reports: Grooming has been a major issue with reports emerging from all over the country highlighting how Hindu girls are being trapped by Islamists pretending to be Hindus. However, Wikipedia conveniently dismisses such concerns terming grooming jihad a ‘conspiracy‘ by Hindus but the site claims that the reverse is true. Furthermore, the site has been locked by its editors and moderators to prevent users from making changes to the faulty data.[37]

TFI condemned how wikipedia in the Love Jihad article mocked the sufferings of the Hindu girls and TFI sarcastically says: So, if a girl is kidnapped, she is raped and subsequently murdered, this is nothing but an attempt to defame the Islamic community. By this logic, the murders of women like Hina Talreja are tantamount to Islamophobia, the mention of Direct Action Day would amount to Islamophobia, and the portrayal of Love Jihad in the webseries ‘Family Man’ will also amount to Islamophobia.[38]

OpIndia reports:

For thousands, if not lakhs of non-Muslim women in India, Love Jihad is a grim and disconcerting reality, but not for online platform Wikipedia that intends to wish away the sufferings of these women as a fictional concept.
In order to lend credence to its assertion that Love Jihad is not a real phenomenon, the Wikipedia page equated it with western theories of Jewish world domination, white nationalism and Euro-American Islamophobia. The page said Love Jihad depicted Oriental portrayal of Muslims as being barbaric and hypersexual.
, Wikipedia is attempting to whitewash the scourge that has afflicted thousands of women in India, many of whom are not even alive, simply because they were killed by the assailants for going against them and resisting their forced conversion to Islam.
. Instead of being a neutral page that an encyclopaedia is supposed to be, the page on Love Jihad presents a highly biased Islamist viewpoint, the the article reading more like an op-ed published on an Islamist left liberal publication than a genuine crowd-sourced encyclopaedia page.
With this, Wikipedia is trying to completely dismiss the crime of Grooming Jihad or Love Jihad using its power and influence. It is notable that when one searches for ‘Love Jihad’ on Google, the Wikipedia definition for the term appears on the top of the search results. Thus, the Internet giants are spreading a faulty and highly problematic definition of the term, and tries to dismiss an alarming and real problem taking place in India.
The Islamist Wikipedia editors and moderators have also locked the page to prevent netizens from making corrections to the page. The page has been made extended confirmed protected, which means people with only extended confirmed status can edit it. The talk page of the page shows that a large number of people have objected to the portrayal of the phenomenon on it, but the moderators overruled them, reverted any edits made contrary to the claim made by the page, and locked it so that most people can’t edit it.
Even as Wikipedia labels Love Jihad as a conspiracy theory concocted by the Hindutva supporters, and ipso facto dismiss the trials and tribulations faced by thousands of its victims, it describes the phenomenon of ‘reverse Love Jihad’ as an “organised movement” carried out by right-wing groups.
So in essence, Wikipedia dismisses the phenomenon of Love Jihad but it does recognise the existence of reverse Love Jihad. For Wikipedia, the phenomenon of Love Jihad exists only when the victims are Muslims. When they are Hindus, Christians, Jews or adherents of any other religion, the concept of Love Jihad becomes a contrived notion, created with the express purpose of vilifying Muslims.
This hypocrisy of acknowledging reverse Love Jihad but brushing off Love Jihad as a fabricated theory encapsulates the treachery of Wikipedia. The recognition of Love Jihad as a real phenomenon when the victims are Muslims and not otherwise betrays that the online encyclopedia is pushing the propaganda peddled by Islamists to feign victimhood and accuse victims of being assailants. When Islamists are caught in the act, they shield themselves by accusing others of Islamophobia. Wikipedia seems to have pulled a trick out of the Islamists’ playbook when it labels Love Jihad as a figment of imagination when the victims are non-Muslims and characterising it as an organised phenomenon when the victims are Muslims. [39]

Kashmir[edit]

Hindupost and other media reported: the online encyclopedia had also been called for depicting a wrong map of Jammu & Kashmir.[40][41][42]

Example of editor removing almost all mention of Hindu, Sikh and Buddhist history in Kashmir [14] [archive] [15] [archive] [16] [archive]

Here is a rare example of self-awareness of wikipedia bias in the Genocide of Kashmiri Hindus [archive] article

Negationism[edit]

Double standards[edit]

Wiki Pravda has an article on Demolition of the Babri Masjid, but not a single article about a demolition of a Hindu or Buddhist or Jain or Sikh temple.

Wiki Pravda has articles [17] [archive] (and templates [18] [archive] and categories [19] [archive]) with the titles Violence against Muslims in India and Violence against Christians in India but no articles with similar article titles on any other country. Does violence only exist in India? There are also no articles with the title Violence against Hindus/Buddhist articles in any country, even though such violence exists even within India. Wikipedia has also the article "Persecution of Muslims in Myanmar", but all articles about the West are called Islamophobia, like "Islamophobia in Australia " (see [20] [archive]) Is this Anti-Indian/Anti-Asian racism? OTOH, similar propaganda articles [archive] have been deleted on wikipedia.

For example the wikipedia article "Child abuse" contains a picture of an Indian girl allegedly hurt by a bomb from "Saffron terrorism", but the article contains no pictures of the much more frequent Hindu (or for that matter, Christian) victims of Grooming Jihad.

In general, every persecution of Hindus is minimized, whitewashed or censored. (Examples: Genocide of Kashmiri Hindus, Godhra train terror attack) But in many articles, Hindus are blackened for alleged persecutions of Muslims that in many cases are actually hoaxes or cases where Hindus were also or even the pre-dominant victims) (Examples : 2022 Delhi Anti Hindu riots and many other riots).

Hindu personalities and politicians[edit]

Human rights[edit]

Hindu human rights are slandered on wikpedia so much that an article on a Hindu human rights group is "now completely looking like it is a neo-nazi organization" [archive] and " most of the information in this article is focused on negative news" [archive]

  1. In 2021, the article for Hindu Human Rights was nominated for deletion. This was part of a wider campaign to cancel the Hindu Human Rights group, and to promote the anti-Hindu hate group (according to many critics) "Hindus for Human rights".[43]

Bias against Hindu politicians and organizations[edit]

  • Bias against Hindu American Foundation compared to Indian American Muslim Council[44]
  • Bias against Hindu University of America

Modi[edit]

See Examples of Bias in Wikipedia: Character assassination

BJP[edit]

OpIndia reported that wikipedia editors have requested the deletion of the article on Bhartiya Janta Yuva Morcha, the youth wing of the BJP.[45]

RSS[edit]

RSS and Hindu politicians and parties are often branded as fascist nazi on wikipedia.[46]

Arts and music[edit]

  1. An extremely significant contribution by India is the "classification of musical instruments". Wikipedia very brazenly tells us: [.......] The claim that this classification was done by Mahillon, Sachs, or Hornbostel is an extremely fraudulent claim (a glaring example of the western "digestion" of Indian sciences and presentation of Indian ideas as western discoveries or inventions, so consistently highlighted by Rajiv Malhotra), and they very clearly simply lifted the ancient Indian system of classification of musical instruments from the time of Bharata's Natya Shastra (pre-500 BCE) into four categories: 1. Ghaṇa vādya: idiophonic instruments. 2. Avanaddha vādya: membranophonic instruments. 3. Tata vādya, chordophonic instruments.4. Suṣira vādya: aerophonic instruments.[21] [archive]

Ethnic and racial bias[edit]

Internet policies[edit]

  1. Wikipedia engages in censorship of points of view that they disapprove of. In 2020, Wikipedia decided it would no longer accept Swarajya Magazine and OpIndia, based in India, as a reliable source, or even only as an external link. Wikipedia also discriminates against other Hindu sources, such as Republic World despite allowing anti-Hindu media sources that promote fake news as sources. Additionally, using sources even like Dharmapedia is discouraged at the least. Even citing Dharma Dispatch is discouraged. Due to its anti-Hindu sourcing policies, Wikipedia has an inherent anti-Hindu bias as the anti-Hindu mainstream media sources (along with blatantly anti-Hindu publications that are not challenged, unlike Hindu outlets) are considered factually correct and the most reliable in the eyes of Wikipedia editors.

Journalists and media[edit]

TFIPost has reported that the Wikipedia page of OpIndia, in the very introduction, says that the website has on multiple occasions spread fake news. Similarly, Arnab Goswami’s page too seems to have been edited by someone with a heavy bias against the star-journalist and aims at undermining Goswami.[47]

OpIndia reported: the OpIndia page on Wikipedia is negative because OpIndia dared to challenge the ecosystem and the foot-soldiers of the ecosystem decided to hit back at us.
The OpIndia page on Wikipedia has been created and edited by an ecosystem that the OpIndia went after and exposed, time and again.[48]

Anti-Hindu politicians[edit]

Science[edit]

Fringe[edit]

Conspiracy theories[edit]

Politics[edit]

Claims of "Hindu fascism"[edit]

  • Many examples of editors trying to link Hindu nationalism (or Hindus like Swami Dayananda) with fundamentalism, fascism, the far right, "propaganda", and similar. (See articles like RSS, Golwakar, BJP, etc)
  • A lot of these editors cite or are influenced by writers like Michael Witzel, Meera Nanda, Martha Nussbaum etc.
  • Example [archive]
  • Compare the negative portrayal of Hindu Nationalism v/s the neutral portrayal of Muslim Nationalism, Black Nationalism and Jewish Nationalism.Only Hindu Nationalism is described as Fascist, Right-wing, Extremely Conservative, and as Ethnic Absolutism. Other nationalisms are described in sympathetic terms, highlighting their purpose in preserving cultural heritage.[49]

General articles on fascism[edit]

The high level article "fascism" as one would expect doesn't mention Indian politics. There is no nonsense like BJP and RSS are fascist parties in the article "Fascism" or "Neofascism". That sort of pseudoscience from Indian social sciences is apparently not scholarly enough to be included in these global overview articles.

The article on Adolf Hitler's religious views notes quite correctly the following (confirming that the Nazis believed in the Aryan invasion theory):

Hitler's choice of the Swastika as the Nazis' main and official symbol was linked to the belief in the Aryan cultural descent of the German people. They considered the early Aryans of India to be the prototypical white invaders and the sign of the Swastika to be a symbol of the Aryan master race.[195] The theory was inspired by the German archaeologist Gustaf Kossinna,[196] who argued that the ancient Aryans were a superior Nordic race from northern Germany who expanded into the steppes of Eurasia, and from there into India, where they established the Vedic religion. [22] [archive]

However, in previous versions of the Fascism article, the wikipedia article included the RSS in the "See also" section, alongside with the articles on "Stormfront", "American Nazi Party", and "Ku Klux Klan". [23] [archive] Old version of wikipedia

The article Neo-Nazism includes some very dubious claims [24] [archive]:

  • It claims "right wing people" in India use the swastika as a "propaganda tool".
  • It includes a dubious quote by Savarkar (such Nazi claims about Savarkar have been refuted in the works of Koenraad Elst, esp. The Saffron Swastika)

Fascism and Christianity/Islam[edit]

The wikipedia article "Neo-fascism and religion", which existed in wikipedia for many years, was deleted from wikipedia, probably because some wikipedians were uncomfortable with fascism links to Christianity and Islam.

Linking Hindu politics with Fascism[edit]

However, the picture is different when it comes to articles about Indian politics. Here there is more obvious bias regarding Indian politics.

Starting with the categories, one notes the following:


Some wikipedians have tried to put the following persons into the category “Indian fascists”: M. S. Golwalkar: Difference between revisions - Wikipedia Vinayak Damodar Savarkar: Difference between revisions - Wikipedia K. B. Hedgewar: Difference between revisions - Wikipedia

General articles on Indian politics[edit]

Old version of wikipedia


Hindutva[edit]



  • http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hindutva&diff=prev&oldid=111849531 [archive] Central concepts of Hindutva surround [ [ National mysticism ] ] and the notion of "[ [ Indigenous Aryans ] ]"...These notions correspond to an [ [ irredentist ] ] and [ [ jingoist ] ] stance in questions of contemporary [ [ Indian politics ] ]...* emphasizing historical oppression of [ [ Hindu ] ]s...and the call to "reverse" the influence resulting from these intrusions...* denunciation of [ [ British colonialism ] ] and [ [ Communism ] ] alike for a perceived weakening of [ [ Hindu ] ]s...* The irredentist call...* denunciation of the [ [ Government of India|Indian government ] ] as too passive Old version of wikipedia
Arya Samaj[edit]
  • [25] [archive] The doctrines of Arya Samaj are identified as [ [ religious fundamentalism ] ] . [ [ :Category:Fundamentalism ] ] Old version of wikipedia


  • [26] [archive] Old version of wikipedia Claims of “fundamentalism”
BJP and Narendra Modi article[edit]
  • http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:India&diff=next&oldid=104627136 [archive] Your BJP example might be a little disingenious, but fwiiw, I agree we shouldn't waste space on heaping up adjectives. BJP is notable for being nationalist far-right. That's 21 characters, and if we're going to mention BJP at all, these 21 characters are well invested for pointing out why we do. As it is, the politics section doesn't make clear the nature of the BJP intermezzo. [ [ User:Dbachmann|dab ] ] [ [ User_talk:Dbachmann|(𒁳) ] ] 18:04, 31 January 2007 (UTC)Comment:Far right? Old version of wikipedia
RSS[edit]
  • For a long time, the lead also called it an "extremist organization". [27] [archive]
  • There are also "extremism" allegations in the rest of the article.

The article Fascism in India is now a redirect to RSS, previously it was a stand alone article that included some accusations of fascism against the RSS [28] [archive]

There are many more fascism allegations against the RSS on various wiki talkpages.

VHP[edit]


Shiv Sena[edit]

Linking Hinduism with Western fascism[edit]

Claims that Vedic India was racist[edit]

  • -Rigveda (for example, colonial-era claims of racism in the Rigveda/Ancient India were (previously) in articles)

One wiki admin was constantly inserting the following claims about Indra in the RigVeda in wiki articles. Such claims (racialist interpretations of the Rigveda) have been refuted in e.g. the book "Aryan and Non-Aryan in South Asia" and other books.

  • [29] [archive] Old version of wikipedia "sadly, this article is very, very, far from being encyclopedic or even factual. It's a sermon. An eulogy. I made a few edits, but they do very little. The Vedas don't condone discrimination? Varna has nothing to do with skin color? I believe that many Hindus believe so (and this may of course be asserted), but that's just because most Hindus have never actually read the vedas, or if they have, they didn't bother to translate. The Rigveda, for example (9.73.5) talks about the blowing away with supernatural might from earth and from the heavens the swarthy skin which Indra hates."
  • And in the Indo-Aryan migration article the same wiki admin writes a paragraph claiming that the RigVeda was racialist:

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Indo-Aryan_migration&diff=21558098&oldid=21557041#Rigveda [archive] Old version of wikipedia]

The same wiki admin removes facts that go against such a racial theory:[30] [archive] Old version of wikipedia However, such colonial era claims are still popular in sections of the European far right.

Defamation with fascism smears[edit]

"New Right, unite! Further information: Aryan_Invasion_Theory_%28history_and_controversies%29 § Later_racialised_theories"
"it is very funny to see Alain de Benoist and Subhash Kak united as contributors in a racist/nationalist journal: their outlook is really comparable, ethnic nationalism paired with mythic fantasies of noble "Aryan" forbears, just that Benoist of course places the Proto-Indo-Europeans in Europe, while Kak places them in India, each implying, I suppose, concentric circles of racial degradation around the original homeland. This makes them 100% related in terms of their mindset, and 100% opposed in its application to geography [ [ User:Dbachmann|dab ] ] [ [ User_talk:Dbachmann|(𒁳) ] ] 14:22, 22 February 2007 (UTC)"

Defamation with fascism smears: BLP article example[edit]

  • https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Koenraad_Elst/Archive_1#Synthesis [archive] : Again smears Elst as a Fascist: “you say "synthesis" but what you mean is that you are going to nitpick until you successfully obfuscate the fact that Elst has his sympathies equally divided between Neo-Fascism, Flemish nationalist Islamophobia and Hindu nationalism. --dab 12:35, 20 July 2009 (UTC)”


  • Elst has responded to these allegations on his blog:

Breivik[edit]

The wiki article on Breivik contains this sentence: Neoconservative blogger Pamela Geller,[218] Neo-pagan writer Koenraad Elst[219] and Daniel Pipes are also mentioned as sources of inspiration.

This is wrong and wikipedia is propagating falsehoods.

The timeline of events was:

Breivik’s manifesto contains a massive compilation of blog articles from various authors and bloggers. Two of these blog articles only cite Elst among many others. (see article by Elst in Brussels Journal) A wikipedia editor writes that Breivik mentions Elst as a source of inspiration (which is wrong, see point 1). Meera Nanda (very probably) uses wikipedia as a source for a paper in which she links Elst (and Hindutva and Voice of India) with Breivik. See her article “Ideological Convergences: Hindutva and the Norway Massacre” Other authors continue to use Meera Nandas misleading work and/or Wikipedia when discussing Hindu revivalism. Searching google, one can see that some other authors have then used the allegation from wikipedia and Meera Nanda that there is a Elst/Hindutva-Breivik link.

Thus the falsehood gets propagated first from wikipedia, from there to Meera Nanda and so on...

Some wikipedia editors went completely crazy and tried to write that Breivik was a Hindu and that Hindutva was the main motive for his attack!

See:

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Anders_Behring_Breivik&diff=prev&oldid=441730981 [archive]

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents&diff=prev&oldid=441732220#Anders_Behring_Breivik [archive]

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions/Johnmylove&offset=&limit=500&target=Johnmylove [archive]

Bias from wiki administrators[edit]

Examples of claims of Hindu fascism by anti-Hindu wikipedian admins:

  • http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Dbachmann&diff=prev&oldid=79618625 [archive] Old version of wikipedia When I use the term [ [ Hindutva ] ] I am referring to the fanatical/fundamentalist [ [ national mysticism|national mysticists ] ]. "Hindutva" is a recent and artificial term and refers to precisely this attitude, combining Hinduism with extremist right-wing nationalist politics: The relation of Hindu to Hindutva is about the same as [ [ Islam ] ] to [ [ Islamism ] ]
  • http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Dbachmann/Parliamentary_nationalism [archive] Wiki admin makes a list that attempts to show that India has the most nationalists in any country. He does this by including moderate center-right parties (BJP, wich was the ruling party some years ago) for India, while for all other countries he only includes extreme far-right parties without any of the other rightist and conservative parties. No wonder then that in Dab's statistic countries which are effectively ruled by a right-wing goverenment like Berlusconi's Italy rank lower than India.) If he wouldn't lie that much with his "statistics", the list would look very different.

Other topics[edit]

Godhra train burning and Gujarat riots[edit]

Due to editors like this admin [archive], the article suggests or implicates that the train burning attack was or could have been an "accident", that the riots were pre-planned and there was state complicity, etc., based on biased and outdated references like Martha Nussbaum. This is then repeated in articles like "Narendra Modi" and "BJP".

  • This is a current topic. The argument from wikipedia editors is that sources like Martha Nussbaum should take precedence over other sources. It has been discussed at talkpages several times.

Persecution of Hindus, Anti-Hinduism[edit]

Personal attacks[edit]

Aryan invasion theory articles[edit]

California textbook controversy[edit]

  • This is a bit of an older topic, but still relevant.


Topic about deletion and censorship at wikipedia[edit]

Biographies of living persons[edit]

  • Many pro-Hindu authors were viciously attacked and defamed on wikipedia over the years. A good example is Koenraad Elst, and also Subhash Kak, David Frawley, Nicholas Kazanas, etc. Related to this, the publishing house Voice of India was also the victim of defamation on wikipedia.
  • This could also be compared to articles of anti-Hindu historians and writers like Romila Thapar, Michael Witzel, etc. which the same editors have protected from any criticism.

Projection[edit]

Many wikipedia articles are an exercise of projection :

  • the projection of Muslim misogyny onto Hindus (the wikipedia article Love jihad claims it is a conspiracy theory, the same article suggests claims of "reverse Love Jihad [archive]" by Hindus are real!)
  • the projection of Islamic iconoclasm onto Hindus (some wikipedia articles push the propaganda of "Hindu iconoclasm")
  • the projection of Islamic terrorism on Hindus (viz the wikipedia article Hindu terrorism)

General/Uncategorized[edit]

Missing articles[edit]

Wikipedia has articles with titles like "Violence against Muslims in India", but no corresponding articles with a title like "Violence against Hindus in India".

Wikipedia has articles with titles like "Demolition of the Babri Masjid" but no articles with titles like "Demolition of Somnath temple" (or about the demolition any other temple, or about the demolition of any church for that matter).[50]

Wikipedia has an article titled "Islamophobia", but no article titled Hinduphobia.

Articles in certain areas (political, historical, or simply fringe or nerdy subjects) have been deleted, often systematically, often by politically motivated pov warriors.

Double standards in applying wikipedia policies or guidelines[edit]

The "Hindutva Harassment Field Manual", a self-published, non-peer reviewed and (for wikipedia most importantly) anti-Hindu source is cited in wikipedia, but pro-Hindu sources that are non-peer reviewed or self published cannot be cited. [36] [archive]

Good or Featured articles[edit]

Good or Featured articles at wikipedia give the illusion of being objective as one would expect in a "normal" encyclopedia, despite having strong biases and false claims.

Some biased editors like this admin [archive] or Darkness Shines were nominating very biased articles to GA/FA status.

Examples of GA/FA articles with bias issues:

  • India (article bias in large part due to wikipedia user Fowler [archive])
  • Narendra Modi (article bias in large part due to an admin [archive])
  • BJP (article bias in large part due to an admin [archive])
  • Pakistan (claims that Pakistan was islamised trough "peaceful" Sufism)
  • Hyderabad
  • Flag of India
  • Political integration of India

Wikipedia doublespeak[edit]

Issue Wikipravda stamp of approval Forbidden & Wiki-censored

Wiki Ministry of Truth Approval

Wikipravda Censored

Spot the contradiction!
Wikipedia redirects [archive] about "genocide" "Gujarat genocide" should redirect to 2002 Godhra riots.
Issues: Just the city of Godhra alone had riots in the years 1925, 1928, 1946, 1948, 1950, 1953, 1980, 1981, 1985, 1986, 1988, 1989, 1990, 1991, and 1992. Why single out this article for the redirect? Or why not redirect it to the bloody invasions of Ulugh Khan, Mahmud of Ghazni, Muhammad Ghuri and Qutbu'd-Din Aibak in Gujarat? It also plays into the conspiracy theories, promoted on wikipedia, that the riots were pre-planned and orchestrated by Narendra Modi and BJP, that Muslims were the only victims in a "genocide" (one third of the deaths were Hindus), and that the riots were started by Hindus after they deliberately set themselves on fire using perfidious mass suicide to start the riots. The fact that the riots were started with the terrorist attack in Godhra is whitewashed on wikipedia.

A comment from Colobel Nanda Kumar: "Despite the Gujarat riots, not even 100 Muslims migrated from there to any other corner of India.But after the massacre of Hindus in the valley of Srinagar, 5 lakh people have not been able to return to the valley till today. Despite this, Wikipedia calls Gujarat a genocide time and again, not Srinagar! 𝙏𝙝𝙞𝙨 𝙞𝙨 𝙘𝙖𝙡𝙡𝙚𝙙 𝙨𝙚𝙩𝙩𝙞𝙣𝙜 𝙩𝙝𝙚 𝙣𝙖𝙧𝙧𝙖𝙩𝙞𝙫𝙚. 		The redirect Genocide of Kashmiri Hindus should not be allowed to exist.
The redirect Genocide in Kashmir should not redirect to the article about the Genocide of Kashmiri Hindus, but to an article about alleged human rights abuses by the Indian army in their "war against terrorism" in Kashmir.
Unlike a riot, the cultural and ethnic genocide of Kashmiri Hindus was actually a genocide: the Hindus and Hinduism was displaced from Kashmir.
Allowed and disallowed articles While wikipedia has an article about the "Demolition of the Babri Masjid", because it can be portrayed as "Islamophobia", Wikipedia has no articles about the destruction of a temple (even though there were many thousands of temple destructions, but only a handful of mosque destructions) Wikipravda has not a single article about a demolition of a Hindu or Buddhist or Jain or Sikh temple.
There is no article called "Demolition of the Somnath temple", but on the talkpage of the Somnath temple article, the wikipedia editors complain that they find descriptions of the destruction of the temple "extremely distressing"[51]
most temple destructions are simply whitewashed and censored on wikipedia, starting with the articles on Ram Janmabhoomi
Allowed sources The "Hindutva Harassment Field Manual", a self-published, non-peer reviewed and (for wikipedia most importantly) anti-Hindu source is cited in wikipedia, but pro-Hindu sources that are non-peer reviewed or self published cannot be cited. [37] [archive] A pro-Hindu self-published source would never be allowed on wikipedia.
Character assassinations Attacks against Hindus are detailed in lengthy sections in articles on Hindus, but in articles about anti-Hindus, any criticism should be removed because they allegedly are "undue emphasis" [archive]. Attacks against Hindus are always ok on wikipedia
Indians (and Pakistani Hindus) should not be allowed to edit Pakistan articles (but Indophobes should manage the India articles) The same editor who believes Indians should not edit Pakistan articles is of course "allowed" to "manage" [archive] India articles (he thinks he owns articles like "India" and many others), even though he has been called out for his Indophobic and hinduphobic bias many times [archive]. (Wikipedia user Fowler [archive] admits he "manages" the India [archive] article (among other articles), believes he "owns" the article and he attacks those editing with different views). Indians should not be allowed to edit Pakistan articles because they are biased:

"India-POV-promoting editors have been relentlessly editing Pakistan-related pages, promoting Hindu majoritarian- (or anti-Pakistan) POV. It is toxic, utterly, and shamefully toxic. They don't know anything about Pakistan, but because the Pakistani editors on Wikipedia are exhausted, tired, and unable to counter, the Indians or India-POVers are getting away/ They promote cultural irredentism. They claim Pakistan by some fantasy of Indian reunification, claiming Pakistanis, who are Muslim, as converted Hindus, or rubbing this in by whatever it takes. Someone has to come to the Pakistani's defense. I am the author of the FA India and the prime author of the History of Pakistan, Kashmir, British Raj, Company rule in India, Indus Valley Civilization, Partition of India, Indian rebellion of 1857, in other words, most things in Indian history that have anything to do with the current impasse between India and Pakistan. Do they really think I don't know what is going on here? I do think that Indian (i.e. India-POV promoting) editors have swamped Pakistani pages. Arbcom needs to take another look at India-Pakistan 1RR etc does nothing because there are many more Indian editors than Pakistani. Consequently, many Pakistan-related pages are no longer neutral, the faults on average lying at the doorsteps of the Indians.[52]

"Hindu terrorism" : Categorizing as "Hindu terrorism" incidents that were for political reasons blamed on Hindus while in reality being perpetrated by Muslims: [38] [archive] [39] [archive]"Hindu terrorism" clearly isn't about a neologism [archive] [40] [archive] Categorizing as "propaganda" films against terrorism: [41] [archive] [42] [archive] [43] [archive] Islamic terrorism : "Terrorism has no religion" [archive]

See also[edit]

Links[edit]

These links are being provided as a convenience and for informational or entertainment purposes only; they do not constitute an endorsement or an approval by Dharmapedia of any of the products, services or opinions of the corporation or organization or individual. Dharmapedia bears no responsibility for the accuracy, legality or content of the external site or for that of subsequent links. Contact the external site for answers to questions regarding its content.
  1. ↑ https://twitter.com/lsanger/status/1301340344760578048 [archive]
  2. ↑ https://www.opindia.com/2020/11/caravan-magazine-questions-opindia-wikipedia-coverage-full-response/ [archive]
  3. ↑ http://www.msxnet.org/orwell/1984 [archive]
  4. ↑ https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Anti-Hindu_sentiment&oldid=1078346625#Hinduphobia_as_section_title [archive]
  5. ↑ "Islamic terrorism" [archive]. Wikipedia. January 18, 2010. Retrieved December 26, 2012.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  6. ↑ https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Christianity_and_violence&oldid=526775071 [archive]
  7. ↑ https://www.conservapedia.com/Examples_of_Bias_in_Wikipedia:_Anti-Christianity [archive]
  8. ↑ https://www.nysun.com/article/29080 [archive]
  9. ↑ https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&page=Sudden+Jihad+Syndrome [archive]
  10. ↑ http://www.thecourier.com/opinion/editoral/ar_ED_021607.asp [archive]
  11. ↑ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Sudden_Jihad_Syndrome [archive]
  12. ↑ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Sudden_jihad_syndrome [archive]
  13. ↑ http://washingtontimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080102/NATION/203823370/1001 [archive]
  14. ↑ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Miscellany_for_deletion/User:CltFn/Sudden_Jihad_Syndrome [archive]
  15. ↑ https://www.scaruffi.com/politics/wikipedi.html [archive]
  16. ↑ https://www.scaruffi.com/politics/wikipedi.html [archive]
  17. ↑ https://web.archive.org/web/20170714212418/https://ishwarsharan.wordpress.com/appendix/encyclopaedia-britannica-wikipedia-their-counterfeit-st-thomas-entries-exposed-ishwar-sharan/ [archive]
  18. ↑ https://hindupost.in/media/wikipedia-war-and-bias-against-hindus/ [archive]
  19. ↑ https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Ganges&diff=424945543&oldid=424944546 [archive]
  20. ↑ https://www.theaugust.com/current/nupur-j-sharma-wikipedia-fight/ [archive]
  21. ↑ https://www.opindia.com/2020/03/delhi-anti-hindu-riots-wikipedia-bias-edits-dbigxray-investigation/ [archive]
  22. ↑ https://www.opindia.com/2020/07/the-saga-of-wikipedia-bias-continues-jai-shri-ram-is-a-war-cry/#google_vignette [archive]
  23. ↑ https://twitter.com/JustHeretic014/status/1690747545205805056 [archive]
  24. ↑ *Encyclopaedias Britannica & Wikipedia: Their Counterfeit St. Thomas Entries Exposed – Ishwar Sharan – Ishwar Sharan [archive]
  25. ↑ https://hindupost.in/media/wikipedia-war-and-bias-against-hindus/ [archive]
  26. ↑ https://www.opindia.com/2020/04/wikipedia-rss-page-vandalised-hindu-terrorist-organisation-islamist-editor/ [archive]
  27. ↑ https://www.opindia.com/2020/04/noakhali-riots-wikipedia-page-vandalised-exchange-hindu-muslim/ [archive]
  28. ↑ https://www.opindia.com/2021/02/pm-narendra-modi-wikipedia-left-edit-investigation/ [archive]
  29. ↑ https://www.change.org/p/prime-minister-of-india-hinduphobia-shown-by-wikipedia-by-displaying-false-information-about-delhi-riots-of-2020 [archive]
  30. ↑ https://hindupost.in/media/wikipedia-refuses-to-include-violence-by-muslims-in-its-article-on-the-delhi-riots/ [archive]
  31. ↑ https://tfipost.com/2020/03/war-over-wikipedia-page-how-wiki-page-of-delhi-riots-became-a-platform-for-a-heated-information-battle/ [archive]
  32. ↑ https://tfipost.com/2020/03/war-over-wikipedia-page-how-wiki-page-of-delhi-riots-became-a-platform-for-a-heated-information-battle/ [archive]
  33. ↑ https://www.opindia.com/2020/02/delhi-riots-wikipedia-article-biased-anti-hindu/ [archive]
  34. ↑ https://www.opindia.com/2020/03/delhi-anti-hindu-riots-wikipedia-bias-edits-dbigxray-investigation/ [archive]
  35. ↑ https://www.opindia.com/2020/03/delhi-anti-hindu-riots-wikipedia-bias-edits-dbigxray-investigation/ [archive]
  36. ↑ https://www.opindia.com/2020/08/bengaluru-riots-wikipedia-indian-secularism-muslim-rioters-religion-bias-violence/ [archive]
  37. ↑ https://hindupost.in/media/wikipedia-war-and-bias-against-hindus/ [archive]
  38. ↑ https://tfipost.com/2021/06/love-jihad-is-not-real-but-reverse-love-jihad-by-hindus-is-concerning-wikipedias-absolutely-clear-take/ [archive]
  39. ↑ https://www.opindia.com/2021/06/wikipedia-dismisses-love-jihad-as-a-conspiracy-theory-by-hindus/ [archive]
  40. ↑ https://hindupost.in/media/wikipedia-war-and-bias-against-hindus/ [archive]
  41. ↑ https://tfipost.com/2020/12/indian-government-tells-wikipedia-to-respect-indias-sovereignty-or-get-banned-in-india/ [archive]
  42. ↑ https://www.opindia.com/2020/12/govt-of-india-orders-wikipedia-to-remove-wrong-map-of-jammu-and-kashmir/ [archive]
  43. ↑ https://www.hinduhumanrights.info/hindus-for-human-rights-stole-hhr-google-knowledge-panel/ [archive]
  44. ↑ https://twitter.com/stitha_pragna/status/1690944173233569795 [archive]
  45. ↑ https://www.opindia.com/2020/03/delhi-anti-hindu-riots-wikipedia-bias-edits-dbigxray-investigation/ [archive]
  46. ↑ https://www.opindia.com/2020/04/wikipedia-rss-page-vandalised-hindu-terrorist-organisation-islamist-editor/ [archive]
  47. ↑ A Shady Wikipedia user is targeting right-wing Wiki Pages. OpIndia, Swarajya and Vivek Agnihotri top targets [archive]
  48. ↑ https://www.opindia.com/2020/06/wikipedia-opindia-crusade-left-bias-wiki-editors-negative-all-you-need-to-know/ [archive]
  49. ↑ https://twitter.com/GKChesterton000/status/1690766380650680320 [archive]
  50. ↑ Wikipedia only has article titles about the demolition of mosques or of Communist monuments. The single exception is this article : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demolition_of_Dhul_Khalasa [archive]
  51. ↑ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Somnath_temple/Archive_1#KM_Munshi's_last_laugh_The_first_mass-revert [archive]
  52. ↑ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/3RRArchive424 [archive]
Retrieved from "https://en.dharmapedia.net/w/index.php?title=Examples_of_Bias_in_Wikipedia&oldid=78467"