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

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

Examples of Bias

  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

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

  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]


Jai Shri Ram is a religious chant sacred to Hindus. It essentially means “Glory to Shri Ram”, a revered deity in Hinduism. The Wikipedia page, however, makes disparaging remarks based on motivated media reports. The opening paras of the Wikipedia article itself disparage the religious chant claiming it to be used as a war-cry to perpetrate communal violence against Hindus. The sources referenced to make this outlandish claim are mostly opinion pieces from Scroll, EPW, NYT and authors like Christophe Jaffrelot and Nandita Menon. One of the cases that they mention to “substantiate” their assertion that Jai Shree Ram is a communal war cry is of a Muslim man being lynching by Muslims for chanting Jai Shree Ram. 146 https://www.opindia.com/2020/02/muslims-refugees-can-continue-to-get-citizenship-as-per-provisions-of- [archive] citizenship-act-caa-does-not-prevent-that-government-clarifies-in-lok-sabha/125 The incident took place in the Kathgharhi village of Ramkola police station in the Kushinagar district of Uttar Pradesh, where the youth named Babar was lynched because he campaigned for Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and distributed sweets after the Yogi Adityanath the government was formed. Babar was severely beaten up by his neighbours and relatives on 20th March 2022. The youth was referred to the district hospital and then to Lucknow where he died during treatment on Sunday 27th March 2022.

The Muslims in the area were angry with Babar even after his death. When the body of the deceased reached the village, people were enraged. People refused to perform the last rites of the body. The administrative staff also became active considering the seriousness of the case. The local MLA PN Pathak also reached the spot. After the assurance of MLA PN Pathak and administrative officials, the family agreed to perform the last rites. The area MLA himself shouldered the body of the deceased Babar. In fact, after the formation of the BJP government in UP on March 10, Babar had distributed sweets in the entire village.

The family members of the deceased Babar said that the people living in the neighbourhood were angry because Babar was campaigning for the BJP. Many times Babur was warned that he should not campaign for the BJP. Babar asked for security from the Ramkola police station to several officials, but his plea was not heard. As the Ramkola police station did not respond to him, the goons were emboldened and they beat Babar badly and then threw him down from the roof. Seriously injured in the attack, he died during treatment at the hospital. After this, Babar’s wife has lodged a case against the accused at Ramkola police station. SDM Varun Pandey, who rushed to the spot, said the case is being investigated, the accused will be arrested and strict action will be taken against those who are guilty. BJP MLA PN Pathak said the accused will not be spared at any cost. The SDM also said that the victim had complained about death threats, but no action was taken at that time. He added that an FIR has been registered, and they are investigating the matter.

If anything, this incident shows how individuals are being persecuted for chanting Jai Shree Ram and asserting their political and religious agency. In this case, the victim was a Muslim, lynched by Muslims who harboured specific animosity towards Hindus and their religious and political expression. This incident, far from proving Jai Shree Ram as a war-cry, proves that Islamists are persecuting those who express devotion to Lord Ram147. While making the Wikipedia article on Jai Shri Ram political and insulting towards Hindus, the article fails to mention that there have been several instances where fake news was spread about Muslims being forced to chant Jai Shri Ram. 147 https://www.opindia.com/2022/03/muslim-youth-lynched-in-uttar-pradesh-for-celebrating-bjps-victory/ [archive]


It is evident, therefore, that the Wikipedia page on Jai Shri Ram has been deliberately kept one sided – an editorial decision. In fact, if one looks at the ‘talk’ page, it is revealed that there was a section someone had added which spoke about the usage is in such fake cases, however, it was removed – the move justified due to flimsy reasons by ‘Kautilya3’, the very editor booked in Manipur for creating strife.133

From the talk page, it becomes evident that the section on such fake Jai Shri Ram crimes was removed because apparently, there were no “reliable sources” to prove these cases. A user proceeds then to provide “reliable” sources (which are essentially some Left sources that Wikipedia accepts). Kautilya3, who has been booked in Manipur for inciting violence and disaffection then justifies the removal saying that there are not enough verifiable sources to prove “positive” positions in this article – which is crimes driven by the Jai Shri Ram chant – and therefore – negative position – fake news – cannot be added.134

One has to then ask why this page takes the slant that it does. In the end, the user who provided sources to ensure the article could be made less bias gives up, saying that it is evident to him that editors have an agenda. In another conversation about the fake Jai Shree Ram cases, the concerns are dismissed citing flimsy reasons yet again.

In this section, a clearly fake account (Postaltoad) lists down why the source mentioned for the fake Jai Shri Ram crimes is not reliable. Further, the account claims that the instances where either Muslims or sympathetic media blatantly lied about involvement of Jai Shree135 Ram in the crime are “minor incidents” and therefore must not be added – making a case for the removal of the section completely.

Thereafter, Kautilya3, the very man booked in Manipur, says that even if the Logical Indian was a “reliable source”, the section on fake crimes attributed to Jai Shri Ram should not be added because it just makes a “BIG DEAL” out of minor instances. Newslinger – another prolific Leftist who has been involved in several such bias articles – says that the section has been removed because of the unreliability of the source and because it is given the subject undue weight in the article. In another conversation, Kautilya3 says that fake cases are of no interest to “US” because Wikipedia is not a fact-checking website. Newslinger goes further, claiming that the co- founder of Wikipedia is also, not a reliable source. While Newslinger claims that the co-founder of Wikipedia is not a reliable source, the article tarnishing Hindus mentions Rana Ayyub’s opinion piece as a reliable source. Rana Ayyub is currently under investigation for embezzlement of funds and the Supreme Court had also observed that her “journalism” in the 2002 Gujarat case had no reliability and was fabricated.136 Both the ‘editors’ then deny an edit request asking for a more ‘neutral’ term be used instead of ‘warcry’. In the process, there is also conversation about banning “right wing people” who disagree with their bias. The editors then proceed to be extremely worried about a criticism of the page published, claiming that the edits on the page ‘would increase’ because a criticism was published. (section continues to next page)137

There was another conversation, a contributor says that the sentence in the introductory paragraph should be changed. His edit suggestion was rather reasonable, keeping intact that Left bias of the introduction as well, however, it was rejected by Kautilya3 saying that the most prominent use of Jai Shree Ram is to perpetrate violence against Muslims. This Wikipedia article is protected and therefore, not everyone can edit it, as evidenced by the talk page discussions as well.138

The page on Jai Shri Ram was created by an account which no longer exists. In his log, it is evident that he only made edits to some Bollywood pages and the only page of significance created was Jai Shri Ram. It is, therefore, entirely possible that this account was merely a pseudonym which was used to create the page and then deleted. Currently, the page is being manned by two main accounts – Kautilya3 and Newslinger.


Source: Wikipedia's War On India: A Dossier on Wikipedia

BLP, Biographies of living persons

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

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

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

Islamic invasions

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

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

Noakhali genocide

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

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]


Godhra Train Burning – whitewashing a massacre When one searches “Godhra Train Burning” using the Google search engine, the first result to show up is the Wikipedia article. The first paragraph of the Wikipedia article itself reveals the utter bias of the page. The first paragraph of the Wikipedia article says that the cause of the fire that burnt 59 Hindu pilgrims to death “remains disputed” even though multiple people have been convicted for burning the Sabarmati Express train in Godhra.110 In fact, even Indian leftists have almost stopped claiming that it was an accident, but the Wiki article in the first para says that “The cause of the fire remains disputed”. The truth, however, is not “disputed”134.

On 27th February 2002, the Sabarmati express was scheduled to reach Godhra station at about 3:30 am. On that day, the train was running four hours late. As such, it arrived at Godhra by 7:40 am. 8 minutes later, a mob of 2000 Islamists set 59 Hindus, including 25 women and 15 children, in the coach S6 of the train on fire in Godhra’s predominantly Muslim area – Signal Falia. 31 Islamists were found guilty of the Godhra massacre on February 22, 2011, by the trial court (with only 11 receiving the death penalty and 20 receiving life in prison), and all 31 convictions were affirmed by the Gujarat High Court in October 2017, resulting in everyone receiving a life sentence. Prior to that, based on the testimony of witnesses and survivors, it was obvious to anybody with even a modicum of intellectual integrity that Muslims had set the train on fire. In February 2003, an accused person made a judicial confession in which he acknowledged that Godhra was a well-planned attack and that he had personally participated in it. A judicial confession is conclusive evidence. This proves that the Godhra carnage was a preplanned attack on the innocent Karsevaks.

In the March 2006 issue of Outlook, a report was published. This report includes the following two paragraphs: Gayatri Panchal, a resident of Ahmedabad, who survived the incident on February 27, 2002, but lost both her parents in her reaction to the report has said, “The report of the Banerjee Commission is absolutely wrong. I have seen everything with my own eyes and barely escaped myself but lost both my parents.” Panchal, who has three sisters, said the Banerjee Commission report was not correct as the fire could not have been accidental as no one was cooking in the S-6 coach and it was packed with passengers. “Mobs pelted stones at the coach for a long and then threw in burning rags and also poured some inflammable material so that the coach was on fire. I will maintain the same wherever I am called to depose on the matter,” Panchal said. So, it is clear that, according to the eyewitness account, coach S-6 caught fire when Muslims drenched it in gasoline, set it ablaze, and circled the railway from all sides to prevent the Ramsewaks from leaving, according to the police’s obviously plausible statement. It becomes necessary to refer to the Nanavati-Mehta commission’s comments which cite the forensic science laboratory’s reports. The report denies all the possibilities and conspiracies 134

https://www.opindia.com/2023/01/bbc-documentary-on-gujarat-riots-whitewash-islamists-who-set-the- [archive] godhra-train-on-fire/111 raised by Muslims and liberal activists inventing multiple reasons for the coach being set ablaze. These theories included ideas of an imaginary scuffle between Karsevaks and the local Muslim vendors, and an equally untrue incident of Hindus molesting a Muslim girl. Here is what the commission has concluded:

“From the evidence of all these witnesses and other material on record it becomes clear that except overcrowding in the train and occasional raising of slogans inside the train and on platforms of the intervening stations, the Ramsevaks had not done anything and no incident had happened earlier which could have led to the incident which later on happened at Godhra. In absence of any evidence whatsoever indicating any incident on the way, the Commission has no hesitation in coming to the conclusion that the suggestion made by Jamiat e Ulma-E-Hind that a quarrel had taken place between Ramsevaks and vendors at Ujjain railway station is without any basis. Its journey from Ayodhya to Godhra was trouble-free.”

Regarding the fire and its origin, D V Talati had told the Nanavati-Mehta Commission, “About 60 litres of inflammable liquid must have been used in burning that coach. The floor of the coach in some places was totally burnt. After explaining the difference between a fire in an open space and a fire in a confined place, he stated that the phenomenon of flashover can happen in a place that is small and completely closed. The size of S/6 was quite big. Its total area of it was 5000 sq. ft. Therefore, there was no possibility of a flashover in that coach unless the fire was big. The fire had not started from below the coach. The total quantity of liquid that was required for burning the coach could not have been thrown from outside, nor the fire which took place in S/6 could have been caused only by the burning rags thrown in it. As there was more damage in the eastern part of the coach, he had come to the conclusion that the fire had originated in the eastern part of that coach.”

The Godhra train burning of 2002 is the clearest illustration of the ruthless inhumanity of Islamists. For the Wikipedia article to claim that the cause of the fire remains “disputed” is a gross twisting of facts meant to whitewash a conspiracy that claimed the lives of 59 Hindus including children and women. When the question of bias was brought up on the “talk” page of the Wikipedia article, the senior editor on Wikipedia defended the glaring bias.112 When someone pointed out that the article was biased and that the court of India, with ample evidence, had convicted people for act of arson, Vanamonda93, a notorious and prolific Wikipedia editor claimed that the Wikipedia policy required them to maintain “neutral point of view” – which means summarising information from “reliable sources” – and not what the courts say.

Essentially, Wikipedia, as a matter of policy, only collates information from Left media sources and does not even consider the court of India to be an authority after tens of Islamists were convicted for the attack. The Wikipedia article mentions that the trial court convicted 31 Muslims for the burning, which was upheld by High Court. But the article still mentions that “Scholars remain sceptical about the claims of arson”. In one of the references, the Wikipedia article says, “Several other independent commentators also concluded that the fire itself was almost certainly an accident, saying that the initial cause of the conflagration was never conclusively determined. Historian Ainslie Thomas Embree stated that the official story of the attack on the train—that it was organized and carried out by people under orders from Pakistan—was entirely baseless. Scholar Martha Nussbaum has also challenged this narrative, stating that several inquiries have found that the conflagration was the result of an accident rather than a planned conspiracy”.113

In this regard, another discussion took place on the “Talk” page135 of the article. One editor had removed the reference and Vanamonde93 had reinstated it. The reason first given to the editor by Vanamonde93 was that the removal of the reference to Martha Nussbaum and her conspiracy theory of how the cause of the fire was unknown, was not “neutral”. Martha C. Nussbaum is the Ernst Freund Distinguished Service Professor of Law and Ethics at the University of Chicago. She had written a book about the Gujarat riots 2002 which essentially concluded that there were doubts that the Sabarmati express was burnt by a mob. Further, it peddled the same tropes and lies about Hindu fundamentalism136.137 The discussion thereafter about the reference to Nussbaum was dismissive, bullying and disingenuous.

The editor who had removed the reference tagged Vanamonde93 to say that the case of Godhra train burning had been decided by the court and perpetrators convicted and sentenced and therefore, the main peg of the article should be the conviction and what the courts said about the case. (see screenshots below) 135 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Godhra_train_burning/Archive_2 [archive] https://www.epw.in/journal/2007/50/book-reviews/clash-within-democracy-religious-violence-and-indias- [archive] future.html 137 https://www.amazon.in/Clash-Within-Democracy-Religious- [archive] Violence/dp/0674030591#:~:text=Book%20overview&text=Since%20long%20before%20the%202002,%2C%20 tolerance%2C%20and%20religious%20pluralism. 136114

Vanamonde93 essentially says that Wikipedia guidelines demand that less weightage be given to court judgements and more weight be given to observations by “experts”. The editor then points out that nowhere does the guideline say that vanamonde93 is alleging and that “context matters” demands that the investigation is the main context of the article. Vanamonde93 then accuses the editor of being obtuse and shuts him down. The editor then gives further context. The editor points out that the article by this “expert” only says that a large amount of inflammable was used and therefore, she does not actually endorse the “accident theory”.115 After that, Vanamonde93 and others bully the editor to declare that the reference will stay and that he has no right to second guess an academic. In another conversation, there were questions raised about the quality of resources and the sentence which said that the causes of the fire are still disputed or that they have not been proven conclusively.116

The individual raising this question says that the reference for the doubts raised are from 2013 and in 2016, the police had identified and arrested the mastermind, therefore, the grey area created in this article should be removed.

Vanamonde93 again refuses, saying that the police is not a reliable source.

Repeatedly, Vanamonde93 refuses to acknowledge the court verdict saying that “it means very little”.

The Wikipedia article quotes the Concerned Citizens Tribunal report which ruled that concluded that the fire was an accident. This ‘Tribunal’ was a private group convened by Teesta Setalvad, who had tutored Gujarat riot witnesses to give false statements.117

The article further quotes historians and scholars to claim the fire was an accident. Whether it was fire or accident is a matter of forensic examination, not the subject of opinion of ‘scholars’.

Source: Wikipedia's War On India: A Dossier on Wikipedia

2020 Delhi Anti-Hindu Riots
  • 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]

Opindia report

When one Googles 2020 Delhi Riots, the first search result is the Wikipedia article. The 2020 Delhi Riot was a planned onslaught in the nation capital by Left and Islamist groups, specifically targeting Hindus, with a stated objected of bringing the democratically elected government to its knees. The investigation into the Delhi Riots 2020, which is still sub-judice has led to some startling revelations about how the riots were planned right from December 2019, culminating in targeted violence against Hindus starting 24th February 2020. The Wikipedia article on the 2020 Delhi Riots is summarily biased, blaming Hindus for the riots and misrepresenting the facts of the case. The opening paragraph of the Wikipedia article itself lays the blame squarely on Muslims using smart language to downplay the brutal murders of Hindus and the findings of the police investigation – including court observations. 121 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wiki_Ed/Boston_University/Public_Writing_Across_Genres_(Spring_2 [archive] 021) 122 https://wikiedu.org/supporters/98 [archive] The article starts with branding the Delhi Riots a result of “Chiefly Hindu mobs attacking Muslims”.

While it gives a description of the Muslims killed, it relegates the violence against Hindus to be merely ‘assaults’ – when the truth is far from it. To understand the bias of the first para itself, it is pertinent to note that when the Wikipedia article claims that “corpses were being found in open drains”, it references an NPR article123 in which, this sentence was mentioned verbatim without any corroborative evidence. The only documented case of a dead body being found in an “open drain” was that of Ankit Sharma – a Hindu IB officer who was brutally murdered by an Islamist mob – led by AAP councillor Tahir Hussain who has admitted on record that the violence was orchestrated to target Hindus. If one was to read the Wikipedia article, however, one would be led to believe that Muslim corpses by the hundreds were being found in open drains. The second paragraph of the Wikipedia article solidifies the propaganda in the first para with wildly one-sided claims.

To claim that Muslims were “Marked as targets”, Wikipedia relies on conjectures. While it cannot be denied that there was retaliatory violence against Muslims, the conspiracy of the violence was against Hindus and there was no evidence of Muslims being specifically targeted or their genitals being checked to ascertain their identity. In fact, there were several accounts of Hindus being checked for their religious identity before being targeted. 123 https://www.npr.org/2020/03/07/812193930/delhi-riots-aftermath-how-do-you-explain-such-violence99 [archive]

When Wikipedia talks about mosques being targeted, they reference a link about the Ashok Nagar mosque which was gutted. There are several testimonies of local Hindus who don’t deny that the mosque was burnt but say that the mosque was burnt only after a Hindu temple was burnt by Muslim mobs124. It is also true that several Hindus were acquitted for Ashok Nagar violence, something that the Wikipedia article fails to mention 125.

The Wikipedia article further reads: “The riots had their origin in Jaffrabad, in North East Delhi, where a sit-in by women against India's Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019 had been in progress on a stretch of the Seelampur–Jaffrabad–Maujpur road, blocking it. On 23 February 2020, a leader of the ruling Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party, Kapil Mishra, called for Delhi Police to clear the roads, failing which he threatened to "hit the streets". After Mishra's ultimatum, violence erupted. Initially, Hindu and Muslim attacks were equally lethal. Most deaths were attributed to gunfire. By 25 February 2020, the balance had shifted. Rioters wearing helmets and carrying sticks, stones, swords or pistols, and the saffron flags of Hindu nationalism entered Muslim neighbourhoods, as the police stood by. Chants were heard of "Jai Shri Ram" ("Victory to Lord Rama"), a religious slogan favoured by prime minister Narendra Modi's party. In the neighbourhood of Shiv Vihar, Hindu rioters attacked Muslim houses and businesses for three days, often firebombing them with cooking gas cylinders and gutting them without resistance from the police. In some instances, Muslims countered perceived threats by returning the violence; on the 25th a Muslim mob approached a Hindu neighbourhood throwing stones and Molotov cocktails and firing guns. During this time, stories were also told of Sikh and Hindu families coming to the aid of besieged Muslims; in some neighbourhoods, the religious communities cooperated in protecting themselves from violence.”

The conspiracy to commit violence in February was being hatched since the 5 th of December 2019. In fact, on the 23rd of February, it was the Muslim mob which started pelting stones against the Hindus and the police personnel and the first person to be murdered by the Muslim mob was police constable Ratan Lal.

There is no basis to claim that it was Kapil Mishra who had instigated violence and yet, Wikipedia has repeated this trope ad nauseum without adding the counter argument either of other media houses or of the police investigation itself. Further, it is a lie that most deaths on the 23rd and 24th were attributable to gun fire. On the 24th itself, Ratan Lal was lynched to death by a Muslim mob. It was on the night of 24th that the hands and legs of a Hindu man, Dilbar Negi, were chopped and he was burnt alive by a Muslim mob – in Shiv Vihar – where Wikipedia claims Muslims were overwhelmingly 124 https://www.opindia.com/2020/02/eyewitnesses-delhi-riots-shiva-temple-desecration-triggered-attack-on- [archive] mosque/ 125 https://www.opindia.com/2022/09/delhi-court-acquits-yogendra-singh-and-suraj-in-a-delhi-riots-fir-filed- [archive] by-shamshad/100 attacked. Further, it was on the 25th that Ankit Sharma was brutally killed by Tahir Hussain and his Muslim mob – the very date when Wikipedia says the violence became overwhelmingly anti-Muslim.

Shiv Vihar, which the Wikipedia article claims was the epicentre of Hindus attacking Muslims, was actually the very place where Hindus came under attack overwhelmingly. Dilbar Negi was murdered amidst chants of “throwing Kafirs out” and “taking Hindu girls away” – these slogans were raised throughout Shiv Vihar126.

Further, it was in Shiv Vihar where even a Hindu school was not spared, with attacks being launched from a Muslim school. Evidence of the fact that the violence was preplanned came from Shiv Vihar as well, where it was revealed how Muslim students from the Muslim owned school were sent home early – right before the violence against the Hindu school commenced. From the roof of the Muslim owned school, weapons, acid pouches, catapults etc were recovered.

The Wikipedia article furthers lies about CAA and shockingly, fails to even mention Sharjeel Imam and Umar Khalid – two of the prime accused in the conspiracy case. The 2020 Delhi Riots page is also locked, which means that the thousands of editors across the world have no access to edit the page. The page is under ‘extended access’ protection which means – “Articles under extended confirmed protection (ECP) can be edited only by extended-confirmed accounts – accounts that have been registered for at least 30 days and have made at least 500 edits, or have been manually granted extended-confirmed rights by an administrator (usually because the account is a legitimate alternative account of a user who has extended-confirmed rights on another account). Extended confirmed (30/500) protection is therefore a stronger form of protection than semi-protection (rough guide)”. Essentially, only a handful of people would have access to edit this page and that too, the administrators can reverse – which has happened in the past – as a result – the misinformation would never be corrected given the Left confirmation bias of Wikipedia’s senior editors and administrators along with other sources which present an alternate view being in the blacklisted category.

The 2020 Delhi Riots page was created by a Wikipedia editor DBigXray who has now deleted his original account and in all probability, functions under another pseudonym. There are several conversations in the ‘talk’ page which reveal the ideological bias with which this page was created and curated. 126 https://swarajyamag.com/politics/kill-hindu-kafirs-and-take-away-their-daughters-delhi-riots-chargesheet- [archive] tells-how-a-muslim-mob-set-dilbar-negi-on-fire101 In one of the conversations, an editor provides sources for Ankit Sharma being stabbed multiple times and even the brutality that was done to Dilbar Negi. The “senior editors” simply dismiss these claims. To date, Dilbar Negi is not mentioned in the Wikipedia article.

The conversation also refused to consider evidence and sources regarding how the violence was not anti-Muslim but anti-Hindu in nature127. If Wikipedia truly followed the neutral point of view rule, it could have, at the least, added how some sources claim that it was an anti-Muslim violence while others make an argument for how it was anti-Hindu. While only the latter is true, adding both would still show ‘neutrality’, however, none of this information was considered and added to the page which 127 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:2020_Delhi_riots/Archive_20#The_conviction_in_court_tells_a_totally_diffe [archive] rent_story102 shows the biased approach of the editors. It is also pertinent to note that a lot of the information was dismissed outright because the sources themselves have been blacklisted by Left leaning editors.

In one of the conversations, after 9 Muslims were convicted for causing planned riots against Hindus, it was brought to the attention of admins that the claim that the riots were anti- Muslim should be changed. The editors, clearly biased, resorted to whataboutery to not include that version128.

Throughout the ‘talk’ pages, the only reason given to not add a counterview based on factual positions is that the admins and editors need “reliable” sources and the sources themselves have been selected carefully only to conform to a Left bias.

The biases in the Wikipedia article about the Delhi Riots 2020 is enough for an entire research paper. For the purpose of this paper, we would limit ourselves the details already mentioned, since it substantiates the question of bias substantially.

Source: Wikipedia's War On India: A Dossier on Wikipedia

2020 Bengaluru Anti-Hindu Riots

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

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

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

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

Whitewashing Islamic terrorism

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:2025_Pahalgam_attack&diff=prev&oldid=1286896824 [archive]

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2025_Pahalgam_attack&diff=prev&oldid=1286896058 [archive]

Negationism

Double standards

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

Human rights

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

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

Modi

See Examples of Bias in Wikipedia: Character assassination

BJP

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

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

Democracy in India

When one Googles ‘Democracy in India’, the Wikipedia article is the 4th result that shows up in search. The Democracy in India should be an elaborate article given that India is world’s largest democracy, every year there are elections which are much bigger than elections in most other countries and that it has an ancient, long history of participatory democracy and republics. However, the Wikipedia the article has just 3 paras, and its only focus is to claim that India’s democracy is among the worst in the world.

The full Wikipedia article on ‘Democracy in India’.

This short wiki article entirely relies on V-Dem Institute’s democracy rankings to call India a ‘flawed democracy’. The article is just a summary of V-Dem report with no counter-points, which says that India is “one of the worst autocratisers in the last 10 years".

The wiki article claims that “Free political speech is limited” based on V-Dem claims.

The article’s first line originally was “Democracy in India is the largest by population in the world”. But in April this year, this was changed to “India was the 19th most electoral democratic country in Asia according to V-Dem Democracy indices in 2023 with a score of 0.399 out of 1.”

From the edit, it is evident that the ‘editor’ who removed the reference to India being the largest democracy by population commented, “what on earth does this mean” before removing it.

The line which was added had grammatical errors which could have been edited, however, the “editor” proceeded to remove the entire reference to India being the largest democracy in the world by population.

The article also had reference to a book on Indian democracy by Ramchandra Guha and a research report on Indian elections, which were removed. V-Dem ranks India below countries like Peru, Niger, Honduras etc in democracy ranking. Niger has seen several coupes and coupe attempts in recent history. The Peruvian president attempted to dissolve the Peruvian Congress in the face of imminent impeachment by the legislative body. On history of democracy in India, the article claims that there is no evidence that elections and democracy existed in ancient India.

It is important to note that V-Dem reports have been debunked for their flawed methodology and their source of funding has come under scrutiny several times in India. V-Dem is heavily funded by George Soros and his Open Society. The funders also include government agencies, which make the findings a direct interference in India’s internal affairs. Here are some of the funders of V-Dem109:

1. George Soros’ Open Society 109 https://www.v-dem.net/about/funders/90 [archive] 2. Swedish Research Council 3. European Research Council 4. European Commission 5. Research council of Norway 6. Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Sweden 7. Canadian International Development Agency 8. Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Denmark 9. Facebook 10. USAID


George Soros, his campaigns against India and his close nexus with Wikimedia has already been detailed in this report. It is pertinent to note that the USAID is widely regarded as a regime change agency of the United States of America. The U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) is the principal U.S. agency. According to the USAID website, “The President’s Fiscal Year (FY) 2024 Budget Request for the State Department and the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) is $63.1 billion for foreign assistance and diplomatic engagement, which includes $32 billion in foreign assistance for USAID fully- and partially-managed accounts, $3 billion (10 percent) above the FY 2023 Adjusted Enacted level… The FY 2024 President’s Budget also requests both mandatory and discretionary resources to out-compete China, strengthen the U.S. role in the Indo-Pacific, and advance American prosperity globally through new investments to respond to these unprecedented and extraordinary times”. The main objective of USAID is clearly, to further US interests abroad and regime change has been one of the interests of the US.

The USAID website says about their mission, “On behalf of the American people, we promote and demonstrate democratic values abroad, and advance a free, peaceful, and prosperous world. In support of America’s foreign policy, the U.S. Agency for International Development leads the U.S. Government’s international development and disaster assistance through partnerships and investments that save lives, reduce poverty, strengthen democratic governance, and help people emerge from humanitarian crises and progress beyond assistance”. One knows what it truly means when a US agency says that they want to promote “democracy” in foreign countries. In fact, on its website, USAID also says, “We aspire to lead international and US Government efforts to advance the economic, political, social, and environmental well-being of the world’s most vulnerable people”. USAID is an agency funded directly by the US government and is meant to fulfil USA’s foreign policy agendas110. 110 https://www.opindia.com/2024/07/sam-pitroda-ngo-global-knowledge-initiative-rahul-gandhi-usaid-state- [archive] department-rockefeller-foundation-deep-state/91

William Blum has said that in the 1960s and early 1970s, USAID has maintained “a close working relationship with the CIA, and Agency officers often operated abroad under USAID cover.” The 1960s-era Office of Public Safety, a now-disbanded division of USAID, has been mentioned as an example of this, having served as a front for training foreign police in counterinsurgency methods (including torture techniques) In 2023, an American lawmaker alleged that a US-based NGO in Pakistan has links with designated terrorist organizations. This NGO has been receiving financial aid from US Agency for International Development (USAID). In a letter dated January 24 2023 to USAID administrator Samantha Power, Congressman Michael McCaul, Chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee requested suspension of the USAID funding to the NGO pending a full and in-depth review of these accusations.

Reportedly, the in question nonprofit organization, Helping Hand for Relief and Development (HHRD), which is based in Michigan, is affiliated with Jamaat-e-Islami, an Islamist terrorist organization that operates in South Asia. USAID granted HHRD a grant of $110,000 in October 2021 to cover the costs of shipping associated with its humanitarian relief work. “This award was made despite longstanding, detailed allegations that HHRD is connected to designated terrorist organizations, terror financiers, and extremist groups,” McCaul’s letter read.

Falah-e-Insaniat Foundation (FIF), the charitable arm of Lashkar-e-Taiba, the terrorist organization responsible for the 2008 Mumbai attacks, is one of the sponsors of HHRD events in Pakistan.

It is pertinent to note that FIF has been designated as a terrorist organization by the United States in 2016.

Concerns about the HHRD’s relationship with Al-Khidmat, Jamaat-e-Islami’s official charitable organization, were also expressed in McCaul’s letter. The United States of America, through USAID, is also now being accused of affecting regime change in Bangladesh leading to the ouster of Sheikh Hasina111. Minorities in Bangladesh, especially Hindus, are under serious attacks in Bangladesh after the US-sponsored coup. It is, therefore, evident that government agencies like USAID and foundations like that led by George Soros have been attempting to affect regime change with these motivated reports. Further, it is important to see how flawed the methodology of V-Dem is. After the 2021 V-Dem report claiming that India was no longer a democracy but an ‘electoral autocracy’, OpIndia had conducted a detailed research about their methodology. First, a glance at the members of International Advisory Board organisation shows its anti- India bias. The board had two Indians – Centre for Policy Research Chairman Pratap Bhanu

111 https://www.opindia.com/2024/08/kyrgyzstan-pakistan-sri-lanka-bangladesh-us-diplomat-donald-lu-rahul- [archive] gandhi-met-regime-change-operations/92 Mehta and JNU professor Nirja Gopal Jayal – both of them are known critic of Modi government’s policies, including the CAA. It may be noted that V-Dem has used the CAA as one of the main examples as proof of India turning autocratic. For some unknown reason, Pratap Bhanu Mehta’s name was removed from the list on the V- Dem website. He was listed as an advisor on the website, as can be seen in an archive of the webpage112.

Another member of the advisory board was a Pakistani national, lawyer-politician Aitzaz Ahsan.

Apart from the advisory board, another major concern was the so-called country experts, the people who provide the insight, based on which V-Dem ranks the countries. Shockingly, the Sweden based organisation judges whether a country is democracy or not based on the opinion of around two dozen people. The methodology adopted by V-Dem makes it clear that their report is not based a large-scale survey, but based on ‘data’ provided by 5 person per country for each indicator.

As the report is based on five indices, this means around 25 persons per country. The V-Dem website confirms this in their website by saying, “We endeavour to have a minimum of five experts for each indicator per country. This typically means we have twenty-five or more experts per country, since each expert only codes indicators in his/her areas of expertise.” Another matter of concern is that the 25 experts who give data on a country may not be from that country. V-Dem says that “two-thirds of Country Experts providing data on a country should be nationals or permanent residents of that country”. This means, 8 or 9 ‘experts’ out of 25 giving opinion on a country are foreigners113.

For such motivated and biased reports114 to form the ONLY basis of the Wikipedia article on India is essentially, aiding foreign agencies, bad-faith actors and elements like George Soros to affect regime change in India, amounting to interference in Indian democracy. Interestingly, the page “Democracy in India” was earlier deleted by an administrator citing similar information which was contained in another page as well. However, it was later “reviewed” and created again by an administrator level editor in February 2024 – in the midst of the General Elections in India. Administrator PhilKnight who had initially deleted the page is high up the Wikipedia foodchain. 112 https://web.archive.org/web/20201105110201/https:/www.v-dem.net/en/global-team/advisory-board/ [archive] https://www.opindia.com/2021/03/the-v-dem-report-that-downgraded-india-is-opinion-of-25-people/ [archive] 114 https://sundayguardianlive.com/opinion/v-dem-report-2024-a-political-hatchet-job-in-the-name-of- [archive] research 11393

His page reads, “Welcome to my user page. I started editing under the name 'Addhoc' in July 2006, and my request for adminship passed in September 2007. In March 2008, I changed my username and for the avoidance of doubt, I'm not this Phil Knight or anyone else notable. In July 2009, I joined the Mediation Committee, and following the December 2010 elections, I was appointed to the Arbitration Committee for a two year term. In January 2011, I was given checkuser and oversight privileges. In March 2013, I was appointed chairman of the Mediation Committee for a 6 month term. In February 2015, I was appointed to the Ombudsman commission for a 12 month term”115. The user Rosguill who reinstated the page is also an administrator of English Wikipedia116. As mentioned earlier, there are only 435 active administrators, who are from across the world. They are mostly all anonymous and their real identity is not known. Wikipedia administrators have power to alter content and decide almost everything about the articles present on Wikipedia. Not just the articles, they have the power to even decide who can or cannot edit the articles on Wikipedia.

Administrators have the right to ban editors/users, curtail their activity, protect pages so editors cannot edit the content, delete pages after discussion, delete users, decide on disputes etc.

This summarily negates the fact that Wikipedia is a free for all encyclopaedia where thousands of editors have the right to edit and ensure accurate information is presented. This article on ‘Democracy in India’ is also testimony to what researchers have said about Wikipedia and its bias. The ‘Critic Research’ cited in the beginning of the paper essentially said that Wikipedia’s NPOV (neutrality) requirement does not mean that all view points in the subject gets equal prominence or even representation in an article, especially when all the sources that present a viewpoint opposing to the Left have been blacklisted by the very administrators who rule the roost on Wikipedia. Democratic backsliding by country This Wikipedia article lists countries where democracies are descending into autocracies, and India is in the list. Not surprisingly, V-Dem Democracy indices is the source of the claim that autocratization is taking place in India after Modi govt came to power in 2014. It states, “The V-Dem Democracy indices claim that democratic backsliding is taking place in India under Prime Minister Narendra Modi and the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party, citing the passage of the 2019 Citizenship (Amendment) Act and the government's subsequent response to the Citizenship Amendment Act protests.” 115 116 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:PhilKnight [archive] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Rosguill94 [archive] The Wikipedia page which cites CAA as the main reason for ‘Democratic Backsliding’ has failed to mention that CAA had nothing to do with Indian citizens – Hindus or Muslims. It merely expedited the citizenship for those who had already come to India before December 2014, fleeing religious persecution in neighbouring Islamic nations. The violence that subsequently took place was a result of misinformation being spread by several nefarious elements and Wikipedia regurgitates that information without basic fact-checking. The article further states that “V-Dem Institute identified India as one of five severe cases of democratic backsliding, relating to disproportionate limitations being placed upon the role of the Parliament of India through measures responding to the COVID-19 pandemic.” V-Dem is mentioned 4 times in the 390 word India section, and it is evident that the entire claim is based on V-Dem reports.

Just like the Democracy in India article, the India section of Democratic backsliding by country is also mostly a summary of V-Dem report, without any counter argument. It also quotes other such reports to claim “India is a flawed democracy.” The article also mentions Freedom House report which had downgraded India from "free" to "partly free" over anti-CAA protests. This Freedom House had used The Wire’s fake Tek Fog story to make the claim. And even after the Wire retracted the story, the US government funded human rights ‘watchdog’ retained it.

This article on Wikipedia is the prime example of how political interests and personal beliefs tarnish information pool, with the same information being regurgitated and no scope of rectification since any publication which essentially does not toe the Left line is blacklisted on Wikipedia. The page “Democratic Backsliding By Country” was created as an offshoot of the main page “Democratic Backsliding”.

In the “Democratic Backsliding” article on Wikipedia, India is mentioned in a table which charts the time since when the backsliding has supposedly started.95 The table says that the backsliding in India started in 2014 after India elected PM Narendra Modi.

There are three references added in Wikipedia. 1. A ‘Democratic Decoupling’ research paper which relies heavily on V-Dem, Freedom House which have been widely debunked117. 2. A paper called ‘A Tale of Culture-Bound Regime Evolution: The Centennial Democratic Trend and Its Recent Reversal’, which again relies on V-Dem. The paper says, “Using a new measure of “comprehensive democracy” derived from V-Dem (www.v-dem.net), my analysis traces the global democratic trend over the last 116 years, from 1900 till 2016, looking in particular at the centennial trend’s cultural zoning”118. 3. The V-Dem report itself119 This certainly does not make the Wikipedia article “neutral”. It simply cites three sources that confirms the bias of its Left leaning editors. Interestingly, this article does not even mention countries like Pakistan, Bangladesh, Myanmar etc when it talks about democracy.

From the ‘Talk’ page of the article, it is evident that the editors of the page have a serious bias towards the Left. 117 https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13510347.2020.1842361?journalCode=fdem20& [archive] http://fox.leuphana.de/portal/de/publications/a-tale-of-culturebound-regime-evolution-the-centennial- [archive] democratic-trend-and-its-recent-reversal(2b6baaf4-3942-4491-92ca-55782d455a62).html 119 https://web.archive.org/web/20210227182459/https://www.v-dem.net/en/news/democratic-backsliding- [archive] india-worlds-largest-democracy/ 11896 Further, what is interesting is that this article on Wikipedia was a result of a formal “course” offered by the Wikimedia Foundation. In the talk page, it is mentioned that this article was a “subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment” in 2021120. 120 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Democratic_backsliding97 [archive]

When one goes to the “Course Page” linked in this section, one sees it was a course offered by Boston University in collaboration with Wikimedia Education121. Wiki Edu is funded by Wikimedia Foundation122.

This article which brands India as a country of concern where democracy is dying is basically an article which was created with the explicit funding of Wikimedia Foundation which runs Wikipedia.

Source: Wikipedia's War On India: A Dossier on Wikipedia


Hindu terrorism allegations

“Hindu terrorism” article – opinions passed off as fact, crimes of omission If one searches ‘Hindu Terrorism’ on Google, the first result that comes up is the Wikipedia article.

There is a wiki page called Hindu terrorism, and it is mostly based on opinions published in various outlets like Economic and Political Weekly, Caravan, Wire, Scroll etc. It claims that the accused in Hindu terrorism were members of Hindu organisations such as Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) or Abhinav Bharat.

However, the terminology used by them makes no way for nuanced takes and glosses over several important facts that negated any existence of “Hindu Terror”. It also ensures that it does not delve into the allegations, backed by several testimonies and facts, that it was Congress which actively tried to perpetuate the myth of saffron terrorism. The entire section defining “Hindu Terrorism vs Hindutva Terrorism” is a work of fiction, dubious opinions and crimes of omission. 128 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:2020_Delhi_riots/Archive_19103 [archive]

The section starts by citing an opinion article written by one Nikita Saxena for The Caravan Magazine to indicate when the phrase “Hindu Terrorism” started to get traction. The article was actually about how the Modi government investigating terror financing of Islamic and Sikh terror groups – many of which are proscribed internationally. There is no dispute which exists throughout the world that Islamic and Sikh extremist groups have indulged in grievous terror activities and been convicted for it. It was in this article that The Caravan writer talks about Hindu terrorism, laden with opinions and conjectures. The same article is also referenced in the last paragraph of this section which talks about the Multi-Agency Centre which created focus groups with the mandate of looking into Islamist and Sikh terrorism and the funding that they get.

First and foremost, the referencing of an opinion piece on a publication is in itself problematic. Wikipedia is supposed to be a user sourced ‘encyclopaedia’ and one of the reasons why it has a serious left bias is because of opinions by those agreeable to the Left ideology are passed off as facts. Further, if one notices there is a tag next to the reference to the Caravan article which says, “undue weight? – discuss”.104 Undue Weight is a Wikipedia guideline which says, “Neutrality requires that mainspace articles and pages fairly represent all significant viewpoints that have been published by reliable sources, in proportion to the prominence of each viewpoint in those sources”. The problem with this guideline is embedded, making it impossible for the article to be neutral in viewpoint since the pool of “reliable sources” is in itself tarnished as discussed in the research on Wikipedia Bias. Essentially, Wikipedia editors, who are overwhelmingly Left leaning blacklist any source as “unreliable” if it does not conform to their own political bias and therefore, they only represent the views which are presented by the Left. Even material evidence and fact-checks which do not conform to the Left bias are not mentioned in Wikipedia because the sources which are not verifiably left are blacklisted and therefore, cannot be cited to present any alternate viewpoint or facts. The result is that the Wikipedia articles regurgitate every fake news peddled by the Left without a counter and pass off even opinions as facts.

The sleight of hand is also evident in the second sentence of the section where it is mentioned that Digvijay Singh had prominently mentioned the term “Hindu terrorism” in his 2007 election campaign. The opposition by the BJP to the usage of the term is not mentioned in the same paragraph, as neutrality would dictate, but as an explanatory note towards the end.

The second paragraph of the section starts with “While perpetrators have consistently justified these acts by their Hindu faith”, however, this sentence has no reference. It is essentially an opinion by the editors of the page and not supported by any evidence. This sentence is used to make a case for why the article is using the term “Hindu terrorism” and not “Hindutva terrorism” – claiming that Hindus who have supposedly indulged in terror activity (not supported by facts) have justified their actions in the name of Hinduism. This is done essentially to water down Islamic terrorism and put Hindus on the same list as Islamic terrorists – as evidenced by the fact that the Caravan article, making the same case, is referenced in this article, despite being a mere opinion.

In the third paragraph, the article does mention some opinions on Congress’ coinage of the Hindu terror bogey, however, it then discredits it by against quoting the Caravan article where it mentions that the BJP’s “narrative” that Congress created the Hindu terror bogey sans facts is negated by the fact that it was investigating terror financing to Islamic and Sikh terror groups. It makes this claim by saying that while the Modi govt was investigating Islamic and Sikh terrorism, it ignored “several cases” of Hindu terror where Pragya Thakur and Aseemanand have been “tried and arrested”. The last sentence essentially makes it sound like Pragya Thakur and Aseemanand were held guilty by a court of law, however, that is not true. The first example of ‘Hindu terror’ in the article is Samjhauta bombing, where all accused were acquitted – including Aseemanand and Sadhvi Pragya. In fact, there were several investigations and proofs which showed that Congress had potentially let go of Lashkar-e-Taiba terrorists who were responsible for the Samjhauta Blast in order to torture and implicate Hindus in the case. In the Malegaon Blast as well, which this article refers to, the same contentions had surfaced.105 For 2006 Malegaon blast, initially, nine suspects were included in the charge-sheet based on the available evidence. One of the suspects Shabbir owned a battery unit in Malegaon – he was alleged to be a trained operative of LeT and investigators had found traces of RDX in his factory For Samjhauta Express blast, United States shared intelligence inputs about the proven links of Arif Qasmani, a Pakistani national linked with terrorist organizations. UN Security Council has still listed him as the perpetrator of Samjhauta Express blast. However, the Government of India changed the course of the investigation to implicate alleged Hindu extremists, one of which was Lt. Col Srikant Purohit, a serving army officer. He was also charged for the 2008 Malegaon Blast. For 2008 Malegaon Blast, another alleged Hindu extremist named Sadhvi Pragya Thakur was charged. In the Court, as many as 59 witnesses from the Army stated that Purohit was a military intelligence person who was actually doing his job (of gathering intelligence inputs) by infiltrating extremist organizations.

In 2016 it was found that ATS had planted RDX to frame Col Purohit and Sadhvi Pragya to prove Hindu extremism. Inspector Mehboob Abdul Karim Mujawar also confirmed in a video that ATS team had planted RDX to frame Purohit and Sadhvi Pragya. In August 2017, Col Purohit was granted bail after spending 9 years in jail. Earlier, in April 2017, Sadhvi Pragya was granted bail too. The Bombay High Court, while granting bail to Sadhvi Pragya stated in its order that prima facie, there’s no case against her. In fact, in the Samjhauta Blast case, initial reports had suggested the involvement of Pakistan based terror group Laskhar-e-Taiba. In 2009 Asif Qasmani was named as the main accused by the United States treasury and the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) which resulted in him getting a travel ban and also got his asset frozen. But surprisingly the Indian investigative agencies drew a completely different conclusion and blamed “Saffron Terrorists” for the blast. According to reports in 2010, the NIA was ‘convinced’ that Hindus had done the blast (they were later acquitted by the court). A Times Now expose had also revealed that the time that the Pakistani suspects who had planted the bomb were let off without any proper investigation under the UPA government. According to the report the Pakistanis named Ajmat Ali and Usman were initially arrested by the Indian authorities but were discharged within a fortnight. One suspect named Ajmat Ali was arrested by the Punjab Police from the Attari Railway Station as he did not have valid papers. He was apparently using an alias named Rajesh Khanna but had a resemblance to the sketches of the bomb planter which were published by the GRP in connection with the Samjhauta blast.106 But according to Gurdeep Singh, who was the Investigative Officer assigned to the Samjhauta Blast case, Ajmat was let off the hook after preliminary interrogation due to “directions from seniors”.

None of these details have, of course, been added by the Wikipedia article 129130. In the Ajmer Dargah blast, the Wikipedia article mentions that the accused had, in fact, said that they had been forced to implicate RSS by the then Home Minister Sushil Kumar Shinde. However, elsewhere, it mentions how Shinde had spoken about Hindu terrorism and also, calls Abhinav Bharat a “Hindu militant group” without mentioning that Shinde had, in fact, apologised for his “Hindu terror” remark131 and that it was indeed the Congress government which had refused to designate Abhinav Bharat as a terror group saying that they had not indulged in terror activity.132 The article was originally titled Saffron Terror, but later it was renamed to Hindu terrorism. However, the original article said that “Saffron Terror is identical to Hindu Terror or Hindu Terrorism.”

In the ‘Islamic terrorism’ article, they have mentioned multiple times that this term is ‘misnomer’, and use of the term is disputed. It cites several entities opposing the use of the term Islamic terrorism, but no such objection is mentioned in the Hindu terror article. In one section in the “talk” page, it is evident that a portion on the Delhi Riots 2020 was removed because the version did not suit the administrator and editor’s political narrative. The page on Hindu terrorism has been marked “Require extended confirmed access”, which means it is extremely difficult for average Wikipedia editors to edit and therefore, the bias would not be corrected based on verifiable information. The ‘talk’ page, a senior Wikipedia editor booked in India for creating strife and bias Previously, a section on Delhi Riots 2020 was added to the Hindu terror Wikipedia article. In this section, it was added that a police investigation into the incident had revealed that the perpetrator belonged to AAP and therefore, it was a conspiracy to create strife. (see screenshot below) 129 https://www.opindia.com/2017/06/did-upa-govt-let-off-pakistani-suspects-in-samjhauta-blast-to-further- [archive] saffron-terror-theory/ 130 https://www.opindia.com/2019/05/how-congress-created-the-hindu-terror-theory-a-saga-that-started-not- [archive] with-malegaon-blasts-but-sikh-massacre-of-1984/ 131 https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/shinde-apologises-for-hindu-terror-remark-ahead-of-budget- [archive] session/article4435746.ece 132 https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/other-states/centre-rejects-maharashtra-govts-proposal-to-ban- [archive] abhinav-bharat/article5049051.ece107 In the talk page, a Wikipedia editor, “Kautilya3” essentially said that the Delhi Police investigation should be removed since the Delhi police specifically is not a reliable source of information.

Further in the talk page, another editor chimed in saying that if there is another version of the event which the Delhi Police discovered, it has to be mentioned in the article. Thereafter, administrator agreed that Delhi Police is not a reliable source (while the Left- leaning media is) and proceeded to delete the entire section since the investigation did not conform to his political bias.108 It is important to mention here that Kautilya3 is a Indian-origin UK-based doctor – Uday Reddy – who was recently booked in India for spreading disharmony between communities with his anti-India edits on Wikipedia133. An FIR has been registered against the Indian-origin man who works as a professor at a University in the United Kingdom by the Manipur police in the state capital Imphal. He was accused of inflammatory posts and statements on social media platforms. Reddy’s X handle Kautilya3 is withheld in India. In the complaint against Reddy, it was stated that he may have links with Khalistanis elements in Canada. He has been accused of editing Wikipedia articles with misleading information.

The complaint against Reddy was filed by a resident of Manipur based on which the FIR was registered. Reddy teaches Computer Science at the University of Birmingham. It has been alleged that Reddy has been working online to create tensions between Meitei and Kuki communities on religious grounds in Manipur. The FIR has been registered with a police station in Imphal East district under Sections 117 (abetment), 295-A (insulting religious sentiments), 153-A (promoting enmity between communities) and other relevant provisions of law.

The complaint read, “The accused person deliberately with malicious intention insulted the Meitei’s religious beliefs and promoted enmity between the Meiteis and other communities on religious grounds.” Though Reddy has not officially given any statement on social media, he has thanked others for expressing solidarity with him. The police said in a statement that Reddy often hosts spaces on social media platforms and allegedly directs people in Manipur on how to create unrest and trouble against law enforcement personnel. The complaint read, “The unlawful activities of the accused person and his associates amount to anti-national activities that challenge the integrity and sovereignty of India, and are fit to be dealt with under the relevant provisions of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act.” 133 https://www.opindia.com/2024/07/fir-against-uk-based-indian-origin-professor-uday-reddy-manipur-kuki- [archive] meitei-hatred/109

It further read, “As there is a high possibility of the accused being linked with Khalistanis in Canada… and with narco-terrorist groups… the call records of the accused, financial activities… may kindly be investigated.” The complainant also requested the Indian authorities to contact the employers of Reddy and inform them about the “criminal acts committed by him against India”. He also requested to issue a lookout circular (LOC) to monitor entry and exit points in India. Uday Reddy has been called out multiple times for his lack of understanding about Manipur and for spreading propaganda about Meitei community. For instance, in one of the discussions he was called out for his failure to accurately address Manipur’s history, specifically the Anglo-Kuki war. He was also seen mocking Meitei victims on several instances. He also showed his anti-Hindu bias multiple times. In April 2022, he accused Hindus of “weaponising” Ram Navami against Muslims. In a post on X, he wrote, “Hindutva nationalist organisations, spearheaded by RSS and BJP, have weaponised the festival to create Hindu– Muslim frictions, causing riots and deaths, in which the Muslims have been the major sufferers.”

In reality, it was Muslims who have attacked Hindus across India on Hindu festivals like Ram Navami and Hanuman Jayanti. In fact, processions related to festivals of Saraswati Puja and Ganesh Chaturthi too have been attacked, which are benign festivals related to celebration of wisdom and knowledge.


Source: Wikipedia's War On India: A Dossier on Wikipedia

Arts and music

  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

Internet policies

  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

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

Science

Fringe

Conspiracy theories

Politics

Freedom of the Press in India

The first sentence in the Wikipedia page on “Freedom of the Press in India” is as follows: “Freedom of the press in India is legally protected by the Amendment to the constitution of India, while the sovereignty, national integrity, and moral principles are generally protected by the law of India to maintain a hybrid legal system for independent journalism. In India, media bias or misleading information is restricted under the certain constitutional amendments as described by the country's constitution. The media crime is covered by the Indian Penal Code (IPC) which is applicable to all substantive aspects of criminal law” This entire paragraph makes very little sense and also misrepresents the constitution of India given that there is no amendment to the constitution which legally protects freedom of the press. Freedom of the press is included in the gambit of freedom of speech and expression. Further, there is no “constitutional amendment as described by the country’s constitution” which restricts media bias – this sentence essentially goes to project a misleading impression of India given that it insinuates that any editorial slant may be outlawed by the constitution itself.

Interestingly, the only reference for this entire paragraph is an opinion piece in the Washington Post headlined, “In Modi’s India, journalists face bullying, criminal cases and worse”. The article was written in 2018 by Annie Gowen who has a history of anti-India and anti-Hindu tweets, laden with misinformation and inaccuracies138139. The next paragraph reads as follows: Nevertheless, freedom of the press in India is subject to certain restrictions, such as defamation law, a lack of protection for whistleblowers, barriers to information access and constraints caused by public and government hostility to journalists. There is again no reference to substantiate that the public at large is hostile towards journalists, as is the government. The only purpose this serves is to paint India in an autocratic light. 138 https://www.opindia.com/2018/07/racist-foreign-journalist-annie-gowen-washington-post-brazens-it-out- [archive] even-as-hindus-seek-apology-for-her-insulting-tweet/ 139 https://www.opindia.com/2018/07/hinduphobe-journalist-of-washington-post-now-tries-to-lie-about- [archive] censorship-on-media-in-kashmir/118 Further in the article, The Wikipedia article strings together a bunch of opinions to pass it off as fact.

The Wikipedia article further says that the Indian government in 2020 had issued warnings to foreign media. The reference they use for it is an Outlook article from 2020 which merely states that the foreign media did not report accurate on the Delhi Riots 2020 and the government had issued rejoinders to them140. The article then mentions the raids on BBC and insinuates that the raids were conducted because of an anti-Modi documentary aired by the BBC. In truth, the raids had nothing to do with the BBC documentary. In February 2023, the BBC offices were surveyed by tax authorities for 3 days. After the survey, the Finance Ministry had issued a statement explaining the depth of tax fraud committed by the BBC. Without naming BBC, the statement said that a survey action under section 133A of the Income tax Act, 1961(the Act) was carried out at the business premises of group entities of a prominent international Media Company at Delhi and Mumbai. The statement noted that BBC is engaged in the business of development of content in English, Hindi and various other Indian languages; advertisement sales and market support services, etc in India. The statement said that the income/profits shown by various group entities under BBC India do not match their scale of operations in India, as the quantity of content in India is substantial. In the raid by the Income tax department, which has been described as a survey,

140 https://www.outlookindia.com/national/india-news-sarkar-unhappy-with-india-as-seen-from-abroad-news- [archive] 302944119 several pieces of evidence were found that show that tax has not been paid on certain remittances which have not been disclosed as income in India by the foreign entities of the group. The ministry further informed that the survey revealed that BBC India had made remittances to its foreign offices for utilising the services of seconded employees, or temporary employees sent from overseas. While such remittances are subjected to withholding tax, BBC avoided it. Further, the I-T department also found discrepancies and inconsistencies with regard to Transfer Pricing documentation. Such discrepancies relate to the level of relevant Function, Asset and Risk (FAR) analysis, incorrect use of comparable which are applicable to determine the correct Arm’s Length Price (ALP) and inadequate revenue apportionment, among others, the statement said.

The ministry has said that the survey operation has resulted in the unearthing of crucial evidence by way of statements of employees, digital evidence and documents which will be further examined in due course. “It is pertinent to state that statements of only those employees were recorded whose role was crucial including those connected to, primarily, finance, content development and other production-related functions,” the ministry said. Interestingly, while the ‘Liberal’ ecosystem in India had tried to defend the BBC and blame the Modi government for conducting the survey at the BBC premises, the broadcasting company has a notable past of tax evasion and fraud. For example, Thousands of public employees, including those at the BBC, were not paying their taxes at the source, according to a 2012 report from the public accounts committee in the United Kingdom (UK).

There were, at that time, also reports claiming that the BBC has agreed to cough up Rs 40 crores to make up for their tax evasion over a period of almost 6 years – from 2016 to 2022. The Wikipedia article, of course, leaves out the several attacks against journalists that the Left does not agree with. While it mentions imagined threats by Sagarika Ghose and Ravish Kumar, it does not mention how the Congress alliance govt in Maharashtra arrested and kept Arnab Goswami in jail for weeks over a case that was later dismissed by the court.

Further, the Wikipedia article also talks of Bobby Ghosh and passes off speculation and opinion about the reasons of his exit from Hindustan Times as a fact. The Hate Tracker that120 Ghosh had started was actually taken down because wild inaccuracies were pointed out in the tracker and not because there was any government pressure141.142

141 https://www.opindia.com/2017/08/hindustan-times-hate-tracker-a-classic-case-of-how-media-peddles-an- [archive] agenda/ 142 https://www.opindia.com/2017/10/what-has-happened-to-hindustan-times-database-hate-tracker/ [archive]

Source: Wikipedia's War On India: A Dossier on Wikipedia

Claims of "Hindu fascism"

  • 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

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

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

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

Old version of wikipedia


Hindutva



  • 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
  • [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
  • 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
  • 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


Shiv Sena

Linking Hinduism with Western fascism

Claims that Vedic India was racist

  • -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

"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

  • 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

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

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

Godhra train burning and Gujarat riots

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

Personal attacks

Aryan invasion theory articles

California textbook controversy

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


Topic about deletion and censorship at wikipedia

Biographies of living persons

  • 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

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

Missing articles

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

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

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

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

Links

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.

https://jewishjournal.com/commentary/opinion/374801/wikipedias-fundamental-sourcing-problem/ [archive]

https://www.opindia.com/2024/12/wikipedia-sambhal-violence-page-criticised-for-biased-claims-and-false-narratives/ [archive]

  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.
  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=94689"