Talk:Atiq Ahmed
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Atiq Ahmed article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1Auto-archiving period: 28 days ![]() |
![]() | This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
|
![]() | Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at pageviews.wmcloud.org |
|
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 28 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present. |
Semi-protected edit request on 15 April 2023
![]() | This edit request to Atique Ahmed has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
death_date = Willpat1234 (talk) 17:39, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
April 15, 2023Already done – Special:Diff/1149988700. Favonian (talk) 17:47, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
Semi-protected edit request on 15 April 2023 (2)
![]() | This edit request to Atique Ahmed has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
On April 15, 2023, justice was served when Ahmed and his brother Ashraf were gunned down during a court-mandated medical checkup in Prayagraj. Ahmed's callous response to his son's funeral, "I wasn't taken, so I didn't go," proved he deserved what was coming to him. Before Ashraf could mention the name of their accomplice, Guddu Muslim, the perpetrators, who had disguised themselves as media personnel, shot Ahmed in the head, instantly killing him. They continued to fire, taking down Ashraf as well. The entire event was broadcasted live on television, and the killers did not attempt to escape or hide their identities. They even shouted "Jai Shree Ram" as they were being apprehended. It's worth noting that Ahmed was surrounded by police officers during the incident, yet none of them intervened to stop the well-deserved punishment.
Miranjoon (talk) 19:57, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
Not done: You're being totally biased on this one. Please maintain a neutral point of view. ❯❯❯ Raydann(Talk) 20:04, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
Jai Shree Ram
It has been proven that there was no chanting of Jai Shree Ram. Please correct it. 42.105.129.188 (talk) 20:11, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
- Please share source for this. Mixmon (talk) 20:18, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
- its a video 42.105.129.188 (talk) 20:20, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
- Hindustan Times, which is a reliable news source has reported that the perpetrators did in fact chant the slogan. Check here and here. Can you provide a source which proves thay did not do so? ❯❯❯ Raydann(Talk) 20:20, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
- Even if they did, mentioning "murderers raised slogans" should be enough 2405:201:6019:603B:79B9:F46A:6962:5FE7 (talk) 21:43, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
- Mentioning the exact slogans they chanted give additional context to the reader about the intentions of the perpetrators. It is necessary to maintain a fair point of view. It has been confirmed by various media outlets and in the video itself it can be clearly heard. WatermelonSeller05 (talk) 16:21, 16 April 2023 (UTC)
- The bot has put up a banner saying 'the article may be published from a fan point of view". You need to check the current version again and remove the lines which may seem that they were written by a fan point of view 2405:201:6019:603B:79B9:F46A:6962:5FE7 (talk) 21:45, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
- What is the slogan in this case is pretty WP:DUE. >>> Extorc.talk 05:22, 16 April 2023 (UTC)
- Even if they did, mentioning "murderers raised slogans" should be enough 2405:201:6019:603B:79B9:F46A:6962:5FE7 (talk) 21:43, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
- Hindustan Times, which is a reliable news source has reported that the perpetrators did in fact chant the slogan. Check here and here. Can you provide a source which proves thay did not do so? ❯❯❯ Raydann(Talk) 20:20, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
- its a video 42.105.129.188 (talk) 20:20, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
Neutrality
In the "death" section, the phrase "they chanted slogans" instead of "chanted Jai Shree Ram" should be enough, as the latter sounds very biased. Also taking a dig at he being surrounded by police isn't a professional way of presenting thing on a public encyclopedia 2405:201:4019:3874:ECFB:1304:9526:48BB (talk) 07:55, 16 April 2023 (UTC)
- Telling the exact slogans they chanted is not bias. It gives additional context and should be added. I propose that the previous use of this slogan by nationalists as a battle cry also be mentioned.
- Also, it is a fact that they were surrounded by the police and one of the major highlights of this case. How can people in custody under the police be shot? Removing this highlight would be disingenuous. WatermelonSeller05 (talk) 16:25, 16 April 2023 (UTC)
Semi-protected edit request on 16 April 2023
![]() | This edit request to Atique Ahmed has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please remove Jai Shree Ram from the article in the Death Section. Or else it could lead to communal disharmony SAMMY IS VILE (talk) 08:09, 16 April 2023 (UTC)
Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Mixmon (talk) 08:26, 16 April 2023 (UTC)
- It will lead to communal disharmony is not a valid reason to remove facts from the article. This is an informative article not a government announcement. Facts must be stated. WatermelonSeller05 (talk) 16:26, 16 April 2023 (UTC)
Redux
I have again restored this statement, which was removed with the edit summary "Trying to invoke communal violence. No religion should be targeted during neutral writing. An FIR might be logged against that person if trying to involve any communal writing". Either it happened (and is reliably sourced), or it did not (or is not). Wikipedia is not censored. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:17, 16 April 2023 (UTC)
- And again... Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:44, 17 April 2023 (UTC)
- And again... ❯❯❯ Raydann(Talk) 15:16, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
Semi-protected edit request on 19 April 2023
![]() | This edit request to Atique Ahmed has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Chanting jai shree ram mentioned under the death section is false..Please remove it. Ansh.14229 (talk) 05:31, 19 April 2023 (UTC)
Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Wracking 💬 05:37, 19 April 2023 (UTC)
spelling of his name
Is his name "Atique Ahmed" or "Atiq Ahmed"? Mixmon (talk) 21:14, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
- some sources are also using Ahmad instead of Ahmed Mixmon (talk) 21:15, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
- The sources are pretty confused what is the name of this individual. >>> Extorc.talk 05:22, 16 April 2023 (UTC)
- @Mixmon but one thing is that I can see clearly that Atiq is more common than Atique. Do you agree? >>> Extorc.talk 05:23, 16 April 2023 (UTC)
- This google trends is interesting. >>> Extorc.talk 05:36, 16 April 2023 (UTC)
- Yes Atiq is used more fequently by reliable sources. Mixmon (talk) 05:46, 16 April 2023 (UTC)
Requested move 16 April 2023
![]() | It has been proposed in this section that Atiq Ahmed be renamed and moved to Atiq Ahmad. A bot will list this discussion on the requested moves current discussions subpage within an hour of this tag being placed. The discussion may be closed 7 days after being opened, if consensus has been reached (see the closing instructions). Please base arguments on article title policy, and keep discussion succinct and civil. Please use {{subst:requested move}} . Do not use {{requested move/dated}} directly. |
Atique Ahmed → Atiq Ahmad – A simple look at the sources and a further look into google trends suggests that Atiq is much more common than Atique. Ahmad vs Ahmed is a little debatable but Google trends suggests that Ahmad is a little more common. >>> Extorc.talk 05:54, 16 April 2023 (UTC)
- Support Atique should be changed to Atiq. However, I'm not sure about Ahmad. Mixmon (talk) 06:14, 16 April 2023 (UTC)
- Note: WikiProject India has been notified of this discussion. ❯❯❯ Raydann(Talk) 10:38, 16 April 2023 (UTC)
- Atiq is the right spelling NoworNever007 (talk) 13:19, 16 April 2023 (UTC)
- Neutral Atiq is the correct spelling rather than Atique, but multiple reputable sources have his surname as Ahmed. I would support a change to Atiq Ahmed.
- BBC: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-india-65290042
- Sky News: https://news.sky.com/story/amp/atiq-ahmed-indian-gangster-turned-politician-shot-dead-on-live-television-12858477
- The Guardian: https://amp.theguardian.com/world/2023/apr/16/atiq-ahmed-former-mp-brother-shot-dead-live-tv-india OneRandomBrit (talk) 13:53, 16 April 2023 (UTC)
- Support Move to Atiq Ahmed per reliable sources. ─ The Aafī (talk) 06:36, 17 April 2023 (UTC)
- Comment I have recently noticed that a page with name Atiq Ahmed already exists. If consensus is achieved to rename this page to Atiq Ahmed, then the cricketer page should be moved. Gangster Atiq is more notable than cricketer Atiq in terms of pageviews and coverage in reliable sources. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mixmon (talk • contribs) 11:44, 18 April 2023 (UTC)
- Yea, that was brought to my notice when a topic banned editor closed this request prematurely and also moved the cricketers page without discussion. >>> Extorc.talk 12:45, 18 April 2023 (UTC)
More criminal records should be added
There is a long list of his crimes which includes extortions and threats, they should also be included in detailed in a separate topic 2405:201:6019:603B:79B9:F46A:6962:5FE7 (talk) 21:47, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
- I will look into that soon but to what extent we can work with that considering those are not even charges, just allegations, is debatable. >>> Extorc.talk 05:21, 16 April 2023 (UTC)
- Right. 103.77.43.48 (talk) 02:05, 22 April 2023 (UTC)
Gangster-turned politician
@Nswix here you suggested that because he hasn't been convicted ever, the description should say politician and not Gangster-turned politician. WP:BLPCRIME wont apply to Ahmed because he is not a WP:LOWPROFILE. He was an active gangster. All sources clearly state that. >>> Extorc.talk 05:20, 16 April 2023 (UTC)
- Doesn't change that he was never convicted of crime. He's only ever been accused. Nswix (talk) 05:23, 16 April 2023 (UTC)
- Osama Bin Laden was never convicted. He was still a militant mastermind and a terrorist. >>> Extorc.talk 05:24, 16 April 2023 (UTC)
- Osama bin Laden admitted to being a militant and a terrorist. Nswix (talk) 05:25, 16 April 2023 (UTC)
- And so did Atiq for his crimes.
I don't understand what you draw a disagreement with. Are you trying to apply BLPCIME to him? It doesn't apply to him. >>> Extorc.talk 05:29, 16 April 2023 (UTC)- It is not an allegation that he is a Gangster. It is a known RS backed fact. >>> Extorc.talk 05:34, 16 April 2023 (UTC)
- Mr. Nswix, in which country do you live? Atiq being a gangster is as obvious as humans having hair on their bodies. Even by going by wikipedia standards, EVERY single source describe him as gangster, criminal, mafia etc. He never DENIED being a criminal, in fact he admitted being a don, and flaunted it, even before 21st century. He has served years in jail, for extortion, kidnapping, murder etc. He's a History-sheeter, proven again by facts. He confessed to his most recent crime too! Either you're not an Indian, or you live in some different world. 2405:201:4019:3874:C77:4308:2DCA:6FBA (talk) 16:01, 19 April 2023 (UTC)
- And so did Atiq for his crimes.
- Osama bin Laden admitted to being a militant and a terrorist. Nswix (talk) 05:25, 16 April 2023 (UTC)
- Osama Bin Laden was never convicted. He was still a militant mastermind and a terrorist. >>> Extorc.talk 05:24, 16 April 2023 (UTC)
- That's a factually wrong claim, he was convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment. Mixmon (talk) 05:53, 16 April 2023 (UTC)
- He was a convicted criminal serving life sentence. How would he serve in jail in both Prayagraj and then Gujarat jails? He had 100+ cases ongoing. Some of them were quashed because of connections with Samajwadi Government. 2405:201:6019:603B:BC30:C03E:4646:88D3 (talk) 15:05, 16 April 2023 (UTC)
- I don't know anything about this guy, so I come to this article completely unbiased about him because of yesterday's news. The way the article is currently written is totally unacceptable. You can't say that he's a criminal and a gangster ("criminal and gangster" are even listed as his occupation in the infobox!) unless he's been convicted of some crime or he's been widely acknowledged in reliable sources as being a member of some crime family or something. This may or may not be true about Atique Ahmed, but the claim that he's a criminal/gangster is not substantiated by the text of the article. If this claim is going to remain in the article, better evidence needs to be added. Bueller 007 (talk) 15:14, 16 April 2023 (UTC)
- You should have read the entire discussion before sharing unbiased opinion. Please see these - [10][11][12][13][14] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mixmon (talk • contribs) 15:28, 16 April 2023 (UTC)
- I read the entire article. As I said, relevant references for the claims in the article go IN THE ARTICLE, not on the talk page. I changed the article to read "accused criminal" as per NPOV. If he has been convicted of something, then that information needs to be in the article itself. Not just on the talk page. At the moment, there is no info in the article regarding convictions, so he should be called an "accused criminal" unless flat-out referred to as a "criminal" in a number of reliable sources. EDIT: changed to "convicted criminal" as per BBC. Bueller 007 (talk) 16:33, 16 April 2023 (UTC)
"You can't say that he's a criminal and a gangster ... unless he's been convicted ... being a member of some crime family or something."
From where do you get that @Bueller 007? If the sources overwhelmingly point that he is a gangster, there is no way we call him anything else."If this claim is going to remain in the article, better evidence needs to be added."
The evidence is the swathes of cited sources. >>> Extorc.talk 06:49, 17 April 2023 (UTC)- I'm the one who added all those sources to the article... Do try to keep up. Bueller 007 (talk) 10:39, 17 April 2023 (UTC)
- Kindly, if anyone has any keeping-up to do, it's you. Before you entered the scene, the article already had piles of sources calling Atiq a gangster. >>> Extorc.talk 16:07, 17 April 2023 (UTC)
- I'm the one who added all those sources to the article... Do try to keep up. Bueller 007 (talk) 10:39, 17 April 2023 (UTC)
- You should have read the entire discussion before sharing unbiased opinion. Please see these - [10][11][12][13][14] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mixmon (talk • contribs) 15:28, 16 April 2023 (UTC)
Inadequate description of how he became so rich
A sentence in the lede suggests that he had $1.5 billion dollars in property confiscated. But the article never gets anywhere near explaining how he became so wealthy. Most criminals and gangster and corrupt politicians are obviously nowhere near this wealthy. So it's hard to believe without further information. This info should be added. In addition, I have seen references such as this one referring to him as a Robin Hood like figure. This may or may not be correct, but some information should be added to the article about why someone might have reason to believe this claim. Bueller 007 (talk) 17:28, 18 April 2023 (UTC)
- There are some not so reliable sources which talk about an "election tax" he levied on election candidates. But overall I believe this line is WP:UNDUE for the lead. >>> Extorc.talk 08:18, 19 April 2023 (UTC)
- This article critically examines the "Robinhood figure" tag. It might be useful if you want to add something. However, I think a new article will have to be created if were to add reactions to Atiq's assassination. Mixmon (talk) 18:27, 21 April 2023 (UTC)
- This article is only 33k bytes. No need for a fork now. I would see inclusion of reactions to murder as completely fine (given they are not actually bigger than the rest of the article altogether). >>> Extorc.talk 19:11, 21 April 2023 (UTC)