Talk:Bajrang Dal/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Semi-protected edit request on 23 October 2015

NOT A MILITANT ORGANIZATION 2401:FA00:C:113:B4B1:6871:2C60:179D (talk) 04:26, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

Not done: as you have not requested a specific change in the form "Please replace XXX with YYY" or "Please add ZZZ between PPP and QQQ".
More importantly, you have not cited reliable sources to back up your request, without which no information should be added to, or changed in, any article. - Arjayay (talk) 07:16, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 30 October 2015

Delete the word "militant" from the definition of the organization. It is factually incorrect. 122.160.127.70 (talk) 10:32, 30 October 2015 (UTC)

 Not done That description appears in multiple reliable sources. - Kautilya3 (talk) 11:27, 30 October 2015 (UTC)

misspelling of PM Narasimha Rao

It is spelled as Narsimha, it should be Narasimha. Please change it.

 Done. Thanks. - Kautilya3 (talk) 12:07, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 28 January 2016

The Bajrang Dal (IPA:Bajaraṅga Dala) is a Hindu beliefs organisation that forms the youth wing of the Vishva Hindu Parishad (VHP).[1][2]

Gbkb16 (talk) 06:11, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

 Not done. Reliable sources have been provided which state that it is a "militant" organisation. Please consult them. - Kautilya3 (talk) 11:08, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

which reliable source are you talking about? please provide the complete detail or remove the word militant. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sk234 (talk • contribs) 15:54, 30 August 2016 (UTC)

@Sk234: At the end of the sentence you find two footnotes [1][2]. Please consult them. But, honestly, there are hundreds of sources that describe Bajrang Dal as a militant organisation. This is not a battle you want to fight. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 17:27, 30 August 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 3 February 2016

The Bajrang Dal (IPA:Bajaraṅga Dala) is a Hindu organisation that forms the youth wing of the Vishva Hindu Parishad (VHP) and a member of the RSS family of organisations.[1][2] The ideology of the organisation is based on Hindu fundamentalism.[2][3] Founded on 1 October 1984 in Uttar Pradesh, it has since spread throughout India,[4] although its most significant base remains the northern and central portions of the country. The group runs about 2,500 akhadas, similar to the shakhas (branches) of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh. The name "Bajrang" is a reference to the Hindu deity Hanuman.

The Bajrang Dal's slogan is 'Sevā Surakṣā Sanskṛti' or "service, safety and culture." One of the main goals of the Dal is to build the Ramjanmabhoomi temple in Ayodhya, the Krishnajanmabhoomi temple in Mathura and the Kashi Vishwanath temple in Varanasi, which are currently disputed places of worship. Other goals include protecting India's "Hindu" identity from the perceived dangers of communism, Muslim demographic growth and Christian conversion, as well as the prevention of cow slaughter. Gbkb16 (talk) 09:51, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. Also, reliable sources are needed. Bazj (talk) 10:26, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

 Not done With due respect, Bazj, it is clear what the editor making the request wants; this is a slight wording change to the first two paragraphs. However, this is not reason enough to make the change. The current wording is supported by reliable sources. To change it, you need to provide reliable sources of equal weight that contradict the narrative presented here. Vanamonde93 (talk) 14:36, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

Ajay t9 edit

@Ajay t9: reliably sourced content should never be deleted without consensus. You deletion [1] is based on personal opinion and WP:OR, which has no place on Wikipedia. Government opinions are also largely irrelevant. Reliable sources are all that matter. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 16:58, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Bajrang Dal/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

Mr. Goldstein Orwell, May I ask why you have removed every single authentic and very well cited edits? Every single edit I did was cited, supported, and consistent with the reports of the highly reputable and the largest Indian newspapers (among others, the Times of India and the Hindu) and BBC. You can click on every single link to verify that my edits were consistent with the historical news reports. My edits are necessary because they play a vital role in balancing, otherwise highly inaccurate, distorted and biased views. I would also like to know the exact words that might have violated your policies, so I can use the vocabulary consistent with your policies. Thanks

Last edited at 01:00, 28 August 2007 (UTC). Substituted at 08:51, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 30 August 2016

Sk234 (talk) 15:52, 30 August 2016 (UTC) The Bajrang Dal is a youth orgnisation, committed for nourishment and devlopment of the India's youth.

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. Dat Guy^Talk_Contribs 16:42, 30 August 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Bajrang Dal. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060903115324/http://www.media-watch.org:80/articles/0299/224.html to http://www.media-watch.org/articles/0299/224.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:00, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

Qualifiers like "fundamentalism" and "extremist"

@Vanamonde93: 1. Qualifiers like Hindu fundamentalist and extremist are used, changes were undone, sources [1] and [2] are print sources, will quotations be provided in support, in [3] too the phrase "Hindu fundamentalist is not used. Also suraksha in the context translates to security; such as suraksha dal means security forces, pl show sources that translate it to safety in the context. Pl discuss. Yogesh Khandke (talk) 15:16, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

@Yogesh Khandke: You have this backwards. If you do not have access to the print sources, as you just admitted, then the changes you made were simply based on what you thought should be in the article. That is original research, and I don't have to justify anything else about my revert. If there is disagreement over the translation, you should find a source to support your statement, in the context of this slogan; or remove it altogether. Using a piped link to change "Hindutva" to "Hinduness" is a real NPOV problem; even if that is the origin of the term, virtually all scholars today use "Hindutva" to represent the ideology of majoritarian Hindu nationalism. Finally, a ping will not work unless you add both it and your signature in the same edit. Vanamonde (talk) 05:46, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

@Vanamonde93: 1.Thanks about the "ping" heads up. 2. Hinduness is the meaning in English of the term, and since this is an English encyclopaedia use of an available English word is imo more appropriate and neutral, and not the use of a loaded poorly understood,demonised Sanskrit word.. 3. It is inappropriate to use qualifiers like "extremist" and "fundamentalist" to an organisation based on how its opponents describe it. (In the lead, of course there is the controversies section for that.) That is no wp:OR this article itself informs "The Bajrang Dal is not against any religion. It acknowledges respecting the faith of other people, but expects and asserts for a similar respect of the Hindu Sentiments. Being Hindu, the Bajrang Dal believes in validity of All Religions and Respect for all human beings, irrespective of caste, color, and religion (Aatmasvat Sarva Bhuteshu). It is for this purpose that the Bajrang Dal has undertaken various public-awakening campaigns. It does not believe in violence or any unlawful activity." By which yardstick is this "extremist or fundamentalist", interestingly Sarva Bhuteshu in Atmasat Sarva Bhuteshu, translates as all living beings and not humans so it is a statement of anti-Speciesism. 4. Seva, Suraksha, Sanskar translate as "Service, Security, Embellishment", pl change if you wish source here 5. Please incorporate concerns mentioned above, as I do not have the bandwidth at the moment to engage in a ping-pong discussions, I will make only one edit and change human beings to every living being, evidence here Yogesh Khandke (talk) 23:14, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

Second thoughts on (5) above since it is mis-translated in the original, I will not change that, though I could add a note some day. Tx. Yogesh Khandke (talk) 23:19, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

@Yogesh Khandke: For an editor who has been around for a long time, your arguments are very poorly formed indeed. If you consider scholars to be "opponents" of the Bajrang Dal, that is your affair; Wikipedia will continue to be based on what reliable sources say, and in this case they support the descriptors in the article. Indeed, the article is a lot milder than what many scholars say. Likewise, if you want to change the translation, find a source; if you think the term "Hindutva" is "demonized" and is thus an NPOV problem, once again, find a source that says that the Bajrang Dal supports "Hinduness" and not "Hindutva" as the ideology is commonly understood. If you do not have sufficient internet access, we can wait until you do. There is no deadline. Vanamonde (talk) 07:36, 27 May 2017 (UTC)

@Vanamonde93:."Bandwidth - Something business people say to describe the resources needed to complete a task or project. Eg. We don't have the bandwidth to completet that project."[2]

@Yogesh Khandke: Well, I am not a businessman, and I use the word in its conventional sense. If you have other things on your mind, my comment still applies. Vanamonde (talk) 14:47, 27 May 2017 (UTC)

@Vanamonde93: Language is a dynamic system. Yogesh Khandke (talk) 17:07, 28 May 2017 (UTC)

@Yogesh Khandke: When you get back on topic, I'll be waiting. Vanamonde (talk) 17:10, 28 May 2017 (UTC)

Sorry meant to share this thanks & bye for now. Yogesh Khandke (talk) 17:19, 28 May 2017 (UTC)

• It is clear that the majority of the relevant scholarship considers Bajrang Dal to be en example of extremist hindu nationalism and fundamentalism. That is what the article needs to reflect. Is this article not within the scope of the topic of "Indian history broadly construed" by the way?·maunus · snunɐɯ· 17:57, 28 May 2017 (UTC)

• It probably is. I've pointed it out on YK's talk page. Most of the quibbling since has been about YK wanting to use his translation of "Hindutva", and so I haven't bothered trying to wikilawyer him into a block. If he decides to get into the history of the BD's activities, well, that's a different matter. Vanamonde (talk) 18:16, 28 May 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 3 March 2018

The Wiki page says: "The Bajrang Dal is a militant organisation that forms the youth wing of the Vishva Hindu Parishad (VHP)." Bajrang Dal is NOT a militant organisation. There's no reliable source that claims that. I suppose the page has been edited by someone with secessionist agenda. Please change that to Youth organisation or 'Hindu Youth Organisation'. 183.82.206.158 (talk) 18:48, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

 Not done. What do the 9 citations at the end of that sentence say? -- Kautilya3 (talk) 21:14, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 14 May 2018

Aashish664442 (talk) 06:18, 14 May 2018 (UTC)

 Not done It is not clear what change you want made to the article. Vanamonde (talk) 06:34, 14 May 2018 (UTC)

Remove millitant word from article Aashish664442 (talk) 07:23, 14 May 2018 (UTC)

Bajrang Dal is not a millitant organisation Aashish664442 (talk) 07:24, 14 May 2018 (UTC)

Please see the above discussions. The term is used by most reliable sources describing the subject. Vanamonde (talk) 08:49, 14 May 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 14 June 2018

Change militant to 'Hindu Nationalist'. Militant is not true. They do not do militant activities. They only do protests and road shows and organise festivals. They DO NOT do military activities. Majorthudly (talk) 15:47, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. I see at least one cited source within the article naming Bajrang Dal as a militant group (though there are likely others). Also please note that "militant" does not mean the same thing as "military". This has been discussed repeatedly on this talk page before, so this will not be changed without significant consensus behind it. ‑‑ElHef (Meep?) 16:02, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

Bajrang Dal is not militant organisation pls correct this — Preceding unsigned comment added by 164.100.25.5 (talk) 08:34, 9 October 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 20 February 2019

Remove the word "Militant" 2405:204:520A:6F1F:A44D:8447:9D4A:66F7 (talk) 11:42, 20 February 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit semi-protected}} template. See previous discussions on this talk page on this subject. ‑‑ElHef (Meep?) 14:03, 20 February 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 23 April 2019

Please remove the adjective Militant . BD is a religious organization. This hurts billions of Hindus. Hari7priya (talk) 22:43, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: See above – Þjarkur (talk) 23:00, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 9 April 2018

change "The Bajrang Dal is a militant organisation" to "The Bajrang Dal is a organisation" 27.97.175.104 (talk) 18:48, 9 April 2018 (UTC)

 Not done for now: Please see the section above titled Lead as to this. You are welcome to open up a RfC if you feel the need. — IVORK _Discuss 00:51, 10 April 2018 (UTC)

I wanna remove the word millitiant from bajarang dal Harshilaya (talk) 11:58, 9 February 2020 (UTC)

remove militant word from it

bajrang dal is not a militant organization you must remove militant word from it. it is a religious humanity org. not a militant org. Dinojamespuv (talk) 08:14, 2 February 2020 (UTC)

We'll take legal actions against you if you don't remove the word millitiant .there's no proof or any legal confirmed source on whose basis you can declare it millitiant group Harshilaya (talk) 11:56, 9 February 2020 (UTC)

 Not done per above. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 16:57, 9 February 2020 (UTC)

MohitGemini (talk) 17:44, 13 February 2020 (UTC)

Delete militant word from this info page Priyanshu Gunjal (talk) 07:13, 16 February 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 10 March 2020

NISHANTsgour (talk) 12:52, 10 March 2020 (UTC)

Please allow me to delet word "militant" from the article

 Not done: Asked and answered. —KuyaBriBri^Talk 13:25, 10 March 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 25 May 2020

Bajarang Dal is not a militant organization. It has not been designated as a militant organization and thus the information in the first line is factually incorrect. It also hurts the sentiment of a particular religion by being called militant. The only way it should be called one is if any law does that.

"The Bajrang Dal is a religious militant organisation" - This line needs to be changed R31070 (talk) 06:19, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

See #Lead – Thjarkur (talk) 11:43, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 12 June 2020

Change website link to https://vhp.org/vhp-at-glance/youth/bajrang-dal/ MahatmaVeerSavarkar (talk) 12:46, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. — Yours, Berrely • ^Talk∕_Contribs 15:15, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

@Berrely: Huh? The link in the article was 404, so this seems like a perfectly valid request to me.  Done ‑‑ElHef (Meep?) 21:03, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

Remove the word Militant

Pls ensure you remove the word Militant else a formal police complaint will be filed against this person who edited and owning this page. Sanju6414 (talk) 16:22, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

Per WP:NLT I have blocked the account. Doug Weller talk 18:01, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 30 August 2020

Bajrang Dal is a religious organization and is part of VHP (Vishwa Hindu Parishad English: World Hindu Council). However in Wikipedia it is defined as militant organization. This is vandalism. Please allow me to edit the same. Dileepm (talk) 09:09, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: The claim is supported by a reliable source. If you still think the claim should be changed, please establish consensus for such change. Melmann 09:52, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 22 September 2020

Please remove the term Militant Organisation and name it as Organisation or Hindu Organisation. Ashish1401 (talk) 12:46, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

 Not done The term appears to be well sourced. --RegentsPark (comment) 15:37, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

I thought this sounded familiar. Please see the discussion at the top of the talk page. --RegentsPark (comment) 15:39, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

Militant

Dear Team,

I was searching about "Bajrang Dal" which is a hindu religious group based out in india. I just noticed that "Dawnseeker2000" have misused their editing power to mis-interpret information about this page and added "Militant" keyword.

Bajrang Dal is not a militant org noticed by any country in the world including India. this must have been propaganda to malign the organization. please see the attached image as below and correct it. thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rajeshkumarin (talk • contribs) 10:05, 6 December 2020 (UTC)

The content is reliably sourced and written according to Wikipedia policies. This has been raised many times earlier in the talk page, and you are welcome to read through it.

I should warn you to discuss content and not the editors. Any repeat of this behaviour will be constructed as a personal attack and you can be sanctioned for that. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 12:30, 6 December 2020 (UTC)

"Saints"?

Origin

In October 1984, the Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) initiated the practice of regular processions to be held in Ayodhya in the state of Uttar Pradesh. These processions were called "Ram-Janaki Rathayatra" and were aimed at "awakening the society." While the VHP did not officially claim any anti-religion drivers for this practice, many sections of the society in India viewed this as a pro-Hindu movement. As a result, there was an environment of communal tension and threat surrounding this procession. Under these circumstances, Hindu saints in the VHP called upon the youth to protect the procession. Thus, the Bajrang Dal came into existence.
The organisation has since spread beyond Uttar Pradesh.

The "origin" paragraph includes the phrase it says "...Hindu saints in the VHP...". That implies it is in some way an undisputed fact a fact that these people are saints. I am reverting this line to the version prior to the 11th Dec 2014 edit by Aadigeog, with the more neutral phrase " 'holy saints' (members of VHP) ". HairyDan (talk) 08:56, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

HairyDan, Leaders is better word as compared to Hindu Saints. I went ahead and removed the entire section as it was unsourced and probably false. Anyone can re-add or update back with reliable source. --Walrus Ji (talk) 09:24, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

The word militant

U should remove the word militant from the first line itself Kokanemanoj1 (talk) 18:04, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

It is not pro active Hindu Organisations but organised Navin Chanani (talk) 16:35, 21 July 2018 (UTC)

Remove Militant word. Mandeep174 (talk) 04:07, 26 August 2018 (UTC)

You should removed Militant Brijesh.dsvv (talk) 06:49, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

Theres no proof on basis you can say someone militiant Harshilaya (talk) 11:55, 9 February 2020 (UTC)

There is no proof of militant organization nor declare by local government of india Priyanshu Gunjal (talk) 07:12, 16 February 2020 (UTC)

CIA classified Bajrang Dal as a "militant religious organization" in 2018: https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/resources/the-world-factbook/fields/print_2115.html There is no reason to remove the word militant organization. FlyingBird766 (talk)

CIA is not an indian organization is NIA also do this then why not delet militant word NISHANTsgour (talk) 12:55, 10 March 2020 (UTC)

Bajrang Dal isn't remotely Militant. On the other hand, Hezbollah and Jaish-e-Mohammad are. You are militant only If you have firearms, I think. Bajrang Dal doesn't have them.Dakshisdaksh (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 05:36, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

Remove the word militant Bajrang dal was never is never and will never be a militant group. Editguru45 (talk) 15:17, 17 May 2020 (UTC)

Please remove the word millitant Gandiv009 (talk) 11:57, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

Remove the word militant from it BharatvarshJambudveep (talk) 16:33, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

An organisation of India must be judged by Indian authorities or courts. None has named Bajrang Dal as militant organisation hence the militant must be removed. Doublehit43 (talk) 17:20, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

No, nope, not gonna do it, sorry no, nyet, iye. You last 6 people demanding removal of a sourced word could at least say please, only one did! @Doublehit43: Where do you get the idea "organisation of India must be judged by Indian authorities or courts" Wikipedia (WP) is not an Indian website, and we go by reliable sources, not random people who have made 1 or 2 edits to WP.

• What does the Hindi, or other 'Indian language' WPs say about Bajrang Dal? 220 of ^ßorg 08:12, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

The Hindi wikipedia says "Bajrang Dal , RSS and VHP 's youth face hard. It first started in Uttar Pradesh province of India on 1 October 1984 , which later expanded to the whole of India. Hindutva is the main philosophy of this family . The Bajrang Dal claims that it currently has 2700,000 members including 22,300,000 workers. [ Citation needed ]" What did you expect, anyway? -- Kautilya3 (talk) 17:17, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

@ Kautilya I don't know what I 'expected', I only read/speak English. I hoped for truth and accuracy. More likely, very poor writing, casteism, nationalism, copyvio, COI editing, massive bias, outright lies probably, etc. There's a lot of crap like that on en-WP too. 220 of ^ßorg 01:54, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

@220 of Borg and Kautilya3: It looks like the Hindi Wikipedia is copy paste of their official site. It should not be used for anything. The correct translation of the first line is BD is the youth face of VHP and Sangh Parivar. The BBC calls it " Bajrang Dal, a militant Hindu organisation". I think we should use the same.Walrus Ji (talk) 18:20, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

References

@ Walrus Ji Well, I'd hoped for some reality, apparently not. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ BBC & CIA call it militant, so I don't doubt it. Anyone else, NGOs, etc?
• I wonder if they understand the word "militant", Per:

"You are militant only If you have firearms, I think."

the comment above by Dakshisdaksh (talk · contribs). 220 of ^ßorg 01:54, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

@220 of Borg:, Dakshisdaksh seems to have a poor English vocabulary and an interest to sensor information. Bajrang Dal members have used fire arms and even grenades at many occasions. Some of the incidents are listed in the article for the deniars to look at. In fact, many of the members accidentally killed themselves with incompetent handling of bombs. Disregard Dakshisdaksh's comment as factually incorrect. Walrus Ji (talk) 09:50, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 7 February 2021

The Bajrang Dal, along with VHP, is a terrorist organization as declared by the CIA. Veer.Hindu (talk) 05:31, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

 Not done. They're categorized as "political pressure groups", not a terrorist organization. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 00:52, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

References

Semi-protected edit request on 15 February 2021

Change or remove Tthe word militant from first sentence. Kunalify (talk) 13:56, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: The word appears to be supported amply by reliable sources. For this change to be enacted, you will have to discuss it on the talk page and establish consensus first; see the discussion about the word above. Volteer1 (talk) 14:32, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 17 February 2021

Bajrang Dal is not militant organisation it is a social organisation working in various sector to protect the religious beliefs SourabhSpeaks (talk) 05:47, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

Please remove the tag about bajrang dal that it is Militant organisation SourabhSpeaks (talk) 05:48, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: The statement is supported by 8 reliable sources, including 7 high-quality academic sources. — Newslinger talk 06:43, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 17 February 2021 (2)

The Bajrang Dal (transl. Brigade of Hanuman)[2] is a Hindu nationalist organisation

"Remove militant word after nationalist because this organization has no past record of terror attack in name of religion as first aggressor" 2402:3A80:444:4121:80E4:9D34:EE9B:F263 (talk) 19:33, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: The "militant" descriptor is currently supported by 20 reliable sources, including 18 high-quality academic sources. See the full list, with excerpts, at Special:Permalink/1007358857 § cite note-militant-1. — Newslinger talk 20:27, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 18 February 2021

Bajrang Dal is a Hindu Nationalist Organization with far-right ideology, not a banned or militant organization. 2409:4060:1F:DD1D:530F:C507:A1C1:6DB9 (talk) 03:59, 18 February 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 07:30, 18 February 2021 (UTC)

Recent edits by AryanBaviskar

AryanBaviskar, in Special:Diff/1007606531, you deleted 20 reliable sources, including 18 high-quality academic sources. These sources describe the Bajrang Dal as "militant" because the Bajrang Dal exhibits a lower level of discipline than the paramilitary Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh. For example:

• Jaffrelot, Christophe (2010). Religion, Caste, and Politics in India. Primus Books. ISBN 9789380607047. Retrieved 17 February 2021 – via Google Books. In May–June, the VHP provided itself with an organization, which assembled young Hindu militants, the Bajrang Dal. Its founder, Vinay Katiyar, had until then been a pracharak of the RSS. However, the Bajrang Dal proved to be less disciplined than the RSS and its violent utterances as well as actions were to precipitate many communal riots.

Your edit also added "Muslim conversion, Muslim Terrorism" without providing a citation, and broke the citation template for Eko (2016). Because of this, and because this article has used "militant" with academic sourcing since December 2017, I am restoring the longstanding version. Please obtain consensus for your changes before implementing them. — Newslinger talk 01:02, 19 February 2021 (UTC)

Questioning militant and "neo-fascist" tag.;

According to Wikipedia rules, information provided in passing in otherwise sources is considerably different from the sources directly supporting them. In other words, a source which is cited for calling Bajrang Dal militant, should directly support the matter at hand in order to be reliable, an article concerning specifically showing how Bajrang Dal is a militant organization, is different from one which deals with something else, and simply calls it militant in passing by. Every single one of the citations do that, and therefore do not seem to be reliable. Context matters.

I also think that this article has no place in the "neo-fascist" section, as it has no actual racial supremacist, nor does it have any racial nationalist positions, any source which says that will be appreciated. Furthermore, the website of Bajrang Dal cited itself states that the purpose of Bajrang Dal includes removing Social Evils like Dowry Untouchability etc.

Also, the translation in the beginning of the article is wrong, dal means "team", not "brigade". Based47 (talk) 05:57, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

References

The assertion that "Every single one of the citations do that, and therefore do not seem to be reliable" is incorrect. I reviewed every one of the 18 high-quality academic sources in Special:Permalink/1007358857 § cite note-militant-1, and many of them go into significant detail explaining how the Bajrang Dal has earned its reputation as a militant organisation. For example, see Amrita Basu's Violent Conjunctures in Democratic India (Cambridge University Press), which contains over 40 pages detailing the violence inflicted by the Bajrang Dal. If you do not think the 18 high-quality academic sources cited in this article are reliable, feel free to ask the reliable sources noticeboard for their opinion. — Newslinger talk 10:28, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

Bajarang and militancy

Bajarang dal is a hindu nationalist Union. Bapu tharo (talk) 18:31, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 2 March 2021

Shivashankar108 (talk) 19:03, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

{{pp-vandalism|small=yes}}
{{pp-semi-protect|small=yes}}
{{Short description|Hindu nationalist militant organisation}}
{{EngvarB|date=January 2015}}
{{Use dmy dates|date=November 2020}}
{{Infobox organization
| name          = Bajrang Dal
| logo          = Bajrang Dal logo.jpg
| logo_size     = 200px
| logo_caption  = Logo of the Bajrang Dal
| motto         = "Service, safety, and culture"
| formation     = {{Start date and years ago|df=yes|p=y|1984|10|08}} 
| purpose       = [[youth wing]] of [[Vishva Hindu Parishad]]
| headquarters  = [[New Delhi]], [[India]]
| region_served = [[India]]
| language      = [[Hindi language|Hindi]]
| leader_title  = Head
| leader_name   = Rajesh Pandey
| parent_organisation = [[Vishva Hindu Parishad]]
| website       = {{url|https://vhp.org/vhp-at-glance/youth/bajrang-dal/}}
}}
The '''Bajrang Dal''' ({{trans|Brigade of [[Hanuman]]}})<ref name="Eko 2016" /> is a [[Hindu nationalist organization]]  |date=April 29, 2016 |isbn=978-1-137-55098-9 |pages=77–86 |chapter-url=https://www.researchgate.net/publication/303441330_Regulation_of_Sex-Themed_Visual_Imagery_in_India 

 Note: Calculated changes: remove militant from | purpose = in infobox, remove militant from lead (first sentence).

 Not done: 20 sources support the "militant" statements so far. See § FAQ. — TGHL ↗ (talk) 19:23, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 3 March 2021

Anantbeniwal1 (talk) 02:16, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

Bjrang dal is not a militant organization. Who ever wrote that is a Hinduphobic. Bajrag dal has zero death associated with it.

 Not done: 20 sources support the militant statement so far. See above post and the § FAQ. — TGHL ↗ (talk) 02:29, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 3 March 2021 (2)

Bajrang Dal is a Hindu Nationalist Organisation 115.96.105.22 (talk) 16:07, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

Not done: 20 sources support the militant statement so far. See two posts above and the § FAQ. — TGHL ↗ (talk) 18:16, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

Bajrang Dal is not militant organisation

It's is a Hindhu Religious organization Lucky11493 (talk) 12:07, 19 February 2021 (UTC)

It's both. The "militant" descriptor is currently supported by 20 reliable sources, including 18 high-quality academic sources. Please see the full list, with excerpts, at Special:Permalink/1007358857 § cite note-militant-1. — Newslinger talk 12:14, 19 February 2021 (UTC)

Your reliable sources do not have full vie of the situation in India. It is a highly biased view against an organisation working for unrepresented and oppressed Hindus in India, same as what Missionaries do fir Christians. MPfromMel (talk) 20:16, 7 March 2021 (UTC)

If you have located high-quality academic sources that support your claims, feel free to share them. — Newslinger talk 22:11, 7 March 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 10 March 2021

Bajrang dal is a hindu spritual organization. It's not a militant group like a isis. So please change this as soon as possible 2409:4041:2E86:E77D:ECBF:E62A:83DE:3B33 (talk) 17:14, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

Declining for several reasons.

• You're not being very clear with the changes you want to make.
• There should be consensus for this sort of thing.
• Read the #FAQ and the edit request above, there are many sources to support the militant statement.
  —Belwine (talk) 20:34, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

Due to technical restrictions on Wikipedia, the FAQ posted on the top of this talk page is not visible to users of the Wikipedia mobile website by default. For your convenience, the contents of the FAQ are reproduced below:

Q: Why does this article describe the Bajrang Dal as a militant organisation?

A: The consensus of high-quality academic sources is that the Bajrang Dal is a militant organisation. Please see Special:Permalink/1007358857 § cite note-militant-1 for the list. Neutrality on Wikipedia entails representing fairly, proportionately, and, as far as possible, without editorial bias, all the significant views that have been published by reliable sources on a topic, and the cited academic sources overwhelmingly agree that militant is an accurate descriptor for the Bajrang Dal.

— Newslinger talk 09:31, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 20 April 2021

Hindu nationalist militant[1] Peace4worlds (talk) 16:02, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

Wrong information Peace4worlds (talk) 16:03, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. ‑‑ElHef (Meep?) 16:47, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 1 May 2021

Bajrang Dal is not a militant group rather you can justify it as a religious group only. 2402:8100:2152:D25F:E4DB:C2BF:C25E:47F (talk) 13:39, 1 May 2021 (UTC)

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit semi-protected}} template. Cannolis (talk) 14:30, 1 May 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 17 May 2021

The Bajrang Dal (transl. Brigade of Hanuman) is a Hindu nationalist organisation that forms the youth wing of the Vishva Hindu Parishad (VHP). It is a member of the right-wing RSS family of organisations. 2405:204:A784:E340:9D36:809E:5359:7832 (talk) 05:32, 17 May 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. — IVORK _Talk 06:20, 17 May 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 2 July 2021

Bajarang Dal is not a militant organisation. Please correct it. 2402:8100:282E:17E7:0:0:0:1 (talk) 10:47, 2 July 2021 (UTC)

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit semi-protected}} template. See discussion above ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 10:55, 2 July 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 26 July 2021

Please remove the militant word , it's not a militant organisation it's a cultural organisation if it was a militant organisation government would have banned it till now practically, as militant groups are against constitution of India so please remove the word "militant" 2401:4900:5025:D664:F687:6966:B1BE:B739 (talk) 21:29, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit semi-protected}} template. See discussion above ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 21:33, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 17 August 2021

To Copy-edit and convert a section of the article to prose. Jaya49 (talk) 10:11, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 10:38, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 28 August 2021

• HINDU MILITANT ORGANISATION* this is what is written in the page. Please provide a source of by the Govt. of India stating that is a militant group mha.gov.in has listed all the extremist groups and groups that are a threat to integrity and sovereignty of the state. How can you misrepresent a group when govt of India does not recognise it as a Militant group. I suggest you remove the word Militant from the line, because GOVT OF INDIA doesn't state it as such. DO NOT SPREAD FALSE INFORMATION 117.207.48.186 (talk) 15:15, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 15:38, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 24 September 2021

This is not a militant group. Are they terrorist? Immediately remove this word Hindutvarakshak (talk) 19:59, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit semi-protected}} template. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 20:04, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 22 February 2022

I would like to request an edit for this individuals page as he is deceased now and has false information about his background on his page. 142.186.105.251 (talk) 12:49, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 13:02, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 17 March 2022

Bajrang dal is not a militant organisation 103.13.104.119 (talk) 03:05, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Happy Editing--IAmChaos 03:38, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

Lead

• The controversies involving BD are covered in the article. No need to try to make a statement in the lead. Is there any guideline related to which statement can be added in the lead and which can not? See this: [3]. I think Wikipedia as a source of neutral POV should have the same standards? thoughts? @RegentsPark: — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gauravsaral (talk • contribs)
• During earlier months, someone replaced "militant" with "extremist"[4] and this edit was overlooked, then someone added "militant" again[5] by putting sources. Even after that, "extremist" is unsourced and a forbidden term. Removed extremist per WP:EXTREMIST. While numerous editors have already noted the problems with "militant" term, I agree because more reliable sources describe Bajrang Dal as "paramilitary" organisation of VHP. D4iNa4 (talk) 18:46, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

Nope.Nobody except some famed POV pushers have expressed any problem.Please read through all of the sources.I've thus partially reverted.Will be looking more, once I get to a PC.Winged Blades ^Godric 19:10, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

@D4iNa4:-I checked Ref-5,6,7&8.All of them uses the word militant.Winged Blades ^Godric 19:27, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

Ref 1,2 and 3(??) support paramiltary. Winged Blades ^Godric 19:37, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

• I'm not totally sure I know what bajrang dal is, but if reliable sources generally say they are militant, then so should we. And if numerous reliable sources say so, we should do so in the lead. Also, D4iNa4, you've been around long enough to know better than to make WP:OTHERSTUFF arguments! --regentspark (comment) 19:45, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

@RegentsPark: That WP:OTHERSTUFF argument was made by Gauravsaral [6], I have now signed his comment to avoid confusions. D4iNa4 (talk) 17:45, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

Ah. Ok. Thanks for the update on that. --regentspark (comment) 18:11, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

• What RegentsPark said, pretty much. I have read a good few of the sources about the BD, and they virtually all describe it as militant. Vanamonde (talk) 19:52, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

• I have found dozens of scholarly sources from far more reliable publishers like Cambridge University, Routledge, Pearson, and all of them describe Bajrang Dal as "paramilitary". It means that they are more commonly and reliably described as paramilitary. The sources added by Tyler Durden(soon blocked) were also websites. Militant is much broader term, Bajrang Dal doesn't advocate violence,[7] so it is not a militant organization. RegentsPark There was similar discussion on Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh before which is also described as militant by their critics but it doesn't make them one. D4iNa4 (talk) 20:06, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

@RegentsPark: The discussion I was referring above. I don't see a reason to omit "paramilitary" since it fits the description of Bajrang Dal much better than militant. Also the sources I pointed above that support paramilitary are:[8][9][10][11][12][13], though I am seeing that they are described mostly commonly as "youth wing"[14][15][16][17][18][19][20] D4iNa4 (talk) 20:35, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

D4, Being a "youth wing" does not preclude it from being militant or extremist. You are not reading the sources you cite. For example, your very first source says "perpetrators of some of the most spectacular campaigns of violence". And you think this proves they are not militant? You are out of your mind! -- Kautilya3 (talk) 01:11, 13 December 2017 (UTC)

Per the sources, there are many other ways to describe them. That was the point. Violence is not limited to militants. D4iNa4 (talk)

• I'll let you all sort this out. Though, imo, a paramilitary arm of an organization is, by definition, militant (paramilitaries are militant). --regentspark (comment) 00:57, 13 December 2017 (UTC)

  The word paramilitary has more to do with militia than militant. When it comes to BD, the use of the word "militant" is mostly limited with referring the branch, "militant wing", than calling BD a militant. Now back to militia, Christophe Jaffrelot mentions Bajrang Dal as "militia", belonging to a "militant wing" of Vishva Hindu Parishad.[21] BD is termed as militia by other sources as well.[22][23][24][25][26] To make the lead more meaningful, "X is a Catholic organization of the religious wing of X foundation"(just an example) would work better. Lorstaking (talk) 10:00, 13 December 2017 (UTC)

• There's no shortage of reliable sources that describe BD as a paramilitary organization either (here are a few that I dug up, apart from the sources above[27][28][29][30]). I concur entirely with D4 and Lorstaking. —MBL ^Talk 05:23, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

• I think describing it as militant is more appropriate as compared to describing it as extremist. Militant usually implies that an organisation is willing to use direct action or violence to achieve its goals (whether the goals are extremist or not). Extremist is generally used for thoughts which are at the extreme of the political spectrum.--DreamLinker (talk) 03:44, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

Since last few days, the discussion is only about militant or paramilitary. Lorstaking (talk) 04:52, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

My apologies, as I read the initial part of the discussion. In context of militant vs paramilitary, Bajrang Dal is militant but not a paramilitary force. An example of a paramilitary force in recent times has been Salwa Judum. Bajrang Dal does not have the same discipline and organisation structure required for a paramilitary force.--DreamLinker (talk) 07:42, 17 December 2017 (UTC)

Re-instating a list of sources by a blocked sock, in support of the qualifier:- militant, in my own capacity, since they ought to improve the discussion over here.Winged BladesGodric 14:20, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
Apart from these sources that are cited in the article, here are a bunch of sources that describe BD as "militant". References

I think, a RFC shall be the way forward, with the details of all the sources provided for both the words, presented in a suitable form.Extremist seems to be currently out of contest, though!Winged Blades^Godric 14:19, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

Not a militant group

it is wrong to use the word Militant organizantion.The claim is baseless. 2600:1700:3D60:C910:EDD4:3733:C85B:ACDA (talk) 03:05, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

ITS NOT A MILITANT GRP , ANTI HINDU FORCES TRYING TO MALIGN THE IMAGE FUNDED BY WEST 2405:201:3009:AA60:E05F:154F:5496:1943 (talk) 06:17, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

Religious militant organization is a common designation, including in the CIA World Factbook. Iskandar323 (talk) 06:42, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

the Purpose of Bajrang Dal

Bajrang dal clearly mentions in its website that it works for these issues :

(a) Renovation of Religious Places

(b) Cow-Protection

(c) Social Evils like Dowry Untouchability etc. and Protests against insults hurled at Hindu Maan-Bindus, Hindu Traditions, Hindu Conventions, and beliefs, etc.

(d) Protests against vulgarity and obscenity displayed on the television advertisements and through Beauty Contests

(e) Opposition to the illegal infiltration.

they why did the editors are not using these things ? संन्यासी (talk) 02:25, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

Cow vigilantism is mentioned. Otherwise it's a matter of what they've actually been shown to do. Iskandar323 (talk) 05:45, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 4 May 2023

Bhajrang Dal is not a militant organization. It is a voluntary organization of Hindu youth which resort to promote sadachar(righteous conduct) among the youth. It also sensitise the people about the conspiracies hatched by the foreign missionary organizations to weaken the Hindutva as a whole. 59.93.90.41 (talk) 14:38, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: read through WP:RS and then check out the 20 sources we have cited for that description Cannolis (talk) 15:14, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

those are incorrect refences. Please reove the same. Samresh.singh (talk) 12:00, 12 June 2023 (UTC)