Talk:2021 Tripura riots
| While the biographies of living persons policy does not apply directly to the subject of this article, it may contain material that relates to living persons, such as friends and family of persons no longer living, or living persons involved in the subject matter. Unsourced or poorly sourced contentious material about living persons must be removed immediately. If such material is re-inserted repeatedly, or if there are other concerns related to this policy, please see this noticeboard. |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Times of India
edit@Diptyajit Please read WP:TOI why add them when the information is already covered by other citations added alongside. Please do not add them. If you think sources are needed prefer more reliable sources. There are plenty of them available. Venkat TL (talk) 16:09, 8 November 2021 (UTC)
@Venkat TL: TOI provides some details which are not mentioned in other sources. For example, articles of The Wire & The Quint does not mention the fact that the police asked Facebook and YouTube to freeze accounts. Diptyajit (talk) 16:57, 8 November 2021 (UTC)
- @Diptyajit, The Wire mentions it. This source is already added. Please do not add TOI unless there is no other source. Venkat TL (talk) 17:02, 8 November 2021 (UTC)
Section 144
editThe lead section mentions "Section 144 was imposed ..." - This is very uninformative. Put the reader first and explain what actually happened and what was imposed because the wiki-link doesn't even explain what the law allows. The section only indicates orders can be issued, not what these permit to happen. Explain what was imposed. Was it martial law? curfews? Something else? Also, it is usual to cite what Act, or other law, a section is part of. Wikipedia readers are not lawyers and must be expected to know nothing about Indian law, so don't cite sections it without also explaining what it means in the context of the particular article. Besides, this statement, as it stands, probably has no place in the lead, since it seems this section of law was not imposed everywhere in reaction to the riots, bur only in a couple of places. - Cameron Dewe (talk) 08:25, 4 November 2023 (UTC)