Talk:List of candidates in the 2022 Uttar Pradesh Legislative Assembly election

Uniformity among all pages regarding candidate list

@Venkat TL: What is the criteria you are using for having the candidate list for political parties? Wikipedia is not a place of having political war. Either you have to choose same criteria for all pages or you don't use any criteria for any one. So no need of having AAP candidate list here. I am not against of having the manifesto details but for candidature there should be a uniformity every where.

Thanks --Helpfulltoall (talk) 18:05, 1 February 2022 (UTC)

AAP candidate

@Helpfulltoall Please read WP:SIZESPLIT and WP:LIST to understand the rules.

Since the size of the article "2022 Uttar Pradesh Legislative Assembly election " had reached and exceeded the limit 100KB ( for WP:SIZESPLIT), so the list contents had been WP:SPLIT to List of candidates in the 2022 Uttar Pradesh Legislative Assembly election This is a seperate WP:LIST article and not the election article. Consequently all major alliances based on the coverage in Reliable media, can be added here. If the list was not split from the Election article, then I agree, AAP and BSP and UPA could not be included into the election article. Only NDA and SP+ could be included in the election article. Now that a list is split, they can be included in the list of candidates article. Venkat TL (talk) 19:02, 1 February 2022 (UTC)

@Dhruv edits @Tejasvi 3094 has twice vandalized the page. He has again removed candidates. Please read his hateful message on my talk page. Venkat TL (talk) 19:08, 10 February 2022 (UTC)

• AAP had won 64 seats in Panchayat elections. "UP Panchayat Elections: AAP Wins One Seat Each in Varanasi, Gorakhpur; AIMIM Raises its Graph". News18. 6 May 2021. Retrieved 10 February 2022. --Venkat TL (talk) 19:23, 10 February 2022 (UTC)

Biased towards AAP

@Venkat TL: Thanks for providing me the information about split and size polices. I know them. My concern is why all candidates of major alliances not listed in Punjab Election Page. And moreover AAP is not a major Alliance in Uttar Pradesh. All India Majlis-E-Ittehadul Muslimeen, Jansatta Dal (Loktantrik), Janata Dal (United), Peace Party (PECP), Quami Ekta Dal have more sizeable presence and votes than AAP in Uttar Pradesh which are not listed here.

Either all these parties also get a chance to have their candidate names in this page or AAP have to be removed. There should be an equality. Helpfulltoall (talk) 03:48, 2 February 2022 (UTC)

@Venkat TL: Your Contrib logs are showing that you are not neutral. This is really a matter of concern. Information should be neutral and free from biasedness. Helpfulltoall (talk) 05:55, 2 February 2022 (UTC)

@Helpfulltoall Yes you are right, @Venkat TL is literally dictating and imposing his choices. His recent contributions clearly show that he is not neutral, example, an article titled,"Neo Nazism in India" was a propaganda article, most of it was contributed by @Venkat TL. Thanks God, we got the article deleted. Bharatiya Sanatani (talk) 01:16, 6 March 2022 (UTC)

Hindi Font

@HelpingAbhi Please do not add Hindi font. Only use English. Venkat TL (talk) 13:25, 2 February 2022 (UTC)

Sourcing

@Onel5969: can you please point out which source you are referring to as unreliable. And how to resolve the problem you pointed in the tag. Venkat TL (talk) 17:32, 8 February 2022 (UTC)

Twitter is not a reliable source. No social media site is. Neither is any wiki. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 17:33, 8 February 2022 (UTC)

@Onel5969 This is not a random twitter account being quoted. It is the verified official twitter handle that is releasing the list. The Reliable secondary sources are also quoting the same Reliable primary source in their article. Please refer to this edit by me where, among others, I have added Financial Express a newspaper and a Reliable Secondary source, quoting the exact tweet from the same handle. So how you are concluding that it is unreliable source? It is primary yes, but not unreliable. Moreover Secondary sources have also been added to back up these primary sources. Would you now agree to remove the tag? Venkat TL (talk) 17:46, 8 February 2022 (UTC)

@Onel5969 I am referring to these secondary sources that are quoting the same source even used the same file. [1] [2] Venkat TL (talk) 17:58, 8 February 2022 (UTC)

Sorry, Twitter is not a reliable source. Even if they pulled it off another, reliable site, it could have been manipulated. I would replace those sources with reliable sources to have the tag removed. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 22:19, 8 February 2022 (UTC)

@Onel5969 How can they be manipulated? Their verified twitter handle is releasing their list of candidates. Newspapers and other secondary sources are quoting the same primary source. In any case Wikipedia article now has both secondary and primary sources. The tag has been removed. I will keep the reliable primary source because its purpose here to verify the candidate list and correct it, in case of discrepancy and vandalism. So it is beneficial for the readers. Venkat TL (talk) 09:01, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

Are you serious? There is zero editorial oversight. And do not remove the tag until the problem is corrected, doing so is a form of disruptive editing and could get you blocked. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 11:14, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

@Onel5969, yes I am serious. Candidate list is not a controversial opinion that mandatorily requires a secondary source. This is a reliable primary source for the list of the candidates. Who else would you trust for the list if not the party verified handle? Even though you are not agreeing. This fact does not change. I do not want to continue this dispute and I have already included Secondary reliable sources to back up the primary source. So now I have moved the links to the talk page. Hope you are satisfied.

Venkat TL (talk) 14:53, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

References