Talk:1993 Bombay bombings
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page. |
| B | This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale. (add comments) |
 |
This article is maintained by the Indian history workgroup. |
 |
This article is maintained by the Maharashtra workgroup. |
|
More information about this article...
|
|
 |
This article is part of WikiProject Pakistan which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Pakistan and Pakistan-related topics. For guidelines see WikiProject Pakistan and Wikipedia:Contributing FAQ. | ||||
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale. (If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.) |
||||
|
|||||
| Low | This article has been rated as low-importance on the importance scale. | ||||
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Disaster management, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Disaster management articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. |
| B | This article has been rated as B-class on the quality scale. |
| Top | This article has been rated as top-importance on the importance scale. |
Contents |
[edit] Intro paragraph
An anonymous editor removed the phrasing "various outbreaks of widespread criminal rioting (examples: 1984 Anti-Sikh riots, 1992-93 riots after the destruction of the Babri mosque in Ayodhya, 2002 Gujarat violence) have killed more Indians than these bombs did," claiming that it was "irrelevant." It is not irrelevant, since it places one act of violence in the context of others. It is comparable to saying that although the Nagasaki bombing was the most destructive single bombing in Japanese history, it was less destructive than the firebombing of Tokyo, or that although the American Civil War caused the most American casualties of any American war, World War Two was the most deadly war with American involvement. I'm not positive that those two statements are true, but it's beside the point: context is never irrelevant.
Additionally, I changed the word "worst" to "most destructive," since it carries fewer judgments. Although naturally I don't condone a bombing attack, it's not the place of an encyclopedia to editorialize, but just to present facts. Besides, "worst" is a vague word. It could mean "incompetent," which the bombings certainly were not.
No I think they are irrelevant, in the context it is mentioned, worst is the wrong word though, but the current article seems fine.
Why is there no Wikipedia entry on the 1992-93 Bombay riots? Anyone willing to start one? ...I agree with this one..i came to this site for a project on that and found nothing adn this sit eusually can give me the info i need. if anyone wants to get one going let me know email me at shortie_bie_4t@yahoo.com i am always here to help. Thanks..
I think articles written on the topic should be non biased. it is a known fact that the riots were political and not religious. Pakistani miltants were the obvious choice for blame. The Srikrishna report and other damning evidence points to the RSS and Shiv Sena. The article so far is misleading and biased Jai Hind
I'm sorry, but where is the "up to 5,000 civilian fatalities" figure coming from? It's stated several times that there were 257 fatalities. Is this figure combining that with death from other causes, such as attendant riots? If so, it is extremely misleading, and if not, it is just wrong. I'm changing the figure. Lissacha (talk) 01:06, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] TRUTH
By the way why you need 3 people to dispose off guns given to sanjay dutt and Dont you know that - " ECVEN INDIAN POLICE FORCE WAS RESPONSIBLE FOR BOMB BLAST.therefore we should understand this blast may had politicians involved since money and vote changed hands after BABRI MASJID AND BOMBAY RIOTS ISSUE. This is a politically motivated and not religiously motivated bomb blasts. Hidden hands may be responsible and some of them convicted are just pawns.
[edit] Links
All but one of the links deal with different events. Someone please include better links.
[edit] POV
This is for PBJ. The timeline of riots mentioned is NOT POV, its well taken from sources such as the Times of India and the official reports of the bombings. Please do not insert your POV here.
- It's not about POV, it's about relevancy. The background information seems to be longer than the information on the bombings themselves, which is the subject of this article. In addition, the text you post needs to be cleaned up a lot, although this is understandable if English is not your first language. PBP 12:26, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
This is to 24.58.22.190: if you can explain why explaining individual stabbings are relevant to the Mumbai bombings, then the information can stay. But I think a sentence or two noting that there were riots and killings is more concise than listing all of these facts. PBP 12:35, 12 October 2005 (UTC)
Well they are relevant since thay are the cause....they may be more brief I agree. Its the official text taken from the report not my English, which is as good as you would want it to be. -24.58.22.190
I would even argue against "most destructive". I think we ought to qualify "most destructive". Was it most destructive in terms of lives lost? If it killed more people than other bomb blasts in the past, may be that's what we should say, instead of just using "most destructive", which is not qualified later. Risque.business 09:17, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Naming of the event
Since by the time of the bombing it wasn't quite Mumbai yet, should we, for the sake of historical accuracy, call it the 1993 Bombay bombings instead? For instance, we wouldn't call the siege of Leningrad during WWII "The Siege of St. Petersberg" because it wasn't the name of the city when the siege took place.
- Good point, I agree with this sentiment. The 1993 bombing took place in what was known as the City of Bombay. This precedence, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_leningrad, backs up that articles referenced to cities should use the name of a place that was in use at the time. jkm 21:40, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
- Absolutely. This is all very confusing, and the Mumbai article doesn't help either, calling the city Mumbai or Bombay interchangeably with no regard for the era. I've renamed this article and will fix a few occurrences in the Mumbai article. Let's try and be accurate without personal regard for what we think the name should be - that is, after all, the very essence of NPOV. --kingboyk 21:46, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
Actually, no. It doesn't work that way. 1993 Bombay bombings is not the formal title for the blasts. I'm finding it very hard to put my view across, but unlike the Siege of Leningrad or the Bombay City Improvement Trust, or for that matter (9/11 not 11/9 around the world) there is no formal name for the bombings. Had it been a formal name, the name would have stuck. See [1], [2], and [3]. =Nichalp «Talk»= 06:02, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Sharad Pawar
Are the comments about him correct?
[edit] Table of Accused
I think it would be a good idea to put all the accused and people involved in the blasts into a table with their names, age, role, detail of the roles, sections under which they have been charged, verdict and sentence, and what sentence the prosecution asked for. What do you think? Sniperz11 07:00, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
- I have created a sandbox page at User:Sniperz11/1993 Mumbai Blasts accused table. Please help out in any way you can. Thanks. Sniperz11 20:43, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
