Talk:Illegal immigration to India

message: what about illegal immigrants though smaller in numbers from other countries except of bangladesh and pakistan? 
* erstwhile USSR's smaller countries like uzhbekistan,kazakistan etc. these people most of them simply mingle out among Indian Cities. they enter with visa and vanish. 
the porous nepal border through which pakistanis(mohajir) enters is also a entrance for immigrants from afghania,tajekistan etc. 
* russians colonize cities in west coast of India especially in Goa
* African countries from where drug sellers and scamsters enter India. they also target our girls. 
India may be a developing country of 125crore people. but,still some people want to immigrate to this place!wth
also NEPAL has one of the largest number of people who are working/living in India. but, Indo-Nepal border is visa-free hence kind of acceptable by GOI   — Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.93.14.201 (talk) 05:03, 20 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  other immigrants 

message: In South Asia region ,India is a country of opportunities.the slumdogs of mumbai to bengal to madras ,many of them are illegal immigrants from failed islamist countries neighbouring India like pakistan,bangladesh etc.how can they simply deny this?We ,the Indians knows that ,Our Country is leeched by these illegal muslims who are inherently violent and religiously polarized coming into a Secular Country and works as undercover for terrorists supports ,at the same time Enjoying the facilities of India.India "looks" Poor;but India is the Best compared to any country near to it.be it bangladeshi or pakistani,srilankan or burmese ,they are Jealous of Bharat.it is the reality.Frankly I said this.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.93.41.24 (talk) 09:56, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  reality 

message: The article in its entirety (as it stands now) is a laundry list of allegations, reports from "Indian media"/intelligence, rather than any neutral third party sources. I've tagged it as POV and will edit it soon to make it NPOv. --Ragib 04:17, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You have done a good job. --Bhadani (talk) 18:59, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Bhadaniji, thank you too for fixing some references. --Ragib 21:12, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: POV

message: Ragib,
You can see with your own eyes enormous slum colonies of Bangladeshis in many cities of India, even outside of Bengal. 
Yet Bangladesh leaders have always denied the presence of Bangladeshis in India.
:"When Begum Khaleda visited India as Prime Minister during her first term, she made an extraordinary statement that there were no Bangladeshis in India. No doubt, this remains her stand even today. Her Foreign Minister, Mr Morshed Khan, told a Press conference at Dhaka on February 6 that there is not a single Bangladeshi migrant in India".
I am sorry to say, that is simply dishonest.
The illegal migration of Bangladeshis has been widely studied, by government agencies, (even in Sachar report) in India as well as overseas researchers.
I note that you have not expressed any concern about Hindus in Bangladesh, or the enormous problems several states of India are facing. You want to stonewall these tragic facts.
--Vikramsingh (talk) 00:51, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry, I don't have any recent plans to visit and "See with my own eyes". There are neutral third-party agencies that are there to do this, not the Indian media, right-wing political parties etc. That you feel a statement by Bangladesh Govt to be dishonest is your interpretation, which has not a lot of impact on any Wikipedia article. We are here to write an encyclopedia, and NOT a blog. Thank you. --Ragib (talk) 01:21, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Also, no ad hominem comments please. You probably have better things to do than trying to figure out what I'm trying my hardest to "Stonewall", but that's of not really related to *this* article. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a battleground, nor an Indian newspaper.  --Ragib (talk) 01:22, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well... I guess I have met quite a few people of Bangladeshi origin who migrated into India illegally. But, that can only be a basis of original research, and not in any way a tool to derogate a group or people. Does Wikipedia have articles on how India illegally occupies Bangladesh land (a about a decade back Bangladesh Rifles actually fought a small battle against BSF for a piece of such land, a briefly publicized event on Bangladesh media)? How India harbors Bangladeshi extremists (Bangladesh government has lodged quite a few requests to get some people alleged to be Islamist extremists, and there are complaints form the Bangladesh civil society on local media)? Or, how India keeps Bangladeshi foreign relations terrorized (Bangladesh newspapers has been publishing articles, news and commentaries telling that for 30 years now)? I don't think we should, unless there is reliable and neutral data and sources to support those claims. If we want, we can turn Wikipedia into a battleground of mud-slinging. But, do we really want that? If you want to make a complaint about these illegal aliens draining India, there always are newspapers and other websites. I hope none of my comments hurt anyone, as they are not my viewpoints and rather are random facts (unverified, of course). Aditya(talk • contribs) 04:29, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The article as it stands looks fairly balanced. "Indian newspapers" are reliable sources, like it or not. But there are numerous sources, like Al-Jazeera, BBC, etc that document this phenomenon. As for unverified things, no one is under any obligation to believe them, unless you show something from the Daily Star, Dainik Ittefeq, etc (or other reliable Bangladeshi source) that corroborates. The Nandigram section is probably the biggest news garner right now.Bakaman 00:09, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Denial

message: Does the article really need separate sub-headers for every couple of short sentences? Aditya(talk • contribs) 17:43, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Too many sub-headers 

message: The number 20,000,000 is unrealistically high. This statement was given in 2003. By then population of Bangladesh was 138.4 million.  That makes the number of immigrants a hopping 14.4% of the total population of Bangladesh. This is not possible. Does anyone have any better reference? Extrapolating the abnormal increase in muslim populations in bordering states of WB and Assam, the number seems to be between 1-3 million. 
I am working on to improve the article's tone and style to remove the NPOV banner. 
--Iball (talk) 21:47, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Actual number of illegal immigrants and POV 

message: Would Mar4D explain his edit warring sourced content out of this article? A great many terrorists are infiltrated across the border who then reside in India, specifically in J&K. This is obvious illegal immigration so why remove it? Darkness Shines (talk) 18:02, 20 October 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Bull crap is what I would say, prove how spying/espionage or infiltrating is related to immigration? And please do not use WP:OR and WP:SYNTHESIS arguments. Mar4d (talk) 18:05, 20 October 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: As stated, terrorists are infiltrated across the LOC and then take up residence to carry out their terror campaigns, this is illegal immigration as cited by the three sources given. Also please remain civil. Darkness Shines (talk) 18:07, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

text: As stated, terrorists are infiltrated across the LOC and then take up residence to carry out their terror campaigns - where do they take up residence and what WP:RS do you have? ..this is illegal immigration as cited by the three sources given - How do you know if they are non-Indian nationals? Let me get this, Kashmiri infiltrators move back into Kashmir (their homeland) which is administered by India. Flawed logic; unless they suddenly become non-Indian overnight, or you're saying Kashmiris are not Indian, the crux of your argument is contradictory. I will remove this soon as there is nothing credible n your argument relating this to immigration. Mar4d (talk) 13:42, 21 October 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I do not know if they are Indian or Pakistani nationals, and neither do you. The content is sourced and as such shall stay per policy. If you wish to gain a consensus for it's removal (bear in mind I am not the only person to have restored this) and if you wish to continue to restore Nangparbat edits then please start an RFC to gain a consensus for the removal of the content. Darkness Shines (talk) 14:41, 21 October 2012 (UTC)

text: Please do not call them "Kashmiri", if the militant group is from Azad Kashmir, Sindh, Punjab or whatever they  We won't refer to them as Kashmiri, Sindhi, Punjabi etc. They are all Pakistani --Farah DesaiTalk 15:58, 23 October 2012 (UTC)
replies: text:  You are engaging in WP:OR, where does it say they come from "Azad Kashmir, Sindh, Punjab" or whatever? The text previously said Kashmiri and I am going to restore that, please do not change around the wordings to mislead. @Darkness Shines: It is very clear that these spies include Indian Kashmiris, thus they cannot be referred to as Pakistanis. Just Kashmir is sufficient. Mar4d (talk) 10:50, 24 October 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: It is you who is engaging in OR, the sources say they come across the LOC, from Pakistan. Darkness Shines (talk) 11:19, 24 October 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Firstly Mar4d you need not be so quick to revert edits that are still being discussed. As per Darkness Shines you are the one who is engaging in WP:OR, the sources state only Pakistani that come from the other side of the LOC, and had these spies been Indian Kashmiris then it would not be applicable to this article because Indian Kashmiris can't be illegal immigrants in India. --Farah DesaiTalk 13:07, 24 October 2012 (UTC)
replies: text:  Wrong again, the sources do not state anything credible about their nationality and as Darkness Shines himself confessed above: I do not know if they are Indian or Pakistani nationals, and neither do you. The original text said Kashmiri (meaning groups that are active in Kashmir), you are deiberately engaging in falsification by changing that as it was to "Pakistani". And in reply to had these spies been Indian Kashmiris then it would not be applicable to this article because Indian Kashmiris can't be illegal immigrants in India, I had actually removed the whole section for that reason as it was self-contradictory yet out friend above seems to be bent towards thinking all Kashmiris are Pakistani citizens, just after saying he himself does not know their nationality. One contradiction after another. Mar4d (talk) 23:05, 24 October 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: When you have quite finished raising strawmen I will talk to you. The sources state that these infiltrators come across the LOC. They say they come from Pakistan. I am following the sources, you are just making it up. Come with sources to back your claims, until then goodbye. Darkness Shines (talk) 23:33, 24 October 2012 (UTC)
replies: text:  Am I the one raising strawmen here or you? Where does it mention their nationality or citizenship? Do not engage in WP:SYNTHESIS. And let me just quote what you were saying before, I do not know if they are Indian or Pakistani nationals, and neither do you. Now you are contradicting yourself and also seem very confused. Mar4d (talk) 13:15, 25 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Infiltration by terrorists 

message: The source used does not state that Roy is a "a pro-Indian scholar" This is a BLP violation and source misrepresentation. Darkness Shines (talk) 23:28, 14 February 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: The source does not call anyone a "pro-Indian scholar" Darkness Shines (talk) 23:34, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

text: Then why did you write "scholar"? And the source says a commentator, not a scholar said " the trip to India from Bangladesh is one of the cheapest in the world, with a trip costing around Rs.2000 (around 30$ US), which includes the fee for the "Tour Operator" Also on the voting, you state that as fact, but the source is explicit in that comment being from the same commentator. Darkness Shines (talk) 23:48, 14 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Source misrepresentation 

message: There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Illegal immigration in Angola which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you.  —RMCD bot 10:30, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Move discussion in progress

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Illegal immigration to India. 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:
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.hindustantimes.com/India-news/NewDelhi/More-illegal-immigrants-from-Afghanistan-than-Pakistan/Article1-769063.aspx
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 04:36, 23 June 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Illegal immigration to India. 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/20110725013418/http://dm.architexturez.org/digitalNE/assam%20agitation.htm to http://dm.architexturez.org/digitalNE/assam%20agitation.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:10, 9 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Illegal immigration to India. 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:
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.censusindia.gov.in/data/Census_2001/Publication/India/41020_2001_REL.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110723192023/http://www.gcim.org/attachements/GMP%20No%2042.pdf to http://www.gcim.org/attachements/GMP%20No%2042.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120415124641/http://www.uri.edu/artsci/wms/hughes/banglad.htm to http://www.uri.edu/artsci/wms/hughes/banglad.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120415124641/http://www.uri.edu/artsci/wms/hughes/banglad.htm to http://www.uri.edu/artsci/wms/hughes/banglad.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:57, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: How did the article degenerate from this to the current strangeness? I thought people like User:Darkness Shines was looking after the article. Since, they have failed obviously, someone needs to do something about it. May I? Aditya(talk • contribs) 16:22, 20 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  A very strange article 

message: Number 8’s source is no longer available.
(Deep10shu (talk) 03:41, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Issues with a citation. 

message: I told you to raise the issue here in the talk. You can't just edit war / POV push a long standing part of the article. I'd suggest you to revert your edits back to this version as per WP:STATUS QUO and gain a consensus here. Your wordings like "allegedly", "East Pakistan" , "Rhetorical figures" , changing Bangladeshi to "Bengali" reeks of POV. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 16:32, 3 September 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  September 2019 edits 

message: Random unnamed police officials cannot be used as sources for estimating migrant-counts or their modus operandi. A substantial number of sources document how such numbers are wildly exaggerated in a motivated manner for pandering to right wing sentiments and demographic anxiety. TrangaBellam (talk) 13:55, 27 June 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: * Should have checked the last thread. Haha - merged. TrangaBellam (talk) 17:54, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Count