Talk:Arvind Kejriwal

message: In Indian politics, controversies emerge regularly. It's unnecessary to list every daily controversy. To avoid negativity the controversies section has been removed. Not to be added or reverted before we discuss it here. Thank you. 25 CENTS VICTORIOUS 🍁 21:29, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Regarding the "Lawsuits" section, each part of the section eventually states that Kejriwal apologized. I'm not sure what purpose this section serves in the BLP. 25 CENTS VICTORIOUS 🍁 12:41, 8 April 2024 (UTC)

text: please go through WP:CENSOR. You cannot delete a well sourced section, just because you feel "I'm not sure what purpose this section serves in the BLP." Aren't lawsuits part and parcel of every politician? Please start a WP:RFC. This section was sourced by WP:RS and criticism is a part of WP:BLP, if required we can always move it a new article instead of deleting it and retain a summary in the section. Please establish a consensus via WP:RFC before deleting it. I will be restoring it. --TheMandarin (talk) 05:42, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: RFC isn't called before a discussion. I agree that there should be no separate "controversies" section, anything noteworthy should be integrated in proper sections and negative or positive things shouldn't be inflated. The controversies section is inflated negative aspects some of which are simply trivial. Not everything is included in articles. I don't see a similar controversies section on most major politician articles. MrMkG (talk) 16:30, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Controversies 

message: Greetings. I'm following up on a post at WP:BLPN regarding a recent edit. The source offered to support the content in this edit does not appear to be particularly reliable as to BLP content, nor is the content apparently worth any WP:WEIGHT in this subject's biography. It's just someone's opinion of him. So I removed it. See also WP:BLPSPS and WP:RS for more detail on third-party claims and reliable sources.
That said, the BLPN OP was unwilling to discuss the problematic edit here with its proponent. That's also unacceptable. Talk page it, please. Then follow up again at BLPN if there's a genuine failure to reach a consensus. If your consensus is hung up on reliability of a source, see WP:RSN. And WP:ANI is where abusive editing is remedied. Cheers! JFHJr (㊟) 22:17, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that a single book cannot be used for conspiracy theory, and this has to be backed up by third party reliable sources. ---TheMandarin (talk) 14:48, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  BLPN referral 

message: , I seem to be running into trouble with my edits, so I am asking you for help. Can I add this:  to this article? If so, where?-Haani40 (talk) 18:07, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Being backed by multiple RS, this is a valid addition. Also, the lead is already bloated, so this can be to the relevant section or the main article related to arrest. --TheMandarin (talk) 19:09, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, thanks!-Haani40 (talk) 19:22, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

text: It's already present and with better wording. This wording can make it sound like a conviction instead of a denial of dismissal of a case. MrMkG (talk) 15:09, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Court upholding arrest 

message: I urge the administrators to keep a close eye on this article as well as the Aam Admi party's article. There are many sympathisers of these leftist parties on Wikipedia. They really like censoring anything they know would harm their parties' image. Thanks in advance. 2409:40E1:29:4983:6485:60FF:FEA4:F17B (talk) 18:25, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Clarification: My original comment didn't violate anything. I posted this comment in ORDER to change the tone of the article. Editors are not assuming good faith. I am new at this. Instead of discussing with me on how to improve the article. Some people keep deleting my comment. Why? 103.52.220.45 (talk) 18:15, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: @103.52.220.45, Your comment doesn't identify any specific changes; instead, it merely suggests that the article is being influenced by the left. If you aim to enhance the article, please articulate precisely what changes you propose and the reasons behind them. Grabup (talk) 18:20, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: I would like to draw your attention to the fact that a parallel discussion about this is being held in my talk. Thank you. 103.52.220.45 (talk) 18:22, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  This article is being slowly controlled by the leftists 

message: The contents regarding arrest are less inside the 'CM' section and more on the front page. This seems to be a bad edit. Regarding arrest, either increase the content in sub sections or decrease the size of main section. 122.187.117.179 (talk) 15:56, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Request to remove or shorten the recent arrest paragraph in main article. 

message: Can we use this AI enhanced image Arvind Kejriwal 2022 Official Portrail (AI enhanced).jpg as main portrait, as the current image is of very low quality. Redmyname31 (talk) 05:43, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't see a problem using the AI enhanced image. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 12:36, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: is replacing the current image allowed? Redmyname31 (talk) 13:41, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: It is just an upscaled version of the present one. I don't think it would be a problem. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 13:56, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Please discuss this further. If I change(replace) it, it will be probably reverted; Redmyname31 (talk) 15:35, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: this image Arvind Kejriwal 2022 Official Portrail (AI enhanced).jpg is still unreviewed. Redmyname31 (talk) 04:10, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Portrait Update to Upscaled Version?