Talk:MeToo movement in India

Latest comment: 3 years ago by Ravensfire in topic Jeetendra section removal

Probable factual errors in the article


Doubtful sentences which probably unlikely to stand strict scrutiny.

1) And unlike in the United States, where First Amendment rights strongly protect free speech, defamation laws in India allow the criminal prosecution of women who are unable to prove public allegations against their abusers, with a maximum jail term of two years.

A) Not in the sourced reference. (Wikipedian's own POV ?)
B) The above comparative statement does not seem to be backed well enough by any Indian advocate.
C) Refer article Defamation#United_States, 17 states in USA seems to have criminal defamation laws on their statutes. And almost all the states in USA seem to have civil defamation applicable where in damage awards may go in millions of dollars
D) Although with a reasonable restrictions freedom of expression is well enough protected in India. (talk) 13:24, 17 October 2018 (UTC)Reply

2) "Janice Sequeira, a journalist, backed her allegations, claiming to be an eyewitness of the incident"

A) The sourced reference says, " However, when she arrived on sets, she was told the shooting has been stalled..". That means Janice Sequeira would not be an eye witness for part of event before her arrival.
B) So the sentence may be partially correct and partially incorrect, so factual accuracy of the statement as of now seems to be in doubt. (talk) 13:45, 17 October 2018 (UTC)Reply

The article does not discuss the history of India in relation to social movements. In the introduction, the article could speak about how the government of India has responded to previous social movements and contrast it to how they responded to the Me Too movement. --Meghana Krishnakumar (talk) 05:30, 6 February 2019 (UTC)Reply

Section Criticism updated


Section Criticism actually consists of, review of criticism taking in to account openions of more than one author/article, hence was supposed to be already exception to copyright issue. But still some anon did put a copyright tag to the article, and to take it positively as far as this section now stands reedited reworded / re organised to take care of copyright concerns if any.

This is just to keep informed to editors interested about this section. (talk) 13:34, 18 October 2018 (UTC)Reply

Vishwa Mohan Bhatt


While on may dispute whether allegations against Vishwa Mohan Bhatt should be in his biography, there is absolutely no basis to exclude them from the MeToo India page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 17:28, 15 April 2019 (UTC)Reply

WP:BLP is official policy on Wikipedia and applies uniformly to biographies as well as articles that discuss living persons. Please do not reinclude the content without gaining consensus to include on Talk:Vishwa Mohan Bhatt or WP:BLPN#Vishwa Mohan Bhatt and sexual harassment allegations. — Nearly Headless Nick {c} 18:04, 15 April 2019 (UTC)Reply
Just noting that following the discussion at BLPN (where you can see me thinking aloud) I too think the sourcing and the coverage within the avaialable sources is too thin for Vishwa Mohan Bhatt to merit inclusion on this page. Abecedare (talk) 00:14, 16 April 2019 (UTC)Reply

Inclusion criterion?


I think there needs to be some inclusion criterion for which allegations are discussed in this article and how the material is presented because for obvious BLP-based reasons, this page isn't and shouldn't be merely a "rogues gallery" of everyone who has been accused of sexual impropriety in the past couple of years. I also could not decipher the logic or reason behind who among the accused deserved a sub-section of their own and what that subsection should be named. I have not followed the Indian Me Too movement closely enough to propose an inclusion criterion myself but hopefully other editors, better versed in the area, will have some thoughts.

In addition, the article needs to be carefully reviewed for compliance with wikipedia's policies in general. For example, here are some issues I saw at a spot-check of this version

  • The section "Salman Khan", which lists allegations against the actor and his two brothers, is sourced to an IBT article headlined #MeToo: Pooja Mishra accuses Salman Khan, his brothers of raping her; claims Shatrughan Sinha used black magic Such poor sourcing coupled with a sensationalist headline should have raised some redflags.
  • The section "Arjun Sarja" says, "... a major actress of Kannada cinema, revealed multiple instances of actor Arjun Sarja's misbehaviour towards her. The actress revealed...", (emphasis added) which is attesting to the truth of the allegation in wikipedia's voice.

Can some of the page regulars proofread and review the article? Abecedare (talk) 00:27, 16 April 2019 (UTC)Reply

Abecedare I Afded the article, it contains too much BLP issues to be salvaged.--Eng. M.Bandara-Talk 06:52, 14 May 2019 (UTC)Reply

Semi-protected edit request on 2 August 2019


In education section, add "The sexual harassment case against Anupam Siddhartha was demised by ICC at the Symbiosis International University after three month long investigation, though he was charged with disciplinary excessive issues Mayurmilan (talk) 07:33, 2 August 2019 (UTC)[1] Mayurmilan (talk) 07:33, 2 August 2019 (UTC)Reply

  Done --Trialpears (talk) 20:44, 20 August 2019 (UTC)Reply


Semi-protected edit request on 5 August 2019


Add the following person to the list in "Impact" section:

  Done --Trialpears (talk) 20:47, 20 August 2019 (UTC)Reply

Semi-protected edit request on 5 September 2019


Please add the following person to the list in "Impact" section:

  Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. What makes reliable? NiciVampireHeart 14:10, 13 September 2019 (UTC)Reply

Request of Help


I was looking for some small help. I created an article User:Bookku/Me Too movement (Pakistan) in user namespace. Article is almost ready but before taking to main namespace Looking for help in English language Spell-check, punctuation, grammar check and corrections. Using better alternative words etc. Thanks in advance.

Bookku (talk) 14:08, 22 January 2020 (UTC)Reply

Jeetendra section removal


I've removed this section for two reasons. The main reason is that there isn't anything to show an impact on Jeetendra. The second reason is this isn't even mentioned in their article, which is where it really belongs. This article doesn't have a full list of every accusation that was made, but the ones it has have had an impact on the accussed's career or image (and are sourced to show that impact!). Ravensfire (talk) 16:22, 28 August 2020 (UTC)Reply