Talk:Anti-Bangladeshi disinformation in India

Renaming

@Za-ari-masen should this article be renamed "Anti-Bangladeshi disinformation in India"? Cause the current title makes Indian government responsible for this, but which is actually carried out by the Indian media and politicians. Ahammed Saad (talk) 15:13, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

Agree. Another name could be "Anti-Student–People's uprising disinformation in India. Since it is more associated with the Student–People's uprising than any other form of disinformation related to Bangladesh and/or India. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 19:11, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

"Anti-Bangladeshi disinformation in India" sounds good. I think the disinformation will include more themes affecting Bangladesh/India and wouldn't be limited to the Student–People's uprising, therefore, anti-Bangladeshi sounds more appropriate. Za-ari-masen (talk) 12:42, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

@Za-ari-masen The current title, "Anti-Bangladeshi disinformation in India," might mislead readers into thinking that the Indian government is directly responsible for the disinformation, clearly which is not.

Suggested title: Anti-Bangladeshi disinformation by Indian media or Media-driven anti-Bangladeshi disinformation in India.

The inclusion of the word "media" is essential to clarify the distinction and make the title more understandable for readers. Arijit Kisku (talk) 01:56, 7 December 2024 (UTC)

@Arijit Kisku The title "Anti-Bangladeshi disinformation in India" in no way suggests that the Indian government is engaging in anti-Bangladeshi disinformation. If "Media" is added to "India" in the title, the article would then have to focus solely on the Indian media. However, anti-Bangladeshi disinformation in India is carried out through various means beyond the media, which also need to be addressed here. Therefore, the current title is logical. Nahian • Talk 08:01, 7 December 2024 (UTC)

Agree with Nahian. Za-ari-masen (talk) 11:55, 7 December 2024 (UTC)

Cancellation of the CSD tag from an incorrect redirect

@Tamzin: Sorry to say, canceling the CSD tag from the redirect page "Indian disinformation propaganda against Bangladesh" was not the right decision. This is undoubtedly a misnomer. It is true, and has been confirmed through fact-checking, that India is conducting various anti-Bangladesh disinformation. Therefore, I did not see the need to retain a redirect from such an illogical name. If you wish, you can review the article, or I can provide references to support my claim. Nahian • Talk 07:54, 7 December 2024 (UTC)

@Nahian: That sounds like it would be an argument for the redirect, not against? Either way, CSD R3 is not for substantive disputes. It is for very obvious things like if the redirect said "AmtiBangladeshi dis information in india". You're welcome to make an argument for deletion at WP:RFD. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (they|xe|🤷) 13:38, 7 December 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for the explanation, @Tamzin. I was trying to explain that the redirected title is incorrect, which is why I referred to it as a misnomer (By misnomer, I understood it to mean a wrong name or an improper name. The Bengali meaning of misnomer actually conveys this). Nahian • Talk 13:52, 7 December 2024 (UTC)

The English word means that too, but in the context of R3 the important word is "implausible". It has to be very obvious to the deleting admin that readers are not going to use X to refer to Y; otherwise it's something that needs to go to RfD. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (they|xe|🤷) 14:12, 7 December 2024 (UTC)

@Tamzin I am now slightly confused about my claim. I am not sure if I misunderstood at the time or if there was indeed a mistake in the redirected title. Anyway, thank you for your assistance. Nahian • Talk 21:39, 7 December 2024 (UTC)

Disinformation or misinformation

The article reads as if there is a delibrate attempt by Indian media houses to spread disinformation about the situation of Bangladesh. Although in most incidents when a news is reported false, it is taken down. It indicates towards a misinformation spread rather than disinformation, i.e. the spread of false news is not delibrate. Yunus's Call For Unity In Bangladesh | Attack on Agartala mission: Protests mount, Yunus moves for national unity

This article quotes the Yunus and he is mentioned saying "misinformation" even though he representing the second-person in context of the fake news, as NPOV perspective, should this article be renamed with "misinformation" instead of disinformation? Xoocit (talk) 21:08, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

I don't think this article should even exist. Misinformation in news media is a reality, all over the world. This is just a WP:SOAPBOX page. It should be merged back into the main article, in some condensed form. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 01:13, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

I thought the narrative by Indian media was about CIA meddling in Bangladesh to acquire a base, which was previously refused by Hasina, to counter both India and China. Where did this narrative of Pakistan and China meddling in Bangladesh become the main focus? Or is someone trying to push that narrative under the guise of this soapbox article? 2409:40C1:2C:8F5B:8000:0:0:0 (talk) 02:32, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

The title of the article itself explains everything: How India’s majoritarian politics drive its lazy and dismissive commentary on Bangladesh. But this page covers it up! -- Kautilya3 (talk) 11:39, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

Agreed, I have added a buzzword template to this page, there are other incidences of Bangladesh related violence that might not meet Wiki's notability. These articles would need a through reassessment for their notability especially for WP:NOTNEWS, WP:TMI and WP:NOTDB. Xoocit (talk) 17:53, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

@Za-ari-masen, I have talked about the buzzwords here, the citations do not mention disinformation and the same relayed by Yunus Govt's statement, which is mentioned in the above comment, clearly "disinformation campaign" are words that show delibrate intent to spread false news, which is not implied by any reliable news source.

Ocassional disinformation by small twitter accounts or individuals do not classify as a campaign, this is a MOS:LABEL. Do not revert edits while ignoring TP discussions. Xoocit (talk) 20:05, 16 December 2024 (UTC)

You must have missed the analysis section where the motivations behind the deliberate intent is explained. Moreover, the sources also describe it as a "disinformation", [1], [2], [3]. Za-ari-masen (talk) 02:41, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

Indeed, I notice that the name of Rumor Scanner Bangladesh has been shortened to "Rumor Scanner" and "spreading rumors" transformed to "disinformation campaign".[4] -- Kautilya3 (talk) 11:34, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

Nothing wrong, it is "Rumour Scanner" per sources. I thought we were talking about verifying the "deliberate intent" to describe it as a disinformation. Comments by the analysts verify it. Moreover, the scripted interviews by Indian reporters is another evidence of the intent. Za-ari-masen (talk) 15:51, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

The source said "spreading rumours" and you claimed "disinformation campaign". It does not appear that you understand what the term "disinformation" means. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 20:10, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

So you are saying "spreading rumours" and "disinformation" are mutually exclusive? I'm not sure if it's worth wasting time on such small technical details but if that concerns you, I can change it to "false reports" as the source says. Za-ari-masen (talk) 13:03, 18 December 2024 (UTC)

As a Wikipedia editor, you are obliged to understand what the sources say, and summarise them accurately. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 17:56, 18 December 2024 (UTC)