This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Edit request from Kmlchem, 3 August 2011
This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.
In 2011, during The Kyle and Jackie O Show program Kyle Sandilands announced India as a "shithole" and the river Ganges, which is of religious value to Indians particularly Hindus, a "junkyard".
[1]Kmlchem (talk) 10:58, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
No, per WP:NOTNEWS. No encyclopedic value at all. A stupid comment made by an inveterate self-promoter for cheap publicity that drew a predictable response. -- Mattinbgn (talk) 11:16, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
Wow... it was reported widely in the Australia Press. Hardly NOTNEWS! Not wanting it to be so does not make it NOTNEWS... Can we please get this into the article? As for "no encyclopedic value", given it touches on aspects of Kyle's view on race and India, I rather think that it is relevant! - 114.76.227.0 (talk) 11:20, 28 January 2012 (UTC)
Not done: I'm afraid you misunderstand WP:NOTNEWS. It is the policy which points out WP is not a newspaper and "not all verifiable events are suitable for inclusion". Since the {{edit semi-protected}} template cannot be used for controversial edits, you may want to get a discussion started here to build a consensus on whether that issue should be included in this article. Regards, Celestra (talk) 23:40, 29 January 2012 (UTC)
So I'm curious. What is it about this that isn't notable? In the context of the time, it was particularly unfortunate because Australia had a major diplomatic row with India over treatment of Indian students. So much so the PM at the time took a special trip to India. The comments from Sandilands further inflamed the situation. Are you saying that this was not a notable event?
But hey, I'm not going to push it further. If the Wikipedia admins and editors want to deliberately exclude an important event, then I guess Wikipedia can't really be called a particularly good source of information. If editors want to sweep this under the carpet, with no consideration of the implications for not including the info, then there isn't much I can do about. Good to see Wikipedia is as biased and ignorant as ever! - 58.163.175.192 (talk) 12:39, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
Not done: I'm afraid you misunderstand WP:NOTNEWS. It is the policy which points out WP is not a newspaper and "not all verifiable events are suitable for inclusion". Since the {{edit semi-protected}} template cannot be used for controversial edits, you may want to get a discussion started here to build a consensus on whether that issue should be included in this article. Regards, Celestra (talk) 23:40, 29 January 2012 (UTC)
