Template:Did you know nominations/Kairana migration row

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Allen3 talk 19:30, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

Kairana and Kandhla migration row[edit]

Created by Skr15081997 (talk). Self-nominated at 14:31, 17 June 2016 (UTC).

Page has been renamed Kairana and Sardhana migration row. Reopening DYK nomination for a fresh review. Yoninah (talk) 09:53, 19 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Has the article been changed at all from when it was a duplicate? The article may have a new title, but the only place Sardhana is mentioned is in the article title, not its body, which strikes me as problematic. The C of E|, can you remember which article this duplicated? If nothing else we need to see whether anything was copied; if it was, then it needs to be 5x expanded from the copied material, not merely at least 1500 prose characters. BlueMoonset (talk) 13:15, 19 June 2016 (UTC)
No, I didn't get to see it before the deletion. I stated that based on the rationale that was given for the deletion. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 21:46, 19 June 2016 (UTC)
BlueMoonset, the original CSD tag said "This article may meet Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion because: Kairana exodus page already exists." Please see Kairana hindu exodus. RHaworth was one of the admins who was involved in some of the redirects and might be able to give a clearer answer here. — Maile (talk) 22:33, 19 June 2016 (UTC)
Well, in fact, I know it for sure now, Mukim Kala was deleted 20:41, 18 June 2016 by Reaper Eternal, for "Extremely negative POV". The section "Kairana mass exodus" read: 350 families have deserted the Muslim-majority city Kairana over the past two years due to extortion and loot by goons of gangster Mukim Kala. Many families have shifted to nearby Haryana villages due to the terror of Kala's gang. Locals said they were getting threats on phone and through letters. If one refuses to give protection money, he is killed by the henchmen. They have no option but to leave the city to save their lives. Bharatiya Janata Party has accused the state's Samajwadi Party government of patronizing those behind the violence. The National Human Rights Commission recently issued a notice to the Uttar Pradesh government over the alleged exodus. The move came on the heels of a complaint that a Hindu woman was gang-raped and murdered in the area recently, but no action was initiated due to political pressure. Locals said the city, falling under Shamli district, has turned into Pakistan where murder, loot and extortion were rampant. It is impossible for a decent man to live in Kairana town. A lawyer in Kairana, Meherban Qureshi, said an atmosphere of fear has gripped the city where "no person has the liberty to roam around freely". — Maile (talk) 23:10, 19 June 2016 (UTC)
Now...with all that said above, the history is still intact on this nomination's article. It looks to me like RHaworth did an "unspeedy" and moved Kairana migration row intact to User:Skr15081997/Kairana at 20:02 on 18 June. User:Skr15081997 moved it to main space on 02:11 on 19 June, after the other article had already been deleted. The history of the article goes all the way back to when it was created by Skr15081997 on 17 June. Comparing the histories, it looks to me like this article is word-for-word as it was before deletion. — Maile (talk) 23:30, 19 June 2016 (UTC)
  • BlueMoonset, I have moved the page to Kairana and Kandhla migration row. I haven't copied anything for this article except the line due to extortion and loot by goons of gangster Mukim Kala. I have also added more content to the article. Thanks, --Skr15081997 (talk) 13:23, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Looks like this is ready for review. Montanabw(talk) 05:35, 26 June 2016 (UTC)
    • QPQ checks out. New enough, long enough, and copyvio-free. The issues with duplication vis-a-vis new content seem to have been sorted out above. The article is neutrally written, and cited inline. Likewise the hook. AGF on non-english sources. Vanamonde (talk) 07:59, 23 July 2016 (UTC)