Micro-Win-Act (talk) 13:07, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

   IP rights infringement

   Intellectual property rights infringement

   demanded Republic TV to tender a full-screen apology for use of multiple objectionable words to describe a bunch of people at a political rally

---

User:Zhwiki2943, is rapidly changing the article without discussion and removing the lead’s “Right-Wing” description, which is supported by multiple reliable sources such as CNN, DW, Al Jazeera, etc. Please do not remove it without consensus, as multiple reliable sources have referred to it as Right-Wing. GrabUp - Talk 04:32, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

These sources are rival news broadcasters, This is not a valid reason, and there is no policy stating that rival news sources should be disregarded. I don’t understand how CNN is considered a rival; it is an international channel. The Wikipedia community accepts CNN, DW, and Al Jazeera as reliable sources. Moreover, it is not necessary that Republic TV has to mention itself a righ-wing channel to mention it in the lead when many reliable sources have already referred to it as such. GrabUp - Talk 04:41, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am Dmitri from .ru wikipedia now in India and I watch this TV. User:Zhwiki2943 has not removed "right wing" description in any of their edit. Can you give diff of it ? What the Zhwiki is saying is CNN, DW, Aljaz etc. may be acceptable and reliable for news reporting with the editorial process, they are no reliable for uncomplimentary mentions or opinions on a rival broadcaster. User has clearly said fails WP:NEWSORG, WP:NEWSOPED.WP:SOURCEDEF etc. I agree with the Zhwiki. Dmitri2025 (talk) 09:31, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Dmitri2025: Can you explain how these sources fail WP:NEWSORG or WP:NEWSOPED? We have multiple reliable sources, not just a single one, mentioning this. Per WP:DUEWEIGHT, we should include what the majority of reliable sources are reporting. They are not reliable for uncomplimentary mentions or opinions on a rival broadcaster. Please let me know which policy or consensus states that these sources are unreliable for this. These are not opinion articles; these are news reports. And yes he removed the “righ-wing” from the lead. GrabUp - Talk 12:16, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Analysis of sources. The Al Jazeera reference does not contain anything in the article text about Republic being a "right wing"channel. It is only in the headline (once) and in journalism the headlines do no go through an editorial process. So Al jazeera should be deleted. This also holds for the DW reference and the CNN one. There is no in-depth editorial analysis of the "right wing" tag. These are all passing mentions which are incidental to the news stories. Coincidentally these are all biased sources falling under WP:PARTISAN and these belong in the article body with appropriate qualifying statements like "according to rival new channels CNN and Al Jazeera Republic TV is a right-wing...". These unqualified passing mentions do not belong in the lead section especially when not specifically analysed in the article text. Citations should be in the body and not in the lead. My decision to move it to article text was by MOS:LEAD. Thank you.Zh Wiki Jack ★ Talk

@User:Zhwiki2943: Biased does not mean unreliable on Wikipedia. Please read WP:BIASED and your cited policy WP:PARTISAN, where it is clearly stated: However, reliable sources are not required to be neutral, unbiased, or objective. In this case, multiple reliable sources support the claim. For example, The New York Times describes it as right-wing and explains how it favors the BJP government. For your information, this is addressed in the Reception section of the article, where it explains why it is referred to as right-wing. Therefore, it complies with MOS:LEAD. GrabUp - Talk 04:33, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I also am reading WP:BIASED. First sentence it says Wikipedia articles are required to present a neutral point of view. How this article have neutral viewpoint? In USA, TV channels like FoxNews can say anything biased and wild in name of free speech, but it not same in India or Russia or UK, or any civilized country with regulations on free speech. In Russia, TV channels must follow strict rules for content. For example, in 2012, Russia enforce the law about protection of children from harmful information Russian Internet Restriction Bill. India especially have Program Code for TV channels like Republic and enforce it strictly through directions like this for neutrality, objectivity, and fairness. What you write on Republic TV is not applicable in India and all Western imperialist sources you use are carrying out neo-colonist propaganda misinformtion agenda against Global South for their capitalist owners. I counterpoint you, show us NPOV sources that show Republic TV violating India government TV program code for neutrality, objectivity, and fairness. You can find it at this link.Dmitri2025 (talk) 17:01, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Dmitri2025: There is no place for any government program, code, or anything similar here. We have forums like RSN where consensus determines whether cited sources are reliable. When multiple reliable sources state that this channel is Right-Wing and there is sufficient context provided in the body of the article, it is appropriate to include the term “Right-Wing” in the lead. Per WP:DUEWEIGHT, we should represent what multiple reliable sources or viewpoints say. However, if both of you still disagree with me on this, please let me know so we can initiate a WP:RFC, where Wikipedians can form a consensus on this matter, which we would then have to accept. GrabUp - Talk 17:45, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Dmitri2025 and @Zhwiki2943: Do you have any sort of connection with Republic TV? Do you know anyone from Republic TV, or are you working for them? I am asking because both of your accounts are new, and the majority of your edits are on this contentious page. GrabUp - Talk 18:24, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You talk rubbish with such personal attacks for outing purpose. By your talk style and edits to this article I also can say you work for Western puppet media propaganda channels which you are prominently promoting. My only connection with Republic TV is looking their news on progress of special military operation in new states of Russian Republic. Indian news channels like Republic, Times, Hindustan Times, OneIndia give correct view of Russian liberation actions, against false propaganda narrative of semite Western capitalist like CNN, DW, New York Times, financed by arm industry for Israel and OTAN puppet nation of Ukraine. Republic TV does not pay me anything, when I am in India I pay Airtel and Jio to watch all their channels to keep up with news of my country. There is no use for RFC, all earlier RFC are without outcome so I will not participate in English Wikipedia rigg process.It is completely false to say majority of my edits are to this page. Baseless questioning of editors is a behavorial issue on your end which is against letter of Wikipedia Unform Code of Conduct which we know very well from RU Wikipedia.Dmitri2025 (talk) 04:15, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

А почему вы не смотрите новости на российских каналах? Там же то же самое говорится. Nakonana (talk) 18:50, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

---

I removed the subject text since it relates to Times Now TV and not Republic TV. This diff] was restored. From what I can see Arnab Goswami was only an employee at Time TV and carrying out the mandate of that channel's owners. It seems that being uncomfortable with the Times TV management practices which resulted in the Ofcom findings, Goswami resigned. The Ofcom remarks are against Times TV and not against Goswami (their employee). Times TV subsequently attempted to throw Goswami under the bus by smear articles such as scroll.in citation. Because this is a high priority journalism project article, I believe it must be very well sourced without WP:SYNTHESIS / WP:NOR. Thank you. Zh Wiki Jack ★ Talk — Preceding undated comment added 03:06, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]