Talk:Kumbh Mela

Stop edit warring at Calverstown

The piping is per the IMOS rules and the use of "People" rather than "Famous people" or some variant is standard usage in IrlProj articles. Sarah777 (talk) 15:39, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

Unsourced text with red link and picture

@Srabanta Deb: added the following to the lead without a citation: His sannyasashram was named “Santdas” because of the ordination of Santdasji Kathiababa Maharaj, the saintly congregation of Braj. In the Kumbh Mela that was held after that, Santadas Kathia Baba was also anointed as Sri Mahant of the Nimbarka Sampradaya And Kumbh Mela President Mahant was given. The editor also add a picture (see right).^{09:28, 28 February 2023}

File:Santadasji Kathiababa Maharaj.1.jpg

Santadasji Kathiababa
Picture added by Srabanta Deb

There needs to be a citation for the text. This was requested, but not provided. The additions have therefore been deleted.-- Toddy1 (talk) 15:45, 28 February 2023 (UTC)

I think the red link should have been to a new article called: Santadasji Kathiababa.-- Toddy1 (talk) 15:49, 28 February 2023 (UTC)

Crush or stampede

Further information: Stampede § Human stampedes and crushes, and Crowd collapses and crushes

Per wp:bold, revert, discuss, this is to question the reversion of my edit by Toddy1.

The article uses the tabloid term "stampede" when the description shows clearly that it was a crowd crush. The justification Toddy1 gives for reversion is that this is the term that the sources used. As a matter of principle, we report quotes verbatim but we have no obligation to replicate in wp:wikivoice the style used by the colonial administration. For example, how can we justify a sentence like this: The British officials in co-operation with the native police also made attempts to improve the infrastructure, movement of pilgrims to avoid a stampede, detect sickness, and the sanitary conditions at the Melas. Subtext: the local populace can be expected to behave like animals.

Perhaps the distinction between a stampede and a crowd crush is not appreciated? This report by Al Jazeera puts it very well:

• "Seoul tragedy: The difference between crowd crush and stampede". Al Jazeera. 30 October 2022. The tragic event is being described as a crowd crush or surge, which is different from a stampede. ... A crowd crush is when people are packed in a confined space and keep pushing, causing the crowd to fall in a "domino effect" making it hard for people to get up again. The bigger the crowd, the stronger the effect of the crowd crush is. ... A stampede by contrast implies that people have space to run. It occurs when a larger group of people, which can be frightened or excited, run together in an uncontrolled way to escape from something.

Edwin Galea, professor of fire safety engineering at the University of Greenwich, England makes it even clearer:

Stampede is not only an incorrect term, it is a loaded word, as it assigns blame to the victims for behaving in an irrational, self-destructive, unthinking and uncaring manner, it's pure ignorance, and laziness [...] It gives the impression that it was a mindless crowd only caring about themselves, and they were prepared to crush people.

In virtually all these situations, this is not the case, and it is usually the authorities to blame for poor planning, poor design, poor control, poor policing and mismanagement.

The truth is that people are only directly crushed by others who have no choice in the matter, and the people who can choose don't know what is going on because they're too far away from the epicentre.

The popular press may be satisfied with such sloppy use of words but wp:wikipedia is not a newspaper and we have higher standards. The events described were crowd crushes and it is collusion to call them stampedes. 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 22:57, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

Conversely, Terrorism in India#2010 Varanasi blasts uses the term "stampede" correctly. --𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 23:05, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

One view is that "stampede" and "crowd crush" are used by sources to mean the same thing. If you have that view, then editing the text to change "stampede" to "crowd crush" is entirely legitimate.

But the newspaper articles cited above^[1][2] say that a "stampede" and a "crowd crush" are either different things, or that the words have significantly different meanings. If the newspaper articles are right, then a source that says "stampede" does not directly support a statement that there was a "crowd crush". See Wikipedia:No original research, which says that Wikipedia articles must not contain "any analysis ... of published material that reaches or implies a conclusion not stated by the sources. To demonstrate that you are not adding original research, you must be able to cite reliable, published sources that ... directly support the material being presented."-- Toddy1 (talk) 05:03, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

By the way, in the sentence The British officials in co-operation with the native police also made attempts to improve the infrastructure, movement of pilgrims to avoid a stampede, detect sickness, and the sanitary conditions at the Melas, the subtext is that the officials and the police acted responsibly with respect of planning, design, control, policing and management. -- Toddy1 (talk) 05:27, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

If a source used the name "lion" for a big cat predator with black stripes on yellow fur, we would just correct it to "tiger": no original research is involved. The description of the event says nothing about an explosion, a burst of gunfire, a lathi charge or indeed anything that would suggest a stampede. Compare and contrast with the Amritsar massacre: the fact that people were crushed trying to escape does not mean it was a crowd crush, it is still a stampede. C&C also with Al-Rashid humanitarian aid incident, where the Government of Israel says it was a crowd crush towards the aid trucks but Palestine and the UN say it was a stampede away from IDF gunfire. Choice of words matters and are potentially NPOV violations.

Older sources were sloppy about terminology – we don't use the n-word in Wikivoice, for example. Older sources used the word "stampede" irrespective of circumstances. Modern sources (e.g, Guardian, BBC (usually)) choose consciously which word to use.

I would accept your WP:NOR challenge as valid if I were doing any analysis, but I don't see that I am. --𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 10:41, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

References