Talk:Shiv Sena (2022–present)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

• Balasahebanchi Shivsena.jpg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 15:51, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Feedback from New Page Review process

I left the following feedback for the creator/future reviewers while reviewing this article: Maybe, this title can be used to create a disambiguation page listing the two factions of Shiv Sena.

GrabUp - Talk 10:10, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

Along with the old party as well. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 14:39, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Shiv Sena (1966–2022) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 22:17, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

Merge with main Shiv Sena page

In news articles it is almost always that Eknath Shinde's Shiv Sena faction is referred to as Shiv Sena. Why can't the Shiv Sena page have content for both pre and post split? C1MM (talk) 16:04, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

Makes sense. Working on it. --AbhiSuryawanshi (talk) 01:24, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

I undid that, it should be discussed more if done. For now I am opposed to it. It is already confusing as is and I think this makes the confusion worse. This page is also called Shiv Sena so I don't think news calling it Shiv Sena, etc is contradicting it. The separation clears up the actual timeline, that there was a Shiv Sena which turned into BSS and SS(UBT) and then BSS was called Shiv Sena. The two pages indicate the break, the period of time when no single thing called "Shiv Sena" existed. MrMkG (talk) 03:21, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Having multiple pages for the same party can lead to confusion. Leadership changes do not alter the party's core identity. A leadership dispute doesn't mean the party ceases to exist or splits into different eras unless officially documented. Please provide references and citations to support your claim. I've initiated a proposal for discussion. --AbhiSuryawanshi (talk) 03:44, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Requested move 25 November 2024

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. Consensus reached: no faction lays claim to be considered a primary topic at this time. Best, (closed by non-admin page mover) Reading Beans, Duke of Rivia 15:12, 2 December 2024 (UTC)

---

Shiv Sena (2022–present) → Shiv Sena – Currently, there are two separate pages—'Shiv Sena' and 'Shiv Sena (2022–Present)'—dedicated to the same political party. The party's leadership was disputed in 2022, but its existence remained unchanged. No reliable media refers to Shiv Sena as pre- or post-2022, making the current split unnecessary and inconsistent with how the party is described in sources. For additional clarity, please refer to the discussion on the talk page. I propose merging the 'Shiv Sena (2022–Present)' page into the main 'Shiv Sena' article, with developments post-2022 included as a subsection to provide a comprehensive historical narrative.

Background

It might be confusing for average readers and editors regarding the recent developments in the Shiv Sena party. To clarify the situation, I am sharing some key facts along with reliable references and citations to help others understand the main issue. Split The split in the Shiv Sena resulted in two factions: "Balasahebanchi Shiv Sena" led by Eknath Shinde (not to be confused with main Shiv Sena) and "Shiv Sena (Uddhav Balasaheb Thackeray)" or "Shiv Sena UBT" led by Uddhav Thackeray. This division was temporary as the courts and the Election Commission of India (ECI) were determining who should inherit the original Shiv Sena. Ultimately, Eknath Shinde's faction, Balasahebanchi Shiv Sena, received control of the original party, thereby resolving the dispute. Following this, Shiv Sena (UBT) emerged as an independent party with its own symbol and identity, distinct from the original Shiv Sena, as they lost their legal battle in front of the ECI and the courts. Legal Resolution of Dispute As it was not a traditional party split, legal dispute was resolved by the Election Commission of India (ECI): ECI granted Eknath Shinde's faction the original Shiv Sena name and "Bow and Arrow" symbol. This also meant temporary "Balasahebanchi Shiv Sena" arrangement was merged into original party. Uddhav Thackeray's group became a new party: "Shiv Sena (Uddhav Balasaheb Thackeray)" with "Flaming Torch" symbol. Reasons for ECI Decision Shinde's faction had majority support in legislative wing (76% vs 23.5%). Decision based on Supreme Court precedents emphasizing majority principle. Key Points Shinde retained original Shiv Sena identity and properties (i.e Shiv Sena). No new party was created, he simply inherited old Shiv Sena. Thackeray's faction is a new party, not a sub-party of Shiv Sena. i.e (Shiv Sena UBT) The dispute was resolved legally, not through a voluntary split.

AbhiSuryawanshi (talk) 09:01, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

@AbhiSuryawanshi This has the air of an official press release, can you clarify whether you come in an official capacity or are deputed in some form wrt the party the page is dedicated to?

I did a check and I fear there is one thing missing in this narration, that the dispute is continuing and remains in court, yet to see a final ruling. MrMkG (talk) 04:03, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

@MrMkG Thank you for your question. I'm a volunteer editor with no ties to any political party and have not been deputed by anyone to make changes regarding this or any other political party.

Regarding the ongoing court case, it's about the same party. Even by your logic, a pending court case means no definitive answer yet. Could you explain why you think we need two separate pages for the same political party?

Additionally, the ECI has allocated the "Bow and Arrow" symbol and party identity to Shinde. Is this the same Shiv Sena that existed before, or did the ECI create a brand new party and hand it over to Shinde? --AbhiSuryawanshi (talk) 03:14, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

My reason for opposing a merge is the same as before. ECI doesn't create parties. There was a split in 2022 and ECI forced them to take different party names as they were de facto separate and could not be listed under the same name. Shinde faction took BSS and Uddhav faction took SS(UBT). There was nothing officially called Shiv Sena during this time period (10 October 2022–17 February 2023). Afterwards, BSS/Shinde faction got hold of the name Shiv Sena during the legal dispute over the name and symbol which hasn't seen a final verdict. These are the basic facts.

Whether you consider it to be the same party or not is a purely subjective viewpoint. Another person can alternatively consider SS(UBT) to be the "real" Shiv Sena, that's not our business.

I can now see three reasons why these two pages should be kept separate and none why it should be merged.

* Keeping the chronology straight for readers, a single page implies there is continuity, which is incorrect due to the 2022-23 gap.

* Sources distinguish the two factions as "Shiv Sena (UBT)" and "Eknath Shinde led-Shiv Sena", a treatment not meted to Shiv Sena before 2022.

* The legal dispute over the name and symbol has not reached a final verdict. MrMkG (talk) 05:02, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

@MrMkG Thank you for outlining your concerns. Let's address each point:

1. "Keeping the chronology straight for readers, a single page implies there is continuity, which is incorrect due to the 2022-23 gap." Wikipedia typically consolidates an entity's history on one page, even through significant changes in leadership, name, or ownership. For example, when Elon Musk acquired Twitter (after legal battle) in 2022 and later renamed it to X, Wikipedia retained a single page for the platform's history without splitting it into "Twitter" and "Twitter (2022-onwards)." Instead, significant developments were documented as part of the existing page, ensuring continuity. If more detailed context is needed, a separate article titled "Twitter under Elon Musk" covers these developments, but the main page remains unified.
   Similarly, While there was a leadership dispute between 2022 and 2023, the Shiv Sena as a political entity continued to exist. The Election Commission of India (ECI) recognized Eknath Shinde's faction as the legitimate Shiv Sena, granting them the original party name and "Bow and Arrow" symbol. Although the decision was contested in court, the Supreme Court did not declare the Shiv Sena defunct.. Recent elections were contested under the original Shiv Sena's symbol, highlighting the party's ongoing activity.
   
2. "Sources distinguish the two factions as 'Shiv Sena (UBT)' and 'Eknath Shinde led-Shiv Sena', a treatment not meted to Shiv Sena before 2022." If sources distinguish the factions as "Shiv Sena (UBT)" and "Eknath Shinde-led Shiv Sena," then as per Wikipedia standards, the page names should align with those terms. However, the current naming of "Shiv Sena (2022-onwards)" does not reflect what is found in reliable sources.
   I have not come across any references or media identifying the party as "Shiv Sena (2022-onwards)." The current page title lacks basis in reliable references and creates unnecessary confusion.
   
3. "The legal dispute over the name and symbol has not reached a final verdict." Even if the verdict is not yet reached, it remains a dispute about the same Shiv Sena, not a division into "pre-2022" and "post-2022" entities. Apart from that, while legal proceedings are ongoing, the ECI's decision stands unless overturned by a higher authority. The Supreme Court of India has not stayed the ECI's order, which allows the Shinde faction to function as the official Shiv Sena. Recently, Eknath Shinde's faction contested and won elections using the original Shiv Sena's "Bow and Arrow" symbol, reaffirming the continuity of the party under his leadership.
   UBT's decision to approach the court reflects their dissatisfaction with the ECI ruling but does not mean the original Shiv Sena is defunct in the interim. Even if Uddhav Thackeray wins the case, he will regain control of the Shiv Sena currently led by Eknath Shinde. The court’s role is to determine leadership, not to create a new party for UBT/ES.
   --AbhiSuryawanshi (talk) 08:32, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

1. Twitter to X is a name change. SS becoming two BSS and SS(UBT) and then one of them getting the name SS is not merely a name change nor a leadership dispute. It's an organisational split. Which organisation did ECI recognise as SS between 10 Oct 2022 and 17 Feb 2023? None, Shinde faction/BSS was called SS after 17 Feb. That link is about the legal dispute over the "Shiv Sena symbol".
2. The current naming is a disambiguation. It could be alternatively named SS(ES) or something similar. That's a different discussion. The point is that sources treat them differently and therefore so should we.
3. If he wins the case, he won't "regain control of Shiv Sena". His organisation which is presently called SS(UBT) will get the name Shiv Sena. Nothing else changes. It couldn't be merged which in hindsight also tells us the court case is irrelevant for us other than naming. Leadership isn't disputed, there are two leader of two organisations vying for the name and symbol of the erstwhile unified party through the courts. MrMkG (talk) 14:25, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

Your assumption that this is not a leadership dispute seems incorrect. The ongoing case is about determining who controls the Shiv Sena, founded in 1966. This ECI decision affirmed that Eknath Shinde inherited the original Shiv Sena and its legacy, not a new or separate entity. The ECI's ruling also highlighted that the symbol is not merely a representation but a core part of the party's identity and ownership. Reserved party symbols, like the "Bow and Arrow," are tied to the identity of recognized national or state parties and cannot be handed over randomly without ownership being tied to the party. Learn more [here].
Uddhav Thackeray, unhappy with this decision, appealed to the Supreme Court, arguing that Shiv Sena belongs to him and not Eknath Shinde. I am citing one of the court arguments here, but more details can be found in the court documents available on the Supreme Court of India's website.
I have shared the ECI decision and court arguments showing the dispute is about leadership and control of Shiv Sena, founded in 1966. If you believe otherwise, please provide court documents or reliable references to support claim.
Both the ECI decision and court documents clearly establish that Shiv Sena pre- and post-2022 is the same party. Since the court has neither overturned nor stayed the ECI's decision, Eknath Shinde currently controls the original Shiv Sena.
The existence of two Wikipedia pages for the same political party creates confusion, suggesting there are two separate parties, when in fact it is one and the same. --AbhiSuryawanshi (talk) 00:37, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

These links don't "clearly establish" anything for our purposes. These are primary documents with extensive legal language with your interpretation superimposed on them. We rely on what secondary sources say. Uddhav's petition and the ECI order are about the name and symbol. This is the same in all secondary sources including those you have linked previously.

It isn't a "leadership dispute", that's not the cases and it defies basic facts. Uddhav is not trying to be the leader of the Shinde's party/BSS/Shiv Sena (2022–present), nor is Shinde trying to be the leader of Uddhav's party/SS(UBT) and there is no third party here. If Uddhav gets the name, SS(UBT) will be called Shiv Sena. MrMkG (talk) 15:44, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

Even your link supports my point and contradicts your claim. It seems you may be relying on headlines without reviewing the content of the articles. Please note that headlines and subheadlines are not considered reliable sources on Wikipedia, as they often lack context or may exaggerate. It’s best to use quotes or context from the body of the article for accuracy. I am sharing a direct quote from the link you provided and request that you share specific quotes from the petition that support your claims.

The link states:

"It is submitted that the Petitioner’s case is that the Respondent(s) on account of their action has relinquished the membership of Shiv Sena on 21/22.06.2022 and the disqualification will relate back to that date."

"According to the 2018 constitution, the Shiv Sena chief will be the highest authority in the party who can withhold, remove or annul appointments to any post and whose decisions on all party matters will be final."

Petition relies on the Shiv Sena's constitution, not the Constitution of India. UBT argues that Shinde’s membership in the party was relinquished before he took control, and therefore, Shinde’s faction should not have been granted the name and symbol. This directly challenges the ECI's decision, with Uddhav basing his claim on the party's internal rules.

No reliable sources, including the link you shared, state that the original Shiv Sena was canceled or ceased to exist. The petition challenges Shinde’s control, not the party’s existence. The argument for creating two separate articles for pre- and post-2022 has no basis in reliable media. If you believe that court documents and the ECI decision are not reliable sources, I kindly encourage you to review the WP:CONTEXTMATTERS policy, which highlights how context determines reliability on Wikipedia. If you have a direct quote from a reliable source stating that Shiv Sena was canceled and a new party was formed post-2022, please share it. --AbhiSuryawanshi (talk) 08:33, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

The link says:

Chief Minister of Maharashtra Uddhav B. Thackeray has petitioned the Supreme Court challenging the order passed by the Election Commission of India (ECI) on February 17 whereby it allotted the 'Shiv Sena' party name and its bow and arrow symbol to the Balasahebanchi Shiv Sena faction led by current Chief Minister Eknath Shinde.

We do not delve into interpretation of legal language and matter which you are doing. The case is not about whether the party exists or not, it is not going to say that and it may use the original SS constitution, but that's a matter of the court. MrMkG (talk) 11:45, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

Not gonna work. Even Godi media outlets call it "Shinde's Shiv Sena",[1][2] We are calling it "Shiv Sena (2022–Present)" which is more supportive of your point of view. - Ratnahastin (talk) 05:29, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Since ECI has approved the Shinde faction as Shiv Sena, so I think this article should be shifted to original Shiv Sena page as well.— Preceding unsigned comment added by VNC200 (talk • contribs)

Wikipedia works on consistency and what secondary sources say. Shiv Sena faction of Shinde is not commonly treated as the Shiv Sena founded in 1966. - Ratnahastin (talk) 06:48, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

But officially Shinde faction is known as official Shiv Sena, as recognized by ECI. In the official result website of ECI also, Shinde faction has been named as Shiv Sena. Please change it. For more details check out this link - https://results.eci.gov.in/ResultAcGenNov2024/partywiseresult-S13.htm VNC200 (talk) 04:00, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

There is a clear ongoing dispute regarding this between SS(UBT) and Shinde's SS. We should not be taking sides here. - Ratnahastin (talk) 05:06, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

• Oppose: Currently there is no WP:PRIMARYTOPIC for the name 'Shiv Sena', considering the pageviews. Arnav Bhate (talk • contribs) 11:35, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

  @AbhiSuryawanshi: what you seem to want is a merge, not a move. Arnav Bhate (talk • contribs) 11:36, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

  The pageviews make me think, maybe this page will need to be called Shiv Sena soon and the other page disambiguated. But maybe premature atm. MrMkG (talk) 11:50, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

• Oppose. This requested move is based on the belief that these two are the same political party (emphasis as in nomination). But that is exactly one of the POVs that we need to avoid. One of the current parties and their supporters are promoting the idea that it is the successor of the pre-split party. Another of the current parties wants to deny them this recognition. We must not take sides either way. Andrewa (talk) 04:59, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

  Support Shiv Sena is a still active and recognised political party in India. The official name and symbol is still in use. Any encyclopedic reference must keep that in mind for the information provided of the party in it's page.. Kalpesh Manna 2002 (talk) 18:17, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

  You say Any encyclopedic reference must keep that in mind for the information provided of the party in it's page. But that opinion is the exact opposite to our article naming policy. The party's own web page is a primary source and is considered but is not the last word by any means. Andrewa (talk) 19:32, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.