Talk:British Pakistanis

useful refs list 2021

• Vicky Mooney. (2021) A systematic review of the United Kingdom's contact child sexual exploitation perpetrator literature: Pointing a way forward for future research and practice. Journal of Investigative Psychology and Offender Profiling 13.

Crossref Beatriz Benavente, Diego A. Díaz-Faes, Lluís Ballester, Noemí Pereda. (2021) Commercial Sexual Exploitation of Children and Adolescents in Europe: A Systematic Review. Trauma, Violence, & Abuse 25, pages 152483802199937. Crossref Kish Bhatti-Sinclair, Charles M. Sutcliffe. (2018) Group Localised Child Sexual Exploitation: Identifying Those Who Have Been Prosecuted. SSRN Electronic Journal.

• Jilani, Sarah. "COMING OUT." TLS. Times Literary Supplement, no. 6152, 26 Feb. 2021, p. 24. Gale Academic OneFile, link.gale.com/apps/doc/A653469855/AONE?u=anon~6aaa52be&sid=googleScholar&xid=4ee04d8d. Accessed 7 Dec. 2021.

• Katharine Charsley & Marta Bolognani (2021) Marrying ‘in’/marrying ‘out’? Blurred boundaries in British Pakistani marriage choices, Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 47:2, 361-378, DOI: 10.1080/1369183X.2019.1625131

• Chapter 7 (Page 121-150): Healing, Agency, and Life Crisis Among British Pakistani Ruqya Patients ~ Andreas Gadeberg Nielsen - Islam, Migration and Jinn: Spiritual Medicine in Muslim Health Management. Germany, Springer International Publishing, 2021. (Preview available on Google books)
• Postcolonial Islam in My Son the Fanatic: From Deobandi Revivalism to the Secular Transposition of the Sufi Imaginary
• https://www.dw.com/en/pakistan-the-ordeal-of-abandoned-wives-left-behind-by-uk-families/a-58177420
• https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/forced-marriage-unit-statistics-2020/forced-marriage-unit-statistics-2020
  • https://www.desiblitz.com/content/are-british-pakistani-girls-free-from-patriarchy

References

Bookku (talk) 14:57, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

Genetics study refs

• Genetic history of British Pakistanis mapped for first time University of Leeds 10 December 2021

• • British Pakistani genomics study illustrates need for diversity By Nuala Moran Dec. 28, 2021 Bio World

Bookku, 'Encyclopedias = expanding information & knowledge' (talk) 04:06, 29 December 2021 (UTC)

2022

• Why Claiming British Identity Is Complicated ~ by Aina J. Khan, Mohsin Zaidi, Miriam Walker-Khan Feb. 3, 2022

• Anti-Semitism is rife in the British-Pakistani community ~ by Jake Wallis Simons 18 January 2022
• AMIN, H., & MAJOTHI, A. (2022). The Ahl-e-Hadith: From British India to Britain. Modern Asian Studies, 56(1), 176-206. doi:10.1017/S0026749X21000093
• Nash, Patrick S.. British Islam and English Law: A Classical Pluralist Perspective. United Kingdom, Cambridge University Press. 2022

Bookku, 'Encyclopedias = expanding information & knowledge' (talk) 11:41, 10 February 2022 (UTC)

Street grooming

In the contemporary issues section, there needs to be some reference to the street grooming issue

https://www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/news/17353046.councillor-call-work-identify-disproportionately-high-number-grooming-suspects-pakistani-community/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0MqrO6p2Woc

https://www.spiked-online.com/2020/05/20/its-time-to-tell-the-truth-about-grooming-gangs/

https://www.birminghammail.co.uk/news/midlands-news/revealed-disproportionately-high-numbers-pakistani-8439716

https://www.nationalheraldindia.com/international/uk-court-jails-20-men-mostly-pakistanis-for-sexual-abuse-of-teenage-girls

ROC7 (talk) 23:33, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

Seems like your alternate account Koppite added it and it seems you are desperate to push a grooming narrative to the Pakistani/Asian community maybe you should discuss with others apart from yourself ? 90tillinfinitydue (talk) 07:37, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

@Koppite1 Personally I am inclusivist and would prefer to have content with credible sources. Still would like to share a friendly advice.

I do not know specific rules on false accusations still Same time deleting talk page messages can be problematic many times.

Besides avoid edit war because either of the side does not get more than 2 chances and most likely to get blocked if rule not followed.

Last but not least try to use academic studies from Google scholar might give better weightage to the aspiring content.

Bookku, 'Encyclopedias = expanding information & knowledge' (talk) 08:34, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

Restored the talk page as not sure of rules re deletion. Will ignore the unfounded accusation re account...for now. Koppite1 (talk) 08:49, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

Koppite as come with an obvious agenda to downplay social issues pertaining to Black/Carribean folks and over play and smear other communities in particular South Asians. It is therefore imperative to counter and challenge the sources which are mostly tabloids and newspapers. 90tillinfinitydue (talk) 08:59, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

Prima facie there likely to be breach of WP:3RR from edit warriors can WP:3RR read and take before admin board if any one feel so.

By the way this topic has been handled previously can be found in archives. Better both of you study previous arguments and add new credible sources if any and present the case than personalizing.

Bookku, 'Encyclopedias = expanding information & knowledge' (talk) 09:49, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

Comparing to similar other pages, for instance, Bangladesh, there is mention of the issue regarding gangs, issues that affect the community. Another example is Albanians--there's mention of organised crime affecting their community. In the same vain, Street grooming is a contemporary issue that is affecting the Pakistani community, and is therefore a valid topic to include in the social issues section. Therefore, i'm inclined to reinstate the section. Also sources from e.g. the Times, the Independent etc are relatively strong sources

Koppite1 (talk) 10:00, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

• For info and record: This discussion has been informed @ WT:UK#Requesting inputs. Bookku, 'Encyclopedias = expanding information & knowledge' (talk) 10:14, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

  Also, should be noted that a new report was issued a few weeks ago by the IICSA. It's still a relevant, on going topic.

  Fight against grooming gangs hindered by fear of being branded racist, says official | The Independent Koppite1 (talk) 10:30, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

Terrorism

Again in social issues, what about the links to terrorism e.g.

https://www.efsas.org/publications/articles-by-efsas/london-bridge-attack-2019-three-out-of-four-terror-plots-in-the-uk-have-roots-in-pakistan/

https://www.dw.com/en/banishing-the-extremist-image-a-crucial-task-for-british-pakistanis/a-39129778 ROC7 (talk) 18:36, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

Ancestral roots

The article says British Pakistanis are people “whose ancestral roots lie in Pakistan”. Is this accurate? Pakistan has only existed for 75 years. There are British Pakistanis who were born before Pakistan existed. GimliDotNet (talk) 16:50, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

Murder of Kriss Donald

There has been something of an edit war going on over a disputed section regarding the Murder of Kriss Donald - see here [1] for the material concerned. Personally, I'm inclined to agree with the suggestion that the content is unbalenced, given the singling out of this particular incident. There are also issues with the wording, even if it were to be included. I would strongly recommend that people discuss the content here, and if that doesn't resolve the matter, maybe consider a WP:RfC. AndyTheGrump (talk) 10:07, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

You can’t discuss content with people who switch IPs and create accounts to push their agenda. The content is cited, is relevant (if somewhat ironic) as the section is about racism linked to the Pakistani community, the fact the IP switching POV pusher doesn’t like that is not an argument against it. GimliDotNet (talk) 11:52, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

You are required to discuss disputed content. That is how Wikipedia works. I suggest you do so, and refrain from engaging in hyperbole. You could start by perhaps explaining why you think that this one specific incident merits inclusion, when numerous other incidents don't. AndyTheGrump (talk) 12:02, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

Hyperbole? Quit the personal attacks right now. GimliDotNet (talk) 14:38, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

I will ignore the irrational allegations by Gimli for now. This excuse of "cited" means nothing this event has zero place on a article about the community let alone in a section about racism towards them. It's Undue and is a edit made to distort and undermine the entire section downplaying the racism issue they face its not notable and undue and as describe as above unbalanced with the obvious intention to deflect and divert. It had no place here. Plenty of White racists have murdered people why not add every single racist murder to their respective community pages? We have nothing more to discuss its not relevant, notable or balanced. Heauwo0 (talk) 12:52, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

The fact that it was the FIRST conviction in Scotland under this legislation is especially pertinent. GimliDotNet (talk) 14:38, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

Given that this article is about the British Pakistani community, not Scottish legislation regarding racially-motivated murder, I fail to see why. AndyTheGrump (talk) 15:03, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

Firstly, it’s not Scottish Legislation, it’s British Legislation - there is a difference. And the section is about racism and the British Pakistani community, this was a notable example, the first conviction in Scotland under legislation that included racism as a defining factor, and it was carried out by members of the British Pakistani community. There’s no way it doesn’t fit into the narrative of race related crime in the British Pakistani community. To ignore it is white-washing. GimliDotNet (talk) 16:02, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

It is legislation under Scottish law. As for this being a 'notable example', who says so? Why is it any more notable than any other racially-motivated crime? AndyTheGrump (talk) 16:13, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

It's obviously an attempt to derail and downplay the racism faced by the community to add one rare example of a crime while hundreds of other crimes are never mentioned its got no place here simple as it has its own article go and write whatever you want there but dont push your confusion and defelcting agenda here. The fact is overwhelming evidence suggests race related crimes are committed by Whites against Pakistanis to give this non notable crime any weight is ridiculous and as stated clearly agenda driven editing. Heauwo0 (talk) 17:11, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

Whatever your feelings on this matter WP:NPA and WP:AGF are policies. Withdraw your accusation of racism or else we can take this to WP:ANI. GimliDotNet (talk) 17:21, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

I doubt that would be in your best interest. And meanwhile, please answer my question. Who says that this particular crime is a 'notable example' of anything directly relevant to the article topic? Why is it any more 'notable' than the numerous serious crimes committed against people from the British Pakistani community - none of which the article discusses in any detail? AndyTheGrump (talk) 18:20, 26 June 2022 (UTC)