Talk:Trinamool Congress/Archive 1

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

First of all i feel very sorry for spending time on this site,but still discussion is always good.no heart feelings.I want u to ask you one Q: that what do you understand by the form of organization? and do you have any opinion of your own with which you organize yourself? I have seen many boys who out of the influence of your origination help out people in many ways but after coming under the influence of it he changes into some other person,why this spit of personality happens?I have on explanation if you have please provide it to me obviously if you have the guts or if it is not confidential. thanking you PEOPLE'S FAITHFULLY.

--Hello friend, which organisation you are talking about? Is it TMC? Wikipedia do not belong to any organisation. It is an organisation by itself. This is not TMC's homepage. So I think you should ask any questions or give feedback through TMC's website, not through Wikipedia. Borfee (talk) 14:52, 17 November 2008 (UTC)borfee

WHY did the well refereced things reverted back, on charges of vandalism. The users who commit such acts are warned to use discussion page, otherwise a comlaint shall be filed against them with wikipedia admisnistrators. DONT use this article as a means of Propaganda. I am undoing the changes.

regards. -Viplovecomm (talk) 14:31, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

The picture has been changed because the emblem of Trinamool Congress, which exist on the flag consists of an exclusive symbol of Jora Ghas Phul, which symbolizes down-trodden grass-root flowers. Jora Ghas Phul literally means "two flowers rising from the grass". But in the given picture the grass does not exist and hence it is not the correct flag of the party. The grass exists in the electoral symbol of Trinamool Congress File:Trinamool.png, which is correct. -Trinanjon Basu (talk) 15:45, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

This seems to be a fair objection. --Soman (talk) 16:01, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Yeah your right the logo is changed saw it in their official site. Thanks for correcting me.--Kkm010^as© 17:16, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

From experience from other articles on Indian political parties, having a 'controversies' section is not a very good idea. As we have seen in the conflicts on the CPI(M) article, West Bengal politics is permeated with mutual accusations of violence and crime against their political opponents. My suggestion is not to build a controversies section, and not to include 'nexus' mentions until there is some sort of official court case establishing that such a link exists. --Soman (talk) 18:43, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

-May be whatever you are saying, is right. But to enlist the truth is not a bad idea, even if wikipedia permits it. The edit was done in good faith, just to increase the knowledge of the visitors by updating the facts about the TMC party. I think you have the knowledge how our judicicary works, it took years to reach a final judgement. Even so party like TMC has its influence to buy media, press, legislature and judicary, so how can we believe that this case will reach its might.
In such circumstance, with full legitamte authority provided by wikipedia, i have every right to preserve this well researched edit.
I hope you will discuss it first before reverting.
-Basuupendra (talk) 19:03, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I'm well aware of the limitations of the legal system and I personally don't believe in the innocence of Trinamool. But having controversies sections tends to invite listings of biased commentaries, which does not forward the quality of wikipedia as an encyclopedia. I think the passage on Suvendu Adhikari can stay in the Suvendu Adhikari article, but is not necessary here. --Soman (talk) 19:27, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

I removed the following from the article as it is an unacceptable POV push but I do not have time to verify claims and restructure into a more appropriate content. The community can work on it here.

DRAFT

AITC-MAOIST Nexus

All India Trinamul Congress has been accused many a times by opposition parties like CPIM and Left Front for giving support to maoist cadres.^[1] Later on The [[Criminal Investigation Department]] of West Bengal police, has discovered that Party's MP Suvendu Adhikari has open links with local maoist leadership based in Nandigram. Maoists started there base in Nandigram in September 2007, only with the open handed support of Trinamul Congress. The arrested Maoist leader 'Madhusudan Mondal' has claimed that Suvendu Adhikari himself has supplied arms and ammunation to local maoists, in order to kill and murder the opposition CPIM leaders. About 35 Marxist cadres, and two marxist leaders were killed during during one and a half year of 'Trinamul-Maoist' nexus in west bengal(nandigram movement).^[2][3]

Adhikari supplied ammunition for the CPI (Maoist) members to

fight the CPI (M) and the police in Nandigram. Meanwhile, the over ground activists of the Maoist party along with the Trinamool and others had set up the Bhumi Ucched Pratirodh Committee (BUPC) to mobilise people against land acquisition.

--Madhusudan Mondal to WBCID^[4]

- If it is written on unclaime sources then only it is a POV push. But references are cited from well known dailies, so it is not a POV push. By censoring such a content which aims to expand the article, you are somehow pushing a POV.
Basuupendra (talk) 05:53, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

Sorry you cannot put like that, before adding those materials to this article please read WP:NPOV guidelines properly and secondly few newspapers claim such stuffs doesn't mean you have put it and these type baffling incidents had been happened in other articles too. Therefore, Your edits are going to reverted.--Kkm010 | Talk with me 08:52, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

- Unfortunately i didnt see anywhere such kind of claims are reverted in any of the articles but here. Secondly few "High Ranking" dailies and report of the Criminal Investigation Department is enough for the claims made in the article. By censoring it harshly, you are taking some side, which in any way far from being "Neutral".
-Basuupendra (talk) 12:53, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, YOUR edits are unacceptable. If you do again i will revert it. You so called dailies are baseless. You must read the NPOV properly.--Kkm010 | Talk with me 04:23, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

That paragraph is a catastrophe. Very very badly written, clearly non-neutral, misrepresents sources, has BLP issues. Discussion by Basuupendra to address even some of these issues instead of reverting war would be good. Christopher Connor (talk) 13:57, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Editor_repeatedly_entering_a_.22controversy.22_into_article. Christopher Connor (talk) 14:19, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

I am local people from Calcutta,India. I know very much this issue. This is clear political propaganda by CPI(M) party try to proof AITC-MAOIST link, very day I show in local news paper, they alighted that link. And AITC deny this. I think this article should written as NPOV style. Not take any undue weight in particular topic. - Jayanta Nath ^{(Talk|Contrb)} 15:01, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

FOR GOOD GOVERNANCE , POLITICAL FREE POLICE ADMINISTRATION ___ THIS IS NOT THE WAY TO HANDLE THE SITUATION HARMAD BAHINI IS NOTHING BUT THE INVOLVEMENT OF CPM CADRE WITH POLICE & PARA MILITARY FORCES TO CONTROL MAOIST . IS IT MEANINGFUL COMBINED FORCE TO MAINTAIN LAW & ORDER ? CIVILIANS ARE OBJECTING STRONGLY. CENTAL HOME MINISTRY SHOULD LOOK AFTER NOW BY TAKING THE BOLD STEPS. S M GHOSH ENVIRONMENTALIST —Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.117.234.64 (talk) 09:07, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Vienna,June 26,2012 The entry is incomplete without information on NATIONAL TRINAMOOL CONGRESS with Purno A.Sangma association.Today he is a street walking Presidential candidate representing tribes supported by fickle minded major and minor political parties.Sad.I did not review the whole entry because I came here only to consult on NTC´s short life! Taravadu Taranga Trust for Media Monitoring, TTTMM --Kulamarva Balakrishna — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.119.202.53 (talk) 15:56, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

Sending WP:APPNOTE to Sudipan and RichardOSmith. The student organisation doesn't appear to meet WP:ORG or WP:GNG, but would be worth a merge and redirect here. Boleyn (talk) 18:43, 26 July 2015 (UTC)

demonitization — Preceding unsigned comment added by 116.202.34.204 (talk) 14:42, 25 December 2016 (UTC)

all india trinamooln congess — Preceding unsigned comment added by 182.77.117.190 (talk) 12:58, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

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

• Trinomool Congress logo 2019.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 11:22, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

This edit request to All India Trinamool Congress has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Tmcharish (talk) 08:09, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

•  Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. — Meghmollar2017 (UTC) — 09:18, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

User:Kkm010 reverted the removal of the position 'centre-left' from the infobox. I find the addition of left-right-axis positions on parties like Trinamool quite misleading. Most of Indian political parties (with exception of the self-identified communist left and the Hindutva right) are catch-all parties, with no or little identifiable ideological line, built up around charistmatic leadership and/or caste/regional identities. Trinamool represents the mainstream rightwing in West Bengal. On the national level it forms part of UPA, which with some imagination could be labelled as 'centrist'. But during the NDA government (which could be labelled as rightwing), it was part of NDA. In short, in order to avoid obvious ambiguity its better to remove 'position' altogether from the infobox of the party. --Soman (talk) 17:38, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

May be your are right my friend. Please take this source or this and correct its ideology and if possible what position do it hold because for me it baffling situation to figure out whats there actually ideology and position to be honest it difficult to find what ideology of these small parties in India do have.--Kkm010^as© 17:52, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

One would not be able to dechiffer any ideological position from those documents, without indulging in WP:OR. The party constitution only states a general adherence to the principles of the constitution of India, which is not really indicative of anything. The problem with left-right positions is that they are contextual, whether you're left or right depends on the context in which you act. I would leave out position altogether in the case of Trinamool (and parties like TDP, BSP, NCP, RJD, etc.). --Soman (talk) 02:49, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

But Soman one imp stuff is every party wheter big or small do have some kind of ideology as far as position is concerned its better to leave it. I totally agree with u about left and right situation.--Kkm010^as© 05:17, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

TMC is currently in a Centre-Left political position. So the position part should be corrected to Centre-Left to avoid confusion. Torque 56774 (talk) 18:44, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Post NDA alliance it has evolved into a Centre-Left position. Discussion before removing 'centre-left position ' should have been done! Torque 56774 (talk) 15:39, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

To clarify the dilemma regarding political position of AITC, I suggest an article (from Oxford references) that mentions it to be centre-left.

https://www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/acref/9780191848117.001.0001/acref-9780191848117-e-11 Torque 56774 (talk) 04:44, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

These labels are meaning-less to describe this type of parties in India. Arguably AITC is to the right of CPI(M) and to the left of BJP, but that's about it. Is it left, centre-left, centre, centre-right or right? It's all arbitrary and it is of no particular use to include these labels in the infobox. Likewise for the ideologies listed, they aren't very useful. 'Bengali nationalism' isn't supported by the two references, 'populism' isn't really an ideology per se and 'anti-communism' refers more to the positioning of AITC against the then Left Front government. --Soman (talk) 00:20, 7 March 2021 (UTC)

Yes, I partly agree. The only ideology that could fit is populism. Sunce 'Anticommunism' is particularly against the left front alliance in West Bengal, and directly not promoting capitalism. But I guess the political position section was somewhat appropriate (centre-left); had added reliable citation.

A political position is kind of an identity. Torque 56774 (talk) 02:35, 7 March 2021 (UTC)

AITC is a left leaning political party in India, with populism, distribution of free resources, and anti corporate takeover of farm resources as pillars of its ideology. I don't know why the political position : Center-Center left has been removed. Any political party in India is built on a set of ideologies, and it's stupid to omit out essential information about the party from their wiki pages

Dasjyotishka (talk) 19:42, 7 March 2021 (UTC)

Source which mentions the political position of AITC as left-leaning: https://www.oneindia.com/india/left-right-and-centre-of-indian-politics-2433728.html Dasjyotishka (talk) 19:44, 7 March 2021 (UTC)

Presumably based on copy-paste from Wikipedia, in my opinion. I can't see what the claim for 'leftism' is for Trinamool, apart from a very loose association between populism and leftism... --Soman (talk) 18:31, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

Can't we just add "Catch-all" to the Ideology entry and "Centre" to the Political position field? Ivario (talk) 17:17, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

@Soman: As per your view. You had removed ideologies and position but some other editors added bullshit sources in the ideologies and position. Would you remove them. As a regional party we have very little reliable sources which define the party's ideological stance.--2409:4060:2D87:C12B:5D44:49B1:6B50:8766 (talk) 05:15, 3 October 2021 (UTC)

The party's website is not a reliable source, and shouldn't really have been there. However, the other sources aren't "bullshit". Forbes, the Guardian and Al Jazeera are respected international news sites, and elections.in is a source used on a lot of Wikipedia articles. I'm not entirely sure whether anti-communism should be included; we can discuss this below. YttriumShrew (talk) 20:17, 3 October 2021 (UTC)

Anti-communism

We're having a bit of a fight about whether to describe the AITC as anti-communist. I'd prefer to keep it, but if you wish to remove it, please state your reasoning here. YttriumShrew (talk) 18:31, 20 September 2021 (UTC)

I can't see good sourcing for any of the ideologies listed in there. "Anti-communism", in particular, is only specified in the headline which aren't reliable sources since they don't have editorial oversight, can be misleading and the point of them is to generate views (see WP:HEADLINES). In this case it does seem to be misleading since the article itself describes TMC as a party opposed to the Left Front coalition rather than opposed to communism as an ideological position. Tayi Arajakate _Talk 15:20, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

OK, I've removed it. I've also added some more specific passage citations for the news articles. YttriumShrew (talk) 17:40, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

The news sources are alright, but scholarly ones might be needed for ideology. Election.in is a problematic source though, it's essentially a self published source. That said, it's cited for secularism which is probably the easiest one to reliably source for TMC, not sure about political position. In any case, the entire article can do well with an expansion supported by better sourcing, overall. I might look into it sometime in the future. Tayi Arajakate _Talk 20:08, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

A lone MLA Ashish Das cannot switch his party on his own or whenever he wishes. He can indulge in Anti party activities but being a lone MLA he cannot switch his party since he is an elected representative from one party. The provision is either the MLA has to resign leaving his seat as vacant to conduct a bye-election therefore, getting elected from his desired party or another provision for switching parties without any Bye-Election is a majority of ⅔rd of the ELECTED REPRESENTATIVES (MLAs) gathered to switch parties. No legal issues. Only those ⅔rd MLA's who switch parties will be banned from entering this party for 5-6 years under Anti-Defection Law. Right now Tripura Legislative Assembly has no Elected Representative from Tripura. ChongPong (talk) 05:51, 4 December 2021 (UTC)

The link of the official website of Tripura Govt. cannot be considered as a reference in this case. Recently 12 Congress MLAs of Meghalaya switched to AITC. Since the anti-defection law permits merger of 2/3 members of a legislature group with another party, the 12 MLAs will not attract disqualification. But still the official website of Meghalaya Govt. shows them as INC MLAs which is incorrect because AITC is the main opposition in Meghalaya Legislative Assembly now. Diptyajit (talk) 17:40, 5 December 2021 (UTC)

Regarding Manipur assembly, I lacks information therefore, i will not engage in a discussion though. Though, you claim about 12 MLAs switched to TMC from INC previously having 15 mlas (⅔rd of 15 is 10) therefore it is possible.

The Wikipedia page of Manipur Assembly says something else. It says as per Manipur Govt. Portal. INC has 15 mlas & TMC have 1 MLA. Where is it written TMC is the principle oposition at the Manipur assembly be it Manipur govt portal or Wikipedia page of Manipur Assembly. Nowhere! Therefore, on what basis you are propagating. You can claim. But provide links for Proof preferably the official web links of that state govt. You said government portal of Tripura cannot be considered as a reference in this case. What are you talking about? This is not how it works. Provide proof from the State government portal which will be regarded as the conclusion.

In case of Tripura Assembly, Currently, there are no Elected representative nor Sitting MLA of AITMC at the Tripura Legislative Assembly which i mentioned in my previous talk. Regarding Mr. Ashish Das, he is an Elected Representative from BJP & the provision is "a lone MLA cannot switch his party whenever he wish". There is a provision for official & legal matters. If any MLA has to switch his party, a single Elected Representative (MLA) cannot but a group of ⅔rd of the Total no. of Elected Representatives can.

For example, Bjp has 36 MLAs from Tripura. Now, keep in mind without any by-election/only a group of ⅔rd of 36 MLAs i.e 24 MLAs can switch parties. Even you are aware of it. But can I know the reason behind reverting my edit regarding Tripura Legislative Assembly. Kindly, revert something which makes sense.

1 elected representatives (assembly member) Ashish Das cannot switch his party except resigning for a by-election thereby getting re-elected from the desired party of his choice. Ashish Das didn't resigned for a by-election. Therefore, he remains a BJP MLA. Now, regarding his activities, He got elected from one party now working under the banner of another party. This is called "Anti-Party Activities".

I provided the official link of the government of Tripura. For queries regarding Ashish Das look for Constituency no. 46 & the party from which that MLA got elected. This is the proof even Wikipedia cannot neglect it. You can check here the current Status of Mr. Ashish Das & which party he is in right now.

Visit: https://www.tripura.gov.in/mla-profile ChongPong (talk) 18:50, 5 December 2021 (UTC)

Everyone knows that AITC is the principal opposition party in Meghalaya Legislative Assembly right now. There are plenty of sources available on the internet regarding this matter. https://www.news18.com/news/politics/ex-meghalaya-cm-mukul-sangma-joins-tmc-with-12-mlas-trinamool-now-main-oppn-in-state-4483196.html Here I'm providing one of them. I've already provided the link to the official website of the Meghalaya Government. You can check it. It does not provide the current status of those 12 MLAs. So a state government's official website cannot be considered as a reference in this case. In Tripura, Ashis Das has not faced disqualication till now for defecting to other party. Diptyajit (talk) 19:36, 5 December 2021 (UTC)

Btw, Manipur assembly was not our matter of discussion. Here, I was talking about a single elected representative name Ashish Das from BJP, Tripura who didn't faced any by-election, now claimed by TMC as their MLA which is a false propaganda.

Ashish Das can hold the flag of AITMC or any another party, can go whereever he want, can do whatever he want but still he will be tagged as Bjp MLA until he resigns from his said MLA post. Since, Ashish Das is an Elected Representative from BJP (constituency 46) and not from AITMC.

Now, Regarding his disqualification which you inquired. Few Months ago, Tripura BJP Spokesperson Sri Suvendu Bhattacharjee urged if any MLA is indulged into Anti-party activities, they can resign if they wish thereby conducting a by-election so that they can represent themselves from the party of their choice LEGALLY. But, no Tripura Assembly MLA's came forward to resign. All have faith in the BJP. Except a lone MLA Ashish Das.

Neither Ashish Das resigned from the BJP, faced any by-election, getting re-elected from his desired party (AITMC) therefore entering the Tripura assembly which I already mentioned "a lone MLA cannot switch party OFFICIALLY" & Here we are discussing on official matters & not child play of reverting & counter-reverting.

Ashish Das can indulge into anti party activities but being a lone MLA he cannot switch his party officially except resigning for a by-election. He, being a Bjp MLA & now functioning under the banner of AITMC. He can do whatever he want. But the govt. portal says he is a BJP MLA. So, therefore he is a BJP MLA & this is truth. Ashish Das can claim himself that he joined AITMC but he did not resigned officially from his MLA post elected under the banner of Bjp. In Legal terms he hold the flag of AITMC but not elected from this party "Officially". Also, ⅔rd MLAs from the BJP are not gonna switch sides. Though, Ashish Das is claiming he joined AITMC, Ashish Das remains Bjp MLA officially. I'm repeating this from my first talk. Even a 5 year old kid has brain to understand this. ChongPong (talk) 21:53, 5 December 2021 (UTC)

Yes. We are not discussing about Meghalaya here. I'm just giving an example of Meghalaya because rules are same all over India. Official websites of state governments does not always provide current status of MLAs. That's what I'm trying to say and even "a 5 year old kid has brain to understand this." You should provide more reliable source for the political affiliation of Ashish Das. 12 MLAs of Meghalaya were also challenged by INC leaders to resign and get re-elected in by-election. So it does not matter if anyone challenged or not. - Diptyajit (talk) 22:57, 5 December 2021 (UTC)

@ChongPong and Diptyajit: Please stop edit-warring. If you continue the page protection level may be increased, and you may be temporarily blocked.

I've started a request for comment on this here to help establish a lasting consensus; if you wish to continue discussing this please do so there. YttriumShrew (talk) 00:37, 6 December 2021 (UTC)

@Diptajit... After all these discussions. I assume your IQ is below room temperature. ChongPong (talk) 05:27, 6 December 2021 (UTC)

@YttriumShrew. kindly, visit & conclude. https://prsindia.org/theprsblog/the-anti-defection-law-explained ChongPong (talk) 06:11, 6 December 2021 (UTC)

@ChongPong: You have no IQ at all. You said that you "never mentioned such party name (i.e. TMC congress)." It means you don't even know which portions of this article you are editing. You don't have to explain the anti-defection law. Everyone knows it. The link does not mention anything about Ashish Das's disqualification. Stop reverting edits before reaching to a consensus and without knowing which portions you are editing. - Diptyajit (talk) 07:21, 6 December 2021 (UTC)

🤦‍♂️ "TMC Congress" where? where is that word. Scroll above & point me. Btw Did You mean since i mentioned Trinamool Congress as TMC instead of AITMC or AITC, therefore this is a flaw of my writing. Is this what you mean? Listen, Trinamool Congress was formerly called TMC. Now, it is recognised as a All India based party therefore, a prefix AI (All India) is attached before the name of TMC. But people still recognises Trinamool as TMC. It is just for name sake not even a big issue to make a scene. This is not even a complication for discussion. ChongPong (talk) 07:36, 6 December 2021 (UTC)

@ChongPong: You don't need to explain the history of AITC. You will understand your mistake only by looking at your own edits. And you are not the one to decide what should be discussed or not. Identify your mistakes first. - Diptyajit (talk) 08:12, 6 December 2021 (UTC)

@YttriumShrew: Can you help us reach a consensus by expressing your own opinion? I don’t want to get into this edit war anymore because it has turned into a childish game. Diptyajit (talk) 09:53, 6 December 2021 (UTC)

@Diptajit.. Yes I noticed that TMC Congress thing. It was done by some another user which you reverted & when I reverted your edit focusing only Tripura assembly. I didn't noticed that TMC Congress word which also get attached in my reverts. ChongPong (talk) 13:17, 6 December 2021 (UTC)

@Diptajit: Btw, as far as i know, in 2011 there was a TMC & Congress (INC) led alliance to defeat the Left. Later on, TMC won the 2011 WB election with a majority giving up alliance with the INC (Congress). Right now, you people are denying that there was even an alliance. "Lies". ChongPong (talk) 13:32, 6 December 2021 (UTC)

@ChongPong: Looks like you don't understand anything. No one is denying the fact that TMC allied with INC in 2011. The alliance was led by TMC, not "TMC Congress". The whole thing is clearly mentioned in the article. - Diptyajit (talk) 13:40, 6 December 2021 (UTC)

@Diptajit: A hypen got missed & you make a scene out of it. This is not even an issue except for newbies. Btw, I'm waiting for the consensus as suggested or I will proceed with my view point & edit TMC seats as "0" for the Tripura Legislative Assembly. ChongPong (talk) 18:45, 6 December 2021 (UTC)

@ChongPong: You are the one who is making scenes. The alliance was not led by Congress, it was led by TMC. Don't try to justify your mistake. And you cannot edit wiki pages based on your view point. If there is disagreement, you have to wait until a consensus is reached. - Diptyajit (talk) 21:04, 6 December 2021 (UTC)

@Diptajit: Justifying my mistake? Speak something which make sense. It is you who began to play with words citing a revert where a hypen got missed (which was not my deed) & repeatedly said there is no party like TMC congress which is a Typo basically, actually its TMC-congress led alliance which AITMC cannot digest a decade later, which is why you on (behalf of TMC) removed the name of Congress party. Which I noticed but right now I'm here not for these but to oppose the stand of TMC which claims they have a sitting MLA at the Tripura assembly which is questionable.

On the otherhand, Wikipedia editors (on behalf of TMC) are misusing the flaws of the Anti-defection law therefore, playing games of Reverting & Counter-reverting. Now, If I add citation from Tripura Govt. Portal it will not get digested & it will labelled as biased not by you but by Wikipedia itself, Since, Wikipedia set its rules based on unbiasedness. But can anybody cite a single reliable source? Someone may wrote an article citing "Lone Mla Ashish Das shaved head & joined TMC leaving BJP" which becomes headline and few biased wiki editors are misusing the inadequacies of Anti-Defection law whenever possible. Ashish Das didn't faced charges of Anti-defection & right here, few Wikipedia editors (biased towards TMC) will copy-paste this article citing it as reference to mislead the masses labelling it as a reliable source & readers will believe Ashish Das is a sitting MLA of Tripura Assembly. Nonsense? Except Govt. Portal. no sources can be reliable. But Wikipedia's rules speaking of unbiasedness cannot rely on Govt. Information department, after all govt. is formed by political parties. So, therefore... Then what is the solution? Shall I start again that child's play of reverting & counter-reverting? Waiting for consensus through Wikipedia.

Btw.. I can & I will edit Wikipedia pages based on "Truth" & have Legal acceptance, not on my viewpoint & I'm not going to tolerate fallacies. Thank you. ChongPong (talk) 11:18, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

@ChongPong: The alliance was led by TMC alone (not by Congress). At first you were not even able to point out your own mistake. If you don't have a clear idea about this topic then why are you commenting on it unnecessarily just to cover up your mistake? I will not answer any of your fabrications. You cannot edit wiki pages as per your wish because you are not the policy maker of Wikipedia. If you want to reach a consensus then why aren't you expressing your opinion here? Let's see if other editors agree with you or not. Diptyajit (talk) 12:45, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

Should the listed abbreviation of the All India Trinamool Congress (defined at Template:All India Trinamool Congress/meta/shortname) be changed from "AITC" to "TMC"? YttriumShrew (talk) 03:37, 6 November 2021 (UTC)

Update: We'd also have to update Module:Political party, a project to unify all the meta/colors and meta/shortnames into one database, which will soon replace the templates. YttriumShrew (talk) 20:23, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

Survey

Yes "TMC" is used predominantly as the abbreviation. For instance, I searched up "west bengal bypolls" and the sources I found all used TMC: [1][2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9]. AITC is used sometimes ([10][11]) but not nearly as much as TMC is. Clear WP:COMMONNAME. It could cause confusion with the Tamil Maanila Congress, but their Wiki-abbreviation is TMC(M), and it'll probably be obvious from context. Also, I'd argue that using an abbreviation that people are more likely to recognise outweighs that anyway. YttriumShrew (talk) 03:55, 6 November 2021 (UTC)

Yes, for the template, per YttriumShrew. Of note is that all the examples above are recent, much after their name change which shows that the former abbreviation still remains the common one. Tayi Arajakate _Talk 20:12, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

Discussion