Talk:2006 Mumbai train bombings: Difference between revisions

Initial Comments

Kindly update. --Bhadani 14:05, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Should we edit it that this is an obvious terror attack by Muslim terrorists?

NOTHING is obvious yet except for the blasts. --mav 14:18, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Do you want to cause riots ? have some sense, brother Ashankar 14:35, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Please do not put in speculations that the blasts were caused by any group, without at least citing the source of such claims. Ashankar 14:48, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

I've removed the most glaring bit of speculation. Should the "In Srinagar eight persons are reported to have been killed in the attacks believed to be carried out unidentified Islamic extremists" line be removed until more concrete information is available, as well? --ellF 14:52, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

The Home Secretary has said that there is no link b/w bombay bomb blasts and srinagar bomb blasts, should we delete the above passage? Ashankar 15:40, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

A passage reads: "In Srinagar eight persons, including six tourists from West Bengal, were reported to have been killed in the attacks reportedly carried out by unidentified Islamic extremists". I feel that while locating the Bombay blasts in the context of the recent Srinagar blasts on the same day is all right, the quoted sentence at best is irrelevant to this article and at worst, obliquely seeks to connect the two incidents without any pre-published source for such a link. When read in the light of the denial by the Home Secretary, I feel that the deletion of the quoted sentence is valid. Ashankar 16:59, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Please read the source. Do you thing that you are an investigating agency? We write here based on references and reference is in the link with the news of the Jerusalem Post. Why you are so touchy? --Bhadani 15:19, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

As the most recent comment by Ashankar indicates, there is still a lot of unverified information being discussed. Requesting that the article adhere to a certain level of neutrality and precision is not, I feel, being touchy. Do you disagree? --ellF 15:45, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

We should not be guided by our personal feelings and emotions. We should edit to make the wikipedia an authentic source of information. Please think of the time when wikipedia will become a source of referecne instead of we searching the referecnes! --Bhadani 14:43, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Various "terrorist" statements are being added without reference. Please cite sources! --ellF 14:56, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

You are welcome to search the information and cite sources, if you find. Please assume good faith and do not de-motivate the editors working on the Breaking news article. Investigation into such things take years, so do not feel so bad if you do not find immediate references: please always assume good faith and keep a WP:NPOV. Your 22 edits in eight months are good. But, to learn more about wikipedia more involvement is necessary. Thanks. --Bhadani 15:15, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Agreed. However, adding uncited references to "Islamist extremists" is problematic, especially in the current political climate, which is the point that I have been arguing. Demotivating editors and requesting that prejudice be avoided strike me as being markedly different, and lumping the two together is a bit unfair. --12.38.113.2 15:32, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Great to see you coming after 5th April 2006 to talk about this page. I am sure that you have been editing and reading wikipedia and are well aware of our policies. I have sent a welcome message to you to have a user name - that will make you more comfortable. This will also make others more comfortable. However, you may continue to edit without any user name, if you so wish. --Bhadani 15:39, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

The core policy of this encyclopedia is that every single statement, argument, fact, etc, has to be previously published. If you can't cite a source for a statement it must not be added to the article. mdf 15:56, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for the clarification, mdf. My understanding was that non-cited material did not belong here, but Bhandani's comments and Admin status made me question my edits. However, the quotation and article you mention seem to back up my understanding of how to contribute correctly here, and I believe that they supercede the assumption of good-faith argument proposed above. --ellF 16:03, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

7 blast

7 blasts hit trains in Mumbai Train [1] --pradeepsomani

What happened to the 7th blast in the table? Currently it only lists 6 blasts, it seems to be missing the one between Santacruz and Khar Road. --Railk 10:17, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Photos?

Pls add photos. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pradeepsomani (talk • contribs) of 11.07.06

coincedence

it is just me or are all these terrorist attacks happening either on the 7th or the 11th of any given month? 12.100.11.146 14:43, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

This is the third event happening on the day 11, yes. --TheFEARgod 16:02, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

So it's not just a coincidence it's 7/11? Creepy.--Planetary 23:49, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Actually I was looking for a place to post the same ideas. 9/11 in USA, 3/11 in Madrid, 7/11 in London and now 7/11 again in Mumbai. I think there is a message in here which we are just not getting it. I believe its a little more than a coincidence to happen. These look like meticulously planned acts. I am sure the thinktanks of the world are thinking about the same, but what baffles me is how we get back to our normal life a few days later and forget about what happened. Its a harsh reminder that we are not safe, no matter where we live. I think the best way to deal with these coward guys is to try and think like them. It will be soon time when we will have to take harsh decisions to take out these bad guys but going to the places they breed. I just read a report on Israel's attacks which mentioned about countries which have refugee camps that act as incubators of terrorism. Some of the countries which have been friendly on the face have been thriving grounds for terrorists. These countries breed hate within for the western world, but on face would show that they are allies of the west. What more proof do we want against these terrorists. The reason the terrorists are what they are today is due to the fact that the government of countries they are based in support them. How long shall we fool ourselves thats its one an act in solitary. Just as globalization has got the world closer and one place, so has terrorism consolidated into a true international entity. Its time that as responsible citizens of the one world, to get united against terrorism. Its time we hunt these terrorist down in their burrows. --P bay 04:23, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

dumbass.... it is 7/7 for London....

German/Deutsche Version

Is there a German version of this page available? I'd like to cooperate in it. 81.182.173.123 14:43, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Only few minutes before I created the page. In case, you can translate, that would be a great service to wikipedia. Thanks. --Bhadani 14:44, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

I had started editing a German language page, but just after a few minutes it was deleted with no excuse. Although similar terror attacks (9/11, Madrid, London) are already among German Wiki-articles. 81.182.173.123 15:24, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

I do not have any idea about the policies followed by the German wikipedia. Normally, an item which is currently a Breaking news in the [2] wikinews should be an important item to be inclusion in all wikipedias. --Bhadani 15:32, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Well I don't get it either, but since the German language Wiki-page of this article has been shut down, I need to remove the de: link. 81.182.173.123 15:39, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Terrorist Arrested

I have added this info:

A terrorist has been arrested by the New Delhi police in New Delhi's Jungpura area. 50 kgs. of RDX has been seized from him along with a sum of Rs. 50 lakhs, who is being said to be associated with these bomb blasts.

I saw it on Aaj Tak and Zee News, not updated on their site, but shall be put soon.

Without citation, this probably shouldn't be part of the main article. It appears that someone has already removed it -- perhaps you could repost it if it turns out to be relevant and when you can cite the source? --ellF 15:01, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

NOw, as I have the citation, I think I can post it. Right??

http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/asiapcf/07/12/mumbai.blasts/index.html

Name of article

Is this the correct name for this article? --Emijrp 15:09, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

The correct name should be 11 July 2006 Mumbai train explosions or even better 2006 Mumbai train explosions. I think we should move the page to either of these, preferably the latter. — Ambuj Saxena (talk) 15:34, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

I agree, especially for the latter. --Merovingian {T C @} 16:02, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

What happens if someone blows up more trains later this year in Mumbai? It makes sense to leave the article title as is. -- Wikitravel Sapphire 21:59, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Yes someone please change it, it has been bugging me for a while now how the media loves to surrender an entire day on the calender over to terrorists. 9/11, 7/7, 7/11, 3/11. Are they going to keep doing this until each country gets a terrorist day of their own? I would hope that people make a concious effort to refer to these attacks as the World Trade Center Attacks, the Pentagon Attack, The London Bus and Tube Bombings, The Madrid Train bombings, and now the Mumbai Train bombings. I know it may take a little longer to say but for me at least if gives me the satisfaction of knowing that I am not losing days from my calendar to terrorists.

Perhaps you'll be lucky. Notice how your list didn't include 10/21, the date of the 2002 Bali bombings despite the fact that more people died then in either 3/11 or 7/7... Nil Einne 17:26, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Image

I can't see the map image .svg. I see a big white square. --Emijrp 15:09, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

I had the same problem, but it's working now. Maybe it was a database error? --Merovingian {T C @} 15:30, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Now someone have changed .svg extension to .png. --Emijrp 15:32, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

A new image with the bomb locations marked should be made, like was done for the 7 July 2005 bombings. NoSeptember 15:46, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Done by User:Sukh. --Merovingian {T C @} 16:22, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Terrorist arrested : Speculation ?

One section now reads : "A terrorist has been arrested[11] by the New Delhi police in New Delhi's Jungpura area. 2 kgs. of RDX has been seized from him along with a sum of Rs. 50 lakhs, who is being said to be associated with these bomb blasts

Zeenews article says : "Terrorist arrested :Meanwhile, a person suspected to be a terrorist has been arrested in Jangpura area of Central Delhi. The police recovered 2 kg RDX from his possession. Bureau Report". Where does the 'said to be associated' part come from ? Tintin (talk) 15:20, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

I think it is confirmed it was terrorism. The question is - who? Al Qaeda? CrazyC83 15:35, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Update figure

Rediff claims that 90 people have been killed, though doesn't give the break-up among the sites of explosions. Can someone get the updated break-up so that we can update the article. — Ambuj Saxena (talk) 15:37, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Inexact contain

"They went off at or in the near vicinity of the suburban railway stations of Matunga, Khar Road, Santacruz, Jogeshwari, Borivali and Bhayandar.[2][3]" phrase doesn't say the same that Casualties table. --Emijrp 15:38, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

The table also says that one bomb went off at Borivali, whereas a previous paragraph states two bombs went off at that location. --Gtamber 16:45, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

The Spirit of Wiki (formerly Goodnight)

When I initated this page, and linked it to the main page, I was not aware that the page shall get so many edits so soon. This is the spirit of wiki. Thank you friends, and goodnight for now. We should pray for those killed and injured in the blasts. I would only request that editors who appear on such sensitive pages to edit after gaps of weeks and months should be more careful while doing edits. I welcome them though...Regards. --Bhadani 15:45, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

I agree wholeheartedly. A terrible event covered rapidly and in depth in the spirit of wiki. Our thoughts are with everyone touched by this brutal mass murder. We stand with you in sympathy. --Dumbo1 00:13, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Added photos

I hope they won't be deleted (screenshots)--TheFEARgod 15:51, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. --Emijrp 15:53, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Another blasti n Bandra

Another local train has been hit in Bandra.

I read that too. That would be the 8th blast. I don't think the death toll would be as high on that one, being late in the evening in Mumbai... CrazyC83 16:13, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Where did you read it? The first sentence of the article now says "eight", but it's direct reference says "seven". mdf 16:23, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Timing

Rediff, contrary to what this article say, is reporting the blasts to have occurred betn 6 and 6.30 pm (ist) --soum^সৌমোyasch 16:16, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Map

Let the map of Location of Mumbai in India be there. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:IndiaMap_mumbai.png Pls. help me about copyright status for this image. This image is taken from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:IndiaMap2.PNG pradeepsomani

It's free to use, since the original was free to use (I presume you just took the other picture and superimposed a circle on top of it). Regardless, in my opinion, a map of Mumbai is not really necessary, especially right now. There are already too many images and not enough content in the article. Mumbai is a major city and so its location does not really need to be pointed out. If some don't know the whereabouts of the city, they can go look at the Mumbai article. Perhaps once this article gets longer, the map can be put back in the article. joturner 16:34, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

I corrected the license. joturner 16:36, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

India flag on main page

Why not keep Image:11_July_2006_Mumbai_bombings_-_map_showing_locations.png on the main page. The Indian flag serves no purpose. Any admins here who can do something about it? - Aksi_great (talk) 17:23, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Even I agree. The map described above is a lot more informative. — Ambuj Saxena (talk) 17:35, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Confirmed casualties

What's the source on this data? --Pifactorial 17:34, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

The numbers in the table have no source and contradict the sourced numbers given in the text. Can we get a source for this? Rmhermen 17:41, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

I support a lot of people in Mumbai. (Irony: People complain that America is outsourcing a lot of work to India. In reverse I support almost a thousand folks in Mumbai from America and I still can't pronounce many of their names.) I think that most of the people were sent home for the day. I have not heard if all the users have been accounted for yet. Crud, I hate to worry about people that I know... Bdelisle 05:21, 12 July 2006 (UTC) Update - Finally got word that all the users that I support are ok. Bdelisle 05:35, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Rescue and relief operations

This entire section is also unreferenced. The closest I could find was what appears to be standard policy; when/where was the announcement made for today's events? mdf 17:37, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

An 8th Blast

The CBC has just reported that Mumbai police have confirmed an 8th blast that took place on a train. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.50.77.123 (talk) 17:49, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Contradictory reports from NDTV saying that an 8th Bomb was found but it was undetonated --Kaushik twin 17:55, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Indian Rupees format

In the "Response" subheading, somebody edited the amount of relief money from "Rs. 1,00,000" to "Rs. 100,000". Although it is customary in the United States to write it in the latter format, almost all of India uses the former format. I think a change back to "Rs. 1,00,000" would be prudent. (Although I see how this may cause confusion to readers who are not aware of the Indian system). Any comments?     Amit 18:03, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Since its a page essentially about an Indian event, the lakh format would be more suitable. I feel that ultimately most viewers will see the amount, not the format changes. --Kaushik twin 18:06, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

That needs citation. --Emijrp 18:09, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Is the main article on Indian rupee not enough citation? I believe it explains the system very well.     Amit 18:12, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Oh, are you talking about the relief money in general, or the format that it is written in?     Amit 18:13, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

I mean about relief money. --Emijrp 18:21, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Probably the amount. We should get the fact right before the format: "function before fashion", as it were.  ;-) As for the format, though, a string like "1,00,000" will look like it has a missing zero to many North American eyes. Maybe spelling it out? mdf 18:19, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

I think the citation is needed for the amount to be given as Relief Fund, but not for the format. I feel the format should be in Indian format (Lakhs) if the amount is correct, and format doesn't require any citation. -Sahil

Citation for the relief amount comes from NDTV. Quote, "Meanwhile, Maharashtra Chief Minister Vilasrao Deshmukh has announced a compensation of Rs one lakh for the relatives of those killed and Rs 50,000 for those injured." [3]. Hope that helps.     Amit 18:24, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Ok, :) --Emijrp 18:29, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

I'm one of those North Americans that thought it looked wrong. I could tell from the USD conversion that it was not 1,000,000, so I thought it had an extra comma. I "fixed" it by removing the extra comma, read the wikilinked article on the currency and came back and reverted my edit. I'm not sure what the best solution is, but as this is an article on an Indian event, Indian format should be used - whether that be one Lakh or 1,00,000 Rs. is what I;m not sure on. GRBerry 21:04, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

seven or eight..

Reports according to NDTV its 7 blasts[4], changed it accordingly in article. --Sartaj beary 18:09, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Criminy! NDTV reported "eight" an hour ago. As I read it now, in fact, it says "seven" in the intro paragraph and then proceeds to describe degtails of an "eighth" in the middle. This suggests we remove NDTV as a "reliable" reference altogether. mdf 18:27, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

CNN says eight; I added them as a reference. I also updated the table to remove some of the confusion. joturner 18:39, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Seeing as there seems to be confusion with the Home Office saying seven, how about a compromise, "seven or eight". :) --Kaushik twin 19:04, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

CNN on TV just reported 7! Like User:Kaushik twin says we will compromise with seven or eight till we get next info. --Sartaj beary 19:43, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

With fast breaking news, try to figure not just the timestamps of the news coverage but the timestamp of the goverment announcement that is being treated as the source. Especially with multiple outlets covering the story, they will not all be synchronized - at least some of the non-locals are watching local coverage, or watching someone who is watching local coverage, instead of getting it directly themselves. GRBerry 21:07, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

[5] claims 8 bombs to have exploded. The death count, which as far as I can tell is the best way to estimate the time of publication of the sources, is 147, which is not too far back. --Railk 21:30, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Link to Srinagar

I think we have contradictory reports on Home Office Statements, the NDTV site says that the Home Office states that there is no link, while I just watched an interview on NDTV, with an official from the Home Ministry who said that the attacks were suspected to be performed by the same group.--Kaushik twin 18:13, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Yes.. Home minister just denied the link between Srinagar and Bombay blasts.[6]. --Sartaj beary 18:18, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

First Compartment

Did all the bombs go off in the first class compartments of the trains? - Little Spike

Mid Day qoutes Press trust of India which cites Railway Authorites says all the blasts had hit first-class cars.[7] --Sartaj beary 20:01, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Please add this

AFGHAN PRESIDENT HAMID KARZAI comment --Emijrp 18:23, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

5th citation

The 5th citation doesn't have anything in it. It looks like it's suppossed to be a ref called ndtv-8. Somebody might want to correct this. --Jaysscholar 18:34, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Done. Thanks. joturner 18:38, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Suspects...

The Times of India reports that LeT and SIMI are responsibe for the attacks. both groups have admitted involvement in the incidents. TOI claims that attacks were designed to trigger communal roits LeT, SIMI hand in Mumbai blasts Shall we add suspects and motivation section to the article or wait for official statement??.--Sartaj beary 19:58, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Lashkar-e-Toiba at least has issued a denial[8]. Graft 00:45, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Al Qaeda?

Is there any confirmation of involvement by Al Qaeda in these attacks? CrazyC83 20:04, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

As far as I know, there is no confirmation on this yet. --Siva1979^{Talk to me} 20:43, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Al Qaeda is not even the main suspect. I guess that SIMI[9] would be the primary suspect as Indian police siezed a bunch of weapons from them a few days ago. But it's too early to say.

Added External Link

Added external link to Mumbai Metroblog where they are posting first hand accounts and help links.

Thankyou :) --Sartaj beary 21:53, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Death Toll

CNN has confirmed at least 174 dead [10]. - Little Spike

I changed the death toll range from 147-174 to 160-174, because it is safe to state at this point that the death toll is no lower than 160 and no higher than 174. - Little Spike

Meantime...

I'm reading the wiki article False flag Anon2 23:38, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Of course you are. May I suggest the paranoia article after that? Want me to add to the article that Bush planted the bombs? Let's just fire Jimbo Wales and replace him with Osama bin Laden. He's a good guy.  :-) Mscudder 23:49, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Want me to add to the article that Bush planted the bombs?

At this point in time that seems an unnecessary split. Anon2 00:01, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Trivia

Why is...

The act of terrorism took place on the 11th day of the month, the same day of the month as the March 2004 Madrid train bombings in Spain and the September 2001 terrorist attacks in the United States, while July 2005 London bombings took place on the 7th day of the month.

...here? It's just arbitrary trivia with not relevant conclusion, so I'm removing it. joturner 00:23, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Speaking of trivia, anyone notice that 7/11 is a convenience store chain? 205.188.117.13 00:31, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Only every goddamn racist idiot in the world, as far as I can tell. Graft 00:43, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

How is that racist? Anything to do with Apu Nahasapeemapetilon? 205.188.117.13 00:53, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

See, for example, this Graft 02:49, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Kamikaze or not?

The article does not say if it was suicide bombings or timed explosive devices? If islamists did it, it was possibly suicide bombing. But 2004 Madrid was timed bombings and that was done by islamists?

The Tamil Tigers/Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam has been one of the most successful exponents who honed suicide attacks into an art so to speak. I haven't heard any suggestion that they could be involved and I'm skeptical they would dare care out an attack of this magnitude and kind in India. Nevertheless, I think it's wise to point out that it could easily have been a suicide bombing if it were someone other then Islamists. In any case as far as I know, no one is particularly clear how the attack was carried out. I don't know if you paid much attentiong during the London bombings but I paid some attention at it was quite clear at the time there was a lot of confusion about how the attacks were carried out before it finally became clear quite a while later (can't remember the precise time period). And the investigators there had the advantage of an extensive CCTV network which I suspect is not so extensive in Mumbai. Nil Einne 16:59, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Some suggestions

I've read the article, and some bits are still contradictory or unclear:

1) Number of bombs.

• The lead section says eight bombs plus one defused.
• The "details" section lists seven stations, of which one had two bombs. The defused bomb should also be mentioned in this section.
• The injuries and fatalities table lists only six stations. The Bhayandar location is not included in the table.

2) Repetition

• The bit about cities beng placed on high alert is repeated twice
• The bit about rail services resuming is mentioned at least three times

3) Times and dates lacking

• Quote: "Rail services have now been restored. As a show of investor confidence the Mumbai Stock Exchange has rebounded. It has started the day with the BSE SENSEX Index up by nearly 1% in morning trade. In a show of resilience, foreign investors have chosen not to panic; the Sensex was up almost 3% at 10,930.09 at the end of the day's trade." - Which day is this? When is "now" when the train services were restored? (Also, saying that foreign investors "chose" not to panic is not really verifiable.)
• Quote: Recent reports indicate (as of 18:00 UTC) that the phone networks are restoring service." - which day is this referring to?
• Quote: "The phone network has been completely restored, through the night." - Which night?
• Quote: "The New Delhi police in New Delhi's Jungpura area arrested a person" - When did this arrest take place?
• Quote: "India's major cities were put on high alert after the blasts." - when was this alert issued?
• Compensation announcements - when were these announcements made? Which day?

4) Clarity

• Quote: "The bombs were put on trains plying on the western line of the suburban ("local") train network, which form the backbone of the city's transportation network." - it is unclear whether the western line is the backbone of the city's transportation network, or whether the suburban train network is the backbone of the city's transportation network. The map of the western line is helpful, but a map of the whole transport system would help put that map in context for the overall city. A map of Mumbai with the locations marked would be great.

Hope all this helps. I'll try and help with the editing later on, but hopefully those editing this article will be able to implement these suggestions more effectively. Finally, my condolences to those affected by this awful tragedy. Carcharoth 11:40, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Locations confusion

There seems to be some confusion over the locations. I suspect this is similar to what was seen in the aftermath of the London bombings, where both the departure and arrival station of trains midway between stations were reported as the location.

I have found several lists of locations:

• [11] says "Matunga, Khar, Santacruz, Jogeshwari, Borivali and Bhayendar".
• [12] says "Matunga, Khar, Mahim, Jogeshwari, Borivali and Bhayandar"
• [13] says "Matunga, Bandra, Khar, Mahim, Jogeshwari, Borivili and Mira Road".

Several reports also say that most of the blasts took place on moving trains (presumably between stations), with some at stations.

Looking at the map of the Western Line (here) , it can be seen that the pairs of stations that are being reported are: Bhayander-Mira Road; Santacruz-Khar Road; and the three stations in a row: Bhandra, Mahim Junction, Matunga Road.

When all the confusion is sorted out, what is needed is the precise locations (and which stations the trains were travelling between), the order of these stations on the Western Line, and the order in which the bombs went off. Hopefully that information will be forthcoming in the next few days, but until that happens, please bear in mind the potential confusion that can be caused by referring to old news reports from the immediate aftermath - these reports may later be shown to be incorrect. Carcharoth 12:01, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

PS. And the image will need to be updated as the precise bombing locations are reported. Currently, the image marks the stations, rather than the location of the bombings (which was mostly between stations), and even the stations marked are now mostly incorrect and conflicting with the article and other sources. Carcharoth 12:09, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

36th Citation

Same thing that happened on the 5th citation is now happening on the 36th citation. The name of it is "cnn-q". It might just need to be cnn, which is the third citation. Here's the version I'm currently looking at. --Jaysscholar 13:24, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Why did the phone network go down exactly

I can't seem to find an exact explanation--GregLoutsenko 13:53, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Because it's off-topic for this article. Look elsewhere: like any system, when demand exceeds capacity, it starts to thrash, if not outright crash. mdf 14:09, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Actually I think you're missing the point. Or perhaps Greg wasn't making this point but there is a valid point here. What the article currently says is:

Due to the mobile phone networks being jammed, news channels such as NDTV ran tickertapes with information of injured individuals as well as SMS messages from those who wish to contact their families. [19]

Reports indicated that at around 18:00 UTC on 11 July (midnight in Mumbai), the phone networks were restoring service. The phone network was completely restored during the night.

This is not particularly clear. I assumed at first that phone networks were jammed by the number of people trying to use the phone networks, as is usually the case in emergencies such as this. However then it goes on to report that the networks were restoring service. This suggests that the networks actually had to do something to restore service. There are 4 possibilities here.

One is that the phone networks got so overloaded that some actually crashed rather then being simply jammed/unusable due to the number of people attempting to use them. If this were the case, then the article needs to be clearer that there were in fact many crashes in the network rather then the networks simply being jammed. But another possibility is that the networks didn't actually crash but the phone companies actively managed traffic during the emergency and had a list of essential numbers belonging to the emergencies services etc who were allowed to use the network and numbers perhaps which could be called but any calls between 2 non emergency numbers were not-routed or put in a very low priority que and therefore when it talks about restoring service it means they stopped this active management. I've never heard of such an active management before and it sounds rather difficult to implement but I guess it would technically be possible. The third possibility is that the phone networks were purposely jammed by the police/whoever in case phones were being used to set of bombs. This seems a bit strange since one would assume there would be an agreement between the government and networks to take off service rather then jamming being required. On the other hand perhaps broad spectrum jamming was being carried out in case bombs were remotely detonated but via some other means other then using the GSM mobile phone network.

Alternatively, perhaps the article is just poorly written and in fact the companies weren't restoring service rather service was coming back online as the number of people trying to use the networks reduced. Or perhaps it's not particularly clear whether there were actually crashes. I'm not saying we necessarily need to go into the detail or have to say whether there were crashes in the network or not but we need to make the article clear so it doesn't suggest the phone companies were restoring service when we haven't actually discussed whether there was any necessity for the phone companies to restore service. Or put it another way, my point is that the article is confusing at the current time and should either re-worded it or go in to more detail about precisely what happened to the mobile networks. Nil Einne 16:49, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Local land line Phone was working and SMS facilities were also working.

vkvora 17:25, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Blood Banks and Help Line Telephone Numbers

These are essentially just a list of telephone numbers. I don't think this really qualifies as encyclopedia material and thus should be removed. After the initial situation is over - perhaps a month or two from now - these numbers are going to be unimportant. joturner 14:34, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Removing them even after a week shall be ok too. --Bhadani 15:08, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

I was about to post that I removed them, but I see it has already been discussed. Anyhow, I felt that these shouldn't be in an encyclopedia article even today, maybe Wikinews at best.--Kungfu Adam ^(talk) 15:54, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

I wasn't suggesting that they be removed a month or two from now; I was actually suggesting they should be removed today (I'll carry this out now). I was mentioning the month or two to indicate that not too long from now, no one will care about these numbers (a lá the will anybody care about this subject in ten years? question when thinking about notability). joturner 16:13, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Never mind; somebody else did it. joturner 16:14, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

references

The references section is becoming pretty messy. I'll try to clean it up but more help would be appreciated. sikander 17:19, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Looks like a Typo in this statement. Any idea wht it should say?

((SWE)): The Swedish Prime Minister says "I hate India"

No idea. I've removed it from the page until someone puts a quote with citations. sikander 17:56, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Confirmed Death Toll at 200

The death toll is confirmed by high Indian officials at 200. As well it is confirmed that 200 bodies have been recovered from the bomb sites. - Little Spike