 | This essay contains the advice or opinions of one or more Bharatpedia users. Essays may represent common ideas, or ideas that many users would not support. They are not rules. Think carefully about what they say before following them. |
 | This page in a nutshell: Wikilinks and other hyperlinks can be used as evidence. They are not a substitute for removing defamatory content. |
Hyperlinks can be used as evidence in disputes and in court. Bharatpedia's practice of wikilinking words and phrases to other articles does not by itself make a statement lawful, and it is not a reliable defence if content on Bharatpedia is alleged to be defamatory under Indian law.
Bharatpedia is hosted in India. Editors and administrators should assume that Indian civil and criminal defamation law, the Information Technology Act, 2000, and the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021 may apply. This page is not legal advice.
What the law is concerned with[edit source]
Indian defamation law is not the same as United States libel law. In particular:
- Defamation may be pursued as a tort (civil claim for damages and injunctions) and, where the statutory ingredients are met, as an offence under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (previously Indian Penal Code sections 499 and 500).
- A statement that is published, is defamatory of an identifiable person, and is not saved by a recognised defence (such as truth for the public good, or a privileged occasion) can create exposure for the publisher.
- Intermediaries that host user content have conditional protection under section 79 of the IT Act only if they observe due diligence and act on the notices and orders contemplated by the 2021 Intermediary Guidelines. Ignoring a valid legal notice is not a content-policy question only; it can affect that protection.
- The Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 may separately apply where personal data of a living person is processed.
Foreign judgments about conspicuous hyperlinks and fair-report privilege (for example United States cases on news sites) do not govern Bharatpedia. They must not be cited as if they were Indian authority.
How hyperlinks matter on Bharatpedia[edit source]
A wikilink, external link, or footnote can still be relevant evidence because it may show:
- what text was published on a given revision;
- that an editor pointed readers to another page or source;
- that an administrator or the site had notice of a complaint about that material.
A link to a reliable source does not automatically make a poorly sourced or one-sided claim acceptable under BP:V, BP:NPOV, or BP:BLP. If the article text itself is defamatory or unsourced, adding a hyperlink does not cure it.
What editors should do[edit source]
- Do not add, restore, or keep unsourced or poorly sourced negative claims about living persons. Follow Bharatpedia:Biographies of living persons and Bharatpedia:Libel.
- If a subject or their representative identifies alleged defamation, do not respond with a legal threat on-wiki. Point them to Bharatpedia:Contact us or Template:Mailto and, if the material is clearly libellous, blank or revision-delete it.
- Do not assume that because a statement is only a link it cannot be treated as publication.
- Administrators handling such reports should preserve diffs for the record, remove clearly libellous revisions from public view where policy allows, and avoid quoting the attack in deletion summaries.