Talk:Kashmir conflict

CM said

I have re-added the CM of J&K's statement with reference in his own words. I think that I made it neutral enough, and thus as the story got extensive coverage, the statement of the CM of an Indian administered state should have a place there. Faizan (talk) 15:48, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

Faizan, The IP you are supporting has been referred to WP:NOTNEWS. The same applies to you. This is just day to day politics, nothing of encyclopedic value, least of all in the lead of an article that covers 70 years of history! - Kautilya3 (talk) 17:14, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

Kautilya, how does NOTNEWS apply here? I am not supporting any IP, but I think that likewise the reports of European Union regarding the turnout, the reported relevant statement of the CM can get a place there too. Faizan (talk) 18:20, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

Of course, you are supporting this IP [1]. I have no idea whether this is the same IP that first inserted this text [2]. But he/she has been told that, for a news item to get inserted into Wikipedia, it should have enduring notability [3]. You have again reinserted the text without bothering to address the issue. Is this of enduring notability in an article that covers 70 years of history? The WP:BURDEN is on you to demonstrate it. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 19:55, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

Faizan, it is covered by notnews. Mufti said it because Pakistan supported militants not done any blast during elections, why you are writing such insignificant thing in lead? This article is not about elections in Jammu and Kashmir, its about Kashmir conflict.--Human3015 Say Hey!! • 07:37, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

Moreover, views of EU and UN matters, these are international organazations, some random comments by local politician for sake of politics dose not deserve place in lead. Kashmir conflict is all about views of International standard organazations. --Human3015 Say Hey!! • 07:42, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

We can also see that IP is requesting Faizan for "help" [4]. I think Faizan is "hopeful of adminship", I saw his name in "hopeful admins" list, but his behaviour is like an IP adress. How one can add a random quote in lead? Former Chief Minister Omar Abdullah said numerous anti Pakistani statements regarding terrorism when he was acting CM, should we add it? PM Modi also said many such statements, should we quote it in lead? In real sense Mufti's statement is also anti-Pakistan, he is thanking militants and Pakistan, he put Pakistan in category of militants. He is indirectly saying that peace in the region is depends on Pakistan, if Pakistan allows everything to happen properly without doing any attack then peace will restore in region. His statement is more like sarcastic statement. But in any case it don't deserve place in lead. --Human3015 Say Hey!! • 07:38, 10 June 2015 (UTC)

Election 2014

Hello Friends ! in compliance with WP policies, i want a dispute resolution by some neutral WP admin. It all started when i first time read this article i found the following wording in the lead paras;

"However, elections held in 2014 saw highest voters turnout in 25 years of history in Kashmir.European Union also welcomed elections, called it "free and fair" and congratulated India for its democratic system.The European Parliament also takes cognizance of the fact that a large number of Kashmiri voters turned out despite calls for the boycott of elections by certain separatist forces.

It looked out of place in the lead because this election dealt only 45% land area of kashmir state which is disputed between india, Pakistan and China. It also looked pro india because it ignored wining pro india chief minister and wining party head comments giving credit to Pakistan and separatists for allowing elections in the state. so i inserted it with indian source reference as follows.

However, elected Jammu and Kashmir Chief Minister Mufti Muhammad Sayeed said, "If God forbid the Hurriyat and the militants tried to disrupt the elections these would not have been as participative as they had been. They (Pakistan) also allowed these elections to take place." Ruling Party president Mehbooba Mufti also defended Mufti's remarks.

Then what happened could be seen in detail on page history. Different tactics were used to remove these lines. My question to all my friends is "Are we good faith neutral WP community or "Are we like fraud lawyers who manipulate rules/law to achieve their goals. Might is right Or right is right ? Thanks. 39.47.121.0 (talk) 17:05, 10 June 2015 (UTC)

First of all, the lead is a quick summary of the article, highlighting the important ideas. There was already too much detail regarding the 2014 election, and you were adding a lot more, verbatim quotes from news reports. In general, you should add material to the article and then summarize it in the lead if it is sufficiently important. Other editors should agree with your judgement about the importance and, if they don't agree, you should discuss it on the talk page.

I have now condensed the lead, while keeping your citation. Please feel free to add more discussion in the body. Please keep in mind however that this is an article about the Kashmir conflict, not an article on the 2014 election. There is a separate article for that. If you really want to do service to Kashmiris, consider creating similar articles on elections in Azad Kashmir - Kautilya3 (talk) 17:54, 10 June 2015 (UTC)

Yup, detail should be added to the separate article as it does not cover 70 years of history. But mention of Pakistan is required too. Faizan (talk) 22:58, 10 June 2015 (UTC)

The news is not too important for this article, you can add this in the page Jammu and Kashmir Legislative Assembly election, 2014 but not in this particular page., and kautilya you don't have to be too much over the top neutral. Cosmic  Emperor  04:19, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

Kautilya3, No need to add "separatists does not tried to disrupt elections", because there are numerous sources where separatist hurriyat leaders appealed to boycott elections. There is difference between "separatists" and "militants". Separatists are more like political activist which often pelts stones but does not categorise as militants and they have done their best to appeal people regarding boycott of recent elections and also they appealed shut down on various elections days. So word "separatist" should not be included in lead stating that they didn't disrupted election. But "militants" are those who use arms and do terror attack, though there was no such major terror incidence during elections still we can't say that its because of Pakistan was not willing to do any attack or they could not do it because of strong security during elections. Still mufti thanked Pakistan for that, he thanked militants. There are clear cut evidences that political separatists tried to disrupt the elections.--Human3015 Call me maybe!! • 07:13, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

I am not being "over the top neutral." The IP made a good argument and convinced me that this is an important part of the "Kashmir conflict" as it exists today, and so it should be highlighted. Pakistanis want credit for not disrupting elections in the neighbouring country. Dubious honour though it is, they should get it. That is part of the conflict. - Kautilya3 (talk) 07:19, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

Kautilya3, its ok if Pakistan wants credit, but does Mufti is reliable source to give credit to Pakistan for smooth conduct of elections and writing it in lead? Give me one more independent source other than Mufti's statement giving credit to Pakistan. As one user said, Mufti's this statement can be written in Jammu and Kashmir Legislative Assembly election, 2014 not in lead of parent article of Kashmir conflict. Election commission of India, EU, UN officials,US officials congratulated India for smooth conduct of elections, who congratulated Pakistan? Mufti's statement came after his alliance with Hindu nationalist party BJP and he just wanted to show his voters that his ideology is not same like BJP and he is "Pro-Pakistani". So its just politically motivated statement. And we are writing it in lead of parent article. --Human3015 Call me maybe!! • 07:39, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

Yes, the views of Mufti, the elected Chief Minister, can be stated with inline attribution for the current affairs of which he had direct knowledge. (This is different from Narendra Modi claiming to have known what "every Indian" thought when he was 21 years old.) - Kautilya3 (talk) 08:01, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

Kautilya3 Doesn't matter what Mufti says: You like the statement of that IP then add it to Jammu and Kashmir Legislative Assembly election, 2014. You very well know terrorists and separatists will always try their level best to disrupt elections; but they were not successful as BSF, CRPF and Indian Army did their best to stop Pakistani terrorists from entering Kashmir. Now in a similar situation, are you going to add these following reliable references in the wiki page of Taj Mahal?

http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/plea-to-declare-taj-mahal-a-shiva-temple-dismissed/article7039804.ece

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/agra/Taj-a-temple-ASI-seeks-time-to-reply/articleshow/47272218.cms

http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/other-states/lawyers-want-taj-declared-a-shiva-temple/article7037345.ece

http://daily.bhaskar.com/news/NAT-TOP-taj-mahal-was-built-on-shiva-temple-are-these-leaders-out-of-touch-with-indian-r-4958953-PHO.html

http://www.thehindu.com/news/taj-mahal-part-of-an-ancient-temple-uttar-pradesh-bjp-chief/article6672772.ece

Read the above links and add them to Taj Mahal if bogus claims by politicians(without any evidence) is so important for you.

Mufti was lying and so are these people.Cosmic  Emperor  09:12, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

CosmicEmperor I do not agree with you statement against Kautilya3 for him showing neutrality.As far what i understand WP policies such instructions to others may disqualify anyone from editing WP because WP has high ethic standards and great reputation.

I agree with Faizan and Kautilya3 and feel that wining CM's statement who represent the state where elections were held is very important in this context. I also agree with Kautilya3 view that lead should short so I propose removal of European union and European parliament statements on following grounds

1. In the presence of European union note why to put extras like European parliament note or EU any other administrative unit/ department note.

2. Election had improved turnout as per one party (India) which was never denied by other party (Pakistan or Separatist) so there is no need for certificate service from European Union because no party dis agreed to this statement.

3. As far European Union certificate of democracy to india is concerned that is not relevant in this artical.

4. European Union is neutral but it is not Pakistan or Pro pakistan separatist it is wining pro india CM by his own self is denying EU. so rival credit by default nullifies EU allegations.

So in order to shorten lead the whole para should be read like this.

" Elections held in 2014 saw highest voter turnout in the last 25 years, However, Credit to separatist leaders and Pakistan for the smooth conduct of the assembly election was given by elected Jammu and Kashmir Chief Minister Mufti Muhammad Sayeed which was defended by Ruling Party leader Mehbooba mufti.

115.186.146.225 (talk) 12:11, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

Question is, who are you?Cosmic  Emperor  12:25, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

• 115.186.146.225, importance is not attached to the sources and their views, but rather to the information that is stated. The fact that the elections were found to be free and fair is important. The fact that the voter turnout was good is important. And, the fact that the separatists didn't cause disruption is important. It doesn't matter to me who said these things as long as they are reliable enough to be cited. - Kautilya3 (talk) 12:58, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

115.186.146.225 agreed 100% sir; CosmicEmperor better try playing video games; Kautilya3 good thought friend but there are so many things which are important but we can not write a movie in the lead; it should be brisk; As Sir 115.186.146.225 stated every one agreed that turnover improved so no need to add extra qualifier certificates on fairness or greatness of Indian democratic system by a regional economic depression hit union. Certificates are only pasted when confidence level of propagator is weak or his position is dubious in world eyes so he wants to hide truth with lipstick touch ups or their are different contradictory claims. On a serious note turnover was good and winner telling the reason is the shortest lead entry. More reliable the sources less dubious WP insertions will be specially on sensitive issues. Agree on para from sir (115.186.146.225) 39.47.50.14 (talk) 17:22, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

Sorry, I don't agree. Elections being free and fair is important, which is why the EU people mentioned it. I think the due weightage in the last paragraph is quite fine. In a few months, we will get scholarly articles covering the election, when we can update the write-up based on them. Cheers, Kautilya3 (talk) 17:55, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

Kautilya3 no need for you saying sorry because that is your opinion about what is important for you. But here we are discussing what should be in the lead. What if against european union certificate some one put Pakistan China and 56 countries OIC members declaring elections not a substitute of plebiscite giving kashmiries right of self determination. Therefore these EU certification for your kind satisfaction should be only in election 2014 separate article. Lead should be crisp as you earlier pointed out and should be stating turnover was good and winner telling the reason. 39.47.50.14 (talk) 18:18, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

Yes sobia naz (39.47.50.14). Additionally Current statement in the lead " elections held in 2014 saw highest voter turnout in the last 25 years" is strange and just like Deceptive marketing tactic we usually face around the world where advertiser claims best or highest in this or that (with only favorable comparisons) which is a malpractice and is tried to be forcefully denied by regulatory authorities. Please see relevant wikipedia article here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_advertising. In election under discussion Turn out was lowest compare to election in other indian states even less then azad kashmir and gilgit baltistan, interestingly no one highlighted that. After detailed thinking and edit history pattern I feel this page is being controlled by few indian editors so all our Talk page consensus efforts will be denied by hook or crook. see current lead statment about election 2014 as example. I think if we were denied neutral consensus we have to consult arbitration committee. 115.186.146.225 (talk) 07:46, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

115.186.146.225, you made a good argument at the top, which I took into account. However, now, you are POV pushing. Do you have a reliable source that questions the statement that the election turnout was the highest in 25 years, or is it your own original research? - Kautilya3 (talk) 08:19, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

Any one can see how POV push had been in edit history. Deceptive marketing like tactics and misuse of WP policies will induce me to refer to arbitration committee who will be in better position to judge with nuetral mind. 115.186.146.225 (talk) 09:09, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

Dear IPs, election turnout was highest since 1989 (the year when armed insurgency started in Kashmir). What advertising you are seeing in it? If you have some problem with content then try to resolve it here on talk page, later you can also go to dispute resolution board. Arbitration is last board to apply and this so obvious information don't even deserve long discussion on this talk page itself. You have to keep your nationalist and personal thoughts out of Wikipedia while editing. Don't waste time of community for such minor issues. Inclusion of remarks of EU and voters % are obvious facts and it should be included. You can challenge any un-sourced and non-relevant content but here it is highly sourced and relevant. Thank you.--Human3015 Call me maybe!! • 09:22, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

Calm down Human3015 WP is not a battle ground. We are community so accept others insertions which are highly sourced and relevant. Do not worry Arbitration will definitely find extensive history of aggressive edit-warring and attempting to turn Wikipedia into a battleground along national lines in case of all including Kautilya3 Human3015 and CosmicEmperor. Please also see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Human3015#Those_users 115.186.146.225 (talk) 09:48, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

Reminder that this article is covered by discretionary sanctions. Also, any edits hinting at offwiki collaboration, unintentional or otherwise, [5] are highly discouraged. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 11:14, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

Thanks sir NeilN for your quick guidance to all of us. 115.186.146.225 (talk) 11:59, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

Very good. Now, you need to provide a reliable source that questions the highest voter turnout statement or withdraw the accusation that it is "false advertising." - Kautilya3 (talk) 12:33, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

Dear Kautilya3 I think 115.186.146.225 thanked NeilN for his warning for edits hinting at offwiki collaboration, unintentional or otherwise keeping in view https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Human3015#Those_users ; after reading that plus all indo pak & kashmir relevant Wiki articles edit history; Apparently Kautilya3 Human3015 and CosmicEmperor are doing so and are providing each other back up to avoid 3 revert rule of edit warring; As far as reliable source is concerned; i already gave that from indian famous news paper "THE HINDU" plus as desired by you, lead should be short so lead should only include " Elections held in 2014 saw better voter turnout since 1989, However, Credit to separatist leaders and Pakistan for the smooth conduct of the assembly election was given by elected Jammu and Kashmir Chief Minister Mufti Muhammad Sayeed which was defended by Ruling Party leader Mehbooba mufti." I have modified a bit the version proposed by 115.186.146.225 at 12:11, 11 June 2015; 39.47.50.14 (talk) 17:07, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

first of all both of you Ips stop tagging me, which gives a red notification. And you 39.47..... tried to facebook connect with 115.186........ I am pretty sure you people are someone's sock. But I don't have any energy left to investigate.Cosmic  Emperor  17:12, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

yes i gave a message to IP 115.186.146.225 about my facebook account so what socializing on Face book is not i crime. you can also add me @ "Sobia Naz" ; but offwiki collaboration with intent to target other users is a crime so keeping in view https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Human3015#Those_users ; and after reading that plus all indo pak & kashmir relevant Wiki articles edit history; Apparently Kautilya3 Human3015 and CosmicEmperor are doing so and are providing each other back up to avoid 3 revert rule of edit warring. 39.47.50.14 (talk) 17:48, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

@39.47.50.14: This is the third time you pinged me with a ridiculous accusation. If you do this again, I will report it to the administrators for harassment. Human3015, CosmicEmperor and I don't "support" each other. We have overlapping interests, and we agree at some places and disagree at others. Whatever communications we have with each other are public. All three of us agree on one point at this time, viz. that you and the other IP are POV-pushing and you are not here to build Wikipedia. - Kautilya3 (talk) 05:50, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

Kautilya3 instead of replying to your threatening and harassing remarks; Respecting WP gratitude i leave this investigation on administrators; I will definitely avail arbitration committee if misuse of editing rights on this article or other indo pak articles are not stopped; I am confident about WP arbitration committee fairness; Still we have time to refine our selves free from ethnic or religious or national mindsets of partiality; If we analyse edit history of this page or other indop pak page in last two year following things are evident;

1. Whenever some one edit with pro kashmiri/pakistani insertion. One of indian editor (from group) like you deletes that with comments "Unsourced" 2. If he provides source then one of indian editor (from group) like you deletes that with comments "Not a reliable source" 3. If he provides reliable source then one of indian editor (from group) like you deletes that with comments "Not a Newspaper" 4. If he re-edits to comply with WP not a news paper then one of indian editor (from group) like you deletes that with comments "No Concensus take to talk page" 5. In the mean while on the basis of three revert rule your group make page protected. 6. If he tries talk page consensus you all group editors converge and deny consensus. 7. Then you provoke that person in to heat of the moment and get him banned.

Brothers such people in real life are called "FRAUD" and CHEATERS". I hope you guys are not such insults so let the investigation begin from some good human because if there is evil in the world then there is some great humans as well. In the end i say sorry if my words hurt some one but let us be fair on WP RESPECTS39.47.50.14 (talk) 09:42, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

There are dozens of Indian/Pakistani editors who do the same thing. But you pointed out only your personal choice. So are you neutral?Cosmic  Emperor  13:33, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

Well, the steps you mention are the normal process of learning to be a Wikipedian. But your problem is in the very first point. You are trying to be pro-somebody or other, whereas we try our best to be pro-truth. We try to find the truth by looking at a wide range of reliable scholarly sources and represent those view points. I would welcome you to register as a regular user and become a good Wikipedian. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 10:06, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

Ok, everybody, the matter is now referred to the WP:Dispute Resolution Noticeboard. Please go there to make your comments. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 16:46, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

Inclusion of Aksai Chin and Azad Kashmir in this page

This article name is Kashmir conflict, Regions of former princely state of Jammu and Kashmir which are now administered by India, Pakistan and China are under the scope of this article, but this article largely contains issues related to only Indian administered side, where are more details regarding Human rights issues or elections in Azad Kashmir and Gilgit Baltistan? We all should try to improve this article, obviously I will give most contribution from reliable sources but still others should also involve in this issue. [6], [7], [8], [9]. There are tonnes of other reliable sources. --Human3015 Call me maybe!! • 12:50, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

Why lead should only contain info regarding human rights issues and elections in Indian Kashmir? why can't we add such info regarding Pakistani Kashmir too? Because both are equally disputed. I will add info regarding elections and Human rights issues in Pakistani Kashmir in lead soon, little bit busy these days. --Human3015 Call me maybe!! • 13:05, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

That's a valid argument. Kashmir conflict should also include Azad Kashmir and Aksai Chin. Cosmic  Emperor  14:02, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

Agreed. Azad Kashmir, Gilgit Baltistan and Askai Chin are automatically included in the conflict. Aren't they included in the article yet? Faizan (talk) 17:48, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

Disputed para in the lead removed. Wait for Dispute resolution committee decision

Disputed para in the lead is

"However, elections held in 2014 saw highest voters turnout in 25 years of history in Kashmir.[19][20][21][22] European Union also welcomed elections, called it "free and fair" and congratulated India for its democratic system.[23][24][25] The European Parliament also takes cognizance of the fact that a large number of Kashmiri voters turned out despite calls for the boycott of elections by certain separatist forces.[23]

It was observed and caused dispute among users so it should be removed until Dispute resolution committee's decision. It is unethical to maintain disputed para for weeks over weeks. It was already on page since last ten days to deceive article visitors because its neutrality is seriously questioned and same has been accepted by dispute resolution committee for investigation.Whistle blowing is encouraged world wide so whistle blowers opinion should be respected here. 115.186.146.225 (talk) 05:45, 19 June 2015 (UTC)

can you be more prcise who disputed it and with whom and what is really disputed here ? before making major surgery Shrikanthv (talk) 06:52, 19 June 2015 (UTC)

Read election 2014 section on this talk page above plus Human 3015 better you focus on dispute resolution of disputed para removed and dont try to indimidate me on my talk page in the name of 3 revert rule. Proof your POV push on dispute resolution page and stop playing childish. 39.47.50.14 (talk) 15:27, 19 June 2015 (UTC)

Shrikanthv it was already explained to you in this Talk page to do not edit war let resolution come. 39.47.184.157 (talk) 16:35, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

what a shame if no one respect WP dispute resolution mechanism. Disputed para reinstated and protected unethically days over days. Justice being delayed. Are these WP standards of neutrality. what a shame for such so called un biased admins 39.47.184.157 (talk) 17:35, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

39.47.184.157, feeling bad for you, but if you revert 4 different users then page will obviously get protected, it is wrong thinking by you that admins endorses current version or they are biased, admin protected page just to stop edit warring, nothing else. We should keep pre-dispute version till dispute resolves because this version is there since months and it is relevant and well sourced. --Human3015 Call me maybe!! • 17:51, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

25 years of AFSPA

I added this from Amnesty international 30 june 2015 report on kashmir https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Kashmir_conflict&type=revision&diff=669877951&oldid=669854640 but user Kestwol called it nonconstructive. Removal of sourced content restored. Recent Amnesty report on completion of 25 years of armed forces special act is all about kashmir conflict hence no reason for calling it nonconstructive and edit warring. 39.47.134.197 (talk) 06:34, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Content dispute

Please some one read the reference before playing undo button case example of non constructive edits by user kestwol. 39.47.134.197 (talk) 10:49, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

I think the IP violated WP:3RR. He has been repeatedly adding POV content and edit-warring against multiple users. Khestwol (talk) 10:55, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

So you more focused on trapping others in WP:3RR then WP RS content and WP good faith editing? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 39.47.134.197 (talk) 12:34, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Free food and liquor making youth to join army in kashmir

There is a growing voice against Indian youth joining army for free food family holidays and liquor for which Andhara Pardesh MP P Ravindra Babu also raised voice but he was then booked by Bihar high court stated times of india.

I included this but one user objected so i thought let us talk on its inclusion. 39.47.134.197 (talk) 09:50, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

39.47.134.197 (talk · contribs · WHOIS), This is my first and last comment regarding this issue. This can't be included, no one will agree on this, so please leave this issue, it is not related to Kashmir conflict. --Human3015 knock knock • 09:56, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Indeed, this has nothing to do with Kashmir conflict. It is WP:COATRACK and poor quality sourcing. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 10:03, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

References

But majority of Indian army is deployed in Kashmir or Pakistan border due to Kashmir conflict with Pakistan so it is relevant. 39.47.134.197 (talk) 10:45, 5 July 2015 (UTC)