Talk:Pakistan and state-sponsored terrorism

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Pakistan (Rated C-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pakistan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Pakistan on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Pakistani politics.
 
WikiProject Terrorism (Rated C-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This template is within the scope of WikiProject Terrorism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles on terrorism, individual terrorists, incidents and related subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Crime (Rated C-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Crime, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Crime on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
Checklist icon
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Espionage (Rated C-class)
WikiProject icon Pakistan and state-sponsored terrorism is within the scope of WikiProject Espionage, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Espionage and Espionage-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page, or contribute to the discussion
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
 
WikiProject Human rights (Rated C-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Human rights, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Human rights on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject International relations (Rated C-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject International relations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of International relations on Wikipedia.
If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Military history (Rated C-Class)
MILHIST This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
C This article has been rated as C-Class on the quality assessment scale.
WikiProject Politics (Rated C-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
 

Image copyright problem with File:Herald.jpg[edit]

The image File:Herald.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

  • That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
  • That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --02:54, 8 February 2009 (UTC)


"WITH NO DOUBT THIS ARTICLE IS WRITTEN BY AN INDIAN" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.20.148.11 (talk) 05:48, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

POV[edit]

User Chandu15: Dont think the neutrality flag is needed for this article. I think a user finds it "bashing" because of the nature of facts stated. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chandu15 (talkcontribs) 07:40, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Please list reasons for the neutrality dispute. I believe the content is well referenced and correct in all aspects.Nshuks7 (talk) 16:43, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

I agree. dont see any POV issues here as per WP:DUE all viewpoints need to be given proportional weight and views of minority generally should not get equal weight as majority. The neutrality tag needs to go.--Wikireader41 (talk) 22:29, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

Removed neutrality tag since no objections have been raised. 59.95.77.221 (talk) 09:36, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Article is a prefect example of Pakistan-bashing. Many of the sources references include non-credible media outlets while the article is also peppered with Op-Ed articles used as citations when they are merely 'opinions' to begin with. I can bet a million dollars, no Pakistani was consulted on this article; hence, the result is a highly biased article that violates quite a few WP policies.Ron Pitz (talk) 22:44, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

The intent of this article is not to determine the truth - it is to cite the opinions of reliable published sources and to allow readers to come to their own conclusions. Hence, if all the claims have been published, it has a NPOV and should be untaggedTommrtnTalk 03:05, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

Agree with Ron Pitza-99.226.242.202 (talk) 03:00, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

International Character[edit]

I am not experienced with writing wikipedia articles, but an important aspect of terrorism in Pakistan is that it provides a kind of hub for aspirants from around the world. Foreign fighters are a common phenomenon in the operations against the Taliban as well as many people have been arrested in various countries for going and getting training in Pakistan. The Kargil war, which was a kind of hybrid attack with terrorists and Army operating in tandem was openly flaunted as an attack by terrorists from various nationalities in the Pakistani media. It is also why many countries are very worried because it enables their citizens or residents to become terrorists by taking a perfectly legal trip to Pakistan.

There are other open alliances with terrorist organizations with politicians idolizing the terrorists, warning them of upcoming actions against them, forming political alliances with their front organizations and openly requesting for their areas to be excluded from terrorist attacks happening in the country.

Recently, members of the LeT/JuD (banned in theory) held massive rallies out in the open where they advocated attacks against India and asked the government to provide weapons for their jihad. This call to arms was made to ordinary civilians and included nuclear war if needed. These were extremely public and well advertized and attended events - tens of thousands of people. They were reported widely in the media post event. They were organized by known terrorist organizations that were banned. There was absolutely no objection from the government or any other entity. No one was arrested or even warned. The state is well aware of these happenings. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.182.19.86 (talk) 17:09, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

selective qouting[edit]

maybe use one qoute for section and say the other book inply same infoMughalnz (talk) 05:16, 4 December 2009 (UTC)Mughalnz (talk) 04:23, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

== is rediff a reliable resource==Mughalnz (talk) 05:17, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

to many ref in comparision to other section maybe reduce the ref to a few[edit]

-to be npov in comparison to other sections

Domestic conerns[edit]

[1]Lihaas (talk) 20:21, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

CNN reports OBL killed in Pakistan[edit]

Add to this article now or wait a few minutes? Hcobb (talk) 03:10, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

well it is not clear whether Pakistan was involved and in what way. clearly he was living the grand life in a huge mansion close to the capital Islamabad while awaiting his 72 virgins not in a cave somewhere in FATA. Did he survive a 10 year manhunt because somebody was protecting him ( ISI immediately comes to mind). was he given up because US squeezed Pasha's bollocks on his recent visit to US??? we will have to wait and see what comes out.--Wikireader41 (talk) 04:36, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
Yeah, it's not like a bunch of other senior AQ leaders were caught in Pakistan. Hcobb (talk) 03:53, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Edit request by VonBismarck[edit]

Pakistan did not help in tracking Osama, so I request that the section titled, 'Role of Pakistan in Osama bin Laden's tracking', be changed to 'The protection (or shielding) of Osama bin Laden by Pakistan'.-VonBismarck (talk) 15:00, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Just because Pakistan did not help track Osama, one cannot conclude that they protected him. CanadianLinuxUser (talk) 15:30, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
If he was housed in Abbottabad, there was some sort of 'protection'. Anyway, Pakistan did not play a role in tracking him, so that title ought to be changed (you can change it to something more NPOV).-VonBismarck (talk) 15:41, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
CanadianLinuxUser, I don't want to get into an edit war with you. Kashmir isn't a separate entity. Most of Kashmir is administered by India and some parts of it are occupied by Pakistan. When anyone says Kashmir, it means the Kashmir administered by India, while the parts occupied by Pakistan are called, 'Pakistan administered Kashmir', so I hope you can restore my last edit or else I will take this matter to one of the noticeboards or RfC.-VonBismarck (talk) 15:23, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
Kashmir is defined as follows: "Today Kashmir denotes a larger area that includes the Indian-administered state of Jammu and Kashmir (the Kashmir valley, Jammu and Ladakh), the Pakistani-administered Gilgit-Baltistan and the Azad Kashmir provinces, and the Chinese-administered regions of Aksai Chin and Trans-Karakoram Tract." Therefore, it is a separate entity as well and part of India. So we are both correct and/or both incorrect. CanadianLinuxUser (talk) 15:28, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
If you look at the article on Kashmir, it says, 'Until the mid-19th century, the term Kashmir geographically denoted only the valley between the Great Himalayas and the Pir Panjal mountain range.' and that is what I meant. You are quoting the next sentence, which is not the traditional, 'Kashmir', so I hope you restore the rest of India sentence. Thanks.-VonBismarck (talk) 15:38, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
Once again, this article is about Kasmir "today", not as how it is perceived "traditionally". CanadianLinuxUser (talk) 16:48, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
You forget that the parts occupied by China and Pakistan aren't being terrorized, so it is necessary to have a, 'rest of India' after 'terrorism in Kashmir'.-VonBismarck (talk) 14:38, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from Jhfjdhfjhsdfkd, 21 September 2011[edit]

bangladesh is not a neighbour of pakistan

Jhfjdhfjhsdfkd (talk) 15:59, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

Not done: I think in this case it just means they're in the same part of the world, not that they literally share a border. — Bility (talk) 21:24, 22 September 2011 (UTC)
That editor later did the edit anyway; I have undone it. Graham87 10:06, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

Revert, why[edit]

Lot of content removed, calling terrorists freedom fighters is a bit POV. Am onobile currently, shall go onto detail tommorow Darkness Shines (talk) 18:20, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

The next time you do a similiar blanket revert on my edit or become the first one to turn up on a template I create, I will have to report you for hounding and disruption. For a start, you could explain what was removed. As for the latter part, that's what the academic source says. While you're at it, also take some time to read WP:BRD-NOT. Mar4d (talk) 18:51, 28 May 2012 (UTC)
That is what one source says. And I wll edit that template if I see fit to, given you just slapped it on a bunch of articles I watch good luck with your hounding allegation. Darkness Shines (talk) 20:40, 28 May 2012 (UTC)
  • There seems to be a tendency for Pakistani editors to be passive aggressive regarding the state of the article. This article seems to cite neutral sources and yet the incidents portray Pakistan in a bad light. But this reality is derived from the facts in the sources and cannot be sugar coated. Keeping this article in constant unreliable mode does not sound very NPOV.

    This article does not seem to have issues any more. If there are specific sections that need clean up, please state those when a clean request is made. Else untag. 67.171.10.156 (talk) 05:25, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

  • @Mar4d, for the umpteenth time, please do not assume bad faith; nobody is wikihounding you. However, if you still think someone is, do not threaten them, just go ahead and report them.

    @Darkness shines, you are right calling terrorists as "freedom fighters" when all they do is indiscriminately blow people up or behead them (including innocent children, and other adult civilians) is a tad POV. Mrt3366 (Talk?) 09:38, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

Dubious[edit]

I have read the ref link and nowhere in the link does it say, London 7/7 Bombers were aided by the ISI, it only states that they met a Pakistani Engineer, it does not state if this person was ISI. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.107.133.46 (talk) 20:17, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

Removed, the ISI is only mentioned as they caught Naeem Noor Khan who is affiliated with al Qaeda. Darkness Shines (talk) 20:36, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

Pervez Hoodbhoy[edit]

Reverted twice by Darkness Shines, but no reason given for the reverts. Mar4d (talk) 17:53, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

You are referring to this. I think it is OK to be included as Tribune, being a well-received news organisation will not publish views of someone until they find that person's views to be notable. Also, Pervez Hoodbhoy says that apart from being a leading physicist, he is also a reputed commentator and analyst. Clearly, Tribune agrees with that. Anir1uph | talk | contrib 18:18, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
Alright, the quote can stay but I've taken out the quote box as it unnecessarily seems to stress or emphasise the opinion of the person. He may self-identify as an analyst, but clearly his qualifications are in another academic field so he cannot be quoted as an authoritative figure. Hoodbhoy's quote can suffice without the quotation box. Mar4d (talk) 19:07, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
I agree, the block quote was a little too much. Anir1uph | talk | contrib 19:17, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Pakistan and state-sponsored terrorism. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Question? Archived sources still need to be checked

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 17:32, 26 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Pakistan and state-sponsored terrorism. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit User:Cyberpower678/FaQs#InternetArchiveBot*this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

Question? Archived sources still need to be checked

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 21:13, 6 June 2016 (UTC)