Jump to content

Talk:Drone strikes in Pakistan: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Legality: updated reasons
b1=n, missing a few citations
 
(48 intermediate revisions by 26 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Talk header|search=yes }}
{{Talk header|search=yes}}
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=B|1=
{{WikiProjectBannerShell|1=
{{WikiProject Pakistan|class=B|importance=High|FATA=yes}}
{{WikiProject Pakistan|importance=Low}}
{{WikiProject United States|class=B|importance=Low}}
{{WikiProject United States|importance=Low}}
{{WikiProject International relations}}
{{WikiProject International relations |importance=Low}}
{{WikiProject Military history|class=B|South-Asian=yes|US=yes
{{WikiProject Military history
|class=B
|South-Asian=yes
|US=yes
<!-- B-Class-1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points have appropriate inline citations. -->
<!-- B-Class-1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points have appropriate inline citations. -->
|B-Class-1=yes
|B-Class-1=n
<!-- B-Class-2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain obvious omissions or inaccuracies. -->
<!-- B-Class-2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain obvious omissions or inaccuracies. -->
|B-Class-2=yes
|B-Class-2=yes
Line 13: Line 16:
<!-- B-Class-4. It is free from major grammatical errors. -->
<!-- B-Class-4. It is free from major grammatical errors. -->
|B-Class-4=yes
|B-Class-4=yes
|B-Class-5=no}}
<!-- B-Class-5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. -->
|B-Class-5=yes}}
}}
}}
{{User:MiszaBot/config
{{User:MiszaBot/config
Line 22: Line 24:
|minthreadsleft = 5
|minthreadsleft = 5
|algo = old(90d)
|algo = old(90d)
|archive = Talk:Drone attacks in Pakistan/Archive %(counter)d
|archive = Talk:Drone strikes in Pakistan/Archive %(counter)d
}}
}}
{{Auto archiving notice|bot=MiszaBot I |age=3 |units=months }}
__TOC__
__TOC__


==Page Move==
== Dubious Peswhar Court data. ==
<div class="boilerplate" style="background-color: #efe; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px dotted #aaa;"><!-- Template:RM top -->
:''The following is a closed discussion of a [[WP:requested moves|requested move]]. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a [[Wikipedia:move review|move review]]. No further edits should be made to this section. ''


The result of the move request was: '''consensus to move''' the page, per the discussion below. [[User:Dekimasu|Dekimasu]]<small>[[User talk:Dekimasu|よ!]]</small> 20:26, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
I cut "According to the statistics presented to the Peshawar High Court by the Government of Pakistan in response to a petition filed in June 2013 - in 333 drone strikes during the last five years, 47 militants and 1500 civilians were killed while 330 were left maimed.[26]"
It was single sourced to the online Daily Mail to an argument by the leader of a political party. Bad sourcing for an outrageous claim. If someone can find multiple sources to show that a policy that was 3% effective was continued, we might consider putting it back.  [[User:Tedperl|Tedperl]] ([[User talk:Tedperl|talk]]) 15:09, 9 September 2013 (UTC)


----
== Links ==


[[:Drone attacks in Pakistan]] → {{no redirect|Drone strikes in Pakistan}} – I make this request for these reasons: (1). According to [http://www.google.com/trends/explore#q=Drone%20strikes%2C%20drone%20attacks&cmpt=q] 'drone strikes' are a far more common term used, as opposed to 'drone attacks'. (2). This means that Wikipedia common name policy is not being observed with the current title: [https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:COMMONNAME&redirect=no] (3). 'Drone attacks' convey a negative skew towards the article, in violation of Wikipedia non-judgmental descriptive policy: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Article_titles#Non-judgmental_descriptive_titles] (4). Many of the initial references used in the actual article state 'drone strikes': [http://investigations.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/05/22/18429089-in-first-public-acknowledgement-holder-says-4-americans-died-in-us-drone-strikes?lite] [http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-24618701] [http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/pakistani-court-declares-us-drone-strikes-in-the-countrys-tribal-belt-illegal-8609843.html] [http://www.voanews.com/content/us-accused-of-unlawful-killings-pakistan-drone-strikes/1774276.html] [[User:Uhlan|'''<span style="color:red">Uhlan</span>'''<span style="color:#FF0000"></span>]] <sup>[[User talk:Uhlan|<span style="color:red">talk</span>]]</sup> 06:16, 12 November 2014 (UTC)
[http://www.aljazeera.com/news/asia/2013/11/protesting-pakistanis-block-nato-supply-route-2013112312404623604.html][http://www.aljazeera.com/news/asia/2014/02/pakistan-anti-drone-campaigner-missing-2014210165427489602.html >> Pakistan anti-drone campaigner missing][http://www.aljazeera.com/news/asia/2014/02/pakistan-pressed-over-missing-drone-activist-201421213182789530.html >> Pakistan pressed over missing drone activist ][http://www.aljazeera.com/news/asia/2014/02/abducted-pakistani-drone-activist-freed-20142141414744609.html >> Abducted Pakistani drone activist freed]([[User:Lihaas|Lihaas]] ([[User talk:Lihaas|talk]]) 19:15, 23 November 2013 (UTC)).


::Please comment with either *'''support''' or *'''oppose''' and leave a comment. Should this page be moved? [[User:Uhlan|'''<span style="color:red">Uhlan</span>'''<span style="color:#FF0000"></span>]] <sup>[[User talk:Uhlan|<span style="color:red">talk</span>]]</sup> 06:07, 12 November 2014 (UTC)
== Maybe someone can explain how this "Closing" process works when all of the editors themselves do not sign in and remain anonymous.... ==


*'''Oppose''' equally good references use the phrase "drone attacks in Pakistan" [https://www.google.com/search?client=ubuntu&channel=fs&q=%22drone+attacks+in+pakistan%22&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8#q=%22drone+attacks+in+pakistan%22+-strike&channel=fs&tbm=nws] (and this is just a half hearted automated search with no custom queries; proper searches would yield much more). Attack also signifies the grievances of Pakistani public; the fact that Pakistani public is vehemently against the tactic is a significant reason behind Pakistan's changing foreign policy from time to time related to drone attacks. The word "strike" is more appropriate when referring to individual incidents. The current title is [[WP:DUE]]. --<span style="text-shadow:#396 0.2em 0.2em 0.5em; class=texhtml">[[User:TopGun|<b style="color:#060">lTopGunl</b>]] ([[User talk:TopGun|<b style="color:#000">talk</b>]])</span> 07:01, 12 November 2014 (UTC)
*'''Support''', a change to a more neutral article name.--[[User:RightCowLeftCoast|RightCowLeftCoast]] ([[User talk:RightCowLeftCoast|talk]]) 22:13, 12 November 2014 (UTC)
*'''Support''', per RightCowLeftCoast [[Special:Contributions/83.11.98.128|83.11.98.128]] ([[User talk:83.11.98.128|talk]]) 19:00, 13 November 2014 (UTC)
*'''Support''' per nom. Also because this keeps it consistent with the general term [[airstrike]]. [[User:Calidum|<span style="color:#002244; font-family:serif">'''-- ''Calidum'''''</span>]] 23:03, 13 November 2014 (UTC)
*'''Support''', although a weak support, but I can understand the rationale. Strike is probably more neutral. Politically, the term 'attack' also seems to imply as if they are an attack on the State of Pakistan, when they are not (really), as the current and previous governments of Pakistan seem to be knowledgeable and even tolerable of them. So they are not really an attack on Pakistan, but rather foreign strikes occurring with the permission (or complicity, whichever fits best) of Pakistani authorities. In contrast, the title of the article [[2011 NATO attack in Pakistan]] is appropriate as it really was an attack on Pakistan's security forces (and hence the state) and was treated as such by the government. These drone attacks however, as I have said, are not treated as attacks on the state by the Pakistani government, and hence, terming them 'strikes' may be appropriate. '''[[User:Mar4d|<span style="color:green;">Mar4d</span>]]''' ([[User talk:Mar4d|<span style="color:green;">talk</span>]]) 11:50, 17 November 2014 (UTC)
*'''Support''', reasons stated in my original page move argument. [[User:Uhlan|'''<span style="color:red">Uhlan</span>'''<span style="color:#FF0000"></span>]] <sup>[[User talk:Uhlan|<span style="color:red">talk</span>]]</sup> 23:30, 17 November 2014 (UTC)
----
:''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a [[WP:RM|requested move]]. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a [[WP:move review|move review]]. No further edits should be made to this section.''</div><!-- Template:RM bottom -->


== Orphaned references in [[:Drone strikes in Pakistan]] ==
Honestly, in a discussion about the quoting of anonymous but supposedly authoritative sources, the people we find who are arguing it AND closing it are deliberately choosing to remain anonymous by not signing in. Money for Wikipedia? Not one dime in support of such anarchy. [[User:QuintBy|QuintBy]] ([[User talk:QuintBy|talk]]) 09:45, 14 December 2013 (UTC)
:I'd like to address your concerns, but there seems to be some confusion. The last discussion "closed" here was [https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Talk:Drone_attacks_in_Pakistan&diff=530365533&oldid=525592366 this one], almost a year ago, closed by a registered editor. Is that the one you mean? As this is your first edit to this talk page, did you mean a different article?
:As for anonymous editors, yes, Wikipedia accepts contributions by anonymous editors. In fact, ''most'' editors are anonymous, including you. Yes, all of your contribs are connected to the user name "QuintBy", but that doesn't tell anyone who you are. Maybe you're a senior government official pushing the government's agenda, maybe you're a lonely crank in a cabin in the remote wilderness pushing your pet theory. More likely, you're somewhere in between. At least with IP editors we can tell something about where they are editing from.
:Money for Wikipedia? Yes, Wikipedia runs on donations.
:Anarchy? Wikipedia has a metric fuckton of rules compared to most anything anyone would call "[[anarchy]]". - [[User:SummerPhD|<span style="color:#D70270;background-color:white;">Sum</span><span style="color:#734F96;background-color:white;">mer</span><span style="color:#0038A8;background-color:white;">PhD</span>]] ([[User talk:SummerPhD|talk]]) 16:44, 14 December 2013 (UTC)
::Also, remember that the sources are not really anonymous. The reporter's name is usually stated, and the editorial staff of the publication is usually publicly available. Furthermore, if the names of the sources quoted in the article are not given, they are still presumably known to the reporter, which is why they are considered "unnamed" but NOT "anonymous." [[User:Cla68|Cla68]] ([[User talk:Cla68|talk]]) 23:39, 14 December 2013 (UTC)


I check pages listed in [[:Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting]] to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for [[User:AnomieBOT/docs/OrphanReferenceFixer|orphaned references]] in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of [[:Drone strikes in Pakistan]]'s orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for ''this'' article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.
== CFR update ==

http://blogs.cfr.org/zenko/2013/12/31/tracking-u-s-targeted-killings/<p>[[Special:Contributions/86.129.4.149|86.129.4.149]] ([[User talk:86.129.4.149|talk]]) 18:10, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

== Legality ==

Shouldn't there be a section on the legality - or rather otherwise - of these assassinations?[[Special:Contributions/101.98.175.68|101.98.175.68]] ([[User talk:101.98.175.68|talk]]) 07:09, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

{{requested move/dated|Drone strikes in Pakistan}}

[[:Drone attacks in Pakistan]] → {{no redirect|Drone strikes in Pakistan}} – I make this request for these reasons: (1). According to [http://www.google.com/trends/explore#q=Drone%20strikes%2C%20drone%20attacks&cmpt=q] 'drone strikes' are a far more common term used, as opposed to 'drone attacks'. (2). This means that Wikipedia common name policy is not being observed with the current title: [https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:COMMONNAME&redirect=no] (3). 'Drone attacks' convey a negative skew towards the article, in violation of Wikipedia non-judgmental descriptive policy: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Article_titles#Non-judgmental_descriptive_titles] (4). Many of the initial references used in the actual article state 'drone strikes': [http://investigations.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/05/22/18429089-in-first-public-acknowledgement-holder-says-4-americans-died-in-us-drone-strikes?lite] [http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-24618701] [http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/pakistani-court-declares-us-drone-strikes-in-the-countrys-tribal-belt-illegal-8609843.html] [http://www.voanews.com/content/us-accused-of-unlawful-killings-pakistan-drone-strikes/1774276.html] [[User:Uhlan|'''<span style="color:red">Uhlan</span>'''<span style="color:#FF0000"></span>]] <sup>[[User talk:Uhlan|<span style="color:red">talk</span>]]</sup> 06:16, 12 November 2014 (UTC)


<b>Reference named "IMU joins ISIL":</b><ul>
== Rfc: Page move ==
<li>From [[War on Terror]]: {{cite web|url=http://www.khaama.com/uzbek-militants-in-afghanistan-pledge-allegiance-to-isis-in-beheading-video-9962|title=Uzbek militants in Afghanistan pledge allegiance to ISIS in beheading video|website=khaama.com|accessdate=25 June 2015}}</li>
<li>From [[Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant]]: {{cite news |first=Mirwais |last=Adeel |url=http://www.khaama.com/uzbek-militants-in-afghanistan-pledge-allegiance-to-isis-in-beheading-video-9962 |title=Uzbek militants in Afghanistan pledge allegiance to ISIS in beheading video |work=Khaama Press |location=Kabul, Afghanistan}}</li>
<li>From [[Operation Zarb-e-Azb]]: {{cite news| url=http://www.rferl.org/content/imu-islamic-state/27174567.html| title=IMU Declares It Is Now Part Of The Islamic State|date=6 August 2015|publisher=Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty|accessdate=6 August 2015}}</li>
<li>From [[Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan]]: {{cite web|url=http://www.eurasianet.org/node/74471|title=IMU Pledges Allegiance to Islamic State|work=EurasiaNet|date=1 August 2015}}</li>
<li>From [[Insurgency in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa]]: {{cite web|url=http://www.khaama.com/uzbek-militants-in-afghanistan-pledge-allegiance-to-isis-in-beheading-video-9962|title=Uzbek militants in Afghanistan pledge allegiance to ISIS in beheading video|website=khaama.com|accessdate=6 July 2015|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150713102036/http://www.khaama.com/uzbek-militants-in-afghanistan-pledge-allegiance-to-isis-in-beheading-video-9962|archive-date=13 July 2015|dead-url=no|df=dmy-all}}</li>
</ul>


I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. [[User:AnomieBOT|AnomieBOT]][[User talk:AnomieBOT|<span style="color:#880">⚡</span>]] 22:14, 3 May 2019 (UTC)
{{rfc|pol}}
Should this page be moved? [[User:Uhlan|'''<span style="color:red">Uhlan</span>'''<span style="color:#FF0000"></span>]] <sup>[[User talk:Uhlan|<span style="color:red">talk</span>]]</sup> 06:07, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 15:36, 7 December 2024

Page Move

[edit]
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: consensus to move the page, per the discussion below. Dekimasuよ! 20:26, 18 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Drone attacks in PakistanDrone strikes in Pakistan – I make this request for these reasons: (1). According to [1] 'drone strikes' are a far more common term used, as opposed to 'drone attacks'. (2). This means that Wikipedia common name policy is not being observed with the current title: [2] (3). 'Drone attacks' convey a negative skew towards the article, in violation of Wikipedia non-judgmental descriptive policy: [3] (4). Many of the initial references used in the actual article state 'drone strikes': [4] [5] [6] [7] Uhlan talk 06:16, 12 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment with either *support or *oppose and leave a comment. Should this page be moved? Uhlan talk 06:07, 12 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose equally good references use the phrase "drone attacks in Pakistan" [8] (and this is just a half hearted automated search with no custom queries; proper searches would yield much more). Attack also signifies the grievances of Pakistani public; the fact that Pakistani public is vehemently against the tactic is a significant reason behind Pakistan's changing foreign policy from time to time related to drone attacks. The word "strike" is more appropriate when referring to individual incidents. The current title is WP:DUE. --lTopGunl (talk) 07:01, 12 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, a change to a more neutral article name.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 22:13, 12 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, per RightCowLeftCoast 83.11.98.128 (talk) 19:00, 13 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per nom. Also because this keeps it consistent with the general term airstrike. -- Calidum 23:03, 13 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, although a weak support, but I can understand the rationale. Strike is probably more neutral. Politically, the term 'attack' also seems to imply as if they are an attack on the State of Pakistan, when they are not (really), as the current and previous governments of Pakistan seem to be knowledgeable and even tolerable of them. So they are not really an attack on Pakistan, but rather foreign strikes occurring with the permission (or complicity, whichever fits best) of Pakistani authorities. In contrast, the title of the article 2011 NATO attack in Pakistan is appropriate as it really was an attack on Pakistan's security forces (and hence the state) and was treated as such by the government. These drone attacks however, as I have said, are not treated as attacks on the state by the Pakistani government, and hence, terming them 'strikes' may be appropriate. Mar4d (talk) 11:50, 17 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, reasons stated in my original page move argument. Uhlan talk 23:30, 17 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Orphaned references in Drone strikes in Pakistan

[edit]

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Drone strikes in Pakistan's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "IMU joins ISIL":

  • From War on Terror: "Uzbek militants in Afghanistan pledge allegiance to ISIS in beheading video". khaama.com. Retrieved 25 June 2015.
  • From Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant: Adeel, Mirwais. "Uzbek militants in Afghanistan pledge allegiance to ISIS in beheading video". Khaama Press. Kabul, Afghanistan.
  • From Operation Zarb-e-Azb: "IMU Declares It Is Now Part Of The Islamic State". Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty. 6 August 2015. Retrieved 6 August 2015.
  • From Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan: "IMU Pledges Allegiance to Islamic State". EurasiaNet. 1 August 2015.
  • From Insurgency in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa: "Uzbek militants in Afghanistan pledge allegiance to ISIS in beheading video". khaama.com. Archived from the original on 13 July 2015. Retrieved 6 July 2015. {{cite web}}: Unknown parameter |dead-url= ignored (|url-status= suggested) (help)

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT 22:14, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]