Misplaced Pages

Talk:Indo-Pakistani war of 1971: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 04:59, 30 April 2015 editOccultZone (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers224,089 edits →Do Watch the New Revert by a New User "Xtremedood": re← Previous edit Revision as of 05:29, 30 April 2015 edit undoXtremedood (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users4,028 editsNo edit summaryNext edit →
Line 76: Line 76:
::: There is no clear consensus above, there is only you and Ghatus. ] (]) 11:15, 29 April 2015 (UTC) ::: There is no clear consensus above, there is only you and Ghatus. ] (]) 11:15, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
::::{{yo|Xtremedood}} Consensus is against you since 2 editors have disagreed. You are the only one, somehow trying to make it look like Pakistan had won the war and using an unreliable source. ] <small>(] • ] • ])</small> 04:59, 30 April 2015 (UTC) ::::{{yo|Xtremedood}} Consensus is against you since 2 editors have disagreed. You are the only one, somehow trying to make it look like Pakistan had won the war and using an unreliable source. ] <small>(] • ] • ])</small> 04:59, 30 April 2015 (UTC)
::::: 2 against 1 is not a consensus. ] (]) 05:29, 30 April 2015 (UTC)


== land exchange == == land exchange ==

Revision as of 05:29, 30 April 2015

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Indo-Pakistani war of 1971 article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
Article policies
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5Auto-archiving period: 3 months 
This page is not a forum for general discussion about Indo-Pakistani war of 1971. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about Indo-Pakistani war of 1971 at the Reference desk.
This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject iconMilitary history: Asian / Indian / South Asia
WikiProject iconThis 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.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history
B checklist
This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
  1. Referencing and citation: criterion not met
  2. Coverage and accuracy: criterion met
  3. Structure: criterion met
  4. Grammar and style: criterion met
  5. Supporting materials: criterion met
Associated task forces:
/ 
Taskforce icon
Asian military history task force
Taskforce icon
Indian military history task force
Taskforce icon
South Asian military history task force
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
WikiProject iconPakistan Mid‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Pakistan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Pakistan on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PakistanWikipedia:WikiProject PakistanTemplate:WikiProject PakistanPakistan
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
WikiProject iconIndia: History Top‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Misplaced Pages's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia
TopThis article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the Indian history workgroup (assessed as Top-importance).
Note icon
This article was last assessed in April 2012.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
WikiProject iconBangladesh High‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Bangladesh, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Bangladesh on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BangladeshWikipedia:WikiProject BangladeshTemplate:WikiProject BangladeshBangladesh
HighThis article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
Note icon
The article falls into the work area of the History workgroup of WikiProject Bangladesh
WikiProject Bangladesh To-do list:
A fact from this article was featured on Misplaced Pages's Main Page in the On this day section on December 16, 2005, December 16, 2007, and December 16, 2009.
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Indo-Pakistani war of 1971 article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
Article policies
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5Auto-archiving period: 3 months 


Russian propaganda

HMS Eagle was nowhere near the war (Albion was en route for evacuation purposes but turned to Gan). The Brits were in Persian Gulf because of different events.

Some Russian admiral boasts about threatening the US and UK navies and this is taken as gospel. I love the bit about him threatening US battleships (WHAT?)

https://www.cna.org/sites/default/files/research/5500010800.pdf

Somebody edit the main page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dustek (talk • contribs) 13:22, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Some useful info

may be added to the article from here: The Blood Telegram - Foreign Policy magazine Anir1uph | talk | contrib 12:07, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Cost of war for India and Pakistan could be controlled by Biswajit Chatterjee from Amex--N2271 (talk) 18:07, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

Do Watch the New Revert by a New User "Xtremedood"

@Lakun.patra:, @Myopia123:,@Chris the speller: - The sources given by "Xtremedood" has nothing to back up in it. It's just a printed data. He is giving a figure of 8000 deaths of Indian Soldiers Vs 3000 Pakistani deaths in 1971 war- a war where Pakistan was cut to two pieces and surrendered.Ghatus (talk) 06:43, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

Source is a legitimate academic source. Your tone displays clear bias which should not be included in the article as it violates Misplaced Pages's NPOV policy. Your aggressive language and threat to call in other editors shows a lack of intellectual impartiality.
The following source is legitimate and has been utilized by a variety of academic sources:
Small, Melvin; Singer, J. David, Resort to Arms : International and Civil Wars, Sage Publications.
On Page 94 of this book the figures are clearly as indicated in my last edit. The Standford source was a means of analyzing the initial source. The official Indian government claim is not neutral. It belongs in the Indians claims section. Xtremedood (talk) 08:08, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
As I said, the printed paper you have given does NOT say where from it got its numbers or its source. Again I say, you are "giving a figure of 8000 deaths of Indian Soldiers Vs 3000 Pakistani deaths in 1971 war- a war where Pakistan was cut to two pieces and surrendered." No other sources verify this ridiculous SOURCELESS data. Tell the source of the numbers in the scanned paper you submitted or your self-declaration of "legitimate" source won't work.Ghatus (talk) 08:46, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Misplaced Pages is not the place for primary data. Similar thing may be said about the Indian government source or many other sources. The fact of the matter this is a great secondary source that is well-respected and has been utilized within a variety of academic articles. Xtremedood (talk) 09:05, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
I repeat it for the third time-"Name the source" of the Number. Where is it written? From where is it collected? What is the authenticity? Where does any other source verify it? Ghatus (talk) 09:46, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Ghatus Your source is not reliable, therefore it is being reverted in favour of a more reliable source. If you have any problems take them to ANI. And stop making personal attacks in edit summaries. If you are irked by something go to an admin.FreeatlastChitchat (talk) 12:39, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
There is extreme inaccuracy in this figure. The author has added no sources for his estimates, either include both or don't include any. 2nd option seems better. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 16:06, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
I did include both, however the Indian figure (3,843) was from a Government of India source and therefore should be in the Indian claims section. The (Melvin Small and Joel Singer) source is legitimate and has been utilized in a variety of more recent publications. It is a well-respected source. Sage Publications is a well-known publisher. The website is from Stanford. Misplaced Pages is not the place for this type of original research that you may be proposing. These figures (8,000 for India and 3,000 for Pakistan) should therefore remain. It is certainly better than the Government of India source (which is definitely not neutral). Xtremedood (talk) 21:35, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
WP:PRIMARY cannot be applied on unchallenged official statistics, this statistic is supported by the independent sources as well, such as this. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 22:18, 16 April 2015 (UTC)

Modern sources like this as given by another user(@OccultZone:) clearly indicate that Indian casualty was around 3800. I would wait for some time for this problem to solve, otherwise I will have to take other remedies in Misplaced Pages. This reverting war can not go on. The modern source also follows WP:RS. As I said, "the printed paper Xtremedood have given does NOT say where from it got its numbers or its source. Again I say, you are "giving a figure of 8000 deaths of Indian Soldiers Vs 3000 Pakistani deaths in 1971 war- a war where Pakistan was cut to two pieces and surrendered." No other sources verify this ridiculous SOURCELESS data".Ghatus (talk) 09:03, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

The 3,843 figure was given by the Indian government according to the source. For the new source you have shown it is not independent. It is from the Indian Institute of Advanced Study which is affiliated with the Government of India. Therefore it may not be neutral. The 8,000 figure comes from a source that does not seem to be affiliated with the Government of India is anyway. Xtremedood (talk) 06:49, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Per clear consensus above, I have restored the previous parameter. Kindly don't change without having a reliable source for the information that you want to be added. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 05:58, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
There is no clear consensus above, there is only you and Ghatus. Xtremedood (talk) 11:15, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
@Xtremedood: Consensus is against you since 2 editors have disagreed. You are the only one, somehow trying to make it look like Pakistan had won the war and using an unreliable source. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 04:59, 30 April 2015 (UTC)
2 against 1 is not a consensus. Xtremedood (talk) 05:29, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

land exchange

article doesnt have any info on land exchange .. for example village of turtuk fell into indian hands.. what were the others ? dd pakistan keep any indian land ?

Categories:
Talk:Indo-Pakistani war of 1971: Difference between revisions Add topic