Talk:Indian Army operations in Jammu and Kashmir/Archive 1

Archive 1

Undone revision - WHY???

@Adamgerber80: You undid my entire revision. Just citing a wiki guideline makes no sense here.DiplomatTesterMan (talk) 11:37, 1 April 2018 (UTC)

DiplomatTesterMan can you please explain to me how the Part 2 of the operation merits enough WP:GNG to make a separate mention on this page? It has just a passing reference in the news article and any content around that seems to not merit any notability. I repeat again, that we do not have to mention "every" single news information which appears in the media regarding this operation on the page. Second, this term of "Part 2" is coined by the media (or more like the editor who wrote the piece) and it is still Operation All Out.

Also, please use the term militants not terrorists per WP:NPOV. Adamgerber80 (talk) 13:23, 1 April 2018 (UTC)

Let me go through WP:GNG again properly and I will get back to you.

I don't think releasing a new hitlist of 250 terrorists/militants/freedom fighters specifically related to operation all out is a small thing since this page deal with just that.... and just the day after the news, 11 militants are killed in coordinated attacks across Kashmir.
But I will try and substantiate this according to proper Wiki guidelines and get back on this.

@Adamgerber80: Isn't the term militant also a point of view? DiplomatTesterMan (talk) 14:27, 1 April 2018 (UTC)

And I saw your changes just now. Hmm... thats a job well done. Cheers. Should learn from you. DiplomatTesterMan (talk) 14:30, 1 April 2018 (UTC)

The word militant does not violate WP:NPOV since it is defined as "combative and aggressive in support of a political or social cause, and typically favoring extreme, violent, or confrontational methods" which is the case. This word is no negative connotation, unlike the word terrorist, associated with it. Hope this helps. Adamgerber80 (talk) 18:25, 1 April 2018 (UTC)

Thanks DiplomatTesterMan (talk) 17:02, 7 April 2018 (UTC)

Query related to Operation All Out and what this page is about

@Adamgerber80: Cntd from above - Are we assuming that every operation involving militants in Kashmir can come under Operation All Out since basically the broad aim of Operation All Out is to continue the fight until there is peace...? Since some incidents considered here do not all specifically state in the sources that they are part of Operation All Out if I am not mistaken can they be mentioned here? DiplomatTesterMan (talk) 15:46, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

DiplomatTesterMan I think there are multiple issues at play here. First, not as a criticism but more as a note and some digression, I think you don't fully understand the WP:GNG policy of Wikipedia aka what is notable to merit it's own page. To add on to this is the issue that Wikipedia is WP:NOTNEWS. This has resulted into numerous pages which, IMO, should not exists on their own such as Operation Sadbhavana (Goodwill), Operation Calm Down, Operation Sarp Vinash, 2018 Kulgam encounter, Indian Army Para (Special Forces) selection. Similarly, the reactions section in 2018 Shopian firing incident needs to be heavily trimmed to meet Wikipedia policy. The idea of this article was to create a single page under which we can include all militant encounters over a given period. Operation All Out, rather the unrest post Burhan Wani and the Indian Armed Forces response to it, stands out on it's own since it has received recurring news coverage over a significant period of time (about a year plus). We have to pick a name which is commonly used for this which could be it's current name or something more generic but something where all these incidents and small operations (which cannot have a page of their own) can be listed. To answer to your particular question that there is no reference that these are indeed under Operation All Out then I would present this news article which clearly claims that this is indeed on.([1]).

Here is what I recommend, we come up with a common name which is an umbrella term for all these small operations . Think of it as India–Pakistan military confrontation (2016–present) article. Now we cannot have a separate article for every cross firing incident which happens but these are all clubbed under an umbrella term. The newspapers do not term them as the India–Pakistan military confrontation (2016–present) but they are still included there. Hope this helps. Adamgerber80 (talk) 23:04, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

@Adamgerber80: Regarding your mention of WP:GNG for various articles I have created. I will take this one at a time. Please direct yourself to the talk page of Operation Sadbhavana first and see whether my assessment of whether it meets WP:GNG is accurate or not. I have only had time for this as of now and will slowly consider the other ones too. Talk:Operation_Sadbhavana_(Goodwill)#Regarding_WP:GNG_related_to_this_page

The idea to come up with a common umbrella term for all these small operations and exchanges between the security forces, militants, and civilians in JK is a good idea and one I had in mind too once I saw how the Op All Out page was developing. Suitable names need to be thought of incase this page, Operation All Out, is not suitable.DiplomatTesterMan (talk) 08:47, 29 April 2018 (UTC)

Proposed merge with 2018 Kulgam encounter

Not sufficient WP:GNG on it's own per WP:NOTNEWS. Adamgerber80 (talk) 14:58, 12 April 2018 (UTC)

• Comment: I don't think 2018 Kulgam encounter can be merged with Operation All Out (Kashmir) since no source has said that this is a part Operation All Out as far as I remember. This doubt also extends to various other incidents on the Operation All Out (Kashmir) page. Are we assuming that every operation involving militants in Kashmir can come under Operation All Out since basically the broad aim of Operation All Out is to continue the fight until there is peace...? @Adamgerber80: Also, if WP:GNG and WP:NOTNEWS are not met for 2018 Kulgam encounter, then can the article be merged into any other article other than this one? If not, then should it be deleted? I think I have asked questions within this comment that cover aspects other than the mere merging of pages, so I will also ask the relevant sections in a new section. DiplomatTesterMan (talk) 15:43, 24 April 2018 (UTC)
• Oppose While 2018 Kulgam encounter needs improvement, the events were sufficiently notable and widely covered to be notable and support a free-standing article.E.M.Gregory (talk) 14:02, 10 May 2018 (UTC)

@E.M.Gregory: Can you please explain to me how this meets WP:CONTINUEDCOVERAGE? Adamgerber80 (talk) 21:44, 10 May 2018 (UTC)

Please be aware that certain Wikipedia editors are the creative force, if one could label their tsunami of WP:ADVOCACY so kindly, behind the serial creation of articles, categories, etc, about stone throwing. Which, of course, features as its most emblematic subject the Palestinian stone throwing. In order to render legitimate in terms of Wikipedia the out and out criminalization of Palestinian resistance, a number of collateral articles have been created, while extant article such as this, about similar conditions, are forcibly propped up so that they support the whole smelly and slurry contraption. -The Gnome (talk) 12:52, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

• Support I agree with @Adamgerber80: on the above made points. It doesn't meet WP:CONTINUEDCOVERAGE. These types of encounters and attacks are common in Kashmir Valley and the sources are more likely like a one time breaking news. Nowadays Gernades attacks are common on security forces, and you will find enough sources to fill the reference section but that article will be nothing more than accumulation of different news websites repeating the same breaking news. I think it's better to add regular attacks in Operation All Out (Kashmir) rather than making whole article using breaking news as a references. My Lord (talk) 04:42, 4 June 2018 (UTC)
• Support the merge. There is a tendency afoot, nowadays, to have centrifugally created articles in a manner that leaves the user lost and uninformed. -The Gnome (talk) 12:52, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

Related to new page

Hi, i wasn't sure how else to compress the page into one, please go ahead.... @Adamgerber80: - DiplomatTesterMan (talk) 17:30, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

Well then the answer is not to create new pages and cause the same issue. Please be patient. We will work this out in conjunction with other editors. Multiple pages need to be merged and this will take some time. Adamgerber80 (talk) 17:32, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

Haha ok. Will be patient. DiplomatTesterMan (talk) 17:33, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

What I was doing - Operation Calm Down, Operation Sarp Vinash, Operation Sadbhavana and other older operations - compress and copy data here.... only the pages which needs a redirect such as op calm down and op sarp vinash and sadbhavana will redirect here others such as meghdoot will stay as they are but be mentioned in short here.... operation all out militant list to new page... and basic details of operation all out stays here... that's what i was doing... so we have compressed at least four wikipedia pages which weren't good enough to be standalone...and corrected misleading titles @Adamgerber80:

At least the lead should be changed as soon as possible.... DiplomatTesterMan (talk) 17:40, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

Proposed merge with Operation Calm Down

Operation Calm Down does not have enough content to be a stand-alone page. DiplomatTesterMan (talk) 06:38, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

• Support merge. I will think about other below ones later and make a separate vote. My Lord (talk) 11:51, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
• Support I have indicated in the discussion above on how we can merge this in. Adamgerber80 (talk) 15:46, 17 July 2018 (UTC)
• Support merge. Agree with nom. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 15:49, 17 July 2018 (UTC)

Proposed merge with Operation Sarp Vinash

Operation Sarp Vinash will have more relevance as a subsection of 'Indian Army operations in Jammu and Kashmir'. DiplomatTesterMan (talk) 06:41, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

• Support I have indicated in the discussion above on how we can merge this in. Adamgerber80 (talk) 15:47, 17 July 2018 (UTC)
• Support. Agree with nom. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 15:50, 17 July 2018 (UTC)
• Support Agree with DTM. ML ^talk 19:09, 17 July 2018 (UTC)

Proposed merge with Operation Sadbhavana (Goodwill)

As per discussion Talk:Operation Sadbhavana (Goodwill) DiplomatTesterMan (talk) 09:36, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

• Support I have indicated in the discussion above on how we can merge this in. Adamgerber80 (talk) 15:47, 17 July 2018 (UTC)
• Support. Agree with nom. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 15:50, 17 July 2018 (UTC)
• Support Agree with DTM. ML ^talk 19:10, 17 July 2018 (UTC)

Relating to proposed page move - Request for participation

If you think the page move rationale is justified, I request you to help come up with names and participate in the proposed page move above. If the page move is not justified according to you I would also request you to oppose it or comment as seen fit. I think this page move needs input from more people that is why I am tagging people here.

(This is not vote gathering since I just want you to take part irrespective of what your opinion is, so more opinions can be considered and a good decision can be reached) (I have just tagged people who I have seen making edits to articles related to Jammu and Kashmir, please don't mind) (Please also consider others who can provide good input to this page move). Thank you. @Kautilya3:@Adamgerber80:@Acharya63:@My Lord: DiplomatTesterMan (talk) 10:00, 4 July 2018 (UTC)

@TheDoctorWho: I just wanted to ask, 7 days has elapsed, can the above page move decision be finalized and how will that happen? Thanks! DiplomatTesterMan (talk) 03:58, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

@DiplomatTesterMan: It appears that it still has a few more hours before it officially has been 7 days. But once that time has reached the request will fall into the Elapsed listings section of the WP:RM page. A non-involved editor or admin willing to close it (not me as I've been involved since prior to the filing of the request) will come along and officially close it. From the looks of it now it will either be closed as something along the lines of "Consensus to move but no consensus as to title" meaning that the page can and will be moved as soon as a title is agreed upon. Or it could be relisted for another 7 days in an attempt to try and come across a clearer consensus as to what title the page will be moved to. TheDoctorWho (talk) 04:41, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

Ok, thank you DiplomatTesterMan (talk) 04:46, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

DiplomatTesterMan, TheDoctorWho, Adamgerber80, Kautilya3 and Vanamonde93, I think you're better able to rewrite the lead to reflect the clarified scope of this article than I am, but this should now happen fairly urgently. Please ping me or post on my user talk page if it isn't going to happen (or of course if you think I've done the wrong thing). Andrewa (talk) 15:57, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

@Andrewa: Thanks. I will do that once I get a chance

@DiplomatTesterMan: What are you doing? I thought this page would be moved to Indian Army operations in Jammu and Kashmir and everything would be merged into it. Why have you created List of militant incidents in Jammu and Kashmir. Where was that stated in the page move discussion? Adamgerber80 (talk) 17:30, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

Adamgerber80 Yes everything goes here... including operation all out... but all these militant operations are not part of operation all out so that shifts.... please clarify again

@DiplomatTesterMan: Yes but the new page is not Operation All out is it? It is Indian Army operations in Jammu and Kashmir which includes every operation Indian Army does or has done in J&K. There were other editors @Kautilya3 and Vanamonde93: who also participated in the discussion and let's wait for them to weigh in. I propose, we decide the page into 2 sections, one is community overreach and can contain sections Operation Sadbhavana and Operation Calm Down as subpoints. Another section which has to do with militant related operations like All Out and all these incidents. Of course do we maintain tables or bullet points is another thing to be discussed. Adamgerber80 (talk) 17:38, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

Every operation may be a stretch. But, certainly every operation since 1989 for counterinsurgency. It will take quite a while to fill in all the back-history, but for the time being, we can focus on integrating the existing content. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 17:41, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

Why not create a DRAFT.... then everyone will have a visul idea of what's going on... I am sure we are all on the same page 90% just that 10% confusion... and a draft will make things faster too just now... unless someone plans on editing the main article just now @Adamgerber80: DiplomatTesterMan (talk) 17:45, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

@Adamgerber80:@Kautilya3: This is the basic structure i had in mind... - User:DiplomatTesterMan/sandbox DiplomatTesterMan (talk) 18:03, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

• I'm afraid I don't have much time to participate at the moment. A few suggestions: I think a table is appropriate for listing details, which would otherwise clutter the prose. The prose section, I would suggest, should eventually include the history of such operations, at least since 1989, and some analysis, which could possibly be split between analysis of the security impacts and of the social impacts; anyhow, these are the broad strands I'm aware of from reading the source material. After some reflection, I also think we should consider limiting this page to post-1989 stuff, and renaming it to reflect that. Vanamonde (talk) 05:53, 13 July 2018 (UTC)

@Kautilya3 and DiplomatTesterMan: I agree with Vanamonde93 here that we should currently focus on post 1989 operations which were aimed at tackling the insurgency. I propose the structure as follows

Two broad sections : Security Impact and Social Impact. Under security impact we have a table (as the one that exists) with a small summary for each year. This will be obviously not complete but we have a start. (@Kautilya3: You are right that filling out every militant event since 1989 is an arduous task and would take months of dedicated effort) Under social impact we have further sub-sections about Operation Calm Down, Operation Sadbhavana (Goodwill) and other initiatives. This can also include recent initiatives by the CRPF ([2]). Once we have a good structure of the page going, we can think about what would be a better name for this page given we are limited the scope post 1989 and including operations of other security forces since even in the current encounters J&K police and CRPF are involved not just the Army (via Rashtriya Rifles). Adamgerber80 (talk) 15:44, 17 July 2018 (UTC)

Two sections are a good idea... I'm going ahead and incorporating the basic structure you have proposed. Feel free to make changes as needed of course. DiplomatTesterMan (talk) 04:40, 18 July 2018 (UTC)

Requested move 4 July 2018

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: page moved to Indian Army operations in Jammu and Kashmir. Andrewa (talk) 15:49, 12 July 2018 (UTC) Reclosed adding move destination per MR. Andrewa (talk) 16:10, 30 July 2018 (UTC)

---

Operation All Out (Kashmir) → ? – Many of the incidents listed on the Operation All Out(Kashmir) page do not have sources which categorically state that the incident is a part of Operation All Out. This page has developed into a list of many incidents in Jammu and Kashmir of violent nature and related to militants and security forces and casualties in these incidents. Using the title Operation All Out is now becoming misleading and should be aptly renamed. TheDoctorWho (talk) 09:02, 4 July 2018 (UTC)

Please note: For general purposes of this RM I did not file this I only fixed the formatting which led to a malformed request. The official filer is User:DiplomatTesterMan and the above rationale was written by them. TheDoctorWho (talk) 09:07, 4 July 2018 (UTC)

• Support move/merge into an article titled Indian Army operations in Jammu and Kashmir, as proposed by Vanamonde93 at Talk:Operation Sadbhavana (Goodwill). -- Kautilya3 (talk) 10:40, 4 July 2018 (UTC)
• Support. Each individual operation, while notable, does not have sufficient coverage to warrant a standalone page. A single page covering a large set of operations makes more sense to me, and also would permit a more thorough and less redundant version of the background to the Kashmir conflict. Vanamonde (talk) 11:30, 4 July 2018 (UTC)
• Opposed The Code name "Operation All Out" is the official name given by Indian government to its military operation in Kashmir after Burhan Wani death in 2017. The operation is slightly different from other military activities that has been running in Kashmir from many decades as it has clear goal of military and government to flush out all the terrorists in the region as soon as possible. All references whether its belong to Government, military or media covering all the news under the same name.Sumit Singh ^T 09:38, 5 July 2018 (UTC)

Please review the policy on reliable sources. Governments are typically not reliable sources. If you can find a scholarly book or journal article that gives significant coverage to "Operation All Out" then it would meet the Wikipedia criteria for notability. Just a usage by a Government does not. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 11:14, 5 July 2018 (UTC)

The gist of this is correct but not the fine detail. These Government sources may well be reliable, but they're not reliable secondary sources. And as such they have very little relevance here, so I'm regarding this oppose !vote as one to be discarded as it shows no understanding of the matter of issue. Andrewa (talk) 15:42, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

• Support While there have been multiple sources which place the events listed on this page under Operation All Out, I still think moving this to a different page would be ideal. I agree with Kautilya3 and Vanamonde93 that the new page should be an amalgamation of this page, Operation Sadbhavana (Goodwill) and some other pages. The name proposed Indian Army operations in Jammu and Kashmir is a fine place to start but we might want to review this to another generic page name as the content in that article evolves. Adamgerber80 (talk) 21:12, 5 July 2018 (UTC)
• Closing comment:I considered relisting but I think consensus on the new name is already clear. There is of course now some work to do on the lead and structure of the article. Andrewa (talk) 15:49, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

---

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.

Regarding above discussions

@Adamgerber80, DiplomatTesterMan, Kautilya3, and My Lord: It is already a week now when above discussion is closed regarding to move or merge the three article into the "Indian Army operation in Jammu & Kashmir". But no work is done yet on the main article or in draft section. Yes it will take some time but current article name not making any sense to its article body. There should be a separate article for "Indian Army operation in Jammu & Kashmir" then all three article should be moved or merged there. Thats why I opposed above in the discussion. Operation All out deserve to be a standalone article due to its mass coverage and information. But if we want to merge it and other two article into the current proposed title, first need to create that article separately. And also everything that happened so far or will be happened in Kashmir to be added. Need to fix ASAP because its misleading right now.Sumit Singh ^T 09:14, 17 July 2018 (UTC)

(Template {{Move review talk}} transferred to top of requested move discussion.  Paine Ellsworth  ^put'r there  16:17, 8 August 2018 (UTC))

Army fatalities per year

Pls also add army fatalities per year since 1990 Ryan Okhla (talk) 03:44, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

Please explain

@Waitemata:, hi, is there some problem with my edit (still asking even though you have self reverted) DTM (talk) 09:41, 19 May 2020 (UTC)

I thought your edit was spurious so I reverted it Waitemata (talk) 09:44, 19 May 2020 (UTC)

Ok thank you for the explanation. DTM (talk) 10:02, 19 May 2020 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

• DyhnpJ1VYAAon65.jpg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 10:52, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

Edits by anti social elements

There has been surges in edits based over unwarranted , unfounded and malicious "news reports" mostly by people from pakistan and terrorist symphatisers. It is in common good of the wikipedia community to resist these attempts and thwart them from spreading misinformation about indian security forces. 59.97.106.101 (talk) 14:00, 23 November 2021 (UTC)