![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
but this article is not about all Pakistani Balochistan? It's only about the province as the map shows? Tobias Conradi (Talk) 15:21, 31 July 2005 (UTC)
first sentence says other thing: The province of Balochistan (or Baluchistan) of Pakistan contains roughly the part of Balochistan that falls within the borders of present-day Pakistan -- Tobias Conradi (Talk) 19:05, 31 July 2005 (UTC)
There is no point having separate infoboxes for each province of Pakistan when they display the same information. I've replaced the Template:Baloch-infobox with a generic one for all provinces. Green Giant 00:16, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
the point of having an info box is that a person could see the key information about a region, country or province at a glance -- 111.68.96.117 ( talk) 05:46, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
The infobox was claiming that Balochistan is a separate country. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.36.125.128 ( talk) 05:36, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
Guys, This Elamo-Dravidian connection hasnt even been proven by most scholars, so we cannot speak so assuringly of this theory as if these people did exist and this connection between the Dravidians and the Elamites is true! This is not a fact so stop speaking like it is one! A better substitute would be Dravidian and Indo-Iranian tribes. I'm no Hindu Nationalist, by the way, trying to disprove foreign connections. I support the Aryan Migration as not just a theory but fact and many scholars in Dravidian languages themselves doubt the Elamo-Dravidian hypothesis. - User: Afghan Historian
I agree, I dont why in several articles the Elamo-dravidian pov is stated as fact, when in fact, the Brahui language consists of an estimate 85% Iranic language based vocabulary. It seems several indian contributors and spammers are adamant that this ethnic group of Iran,Pakistan and Afghanistan be protrayed as Dravidian in some form or another. The article needs to be unbiased and not lend itself to promoting unproven theories.
just run into that article on Al Jazeera, was doing research, should this be added? http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/B5FBCC54-A80E-434F-94C7-369F79CBE8BD.htm -- Tigry 20:34, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
![]() | It is requested that a map or maps be
included in this article to
improve its quality. Wikipedians in Pakistan may be able to help! |
A map is sorely needed in this article. – Quadell ( talk) ( bounties) 20:38, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
Brahui people#Origins, geography, and demographics says:
This article says:
Should the “may have arrived” part in the last sentence be changed, if it was probably – as the Brahui article says – not that way? I don't feel qualified to make a decision since I know next to nothing about regional ethnic history. 11:21, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
Three is a debate over Semitic vs Dravadian origin of the Baloch people. According to this study, http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=1181978, 39% of the Makrani people have Sub-Saharan mt-DNA African lineages. I quote: "Our results contrast with the Makrani Y-chromosome profile, which is similar to that of other Pakistani populations and is dominated by western Eurasian lineages (Qamar et al. 2002). The sub-Saharan African male-specific contribution, represented primarily by Hg E-M2, occurred at only 9% in the Makrani and is also present in neighboring populations, although at a lower prevalence (2%–4%). We estimated the maternal and paternal contributions of sub-Saharan Africans to the current Makrani gene pool, using information from all haplogroups, at 12% (±7%) for the Y chromosome and 40% (±9%) for the mtDNA. These findings must be interpreted in the light of known historical data. Forced migration from Africa began in the 7th century and increased considerably during the Omani Empire. The latter formed a strong slave-trade connection between the Makran port of Gwadar, the principal ports of Oman, and ports located in East Africa, including Mozambique (Clarence-Smith 1989; Sultana 1995). In the 16th and 17th centuries, the Portuguese also traded between Mozambique and southwestern Asia. The African component in the Makrani community may therefore represent the genetic legacy of this slave trade. Whereas the Atlantic slave trade dealt mainly with male labor, the East African slave trade seemingly favored females over males (Lovejoy 2000). Slave women were mainly domestics and/or concubines, and children fathered by the master were freed. In addition, strong cultural barriers hindered male slaves from fathering children, a situation exacerbated by the proportion of slaves imported as eunuchs (Lovejoy 2000). As a consequence of these practices, the contribution of paternal African genes to the population is expected to be low. Indeed, the contrast between male and female African contributions observed among the Makrani strongly supports historical records of a female sex bias during the East African slave trade. Other factors, such as asymmetrical mating patterns between African women and autochthonous males during the process of genetic admixture, and/or unequal reproductive success among Makrani males, might have accelerated the loss of African Y chromosomes from the population. In this context, a similar pattern has been reported recently in the Yemeni Hadramawt population (Richards et al. 2003), geographically adjacent to East Africa, where the African maternal contribution has also been interpreted as the result of the East African slave trade. Our data not only confirm a female-biased slave trade towards the East but also show that this pattern, which includes differential mating patterns between the sexes, extended to the eastern limits of the East African slave trade."
Baluchistan was the fisrt region of Pakistan or sub continent to be conqured by the Rashidun Caliphs, many few people know about it except for some good historians. From a nice source book i have composed an article of islamic conquest of Baluchistan, during the regin of 3 rashidun caliphs Umar, Uthman and Ali. and a brief account of withdrawal of islamic forces from baluchistan during mauwyiah's reign and reconquest of it during latter umayyad caliphs reign.
Mohammad Adil 05:59, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
Just how famous are the famous people listed near the end of this article? Many of them appear to be junior ministers in the regional government. The separate articles with their biographies are very short, quite badly written, and lack sources. Can something be done about this? AlexTiefling ( talk) 10:44, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
This article needs a lot of work. I have found numerous sentences in this article that just do not seem to make sense. For example:
-- Filll ( talk | wpc) 16:30, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
One or more portions of this article duplicated other source(s). The material was copied from: http://www.bso-na.org/army_operation_in_balochistan.html. Infringing material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a license compatible with GFDL. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. -- Moonriddengirl (talk) 20:51, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
Number of Districts
A recent conference in Islamabad put the number of districts at 30... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.163.95.155 ( talk) 05:29, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
The intro paragraph makes it sound like the capital is the only city in this region, but there is an entire section of this article listing important cities of this region. I am not familiar with the geography of this area but it seems that these two statements are conflicting and a remedy is needed for agreement. 165.112.61.190 ( talk) 16:21, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
This article says that "8% of the population are Panjabi, Persian" which is obviously incorrect even from just a perusal of the rest of the article. Most of the population is Balochi (whose language is related to Farsi), and many of the rest are Brahui (who speak a Dravidian language). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.114.162.215 ( talk) 20:07, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
Is Chaudhry Yaqoob Notable enough for the list of notable people? Blackash ( talk) 01:42, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
something is wrong here
>Balochistan has a population of around 12 million inhabitants, which makes up approximately 5% of the Pakistani population. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.201.229.21 ( talk) 18:04, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: Move. Jafeluv ( talk) 08:43, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
Balochistan (Pakistan) → Balochistan, Pakistan — - articles should have the simplest name possible, which in this case requires disambiguation from other existing Balochistans. However, the parentheses are unnnecessary. Green Giant ( talk) 04:19, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
Its appreciate the edit of the names of the less Notables from the lis of notables, but I have chacked that all the removed names wrer not less notables. I therefore undo the edit, please make sure that the edit is really for less notables, Thanks-- 116.58.3.6 ( talk) 08:56, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
Good work--Rind Baloch 09:00, 11 August 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rind Baloch ( talk • contribs)
Mr.Green Hi, I have made some constructive changes in Notable people section of the article, that included people are also Notables in Pakistan specially in Balochistan, please dont consider it as Vandalism please leave it as constructive changesm Thanks --Rind Baloch 05:48, 19 August 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rind Baloch ( talk • contribs)
Balochistan today is a hotbed of struggle for political power between the government and the nationalist tribal chieftains, who are accused of standing in the way of economic development to maintain feudal power. Assassinations, rapes, torture and other violations of human rights by the military are allegedly commonplace. The province is considered to be educationally, culturally and economically deprived by the rest of Pakistan. Women, in particular, are denied almost total access to education, self determination, social visibility and decision-making processes. None of this is represented in the main article on Balochistan. Instead this article presents a bland, outdated account of the province with huge gaps in information. The history section dwells at great length on the 7th century, and finishes in 1945. At the end of the section there is a barely visible link to another article on the Balochistan conflict which does address some modern political issues. At the end of the article there is another well hidden link to another huge, bland, outdated article called Baloch people, which contains one small paragraph addressing the alarmingly extreme realities of life in modern Balochistan. In this main article, it has been a struggle to keep the very small section on social conservatism and honour killings from being deleted.
Above, I see comments about medieval history, ethnic origins, poor grammar, and a long argument about who belongs on the list of "Notables". Fair enough, history is important, but Notables? What a pointless area of focus! This article, and the related articles to which it links, needs to be restructured and expanded to clearly present the political, social and cultural realities of life in present day Balochistan to people using the encyclopaedia. As things stand, what we have here is a gigantic whitewash, and apparently, a number of contributors who are determined to keep things that way. Rubywine ( talk) 02:17, 9 November 2010 (UTC)
![]() |
An image used in this article,
File:Pasni2.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at
Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Media without a source as of 14 August 2011
Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.
This notification is provided by a Bot -- CommonsNotificationBot ( talk) 16:37, 22 August 2011 (UTC) |
![]() |
An image used in this article, File:Astola1.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: All Wikipedia files with unknown copyright status
Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.
This notification is provided by a Bot -- CommonsNotificationBot ( talk) 15:53, 23 October 2011 (UTC) |
![]() |
An image used in this article, File:Abubakar & Ali.JPG, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: All Wikipedia files with unknown copyright status
Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.
This notification is provided by a Bot -- CommonsNotificationBot ( talk) 16:24, 21 December 2011 (UTC) |
This article http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/us/Baloch-plight-attracts-US-attention-amid-tense-ties-with-Pak/articleshow/11500201.cms could be used as a reference for some sections in this article . Interested editors can look at it.-- Ðℬig XЯaɣ 16:39, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
Does it not appear that the article has an oddly mining industry/military strategy tone to it? Especially the economy section. Isn't the economy about how well people are doing, not about what the most recent local billion-dollar investment has been? Some changes along these lines had been made, but appear to have been all removed.
Suggested future changes:
Limit the discussion of natural resources to a single paragraph. There is much more that is interesting about Baluchistan. When mentioning cities and people, let's avoid the use of words like "strategic". This isn't a board game.
How these changes can be made in a way that will withstand assaults from whomever removes such content:
Cite everything. Check back again and again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Samueldee ( talk • contribs) 21:08, 1 November 2012 (UTC)
The following edit has been inserted to the "Etymology" section by an IP editor and, after a couple of deletions, recently restored by User:Faizan Al-Badri. As it is unsourced and somewhat controversial, I am placing it here for discussion.
The doubts that I have for now include: the given etymology of the ethnonym Baloch which is most likely a false etymology; the proposition re. word Makka which contradicts Gedrosia_(satrapy) and the language in general (Greeks "latinising" words, words "of extraction", etc.). kashmiri 08:12, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Added NEUTRAL details of burning issue of extremism and security problems with verifiable recent referenes from the respected international sources (Al Jazeera ) and "Dawan (largest pakistani newspaper) and Pakistan Human Rights Commission Vdhillon ( talk) 12:34, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
The information coming for this link http://www.refworld.org/cgi-bin/texis/vtx/rwmain?docid=47c3f3c412 is completely wrong. The number of Afghan refugees is exaggerated to say the least. I think this link should be deleted. Akmal94 ( talk) 12:21, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
EDIT: I am adding this proper number figure from this article since the other source is wrong and outdated.
http://tribune.com.pk/story/822571/law-and-order-issues-afghan-refugees-do-not-want-to-go-back-home/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Akmal94 ( talk • contribs) 12:34, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
At first he was busy in a melodrama at Balochistan, and now here he comes. The Amnestry International is a reliable source, but they do not explicitly hold Pakistani Army responsible for this. And that's an outdated report. Faizan ( talk) 16:50, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
When this stuff was going down yesterday, I wasn't aware of the POV history. I do, however, think that something like human rights violations in the region should be mentioned in the article. I added something yesterday, and do think that perhaps a shorter version of it belongs in the lead. It seems to be a pretty big deal. IP: You need to find better references, like news websites. Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 14:38, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
Human3015 dear sir, care to join in the discussion before clicking the revert button :)?— TripWire talk 19:18, 18 June 2015 (UTC)
82.11.33.86 ( talk · contribs) You already have been told many times that this is an article on the province, not the conflict. We already have an article on Balochistan conflict. Hence, your edits will be reverted per WP:COATRACK. Thanks. — TripWire talk 16:36, 20 June 2015 (UTC)
Haha, that not policy, go read. Independence movement important part of region 82.11.33.86 ( talk) 16:46, 20 June 2015 (UTC)
Also, how is it POV to add eligible sourced info? Is POV to delete. 82.11.33.86 ( talk) 16:50, 20 June 2015 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Should article have section on independence movement? As is important part of region.
This info was deleted.
[4]
There have been several insurgencies since the creation of Pakistan. Since 2005 another has been ongoing, and the
Pakistan Telecommunication Authority has blocked hundreds of websites created by nationalists and those calling for secession or political autonomy such as the
Baloch Hal, which has been banned since 2009, and those documenting human rights atrocities. This insurgency has been suppressed by the use of extrajudicial executions and torture.
[1]
[2]
82.11.33.86 (
talk) 17:32, 20 June 2015 (UTC) Striking but not deleting sock comments so that the RFC still makes sense. --
lTopGunl (
talk)
19:14, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
**Coatrack no policy. Again by you reasoning we should delete section on economy as their main article for it. Independence movement is important part of region, and needs a paragraph. Consensus is already we mention atrocities, same needs for independence.
82.11.33.86 (
talk) 18:39, 20 June 2015 (UTC) Striking sock comments. --
lTopGunl (
talk)
19:14, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
**And administration has lead to insurgency, and mass atrocities by army. Is very notable as @
Cyphoidbomb: has agreed.
82.11.33.86 (
talk) 19:57, 20 June 2015 (UTC) Striking sock comments. --
lTopGunl (
talk)
19:14, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
References
In 2009 Asif Ali Zardari admited that there were human rights violations carried out on the Baloch during the regime of Pervez Musharraf, including the disappearances of hundreds.
TripWire I agree with you. Same situation faced by me; see section election 2014 here on kashmir conflict talk page /info/en/?search=Talk:Kashmir_conflict and arbitration committee on going discussion here /info/en/?search=Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution_noticeboard . Pro india nationalist have made WP neutrality a joke and not allowing elected CM Mufti credit to Pakistan and separatists for state election 2014 high turn over. Read the last para in the lead of kashmir conflict. 39.47.109.166 ( talk) 17:53, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
Why delete this? [5] and this? [6] 82.11.33.86 ( talk) 18:00, 20 June 2015 (UTC)
Allegations of Human rights violations is wrong, "In 2009 Asif Ali Zardari admited that there were human rights violations carried out on the Baloch during the regime of Pervez Musharraf, including the disappearances of hundreds" So I remove allegations from title.
The last Watch (
talk) 14:01, 23 June 2015 (UTC) This user is a sock —
TripWire
talk
22:07, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
This classical example of WP:SYNTHESIS cannot stay:
The province stands dangerously polarised — and the electoral process is under threat by insurgent groups and by separatists, such as the Baloch National Front that has called for a shutter-down strike from May 5 to election day on May 11.
It is now a battle between the moderates who have chosen to return to the democratic path and the hardliners who believe the elections would harm their cause for independence. Tensions are running high. Even members of the influential Baloch tribal elite are divided. The recent attacks on candidates of nationalist parties allegedly by armed insurgent groups reflect the explosive situation in the run-up to the elections. There has been a dramatic turnaround in Baloch politics after Akhtar Mengal returned home last month to lead his faction of the Balochistan National Party (BNP-M) in the coming elections. Just a few years ago, the former chief minister stood trial for sedition. He languished in jail for almost two years before being released in 2008. [1]
By synthesizing two different sentences which have different connotations and adding a little citation, cannot make an addition correct. As shown above, the two bold sentences have been cheery picked and connected to dd info to the page, which is unacceptable.— TripWire talk 14:42, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
This is not how you define culture at a page which is about the geography, history and the people:
the Baloch people are denied the right to use their language and also denied their cultural rights
— TripWire talk 14:42, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
Still no consensus on this. Also, no one knows who Ashraf Sherjan is. For all we know he is not even Pakistani/Baloch. Pakistan dont acknowledge a dude in Germany nor does it accepts what he says. We cannot include any accusation by any Tommy, Dickie and Hamesh just because he will exaggerate everything to make news. Lastly, as being discussed at Mukti Bahini, if the statement and acknowledgment by a sitting Indian PM Modi cannot be included at Wiki, how can a similar statement and acknowledgment by a Pakistani can be included here? — TripWire talk 14:16, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
{{
cite news}}
: Missing or empty |title=
(
help)
And why you delete this? "In Balochistan poverty is increasing. In 2001-2002 poverty incidences was at 48% and by 2005-2006 was at 50.9%.
[1]"
The last Watch (
talk) 14:49, 23 June 2015 (UTC) This user is a sock —
TripWire
talk
22:12, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
This user is a nationalist Indian ignore and keep reverting his pov. 86.164.37.238 ( talk) 16:22, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
IP location of problem creater on this talk page raises questions that Why Indian editor is worried about Baluchistan a part of pakistan. This in it self confirms RAW (Indian secret agency) involvement in terrorism in balouchistan. I will soon put different sources of balouchistan interior minister Mr. Bugti's various press briefings on RAW terrorism in Balouchistan. 39.47.216.167 ( talk) 16:28, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
Posts just accusing someone else of being a nationalist this or that don't belong here. From what I can see virtually everyone who is involved in these discussions is trying to push a nationalist POV, for one side or the other, and people in glasshouses shouldn't throw stones. So keep the discussion calm, and comment on the subject of the article, not on other editors... Thomas.W talk 16:36, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
You haven't proved anything. Expect that your English hurts so bad that I have to post this in a new section. Suggestion: Read my and other replies atleast twice agian and may be you'll get what can and what cannot be added at Wiki. Stop POV pushing. — TripWire talk 16:04, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
Add this to the end of the History section
Insurgencies by Baloch nationalists took place in 1948, 1958-59, 1962-63 and 1973-77 [1] — with a new and reportedly stronger ongoing insurgency by autonomy-seeking Baloch groups beginning in 2003. [1] [2]
Adding something like this to the end of the Government section
Besides "mainstream" Pakistan-wide political parties -- such as the Pakistan Muslim League (N) and Pakistan Peoples Party -- Balochistan nationalist parties (such as the National Party led by Dr Abdul Malik Baloch and the Balochistan National Party-Awami led by Israrullah Zehri) have been prominent in Province. [1] Human rights violations in Balochistan by "the military, intelligence agencies, and the paramilitary Frontier Corps", have been called "alarming" [3] and "epidemic", [4] and contributing to the "cycle of violence" in the insurgency. [5] The Pakistani government [6] and military [7] have denied allegations over the use of death squads operating in Balochistan.
Since Balochistan became part of Pakistan some 65 years ago, Baloch nationalists have led four insurgencies — in 1948, 1958-59, 1962-63 and 1973-77 — which were brutally suppressed by the state. Now a fifth is under way and this time the insurgents are much stronger. Unlike the past, the educated middle-class youth, rather than tribal leaders, are leading the separatist movement.Cite error: The named reference "Hussain-4-25-13" was defined multiple times with different content (see the help page).
The fifth Baloch insurgency against the Pakistan state began in 2003, with small guerrilla attacks by autonomy-seeking Baloch groups who over the years have became increasingly militant and separatist in ideology.
Every disappeared Baloch leads to many more youngsters taking up arms. Every attack on the security forces leads to more disappeared. It is an endless cycle of violence that has gone on for 11 years.
-- BoogaLouie ( talk) 17:56, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
Note: Proposed compromise Updated 22:20, 24 June 2015 (UTC) -- BoogaLouie ( talk) 22:20, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
I guess now that it has been revealed that The Last/Long Watch (TLW) was a Sock and had many other IPs as further socks and the fact this RfC was also raised by a sock of TLW (82.11.33.86 is a sock of TLW as he himself admits to make an account as instructed by admins - the resultant account was TLW, this IP will be blocked soon as it is already under SPI), we need to have a re-look at the entire issue. Everything was fine before these socks started to appear. So there's no consensus and thus no compromise. If still in doubt, please see the struck out comments on this talk, if we omit those, there's nothing to be discussed. Moreover, as a rule, all edits by socks have to be reverted there's no case. Thanks — TripWire talk 22:40, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
*... all edits by socks have to be reverted there's no case"is not true, there's no rule that makes that mandatory. I have seen many cases where constructive edits by socks have been left alone, and even many cases where articles created by socks have not been deleted. So don't blame what you're doing on the rules. And 82.11.33.86 was not a sock of TLW, it was TLW editing before he created the account. So I suggest you read WP:SOCK, because you obviously don't know what a sock is. Thomas.W talk 23:32, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
"Everything was fine before these socks started to appear."The article was missing any mention of a major issue -- namely insurgency. Google "Balochistan insurgency" and you get 360,000 hits. There have been five different insurgencies in the province since independence and nothing is mentioned about them in the history section. The insurgency affects the human rights situation, it affects economic development, it affects politics in the province. Without any mention the article is incomplete, inaccurate even. -- BoogaLouie ( talk) 14:45, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
the champion of the edits made ...by TLW. I would redo all edits I've seen that have been deleted. I want to give due weight, no more and no less.
Where precisely at the darkness shines DPI was it confirmed that I am a sock? It does not, so do not assume that I am. 82.132.215.177 ( talk) 21:17, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
This page is a frickin' mess. With all the recent strikethroughs from TopGun, the RFC question has been rendered virtually useless. It might be worth considering that we close the RFC as a matter of procedure and start again. Surely we can't reasonably expect other editors to wade through the sea of crap that is there. Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 19:55, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Should this article on Balochistan, Pakistan contain content related to insurgencies and the independence movement, poverty, and allegations of human rights violations in the region? And if so, how much of this content should be presented?
Note: A previous RfC had been opened, but there were some unfortunate sockpuppetry issues and strikethroughs which rendered the original RFC extraordinarily difficult to understand. However, the question the original user posed (in spite of the sockpuppetry) I think is worth discussing:
Should article have section on independence movement? As is important part of region.
There have been several insurgencies since the creation of Pakistan. Since 2005 another has been ongoing, and the Pakistan Telecommunication Authority has blocked hundreds of websites created by nationalists and those calling for secession or political autonomy such as the Baloch Hal, which has been banned since 2009, and those documenting human rights atrocities. This insurgency has been suppressed by the use of extrajudicial executions and torture. [1] [2]
Thanks, Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 04:49, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
References
In 2009 Asif Ali Zardari admited that there were human rights violations carried out on the Baloch during the regime of Pervez Musharraf, including the disappearances of hundreds.
TripWire I agree with you. Same situation faced by me; see section election 2014 here on kashmir conflict talk page /info/en/?search=Talk:Kashmir_conflict and arbitration committee on going discussion here /info/en/?search=Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution_noticeboard . Pro india nationalist have made WP neutrality a joke and not allowing elected CM Mufti credit to Pakistan and separatists for state election 2014 high turn over. Read the last para in the lead of kashmir conflict. 39.47.109.166 ( talk) 17:53, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
--– jfsamper ( talk• contrib• email) 08:43, 6 July 2015 (UTC)The Balochistan conflict has affected the province since 1948. Organizations such as Amnesty International have accused both the Government of Pakistan and the Baloch separatist groups of human rights violations. [1]
Add this to the end of the History section:
Adding something like this to the end of the Government section
Adding something like this between the first and second paragraphs in the Economy section:
— Preceding unsigned comment added by BoogaLouie ( talk • contribs) 10:37, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
References
Since Balochistan became part of Pakistan some 65 years ago, Baloch nationalists have led four insurgencies — in 1948, 1958-59, 1962-63 and 1973-77 — which were brutally suppressed by the state. Now a fifth is under way and this time the insurgents are much stronger. Unlike the past, the educated middle-class youth, rather than tribal leaders, are leading the separatist movement.Cite error: The named reference "Hussain-4-25-13" was defined multiple times with different content (see the help page).
The fifth Baloch insurgency against the Pakistan state began in 2003, with small guerrilla attacks by autonomy-seeking Baloch groups who over the years have became increasingly militant and separatist in ideology.
Every disappeared Baloch leads to many more youngsters taking up arms. Every attack on the security forces leads to more disappeared. It is an endless cycle of violence that has gone on for 11 years.
{{
cite journal}}
: Check date values in: |date=
(
help)
is about the Politics of Balochistan (we could simply add a subsection) but the second part just doesnt fit and it sounds a little POV. What about adding the following to the History section:Besides dominant Pakistan-wide political parties (such as the Pakistan Muslim League (N) and the Pakistan Peoples Party), Balochistan nationalist parties (such as the National Party and the Balochistan National Party) have been prominent in the province [1].
Since 1948, the province has been affected by several insurgencies which took place in 1948, 1958-59, 1962-63 and 1973-77 [1] — with a new and reportedly stronger ongoing insurgency by autonomy-seeking Baloch groups beginning in 2003. [1] [2] Organizations such as Amnesty International and the Human Rights Watch have accused the National Government of human rights violations in the province [3] [4]. The Pakistani government has denied these allegations and has labelled these separatist groups as terrorists [5].
I think the conflict is part of the province's history and the human rights wikilink is more relevant in this context. Thoughts? --– jfsamper ( talk• contrib• email) 08:59, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
References
The fifth Baloch insurgency against the Pakistan state began in 2003, with small guerrilla attacks by autonomy-seeking Baloch groups who over the years have became increasingly militant and separatist in ideology.
I don't think anyone outright opposed some mention of the conflict.I believe Zmaghndstakun and Rashidzaman786 are both against any mention of the conflict and related issues. Initially it seemed that there was some receptivity from some of the other editors above to some mention of the strife issues, but that seems to have changed. Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 15:17, 23 July 2015 (UTC)
Oppose Hi Cyphoidbomb! Heirchy is important. Balochistan_conflict covers Human rights violations/Terrorism/insurgencies by militant groups/agencies, Balochistan should covers gest of Greater Balouchistan movement/conflict and poverty of the region etc. However Balochistan,_Pakistan should not include and just follow the pattren of administrative unit details such as History, Government, Geography, Fauna / Flora, Administration, Districts, Climate, Culture, Education, Economy,Religion, Sports and Demography. Just like what pages on Sistan_and_Baluchestan_Province and Nimruz_Province do. I hope now this RFC do over will be (logically) shifted to Balochistan. Otherwise people will question bad faith anti pak editing ignoring iran or afghan balochs. Good faith is paramount on wiki? ting Zmaghndstakun ( talk) 16:15, 11 July 2015 (UTC)
So what I'm getting at is that because there seems to be a lot of difference between the insurgent movements in the two different countries, there would seem to be reason to include mention of the insurgency in Balochistan, Pakistan and Sistan and Baluchestan Province as well as in Balochistan.
-- BoogaLouie ( talk) 19:01, 15 July 2015 (UTC)
"This is an administrative province article and should expand on the History, Government, Geography, Fauna / Flora, Climate, Culture, Sports, Religion, Demography and Administration of the province."That's what we are trying to do—expand on the history, government, geography, demography of the region. War/insurgencies affect history, culture and government. Economic issues affect culture and the people. Human rights violations affect demography, culture and may relate to government. Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 14:07, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
Pakistani army are committing human rights violations on a massive scale according to amnesty international.Obviously that's not an NPOV way to phrase that. I attempted to present the content more neutrally. Faizan moved it from the lede. I didn't have much of a problem with that, but then it was removed by an IP editor. There was an edit war in the days that followed. At some point TripWire disputed some of the sources, but then the whole shebang wound up deleted again under the argument that it represents POV. It seems to me that most feel that some version of summary content should exist in the article, with only a scant few adamant that because this is an "administrative" article a province, that the content should be excluded. This position hasn't been properly justified. Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 19:51, 23 July 2015 (UTC)
As noted in my close there is no strict consensus on the form of inclusion. BoogaLouie's suggestions in the middle of the discussion (as amended by JFsamper) are a good starting point, as is the suggestion to rename Government to Government and Politics. I am boldly adding a version of those sections to the article as closer however I re-iterate there is not consensus for their form, only for inclusion of the information.— Preceding unsigned comment added by SPACKlick ( talk • contribs)
There's a small but brisk edit-war going on right now between @ Zmaghndstakun: and myself over what I believe is a rather small matter. I'm hoping they will discuss the edits here rather than continue to edit-war. Expanding some. The claim is that Pakistan is bringing Indian involvement in a particular matter to the UN. That's basically supported by the originally give source (although the source says "considering" bringing). Zmaghndstakun was adding material about a specific Indian agency to the claim which was not supported by the source. When pressed, they promised more sources soon and added them here. Immediate problem - one of them is a forum (hint - if you see "thread" in the url, it's probably a forum and when you look at it, it's a forum). Not a WP:RS. They challenged that any of their sources were forums. They are a new editor so probably aren't familiar with Wikipedia policies so I left them a pointer to both RS and SYNTH, followed by a 3RR warning as they continued to edit war. In addition to the RS concerns, I've also got SYNTH concerns. The source for the claim says only Indian involvement, but Zmaghndstakun wants to add a specific agency. I don't think any of their new sources specifically covers that agency being part of the considered UN discussion. I'd like to just stick with what the source says about the consideration of bringing Indian involvement to the UN, nothing else. Thoughts? Ravensfire ( talk) 16:18, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
I have not done any edit war. You ojected to forum sources inserted by me but deleted all including others. I inserted back NON FORUM but mistakenly one forum source still wrongly left which you deleted. Thank you. Zmaghndstakun ( talk) 17:05, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
More edit warring with Zmaghndstakun.
In RFC do-over above you will find a suggestion by Editor Zmaghndstakun that info on insurgency/terrorism in Balochistan be put in the Balochistan article (in the history section) since the insurgency/terrorism is not just in the Pakistan parts of Balochistan:
I didn't think that would solve the problem with the Baluchistan, Pakistan article being discussed here, but was not a bad idea, so I made this edit rewriting an already-existing Governance and political disputes section, not adding to the history section.
Within a few hours it was
rvted by Rashidzaman786 with the edit message:
"(Back to Chris the speller , To much changes and a lot to disscuss before concensus on talk page)"
Disappointing, but OK, let's discuss. But on the talk page Rashidzaman786 comment was: "Last edits by BoogaLouie hurting NPOV and WP Coattrack."
What in the edit is NPOV? What is "WP Coattrack"? No specifics. Later after another editor restores my edits and this time Zmaghndstakun himeself -- the suggester of cover it in page
Balochistan's section history -- deleted them.
For the benefit of those who would like to have an idea of what happens when you follow Zmaghndstakun's suggestion here is a link to the back-and-forth on the talk page. (I know this strays from WP:FOC but the similarity to the current dispute is striking and the frustration is serious. This is how people leave wikipedia in disgust.)
Note lots of reverting, lots of wiki-buzzwords about "NPOV", "WP Coattrack", "concensus", questions unreplied to, but virtually no comments on what specifically is wrong with the content of the edit. -- BoogaLouie ( talk) 20:13, 30 July 2015 (UTC)
Could I suggest the language be changed to "Home Minister Balochistan Sarfraz Bugti claims that..."? Pointed out makes it sound like he is noting a known fact where as the source seems to suggest it is an allegation. At the moment the article reads this way: "Home Minister Balochistan Sarfraz Bugti pointed out that Indian intelligence agency RAW is conspiring against the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) agreement and law and order situation in the province is being sabotaged with planing." Thoughts? Tigerman2005 ( talk) 04:26, 31 July 2015 (UTC)
This talk page should not be used to disscuss issues related to other articles. For other articles there are annexed talk page. Thnk u Rashidzaman786 ( talk) 06:15, 31 July 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to 4 external links on
Balochistan, Pakistan. 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.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers. — cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 16:55, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
Balochistan, Pakistan. 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.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 07:55, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
but this article is not about all Pakistani Balochistan? It's only about the province as the map shows? Tobias Conradi (Talk) 15:21, 31 July 2005 (UTC)
first sentence says other thing: The province of Balochistan (or Baluchistan) of Pakistan contains roughly the part of Balochistan that falls within the borders of present-day Pakistan -- Tobias Conradi (Talk) 19:05, 31 July 2005 (UTC)
There is no point having separate infoboxes for each province of Pakistan when they display the same information. I've replaced the Template:Baloch-infobox with a generic one for all provinces. Green Giant 00:16, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
the point of having an info box is that a person could see the key information about a region, country or province at a glance -- 111.68.96.117 ( talk) 05:46, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
The infobox was claiming that Balochistan is a separate country. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.36.125.128 ( talk) 05:36, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
Guys, This Elamo-Dravidian connection hasnt even been proven by most scholars, so we cannot speak so assuringly of this theory as if these people did exist and this connection between the Dravidians and the Elamites is true! This is not a fact so stop speaking like it is one! A better substitute would be Dravidian and Indo-Iranian tribes. I'm no Hindu Nationalist, by the way, trying to disprove foreign connections. I support the Aryan Migration as not just a theory but fact and many scholars in Dravidian languages themselves doubt the Elamo-Dravidian hypothesis. - User: Afghan Historian
I agree, I dont why in several articles the Elamo-dravidian pov is stated as fact, when in fact, the Brahui language consists of an estimate 85% Iranic language based vocabulary. It seems several indian contributors and spammers are adamant that this ethnic group of Iran,Pakistan and Afghanistan be protrayed as Dravidian in some form or another. The article needs to be unbiased and not lend itself to promoting unproven theories.
just run into that article on Al Jazeera, was doing research, should this be added? http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/B5FBCC54-A80E-434F-94C7-369F79CBE8BD.htm -- Tigry 20:34, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
![]() | It is requested that a map or maps be
included in this article to
improve its quality. Wikipedians in Pakistan may be able to help! |
A map is sorely needed in this article. – Quadell ( talk) ( bounties) 20:38, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
Brahui people#Origins, geography, and demographics says:
This article says:
Should the “may have arrived” part in the last sentence be changed, if it was probably – as the Brahui article says – not that way? I don't feel qualified to make a decision since I know next to nothing about regional ethnic history. 11:21, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
Three is a debate over Semitic vs Dravadian origin of the Baloch people. According to this study, http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=1181978, 39% of the Makrani people have Sub-Saharan mt-DNA African lineages. I quote: "Our results contrast with the Makrani Y-chromosome profile, which is similar to that of other Pakistani populations and is dominated by western Eurasian lineages (Qamar et al. 2002). The sub-Saharan African male-specific contribution, represented primarily by Hg E-M2, occurred at only 9% in the Makrani and is also present in neighboring populations, although at a lower prevalence (2%–4%). We estimated the maternal and paternal contributions of sub-Saharan Africans to the current Makrani gene pool, using information from all haplogroups, at 12% (±7%) for the Y chromosome and 40% (±9%) for the mtDNA. These findings must be interpreted in the light of known historical data. Forced migration from Africa began in the 7th century and increased considerably during the Omani Empire. The latter formed a strong slave-trade connection between the Makran port of Gwadar, the principal ports of Oman, and ports located in East Africa, including Mozambique (Clarence-Smith 1989; Sultana 1995). In the 16th and 17th centuries, the Portuguese also traded between Mozambique and southwestern Asia. The African component in the Makrani community may therefore represent the genetic legacy of this slave trade. Whereas the Atlantic slave trade dealt mainly with male labor, the East African slave trade seemingly favored females over males (Lovejoy 2000). Slave women were mainly domestics and/or concubines, and children fathered by the master were freed. In addition, strong cultural barriers hindered male slaves from fathering children, a situation exacerbated by the proportion of slaves imported as eunuchs (Lovejoy 2000). As a consequence of these practices, the contribution of paternal African genes to the population is expected to be low. Indeed, the contrast between male and female African contributions observed among the Makrani strongly supports historical records of a female sex bias during the East African slave trade. Other factors, such as asymmetrical mating patterns between African women and autochthonous males during the process of genetic admixture, and/or unequal reproductive success among Makrani males, might have accelerated the loss of African Y chromosomes from the population. In this context, a similar pattern has been reported recently in the Yemeni Hadramawt population (Richards et al. 2003), geographically adjacent to East Africa, where the African maternal contribution has also been interpreted as the result of the East African slave trade. Our data not only confirm a female-biased slave trade towards the East but also show that this pattern, which includes differential mating patterns between the sexes, extended to the eastern limits of the East African slave trade."
Baluchistan was the fisrt region of Pakistan or sub continent to be conqured by the Rashidun Caliphs, many few people know about it except for some good historians. From a nice source book i have composed an article of islamic conquest of Baluchistan, during the regin of 3 rashidun caliphs Umar, Uthman and Ali. and a brief account of withdrawal of islamic forces from baluchistan during mauwyiah's reign and reconquest of it during latter umayyad caliphs reign.
Mohammad Adil 05:59, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
Just how famous are the famous people listed near the end of this article? Many of them appear to be junior ministers in the regional government. The separate articles with their biographies are very short, quite badly written, and lack sources. Can something be done about this? AlexTiefling ( talk) 10:44, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
This article needs a lot of work. I have found numerous sentences in this article that just do not seem to make sense. For example:
-- Filll ( talk | wpc) 16:30, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
One or more portions of this article duplicated other source(s). The material was copied from: http://www.bso-na.org/army_operation_in_balochistan.html. Infringing material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a license compatible with GFDL. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. -- Moonriddengirl (talk) 20:51, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
Number of Districts
A recent conference in Islamabad put the number of districts at 30... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.163.95.155 ( talk) 05:29, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
The intro paragraph makes it sound like the capital is the only city in this region, but there is an entire section of this article listing important cities of this region. I am not familiar with the geography of this area but it seems that these two statements are conflicting and a remedy is needed for agreement. 165.112.61.190 ( talk) 16:21, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
This article says that "8% of the population are Panjabi, Persian" which is obviously incorrect even from just a perusal of the rest of the article. Most of the population is Balochi (whose language is related to Farsi), and many of the rest are Brahui (who speak a Dravidian language). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.114.162.215 ( talk) 20:07, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
Is Chaudhry Yaqoob Notable enough for the list of notable people? Blackash ( talk) 01:42, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
something is wrong here
>Balochistan has a population of around 12 million inhabitants, which makes up approximately 5% of the Pakistani population. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.201.229.21 ( talk) 18:04, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: Move. Jafeluv ( talk) 08:43, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
Balochistan (Pakistan) → Balochistan, Pakistan — - articles should have the simplest name possible, which in this case requires disambiguation from other existing Balochistans. However, the parentheses are unnnecessary. Green Giant ( talk) 04:19, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
Its appreciate the edit of the names of the less Notables from the lis of notables, but I have chacked that all the removed names wrer not less notables. I therefore undo the edit, please make sure that the edit is really for less notables, Thanks-- 116.58.3.6 ( talk) 08:56, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
Good work--Rind Baloch 09:00, 11 August 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rind Baloch ( talk • contribs)
Mr.Green Hi, I have made some constructive changes in Notable people section of the article, that included people are also Notables in Pakistan specially in Balochistan, please dont consider it as Vandalism please leave it as constructive changesm Thanks --Rind Baloch 05:48, 19 August 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rind Baloch ( talk • contribs)
Balochistan today is a hotbed of struggle for political power between the government and the nationalist tribal chieftains, who are accused of standing in the way of economic development to maintain feudal power. Assassinations, rapes, torture and other violations of human rights by the military are allegedly commonplace. The province is considered to be educationally, culturally and economically deprived by the rest of Pakistan. Women, in particular, are denied almost total access to education, self determination, social visibility and decision-making processes. None of this is represented in the main article on Balochistan. Instead this article presents a bland, outdated account of the province with huge gaps in information. The history section dwells at great length on the 7th century, and finishes in 1945. At the end of the section there is a barely visible link to another article on the Balochistan conflict which does address some modern political issues. At the end of the article there is another well hidden link to another huge, bland, outdated article called Baloch people, which contains one small paragraph addressing the alarmingly extreme realities of life in modern Balochistan. In this main article, it has been a struggle to keep the very small section on social conservatism and honour killings from being deleted.
Above, I see comments about medieval history, ethnic origins, poor grammar, and a long argument about who belongs on the list of "Notables". Fair enough, history is important, but Notables? What a pointless area of focus! This article, and the related articles to which it links, needs to be restructured and expanded to clearly present the political, social and cultural realities of life in present day Balochistan to people using the encyclopaedia. As things stand, what we have here is a gigantic whitewash, and apparently, a number of contributors who are determined to keep things that way. Rubywine ( talk) 02:17, 9 November 2010 (UTC)
![]() |
An image used in this article,
File:Pasni2.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at
Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Media without a source as of 14 August 2011
Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.
This notification is provided by a Bot -- CommonsNotificationBot ( talk) 16:37, 22 August 2011 (UTC) |
![]() |
An image used in this article, File:Astola1.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: All Wikipedia files with unknown copyright status
Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.
This notification is provided by a Bot -- CommonsNotificationBot ( talk) 15:53, 23 October 2011 (UTC) |
![]() |
An image used in this article, File:Abubakar & Ali.JPG, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: All Wikipedia files with unknown copyright status
Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.
This notification is provided by a Bot -- CommonsNotificationBot ( talk) 16:24, 21 December 2011 (UTC) |
This article http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/us/Baloch-plight-attracts-US-attention-amid-tense-ties-with-Pak/articleshow/11500201.cms could be used as a reference for some sections in this article . Interested editors can look at it.-- Ðℬig XЯaɣ 16:39, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
Does it not appear that the article has an oddly mining industry/military strategy tone to it? Especially the economy section. Isn't the economy about how well people are doing, not about what the most recent local billion-dollar investment has been? Some changes along these lines had been made, but appear to have been all removed.
Suggested future changes:
Limit the discussion of natural resources to a single paragraph. There is much more that is interesting about Baluchistan. When mentioning cities and people, let's avoid the use of words like "strategic". This isn't a board game.
How these changes can be made in a way that will withstand assaults from whomever removes such content:
Cite everything. Check back again and again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Samueldee ( talk • contribs) 21:08, 1 November 2012 (UTC)
The following edit has been inserted to the "Etymology" section by an IP editor and, after a couple of deletions, recently restored by User:Faizan Al-Badri. As it is unsourced and somewhat controversial, I am placing it here for discussion.
The doubts that I have for now include: the given etymology of the ethnonym Baloch which is most likely a false etymology; the proposition re. word Makka which contradicts Gedrosia_(satrapy) and the language in general (Greeks "latinising" words, words "of extraction", etc.). kashmiri 08:12, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Added NEUTRAL details of burning issue of extremism and security problems with verifiable recent referenes from the respected international sources (Al Jazeera ) and "Dawan (largest pakistani newspaper) and Pakistan Human Rights Commission Vdhillon ( talk) 12:34, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
The information coming for this link http://www.refworld.org/cgi-bin/texis/vtx/rwmain?docid=47c3f3c412 is completely wrong. The number of Afghan refugees is exaggerated to say the least. I think this link should be deleted. Akmal94 ( talk) 12:21, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
EDIT: I am adding this proper number figure from this article since the other source is wrong and outdated.
http://tribune.com.pk/story/822571/law-and-order-issues-afghan-refugees-do-not-want-to-go-back-home/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Akmal94 ( talk • contribs) 12:34, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
At first he was busy in a melodrama at Balochistan, and now here he comes. The Amnestry International is a reliable source, but they do not explicitly hold Pakistani Army responsible for this. And that's an outdated report. Faizan ( talk) 16:50, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
When this stuff was going down yesterday, I wasn't aware of the POV history. I do, however, think that something like human rights violations in the region should be mentioned in the article. I added something yesterday, and do think that perhaps a shorter version of it belongs in the lead. It seems to be a pretty big deal. IP: You need to find better references, like news websites. Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 14:38, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
Human3015 dear sir, care to join in the discussion before clicking the revert button :)?— TripWire talk 19:18, 18 June 2015 (UTC)
82.11.33.86 ( talk · contribs) You already have been told many times that this is an article on the province, not the conflict. We already have an article on Balochistan conflict. Hence, your edits will be reverted per WP:COATRACK. Thanks. — TripWire talk 16:36, 20 June 2015 (UTC)
Haha, that not policy, go read. Independence movement important part of region 82.11.33.86 ( talk) 16:46, 20 June 2015 (UTC)
Also, how is it POV to add eligible sourced info? Is POV to delete. 82.11.33.86 ( talk) 16:50, 20 June 2015 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Should article have section on independence movement? As is important part of region.
This info was deleted.
[4]
There have been several insurgencies since the creation of Pakistan. Since 2005 another has been ongoing, and the
Pakistan Telecommunication Authority has blocked hundreds of websites created by nationalists and those calling for secession or political autonomy such as the
Baloch Hal, which has been banned since 2009, and those documenting human rights atrocities. This insurgency has been suppressed by the use of extrajudicial executions and torture.
[1]
[2]
82.11.33.86 (
talk) 17:32, 20 June 2015 (UTC) Striking but not deleting sock comments so that the RFC still makes sense. --
lTopGunl (
talk)
19:14, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
**Coatrack no policy. Again by you reasoning we should delete section on economy as their main article for it. Independence movement is important part of region, and needs a paragraph. Consensus is already we mention atrocities, same needs for independence.
82.11.33.86 (
talk) 18:39, 20 June 2015 (UTC) Striking sock comments. --
lTopGunl (
talk)
19:14, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
**And administration has lead to insurgency, and mass atrocities by army. Is very notable as @
Cyphoidbomb: has agreed.
82.11.33.86 (
talk) 19:57, 20 June 2015 (UTC) Striking sock comments. --
lTopGunl (
talk)
19:14, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
References
In 2009 Asif Ali Zardari admited that there were human rights violations carried out on the Baloch during the regime of Pervez Musharraf, including the disappearances of hundreds.
TripWire I agree with you. Same situation faced by me; see section election 2014 here on kashmir conflict talk page /info/en/?search=Talk:Kashmir_conflict and arbitration committee on going discussion here /info/en/?search=Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution_noticeboard . Pro india nationalist have made WP neutrality a joke and not allowing elected CM Mufti credit to Pakistan and separatists for state election 2014 high turn over. Read the last para in the lead of kashmir conflict. 39.47.109.166 ( talk) 17:53, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
Why delete this? [5] and this? [6] 82.11.33.86 ( talk) 18:00, 20 June 2015 (UTC)
Allegations of Human rights violations is wrong, "In 2009 Asif Ali Zardari admited that there were human rights violations carried out on the Baloch during the regime of Pervez Musharraf, including the disappearances of hundreds" So I remove allegations from title.
The last Watch (
talk) 14:01, 23 June 2015 (UTC) This user is a sock —
TripWire
talk
22:07, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
This classical example of WP:SYNTHESIS cannot stay:
The province stands dangerously polarised — and the electoral process is under threat by insurgent groups and by separatists, such as the Baloch National Front that has called for a shutter-down strike from May 5 to election day on May 11.
It is now a battle between the moderates who have chosen to return to the democratic path and the hardliners who believe the elections would harm their cause for independence. Tensions are running high. Even members of the influential Baloch tribal elite are divided. The recent attacks on candidates of nationalist parties allegedly by armed insurgent groups reflect the explosive situation in the run-up to the elections. There has been a dramatic turnaround in Baloch politics after Akhtar Mengal returned home last month to lead his faction of the Balochistan National Party (BNP-M) in the coming elections. Just a few years ago, the former chief minister stood trial for sedition. He languished in jail for almost two years before being released in 2008. [1]
By synthesizing two different sentences which have different connotations and adding a little citation, cannot make an addition correct. As shown above, the two bold sentences have been cheery picked and connected to dd info to the page, which is unacceptable.— TripWire talk 14:42, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
This is not how you define culture at a page which is about the geography, history and the people:
the Baloch people are denied the right to use their language and also denied their cultural rights
— TripWire talk 14:42, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
Still no consensus on this. Also, no one knows who Ashraf Sherjan is. For all we know he is not even Pakistani/Baloch. Pakistan dont acknowledge a dude in Germany nor does it accepts what he says. We cannot include any accusation by any Tommy, Dickie and Hamesh just because he will exaggerate everything to make news. Lastly, as being discussed at Mukti Bahini, if the statement and acknowledgment by a sitting Indian PM Modi cannot be included at Wiki, how can a similar statement and acknowledgment by a Pakistani can be included here? — TripWire talk 14:16, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
{{
cite news}}
: Missing or empty |title=
(
help)
And why you delete this? "In Balochistan poverty is increasing. In 2001-2002 poverty incidences was at 48% and by 2005-2006 was at 50.9%.
[1]"
The last Watch (
talk) 14:49, 23 June 2015 (UTC) This user is a sock —
TripWire
talk
22:12, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
This user is a nationalist Indian ignore and keep reverting his pov. 86.164.37.238 ( talk) 16:22, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
IP location of problem creater on this talk page raises questions that Why Indian editor is worried about Baluchistan a part of pakistan. This in it self confirms RAW (Indian secret agency) involvement in terrorism in balouchistan. I will soon put different sources of balouchistan interior minister Mr. Bugti's various press briefings on RAW terrorism in Balouchistan. 39.47.216.167 ( talk) 16:28, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
Posts just accusing someone else of being a nationalist this or that don't belong here. From what I can see virtually everyone who is involved in these discussions is trying to push a nationalist POV, for one side or the other, and people in glasshouses shouldn't throw stones. So keep the discussion calm, and comment on the subject of the article, not on other editors... Thomas.W talk 16:36, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
You haven't proved anything. Expect that your English hurts so bad that I have to post this in a new section. Suggestion: Read my and other replies atleast twice agian and may be you'll get what can and what cannot be added at Wiki. Stop POV pushing. — TripWire talk 16:04, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
Add this to the end of the History section
Insurgencies by Baloch nationalists took place in 1948, 1958-59, 1962-63 and 1973-77 [1] — with a new and reportedly stronger ongoing insurgency by autonomy-seeking Baloch groups beginning in 2003. [1] [2]
Adding something like this to the end of the Government section
Besides "mainstream" Pakistan-wide political parties -- such as the Pakistan Muslim League (N) and Pakistan Peoples Party -- Balochistan nationalist parties (such as the National Party led by Dr Abdul Malik Baloch and the Balochistan National Party-Awami led by Israrullah Zehri) have been prominent in Province. [1] Human rights violations in Balochistan by "the military, intelligence agencies, and the paramilitary Frontier Corps", have been called "alarming" [3] and "epidemic", [4] and contributing to the "cycle of violence" in the insurgency. [5] The Pakistani government [6] and military [7] have denied allegations over the use of death squads operating in Balochistan.
Since Balochistan became part of Pakistan some 65 years ago, Baloch nationalists have led four insurgencies — in 1948, 1958-59, 1962-63 and 1973-77 — which were brutally suppressed by the state. Now a fifth is under way and this time the insurgents are much stronger. Unlike the past, the educated middle-class youth, rather than tribal leaders, are leading the separatist movement.Cite error: The named reference "Hussain-4-25-13" was defined multiple times with different content (see the help page).
The fifth Baloch insurgency against the Pakistan state began in 2003, with small guerrilla attacks by autonomy-seeking Baloch groups who over the years have became increasingly militant and separatist in ideology.
Every disappeared Baloch leads to many more youngsters taking up arms. Every attack on the security forces leads to more disappeared. It is an endless cycle of violence that has gone on for 11 years.
-- BoogaLouie ( talk) 17:56, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
Note: Proposed compromise Updated 22:20, 24 June 2015 (UTC) -- BoogaLouie ( talk) 22:20, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
I guess now that it has been revealed that The Last/Long Watch (TLW) was a Sock and had many other IPs as further socks and the fact this RfC was also raised by a sock of TLW (82.11.33.86 is a sock of TLW as he himself admits to make an account as instructed by admins - the resultant account was TLW, this IP will be blocked soon as it is already under SPI), we need to have a re-look at the entire issue. Everything was fine before these socks started to appear. So there's no consensus and thus no compromise. If still in doubt, please see the struck out comments on this talk, if we omit those, there's nothing to be discussed. Moreover, as a rule, all edits by socks have to be reverted there's no case. Thanks — TripWire talk 22:40, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
*... all edits by socks have to be reverted there's no case"is not true, there's no rule that makes that mandatory. I have seen many cases where constructive edits by socks have been left alone, and even many cases where articles created by socks have not been deleted. So don't blame what you're doing on the rules. And 82.11.33.86 was not a sock of TLW, it was TLW editing before he created the account. So I suggest you read WP:SOCK, because you obviously don't know what a sock is. Thomas.W talk 23:32, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
"Everything was fine before these socks started to appear."The article was missing any mention of a major issue -- namely insurgency. Google "Balochistan insurgency" and you get 360,000 hits. There have been five different insurgencies in the province since independence and nothing is mentioned about them in the history section. The insurgency affects the human rights situation, it affects economic development, it affects politics in the province. Without any mention the article is incomplete, inaccurate even. -- BoogaLouie ( talk) 14:45, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
the champion of the edits made ...by TLW. I would redo all edits I've seen that have been deleted. I want to give due weight, no more and no less.
Where precisely at the darkness shines DPI was it confirmed that I am a sock? It does not, so do not assume that I am. 82.132.215.177 ( talk) 21:17, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
This page is a frickin' mess. With all the recent strikethroughs from TopGun, the RFC question has been rendered virtually useless. It might be worth considering that we close the RFC as a matter of procedure and start again. Surely we can't reasonably expect other editors to wade through the sea of crap that is there. Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 19:55, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Should this article on Balochistan, Pakistan contain content related to insurgencies and the independence movement, poverty, and allegations of human rights violations in the region? And if so, how much of this content should be presented?
Note: A previous RfC had been opened, but there were some unfortunate sockpuppetry issues and strikethroughs which rendered the original RFC extraordinarily difficult to understand. However, the question the original user posed (in spite of the sockpuppetry) I think is worth discussing:
Should article have section on independence movement? As is important part of region.
There have been several insurgencies since the creation of Pakistan. Since 2005 another has been ongoing, and the Pakistan Telecommunication Authority has blocked hundreds of websites created by nationalists and those calling for secession or political autonomy such as the Baloch Hal, which has been banned since 2009, and those documenting human rights atrocities. This insurgency has been suppressed by the use of extrajudicial executions and torture. [1] [2]
Thanks, Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 04:49, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
References
In 2009 Asif Ali Zardari admited that there were human rights violations carried out on the Baloch during the regime of Pervez Musharraf, including the disappearances of hundreds.
TripWire I agree with you. Same situation faced by me; see section election 2014 here on kashmir conflict talk page /info/en/?search=Talk:Kashmir_conflict and arbitration committee on going discussion here /info/en/?search=Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution_noticeboard . Pro india nationalist have made WP neutrality a joke and not allowing elected CM Mufti credit to Pakistan and separatists for state election 2014 high turn over. Read the last para in the lead of kashmir conflict. 39.47.109.166 ( talk) 17:53, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
--– jfsamper ( talk• contrib• email) 08:43, 6 July 2015 (UTC)The Balochistan conflict has affected the province since 1948. Organizations such as Amnesty International have accused both the Government of Pakistan and the Baloch separatist groups of human rights violations. [1]
Add this to the end of the History section:
Adding something like this to the end of the Government section
Adding something like this between the first and second paragraphs in the Economy section:
— Preceding unsigned comment added by BoogaLouie ( talk • contribs) 10:37, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
References
Since Balochistan became part of Pakistan some 65 years ago, Baloch nationalists have led four insurgencies — in 1948, 1958-59, 1962-63 and 1973-77 — which were brutally suppressed by the state. Now a fifth is under way and this time the insurgents are much stronger. Unlike the past, the educated middle-class youth, rather than tribal leaders, are leading the separatist movement.Cite error: The named reference "Hussain-4-25-13" was defined multiple times with different content (see the help page).
The fifth Baloch insurgency against the Pakistan state began in 2003, with small guerrilla attacks by autonomy-seeking Baloch groups who over the years have became increasingly militant and separatist in ideology.
Every disappeared Baloch leads to many more youngsters taking up arms. Every attack on the security forces leads to more disappeared. It is an endless cycle of violence that has gone on for 11 years.
{{
cite journal}}
: Check date values in: |date=
(
help)
is about the Politics of Balochistan (we could simply add a subsection) but the second part just doesnt fit and it sounds a little POV. What about adding the following to the History section:Besides dominant Pakistan-wide political parties (such as the Pakistan Muslim League (N) and the Pakistan Peoples Party), Balochistan nationalist parties (such as the National Party and the Balochistan National Party) have been prominent in the province [1].
Since 1948, the province has been affected by several insurgencies which took place in 1948, 1958-59, 1962-63 and 1973-77 [1] — with a new and reportedly stronger ongoing insurgency by autonomy-seeking Baloch groups beginning in 2003. [1] [2] Organizations such as Amnesty International and the Human Rights Watch have accused the National Government of human rights violations in the province [3] [4]. The Pakistani government has denied these allegations and has labelled these separatist groups as terrorists [5].
I think the conflict is part of the province's history and the human rights wikilink is more relevant in this context. Thoughts? --– jfsamper ( talk• contrib• email) 08:59, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
References
The fifth Baloch insurgency against the Pakistan state began in 2003, with small guerrilla attacks by autonomy-seeking Baloch groups who over the years have became increasingly militant and separatist in ideology.
I don't think anyone outright opposed some mention of the conflict.I believe Zmaghndstakun and Rashidzaman786 are both against any mention of the conflict and related issues. Initially it seemed that there was some receptivity from some of the other editors above to some mention of the strife issues, but that seems to have changed. Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 15:17, 23 July 2015 (UTC)
Oppose Hi Cyphoidbomb! Heirchy is important. Balochistan_conflict covers Human rights violations/Terrorism/insurgencies by militant groups/agencies, Balochistan should covers gest of Greater Balouchistan movement/conflict and poverty of the region etc. However Balochistan,_Pakistan should not include and just follow the pattren of administrative unit details such as History, Government, Geography, Fauna / Flora, Administration, Districts, Climate, Culture, Education, Economy,Religion, Sports and Demography. Just like what pages on Sistan_and_Baluchestan_Province and Nimruz_Province do. I hope now this RFC do over will be (logically) shifted to Balochistan. Otherwise people will question bad faith anti pak editing ignoring iran or afghan balochs. Good faith is paramount on wiki? ting Zmaghndstakun ( talk) 16:15, 11 July 2015 (UTC)
So what I'm getting at is that because there seems to be a lot of difference between the insurgent movements in the two different countries, there would seem to be reason to include mention of the insurgency in Balochistan, Pakistan and Sistan and Baluchestan Province as well as in Balochistan.
-- BoogaLouie ( talk) 19:01, 15 July 2015 (UTC)
"This is an administrative province article and should expand on the History, Government, Geography, Fauna / Flora, Climate, Culture, Sports, Religion, Demography and Administration of the province."That's what we are trying to do—expand on the history, government, geography, demography of the region. War/insurgencies affect history, culture and government. Economic issues affect culture and the people. Human rights violations affect demography, culture and may relate to government. Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 14:07, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
Pakistani army are committing human rights violations on a massive scale according to amnesty international.Obviously that's not an NPOV way to phrase that. I attempted to present the content more neutrally. Faizan moved it from the lede. I didn't have much of a problem with that, but then it was removed by an IP editor. There was an edit war in the days that followed. At some point TripWire disputed some of the sources, but then the whole shebang wound up deleted again under the argument that it represents POV. It seems to me that most feel that some version of summary content should exist in the article, with only a scant few adamant that because this is an "administrative" article a province, that the content should be excluded. This position hasn't been properly justified. Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 19:51, 23 July 2015 (UTC)
As noted in my close there is no strict consensus on the form of inclusion. BoogaLouie's suggestions in the middle of the discussion (as amended by JFsamper) are a good starting point, as is the suggestion to rename Government to Government and Politics. I am boldly adding a version of those sections to the article as closer however I re-iterate there is not consensus for their form, only for inclusion of the information.— Preceding unsigned comment added by SPACKlick ( talk • contribs)
There's a small but brisk edit-war going on right now between @ Zmaghndstakun: and myself over what I believe is a rather small matter. I'm hoping they will discuss the edits here rather than continue to edit-war. Expanding some. The claim is that Pakistan is bringing Indian involvement in a particular matter to the UN. That's basically supported by the originally give source (although the source says "considering" bringing). Zmaghndstakun was adding material about a specific Indian agency to the claim which was not supported by the source. When pressed, they promised more sources soon and added them here. Immediate problem - one of them is a forum (hint - if you see "thread" in the url, it's probably a forum and when you look at it, it's a forum). Not a WP:RS. They challenged that any of their sources were forums. They are a new editor so probably aren't familiar with Wikipedia policies so I left them a pointer to both RS and SYNTH, followed by a 3RR warning as they continued to edit war. In addition to the RS concerns, I've also got SYNTH concerns. The source for the claim says only Indian involvement, but Zmaghndstakun wants to add a specific agency. I don't think any of their new sources specifically covers that agency being part of the considered UN discussion. I'd like to just stick with what the source says about the consideration of bringing Indian involvement to the UN, nothing else. Thoughts? Ravensfire ( talk) 16:18, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
I have not done any edit war. You ojected to forum sources inserted by me but deleted all including others. I inserted back NON FORUM but mistakenly one forum source still wrongly left which you deleted. Thank you. Zmaghndstakun ( talk) 17:05, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
More edit warring with Zmaghndstakun.
In RFC do-over above you will find a suggestion by Editor Zmaghndstakun that info on insurgency/terrorism in Balochistan be put in the Balochistan article (in the history section) since the insurgency/terrorism is not just in the Pakistan parts of Balochistan:
I didn't think that would solve the problem with the Baluchistan, Pakistan article being discussed here, but was not a bad idea, so I made this edit rewriting an already-existing Governance and political disputes section, not adding to the history section.
Within a few hours it was
rvted by Rashidzaman786 with the edit message:
"(Back to Chris the speller , To much changes and a lot to disscuss before concensus on talk page)"
Disappointing, but OK, let's discuss. But on the talk page Rashidzaman786 comment was: "Last edits by BoogaLouie hurting NPOV and WP Coattrack."
What in the edit is NPOV? What is "WP Coattrack"? No specifics. Later after another editor restores my edits and this time Zmaghndstakun himeself -- the suggester of cover it in page
Balochistan's section history -- deleted them.
For the benefit of those who would like to have an idea of what happens when you follow Zmaghndstakun's suggestion here is a link to the back-and-forth on the talk page. (I know this strays from WP:FOC but the similarity to the current dispute is striking and the frustration is serious. This is how people leave wikipedia in disgust.)
Note lots of reverting, lots of wiki-buzzwords about "NPOV", "WP Coattrack", "concensus", questions unreplied to, but virtually no comments on what specifically is wrong with the content of the edit. -- BoogaLouie ( talk) 20:13, 30 July 2015 (UTC)
Could I suggest the language be changed to "Home Minister Balochistan Sarfraz Bugti claims that..."? Pointed out makes it sound like he is noting a known fact where as the source seems to suggest it is an allegation. At the moment the article reads this way: "Home Minister Balochistan Sarfraz Bugti pointed out that Indian intelligence agency RAW is conspiring against the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) agreement and law and order situation in the province is being sabotaged with planing." Thoughts? Tigerman2005 ( talk) 04:26, 31 July 2015 (UTC)
This talk page should not be used to disscuss issues related to other articles. For other articles there are annexed talk page. Thnk u Rashidzaman786 ( talk) 06:15, 31 July 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to 4 external links on
Balochistan, Pakistan. 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.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers. — cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 16:55, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
Balochistan, Pakistan. 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.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 07:55, 27 February 2016 (UTC)