This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
UN mediation of the Kashmir dispute article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | Text and/or other creative content from this version of Kashmir conflict was copied or moved into UN mediation of Kashmir with this edit. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists. |
I think this page is mistitled. UN Military Observer Group was just the body that supervised the ceasefire. UN Commission for India and Pakistan (UNCIP) was the body that was responsible for carrying out negotiations between India and Pakistan. The article discusses both, but the page title doesn't reflect that.
I propose that we change the title to a more general term "UN mediation of India and Pakistan" (or "UN mediation of Kashmir"), for which there are plenty of reliable sources. - Kautilya3 ( talk) 21:25, 25 January 2016 (UTC)
Copied from Talk:Kashmir conflict
I'm imposing the following restrictions on this article and any other articles connected with the India Pakistan conflict over Kashmir:
-- regentspark ( comment) 17:19, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
Anmolbhat your recent revert is not in line with our policies. The WP:BURDEN rests on your shoulders as the restorer to evince direct verifiability, failing which will mean I have to rollback. Winged Blades of Godric, you might want to monitor this. JosephusOfJerusalem ( talk) 06:27, 21 March 2018 (UTC)
The Lead does not state the present position as to why UNMOGIP is powerless here. India's position that it is out of the UNMOGIP purview after Shimla agreement. UNMOGIP mandate is lost. At present it only mentions the historical stuff-- DBig Xrayᗙ 13:40, 22 September 2018 (UTC)
There are some pointed observations masquerading as neutral facts in the article such as statements like “but India did not offer an alternative”. There’s no need to include such statements. Neither India nor Pakistan could come to a solution, that’s why the UN intervened in the first place. Jeerabasmati ( talk) 22:26, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: No consensus to move ( non-admin closure) ( t · c) buidhe 16:22, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
UN mediation of the Kashmir dispute →
UN mediation of the Kashmir conflict – The term "Kashmir dispute" is never used anywhere in article titles except here. Therefore, we should rename this article to be
WP:CONSISTENT with several articles.
Soumya-8974 (he)
talk
contribs
subpages 15:09, 21 December 2020 (UTC) —Relisting.
BegbertBiggs (
talk) 13:12, 30 December 2020 (UTC) —Relisting. —
Nnadigoodluck
███
16:16, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: Not moved per consensus. ( closed by non-admin page mover) signed, Iflaq (talk) 12:12, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
UN mediation of the Kashmir dispute →
Kashmir dispute and the United Nations – The role of the United Nations is no longer (only limited to) mediation. UNGA statements by India and Pakistan, OHCHR reports on the dispute, OHCHR statements, and other types of related involvement by the United Nations has been seen. Mediation is now a sub-section.
DTM (
talk)
11:35, 20 October 2021 (UTC)
that the two countries are resolved to settle their differences by peaceful means through bilateral negotiations or by any other peaceful means mutually agreed upon between them. JantaKa ( talk) 10:55, 21 October 2021 (UTC)
"With regard to United Nations, India has undergone a shift from internationalization (1948 to 1950-1965) of the Kashmir (India-Pakistan) question to a preference and insistence on bilateralism (1965-1972 onwards), while Pakistan has largely preferred internationalization of the issue through various bodies of the United Nations. India's shift includes the substantial change in policy during the 1950s and onwards related to self-determination and conducting a plebiscite. "
Sources?
India and Pakistan signed a bilateral agreement in 1972 where mediation from third parties is avoided and issues are to be resolved amicably between the two countries. Pakistan and India have both reiterated the same on numerous occasions even though they may have asked for some buffers in times of heat. Suggesting different policies for two countries without sources can be misleading to readers. Even if you don't agree with my edit because of your preferred point of view, I propose the following:
"With regard to United Nations, the Kashmir question has undergone a shift from internationalization (1948 to 1972) to a more bilateral approach (1972 onwards)"
Citing a deviation from bilateralism is antithetical to both countries' stated policy on the matter and goes completely against the entire spirit of the relations between two countries. The previous version seems vague and makes the reader question the policy of bilateralism itself which is not the case as has been reiterated by Pakistan, India, USA and other countries on numerous occasions.-- I dont agree with this ( talk) 19:50, 25 February 2022 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
UN mediation of the Kashmir dispute article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | Text and/or other creative content from this version of Kashmir conflict was copied or moved into UN mediation of Kashmir with this edit. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists. |
I think this page is mistitled. UN Military Observer Group was just the body that supervised the ceasefire. UN Commission for India and Pakistan (UNCIP) was the body that was responsible for carrying out negotiations between India and Pakistan. The article discusses both, but the page title doesn't reflect that.
I propose that we change the title to a more general term "UN mediation of India and Pakistan" (or "UN mediation of Kashmir"), for which there are plenty of reliable sources. - Kautilya3 ( talk) 21:25, 25 January 2016 (UTC)
Copied from Talk:Kashmir conflict
I'm imposing the following restrictions on this article and any other articles connected with the India Pakistan conflict over Kashmir:
-- regentspark ( comment) 17:19, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
Anmolbhat your recent revert is not in line with our policies. The WP:BURDEN rests on your shoulders as the restorer to evince direct verifiability, failing which will mean I have to rollback. Winged Blades of Godric, you might want to monitor this. JosephusOfJerusalem ( talk) 06:27, 21 March 2018 (UTC)
The Lead does not state the present position as to why UNMOGIP is powerless here. India's position that it is out of the UNMOGIP purview after Shimla agreement. UNMOGIP mandate is lost. At present it only mentions the historical stuff-- DBig Xrayᗙ 13:40, 22 September 2018 (UTC)
There are some pointed observations masquerading as neutral facts in the article such as statements like “but India did not offer an alternative”. There’s no need to include such statements. Neither India nor Pakistan could come to a solution, that’s why the UN intervened in the first place. Jeerabasmati ( talk) 22:26, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: No consensus to move ( non-admin closure) ( t · c) buidhe 16:22, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
UN mediation of the Kashmir dispute →
UN mediation of the Kashmir conflict – The term "Kashmir dispute" is never used anywhere in article titles except here. Therefore, we should rename this article to be
WP:CONSISTENT with several articles.
Soumya-8974 (he)
talk
contribs
subpages 15:09, 21 December 2020 (UTC) —Relisting.
BegbertBiggs (
talk) 13:12, 30 December 2020 (UTC) —Relisting. —
Nnadigoodluck
███
16:16, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: Not moved per consensus. ( closed by non-admin page mover) signed, Iflaq (talk) 12:12, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
UN mediation of the Kashmir dispute →
Kashmir dispute and the United Nations – The role of the United Nations is no longer (only limited to) mediation. UNGA statements by India and Pakistan, OHCHR reports on the dispute, OHCHR statements, and other types of related involvement by the United Nations has been seen. Mediation is now a sub-section.
DTM (
talk)
11:35, 20 October 2021 (UTC)
that the two countries are resolved to settle their differences by peaceful means through bilateral negotiations or by any other peaceful means mutually agreed upon between them. JantaKa ( talk) 10:55, 21 October 2021 (UTC)
"With regard to United Nations, India has undergone a shift from internationalization (1948 to 1950-1965) of the Kashmir (India-Pakistan) question to a preference and insistence on bilateralism (1965-1972 onwards), while Pakistan has largely preferred internationalization of the issue through various bodies of the United Nations. India's shift includes the substantial change in policy during the 1950s and onwards related to self-determination and conducting a plebiscite. "
Sources?
India and Pakistan signed a bilateral agreement in 1972 where mediation from third parties is avoided and issues are to be resolved amicably between the two countries. Pakistan and India have both reiterated the same on numerous occasions even though they may have asked for some buffers in times of heat. Suggesting different policies for two countries without sources can be misleading to readers. Even if you don't agree with my edit because of your preferred point of view, I propose the following:
"With regard to United Nations, the Kashmir question has undergone a shift from internationalization (1948 to 1972) to a more bilateral approach (1972 onwards)"
Citing a deviation from bilateralism is antithetical to both countries' stated policy on the matter and goes completely against the entire spirit of the relations between two countries. The previous version seems vague and makes the reader question the policy of bilateralism itself which is not the case as has been reiterated by Pakistan, India, USA and other countries on numerous occasions.-- I dont agree with this ( talk) 19:50, 25 February 2022 (UTC)