![]() | The
contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to
India,
Pakistan, and
Afghanistan, which has been
designated as a contentious topic. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. |
![]() | This template was considered for deletion on 11 February 2010. The result of the discussion was "no consensus". |
![]() | This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Perhaps putting larger attacks in bold is not a good idea, because whichever article you are looking at has its own link in bold. Maybe underline? — Scouter Sig 15:08, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
Hello- Just a note to explain my template edit adding quotes to the above term: Though widely used in the media in reference to various activities, this expression was invented by U.S. administration political propagandists and is not a legitimate or accurate term for describing the campaigns it is meant to justify. To give Wikipedia proper distance from its invention and use, it should be either placed in quotes or have "so-called" added in front of it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by EHM02667 ( talk • contribs) 18:12, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
It's the template that's unnecessary. -- Wetman ( talk) 10:37, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
Any reason why is this right-aligned and not in the traditional footer style? Lugnuts ( talk) 16:43, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
It says the underlined ones had more than 100 deaths but all of them are underlined. I am deleting this sentence. If anyone who knows more about editing templates would like to change it so only the attacks with over 100 deaths are underlined then go for it. NeoJustin ( Talk page) 05:15, 13 July 2010 (UTC)
The use of emboldening, underlining and colour to convey information does not meet WCAG accessibility criteria; these should be replaced with icons such as asterisks, hashes and daggers. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:37, 11 January 2013 (UTC)
I think its not wise to number attacks as 10th Karachi, 15th xyz etc. Better you name them as "March, Karachi" and "April, xyz" which explain better for navigation.-- Nizil ( talk) 07:21, 19 April 2013 (UTC)
![]() | The
contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to
India,
Pakistan, and
Afghanistan, which has been
designated as a contentious topic. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. |
![]() | This template was considered for deletion on 11 February 2010. The result of the discussion was "no consensus". |
![]() | This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Perhaps putting larger attacks in bold is not a good idea, because whichever article you are looking at has its own link in bold. Maybe underline? — Scouter Sig 15:08, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
Hello- Just a note to explain my template edit adding quotes to the above term: Though widely used in the media in reference to various activities, this expression was invented by U.S. administration political propagandists and is not a legitimate or accurate term for describing the campaigns it is meant to justify. To give Wikipedia proper distance from its invention and use, it should be either placed in quotes or have "so-called" added in front of it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by EHM02667 ( talk • contribs) 18:12, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
It's the template that's unnecessary. -- Wetman ( talk) 10:37, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
Any reason why is this right-aligned and not in the traditional footer style? Lugnuts ( talk) 16:43, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
It says the underlined ones had more than 100 deaths but all of them are underlined. I am deleting this sentence. If anyone who knows more about editing templates would like to change it so only the attacks with over 100 deaths are underlined then go for it. NeoJustin ( Talk page) 05:15, 13 July 2010 (UTC)
The use of emboldening, underlining and colour to convey information does not meet WCAG accessibility criteria; these should be replaced with icons such as asterisks, hashes and daggers. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:37, 11 January 2013 (UTC)
I think its not wise to number attacks as 10th Karachi, 15th xyz etc. Better you name them as "March, Karachi" and "April, xyz" which explain better for navigation.-- Nizil ( talk) 07:21, 19 April 2013 (UTC)