Talk:2022 Pakistani airstrikes in Afghanistan

Afghanistan Mid‑importance

	Afghanistan portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Afghanistan, a project to maintain and expand Afghanistan-related subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.AfghanistanWikipedia:WikiProject AfghanistanTemplate:WikiProject AfghanistanAfghanistan
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

International relations Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject International relations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of International relations on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.International relationsWikipedia:WikiProject International relationsTemplate:WikiProject International relationsInternational relations
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Military history: Asian / South Asia / Post-Cold War B‑class

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history

B

This article has been rated as B-class on the project's quality scale.

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Asian military history task force
	South Asian military history task force
	Post-Cold War task force

Pakistan Low‑importance

	Pakistan portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pakistan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Pakistan on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PakistanWikipedia:WikiProject PakistanTemplate:WikiProject PakistanPakistan
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Pakistani history.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Pakistani politics.

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.

Article name

I suggest we should change the name of the article to 2022 Kunar and Kunduz Airstrikes Xtreme o7 (talk) 14:33, 16 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Xtreme o7, You can comment on the request for move on the talk page. >>> Extorc.talk 10:32, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 16 April 2022

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Moved to 2022 Pakistani airstrikes in Afghanistan. There is no consensus for the new title, but there is broad agreement that some more identification in the form of adding the year would be useful — Amakuru (talk) 10:56, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Pakistani airstrikes in Afghanistan → 2022 Kunar and Khost airstrikes – This seems to be more accurate BenCKP (talk) 17:03, 16 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose because Khost Province (and Kunar Province) was attacked, but Khost (city) was not attacked. It makes the proposed title WP:ambiguous. The current title is unambiguous and clear, and is also WP:concise. Also, it is notable that some sources say Paktika Province was also attacked in the airstrikes, so the title better not exclude Paktika Province. Khestwol (talk) 21:21, 16 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I support move to "2022 Pakistani airstrikes in Afghanistan" as per Jim Michael below. Khestwol (talk) 18:54, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support per WP:Naming conventions (events). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 103.141.159.74 (talk) 22:40, 16 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per WP:NCE, consider removing the year and just keep Kunar and Khost airtrikes per WP:NOYEAR.

Could also include Pakistani -> Pakistan airstrikes at Kunar and Khost per the aviation examples under WP:DESCRIPTOR >>> Extorc.talk 10:31, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"Kunar and Khost airtrikes" is ambiguous. There were many US airstrikes and drone strikes in Kunar Province and Khost Province, including Spera District. Also, the title does not include the word "Province". Khestwol (talk) 10:59, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

To be more precise : we can say -> Pakistan airstrikes at Spera and Shaltan ,Khestwol >>> Extorc.talk 11:45, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

One thing worth noting is that " Pakistani airstrikes in Afghanistan" is much more ambigous than what I have suggested, instead of Opposing the rename, you should suggest new names that are better. >>> Extorc.talk 11:46, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with "Pakistan airstrikes at Spera and Shaltan" as it is more WP:precise. But do you think "at" can be replaced with "on"? Khestwol (talk) 11:55, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"in" or "at" would be preferred.

English is not my native language.

Perhaps someone else can comment on the grammar. >>> Extorc.talk 12:25, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

User:Extorc, because some sources say Paktika Province was also attacked, do you agree with the suggestion by User:Jim Michael below i.e. "2022 Pakistani airstrikes in Afghanistan"? Khestwol (talk) 10:06, 18 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes seems good to me.

Support "2022 Pakistani Airstrikes in Afghanistan" >>> Extorc.talk 10:56, 18 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support "Pakistani airstrikes in Afghanistan" is vague. Which airstrikes and where precisely in Afghanistan? This isn't the first time that Pakistan carried out strikes into Afghan territory. The title needs to reflect accordingly. Mar4d (talk) 14:05, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Move to 2022 Pakistani airstrikes in Afghanistan, providing that these are the only ones that took place this year. Jim Michael (talk) 16:13, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Good suggestion. Khestwol (talk) 18:54, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Some sort of move is needed. The current title is far too vague. -Ad Orientem (talk) 16:31, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed >>> Extorc.talk 18:57, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support change to 2022 Eastern Afghanistan Airstrikes SavageBWiki (talk) 16:29, 18 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Using "Eastern Afghanistan" here is technically incorrect. Khost Province (and Paktika Province for that matter) is part of South-Eastern Afghanistan, not Eastern Afghanistan, as per the United Nations subregions of Afghanistan. However, Kunar Province is part of Eastern Afghanistan. Khestwol (talk) 16:46, 18 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support Existing title is far too vague. The Kip (talk) 05:38, 19 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I can't think of a better title. It can be changed to "2022 Pakistani airstrikes in Afghanistan" only if there is another airstrike from this year otherwise we need to retain the mention of country names on title. CharlesWain (talk) 16:41, 19 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose This is the major notable incident which shows that Pakistan did airstrike on Afghanistan. The title should not be changed, but it can be updated to "2022 Pakistani airstrikes in Afghanistan", which makes it more specific, and counters the argument that title is vague. Jhy.rjwk (talk) 04:45, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Is this the only incident where the Pakistani military launched an airstrike on Afghanistan? Dunutubble (talk) (Contributions) 14:10, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Dunutubble, this is the only major incident so far. But cross-border shelling frequently occurs, especially in Kunar Province, Paktika Province and Khost Province. Also in this month (7 April 2022), a Pakistani helicopter apparently entered Nimruz Province and was shot by the Taliban. A Pakistani general was wounded as a result of the shooting, according Ariana News (see [1], [2]). Khestwol (talk) 15:19, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Then I would support Pakistani airstrikes in Afghanistan the same way Drone strikes in Pakistan is titled. Dunutubble (talk) (Contributions) 20:50, 22 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support 111.119.188.0 (talk) 14:49, 23 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above 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.

Removal of all sources originating from India by one user

I noticed that user:AlphaTangoIndia is removing multiple sources from this article. Recent examples [3], [4]. He seems to be preferring only pro-Pakistan and pro-Taliban sources. For WP:NPOV, I think this is inappropriate, and they should not specifically try to remove all sources published from India. Khestwol (talk) 09:52, 19 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Khestwol: please refer to this page Perennial Sources and see the consensus on Asian News International (ANI). ANI is considered unreliable sources so I replaced it with sources like Tolonews or other international sources. I have not removed sources like ThePrint or Asianet News which are also an Indian sources. Also please let me know which Pro-Pakistan or Pro-Taliban sources I have added on this page. AlphaTangoIndia (talk) 11:17, 19 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Do you say TOLOnews is more reliable than Asian News International? In my opinion, both of these sources should have been there and given equal weight. But may be an expert can answer better on this. Khestwol (talk) 12:46, 19 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No, I am not saying that TOLONews is more reliable than Asian News International (ANI). I am saying that ANI is treated as unreliable source as per the consensus on Perennial Sources page. Besides, if there is a reliable source out there that cover same topic as ANI, so then why is there a need to include a source that is considered unreliable here? This event has gotten a lot of coverage now and there is good amount of international media covering it. There is no shortage of sources related to the topic. AlphaTangoIndia (talk) 17:12, 19 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

RSP doesn't seem to trust ANI. That being said, the choice to remove The Shillong Times seems rather unnecessary. Dunutubble (talk) (Contributions) 14:21, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Airstrikes were retaliation

Since there is no official statement by Pakistan Government regarding the Airstrikes to be Retaliation to the wave of terrorist attacks on it's Border forces, why not just write it as "alleged retaliatory strikes" since some indian news outlet also term them as retaliation.Also it's pretty obvious too. P.S- While reading the article, one gets the feeling that Pakistan is that bad guy who kills Children and women, there are chances that they could be families of TTP insurgents so kindly do look up to this. Pr0pulsion 123 (talk) 21:31, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

here's the Indian News claim

https://theprint.in/world/pakistan-bombs-afghan-border-areas-after-attack-on-convoy-civilians-dead/918904/#amp_tf=From%20%251%24s&aoh=16510207509061&referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&ampshare=https%3A%2F%2Ftheprint.in%2Fworld%2Fpakistan-bombs-afghan-border-areas-after-attack-on-convoy-civilians-dead%2F918904%2F Pr0pulsion 123 (talk) 21:32, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Pr0pulsion 123. Yes some sources say that, but the problem is that the more WP:RELIABLE sources (according to Wikipedia), e.g. Reuters, Al Jazeera, Voice of America, The New York Times, DW, France 24, Bloomberg, etc. do not directly say that. The New York Times for example says: The airstrikes on Saturday appear to have been carried out as retaliation to that attack. but it uses the word "appear". So in my opinion, we can not directly say this in the first line of the lede. Especially since we have already added this opinion later in the lede: According to the Pakistani media and some Afghan media outlets, the attacks targeted militants belonging to Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) in retaliation to a terror attack on a Pakistani military convoy in North Waziristan, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan on 14 April, which had killed seven Pakistani soldiers. And we have cited the source you have given us already. However, in my opinion, we can change the wording of this sentence slightly. We may remove the phrase According to the Pakistani media and some Afghan media outlets and add the word "appear" as per the New York Times. Khestwol (talk) 21:59, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes that would be agreeable. Thanks Pr0pulsion 123 (talk) 22:03, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Hope it's balanced now. Khestwol (talk) 01:25, 28 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]