Template talk:Campaignbox Indo-Pakistani Wars

This template is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia

Pakistan

This template 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

South Asia

This template is within the scope of WikiProject South Asia, which aims to improve the quality and status of all South Asia-related articles. For more information, please visit the Project page.South AsiaWikipedia:WikiProject South AsiaTemplate:WikiProject South AsiaSouth Asia

Military history: Asian / Indian / South Asia

This template 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

Associated task forces:
/
	Asian military history task force
	Indian military history task force
	South Asian military history task force

Operation Meghdoot

It was an Indo-Pakistani confrontation not part of the other wars listed. See the campaignbox for the Arab-Israeli conflict what's included there --TheFEARgod (Ч) 22:20, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This one seems fairly sensible; regardless of whether it's an "Indo-Pakistani War" in its own right, it's an operation within the larger "Indo-Pakistani Wars"—and not within any of the wars already listed—and so ought to be linked here. Kirill Lokshin 22:29, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have a few points. Arab Israeli conflict is different from the terminology of the war used for the Ind-Pak scenario. Having said that, Op Meghdoot does NOT encompass the "Siachen War". Since 1984 both countries have fought numerous times during the "Siachen War" and op meghdoot was but one of the battles/operations in this war. If the link to Siachen War is to be added then an article about the war that covers the conflicts of 84, 85, 86, 87, 89, 95 and other minor ops and attacks that resulted in loss of territory (in '86-'87). In the line of Cold War the Siachen War should encompass these battles and the Siachen War link should point to Siachen War or Siachen Conflict that includes Op Meghdoot and other ops from both India and Pakistan like Operation Rajiv etc. Idleguy 04:52, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

if you have enough information, I support your idea of starting this new article. --TheFEARgod (Ч) 11:01, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, having a broader article would be a good thing. Having said that, I think the campaignbox should continue to be labeled as "Indo-Pakistani Wars" rather than "Indo-Pakistani conflict", as I'm pretty sure that the first term is the more commonly used one for the entire broad conflict (although I may very well be wrong on this point). Kirill Lokshin 13:32, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If the title is the popularly known "Indo-Pakistani Wars", then Siachen Glacier conflict cannot be used under this title, cuz few sources refer to the Siachen conflict as among the four wars. Take the example of books published by several authors on the Ind-pak wars and you'll find that most refer to the 3 major wars and Kargil (sometimes as a mini-war or the 4th war). not one single credible reference I have come across - leaving websites - have stated Siachen to be a war. If it is not a war by general consensus, then how can it be included under "Indo-Pakistani Wars"? If it is to be included as a conflict, the Indo-pakistani conflicts is again a seldom used name. For now, i'm delinking the Operation Meghdoot from the conflictbox until it is corrected. Disinformation is worse than no information. Idleguy 07:09, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Or I think it'd be a slightly better compromise to reword Indo-Pakistani Wars to Indo-Pakistani Wars and conflicts. Only then can Siachen Glacier fit properly as a conflict; again not Operation Meghdoot, which is not a war but akin to a battle. Idleguy 07:18, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 23 August 2019

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

2019 Jammu and Kashmir airstrikes should be added in this template as it related to the conflict between India and Pakistan. If possible, can it be named as Operation swift retort in the template as that was the code name of Pakistan airstrikes in India. Source: [1] 188.66.181.146 (talk) 17:40, 23 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Done – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:00, 14 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 2 November 2021

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Replace "Operation Meghdoot" with "Siachen Conflict." Meghdoot is an operation, not an entire conflict. Besides, it's the only conflict in the template named after a single operation. Cipher21 (talk) 11:39, 3 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Cipher21: Since the Siachen conflict is already linked further up in the template, inserting another link isn't sensible. I have, however, checked the edit history and it appears that the link to Operation Meghdoot was added fairly recently as part of a general change in structure. From what I can see, listing an individual operation that is clearly part of the Kashmir conflict under Other conflicts makes no sense, and I have accordingly removed the link. Angry Harpy‍^talk 10:51, 4 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 11 October 2022

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Please add 1958 East Pakistan–India border skirmish 103.244.173.68 (talk) 15:36, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done ~~ lol1 VNIO (I made a mistake? talk to me) 20:17, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 29 December 2022

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Please add 1959 Canberra shootdown 2400:ADC1:477:8500:C1D5:B14:6246:E79A (talk) 13:30, 29 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: Add to which column? Lemonaka (talk) 09:57, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Lemonaka: add it to Other conflicts 2400:ADC1:477:8500:A4BB:61B1:AE0C:B605 (talk) 13:12, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done Lemonaka (talk) 13:13, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 6 March 2023

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Change "J&K 2019" to "Kashmir 2019." H&K G3A3 (talk) 07:06, 6 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: the article 2019 Jammu and Kashmir airstrikes includes both J and K; you'll need consensus there first to rename to just Kashmir before changing to Kashmir alone could be done here. Lizthegrey (talk) 07:12, 6 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]