Talk:People's Anti-Fascist Front

Fake information

Promoting fake narrative Smjk0990 (talk) 20:15, 18 November 2022 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• People's Anti Fascist Front.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 15:36, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 27 April 2023

In Attacks section, entry for attack on 10 December 2021. Missing link for Wikipedia page of United Liberation Front can be replaced by already given link in 3rd paragraph of Introduction section. Kaamavats (talk) 03:39, 27 April 2023 (UTC)

 Not done. What you called a "link" is actually a citation. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 18:18, 27 April 2023 (UTC)

Recent edits 27 April 2023

The desecration of this article

@Kaamavats - You need to cease POV-pushing, especially considering this is an IPA article. You cannot call the insurgency in Kashmir an ongoing armed conflict between Pakistan backed terrorist groups and Indian forces in the Jammu and Kashmir (Union Territory).

In your rather blatant attempts to push a pro-Indian POV, you have inflated the lead to a point it's larger than the article itself, made a mockery of WP:MOS and the English language, and made numerous violations of WP:NPOV and WP:TERRORIST. Solblaze (talk) 06:24, 27 April 2023 (UTC)

Deliberate manipulation, curbing of Information and use of Single-purpose account by @Solblaze

@Solblaze - You must stop with your deliberate curbing and manipulation of Information as is evident by your own User talk page which talks about your Single-purpose account. Every bit of information I have added/edited is backed by multiple citations from different sources from inside India (Manohar Parrikar Institute for Defense Studies and Analyses) and Outside of India (Middle East Institute, South Asian Voices, Global Network on Extremism and Technology). They all directly reflect the information I am presenting and proves there is no "pro" any-POV. Regarding your specific comment about 'You I cannot call...', Wikipedia article about Pakistan backed terrorist groups clearly mentions Pakistan's direct involvement in multiple militant groups operating in Kashmir. If you 'feel' that my additions/editions are mockery of "English language" and WP:MOS, I invite you to correct them, not entirely remove all the major additions I have made as you did with this revision which again, goes on to prove the subject of this topic. Kaamavats (talk) 07:39, 27 April 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia article about Pakistan backed terrorist groups clearly mentions Pakistan's direct involvement in multyple militant groups operating in Kashmir.

You're not listening to me - there's so many things wrong with this line (and most of your additions) that I don't know where to begin - for one, it's WP:OR and WP:SYNTH, a POV fabricated from your imagination. You're synthesising nonsense by citing Wikipedia, while neither is Wikipedia a reliable source of information, nor can you conjure conclusions out of thin air without a scholarly source. Lastly, you have unilaterally violated consensus about the Insurgency in Jammu and Kashmir and the policy on WP:TERRORIST, which makes it clear that it is inappropriate to label even a widely designated terrorist organisation such as al-Qaeda as such, especially in the lead.

All of this is what's wrong with just one line of what you've added.

If you 'feel' that my additions/editions are mockery of "English language" and WP:MOS, I invite you to correct them, not entirely remove all the major additions I have made

The WP:ONUS is on you to justify the addition of content, especially when it's eleven thousand bytes of such low quality and contentious nature. I will reiterate the fact that you emptied the history section, and inflated the lead with so much pro-Indian POV-pushing to the point that it's longer than the remainder of the article.

have added/edited is backed by multiple citations from different sources from inside India (Manohar Parrikar Institute for Defense Studies and Analyses) and Outside of India (Middle East Institute, South Asian Voices, Global Network on Extremism and Technology)

Where these sources cautiously noted allegations were made by India, you claimed them to be fact. This, again, violates WP:NPOV and WP:SYNTH.

I have neither the energy nor the time to spend writing a PhD thesis dissecting every one of the 11,000 bytes you've added, especially after seeing you've refused to read through the most basic of Wikipedia policies and are trying to WP:WEASEL your POV-pushing in, all while resorting to personal attacks against me for a talk page notice which clearly states it does not allege me of doing any wrongdoing. Solblaze (talk) 12:41, 27 April 2023 (UTC)

Revisions which violated WP:TERRORIST has already been amended by me and @Kautilya3.

The WP:ONUS is on you to justify the addition of content, especially when it's eleven thousand bytes of such low quality and contentious nature.

Please go and read the studies that I have cited first before saying I somehow came up with 'low quality' 'contentious' content. These are not allegations made by any government, an individual or my point of view but studies published by various institutes. Every individual bit of information added is directly reflected in the cited studies which is in line with the principals of WP:V, WP:CS, WP:NOR and dismissing your WP:SYNTH accusation. For example, addition of information regarding "Hybrid Militancy/Militant" is taken directly, word-to-word from South Asian Voices Study which is also backed in Middle East Institute Study in Emergence of “Hybrid Militancy” section. Information of "Secularization of Militancy" is taken from IDSA Study which also comprises major sections of both South Asian Voices Study and The Defence Horizon Journal Study. These additions expand the article by adding new (although these studies were published in 2021 and 2022) information that was perhaps deliberately kept hidden and improves the article from stating what the scholars and experts have observed in the recent trends thus eliminating your WP:OR and POV pushing rhetoric.

trying to WP:WEASEL your POV-pushing

Specified references stated above also cancels this accusation of vague or ambiguous claim.

I will reiterate the fact that you emptied the history section, and inflated the lead with so much pro-Indian POV-pushing to the point that it's longer than the remainder of the article.

Changes made in the History section cannot be considered pro-Indian. There is no evidence that PAFF emerged during the wake of the 2019 Kashmir Protests as was previously mentioned but there is general consensus that PAFF emerged after the removal of Article 370 of the Constitution of India thus making the revised article more specific and accurate. Other changes in the same section like citing the notification of Ministry of Home Affairs, India also made the revised article more verifiable which is again, in line with the principals of WP:V and WP:CS. I cannot see anything in these changes that can be considered pro-Indian. Kaamavats (talk) 17:49, 27 April 2023 (UTC)

Revisions which violated WP:TERRORIST has already been amended

An outright lie, evident as soon as you read the first sentence of the article, which is the very first example I've cited above.

Look - it will be difficult for me to assume good faith if you're not going to be honest with me. Solblaze (talk) 15:14, 28 April 2023 (UTC)

It was my fault. I accidentally erased my own edit. It has been fixed again. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 15:29, 28 April 2023 (UTC)

Note

Dear User:Kaamavats and User:Solblaze, you have both been informed about discretionary sanctions applicable to this topic. All discussion on this talk page must be WP:CIVIL and should be devoted exclusively to discussing improvements to the main page. No personal recriminations belong here. If you want to complain about each other, please do so at each other's user talk pages or at WP:ANI.

I have reinstated User:Kaamavats edits because they appear to be well-sourced and the reason for removing them was vague. All reverts mus be justified by policy-based grounds. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 08:53, 27 April 2023 (UTC)

Edits Recommended

The introductory line "PAFF was established in 2020 by Jaish-e-Mohammad or Lashkar-e-Taiba" is sourced back to secondary statements by Indian institutions and no primary evidence (ownership by the two outfits themselves) is provided.

Similarly in the Description section, "According to Tracking Terrorism, the group was started in 2020 by Jaish-e-Mohammad or Lashkar-e-Taiba" should be edited to add the words "it is believed" as that is the wording used in the source article.

While describing Hybrid Militancy the following texts are added "After completing an assigned task (mainly targeting civilians through pistols)," which does not make sense as the list of attacks jotted down below shows that a majority of their targets were non-civilian. Kashmarxi (talk) 23:32, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

There is enough evidence of targeted civilian killings. Read this study by The Crisis Group. Read this Voice of America article. Read another VOA article. -- Kaamavats (talk) 11:13, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

Personal BRD

Hello! I just started editing this article, and due to some experiences with another article in this topic space I can see things getting somewhat nasty if there is confrontation, in order to hopefully avoid this, Im going to be commiting to editing this article under BRD (Bold, Revert, Discuss). What this means practically is, after being reverted I will examine whether or not I agree with the revert, then come to the talk page and start a discussion about the reverted content, if no one responds within ~24 hours I will revert their revert and leave a message explaining why, aside from that I will engage in discussion on this talk page, and move to mediated discussion, a third opinion, or an RFC if we cant come to consensus. Googleguy007 (talk) 21:22, 16 May 2023 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 7 August 2023

Recent attacks killed 3 army men. A month or so prior they killed and maimed a few more. This should be documented for at least those events which have been proven by their video releases and documented by various open source intelligence enthusiasts and journalists. APT141 (talk) 13:59, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. ARandomName123 (talk)^{Ping me!} 16:25, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

Not a neutral article

The whole "vibe" of the article is of pushing a narrative instead of giving information DrWineBerry (talk) 06:15, 15 September 2023 (UTC)

agree. this all feels strongly biased toward the word of the Indian government-- who are not to be trusted unquestioned on Kashmir issues 128.114.255.121 (talk) 14:50, 19 November 2023 (UTC)

This article needs to be rewritten, why exactly is an organisation that, quote: "Encourages its own readers to submit contributions, without a solid peer-review system in place" (from: "https://www.jstor.org/stable/26296901?seq=2") like "Tracking Terrorism" considered a quality source for important claims like the this organisation is a Jihadist group, despite the organisation not claiming to be a Jihadist group. The other reference for this appears to be a Indian newpaper called "The Hindu" (which going by the name already might not be the most unbiased source regarding the Kashmir conflict) in the article cited this newspaper merely cites what the Ministry of Home Affairs of India (also definitely not an unbiased source) says about the PAFF. And this is just the peak of the iceberg, this article is not neutral at all and needs to be rewritten. Fra020 (talk) 17:48, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 10 March 2024

PAFF is a militant separatist organization. It is not terrorist organization. It is only considered as terrorist by Indian Govt only. Mamlikatekashmir (talk) 02:59, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{Edit extended-protected}} template. M.Bitton (talk) 17:00, 10 March 2024 (UTC)