Talk:United Nations peacekeeping missions involving Pakistan

Untitled
Note: any changes or disputes over the article's content are to be discussed here.

Democratic Republic of Congo
Some mention of this matter should be included in the article. ·:·Will Beback ·:· 10:22, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
 * UN troops 'traded gold for guns'

Battle of Mogadishu
When reading the article about Pakistani efforts in Somalia and Mogadishu, it is blatantly obvious that the author is in huge favor of the Pakistani armed forces present there and sometimes over exaggerates and glorifies the events and actions of the Pakistani military.

For example, when speaking about the Battle of Mogadishu the author does factually mention the role of Pakistani armor in coming into the militia-controlled portion of the city and aiding US troops in their exfiltration, however, the author embellishes their role-

"Had it not been for the courage, valour and steadfastness of the Pakistani soldiers, the rescue operation could not have succeeded and the trapped US soldiers might have perished."

Pakistani armor did come to the aid, and certainly rescue, of American forces, however they did not perform anything more than what was asked from their job. They performed no extraordinary action. The article leads the reader to think that the Pakistani armor performed super-humanly and went above and beyond the call of duty.

Furthermore, when the author writes about the ambush of Pakistani soldiers during a weapon inspection, the article again seems embellished and takes a more narrative than factual form. For Example-

"The ambushers were using children and women as human shields to prevent being fired back while the road-blocks they had set up made Pakistanis withdrawal difficult. Though taken by surprise and totally exposed, the courageous blue beret Pakistanis fought their way back taking full care that the children and women protecting the attackers remained unharmed"

The aforementioned quote is clearly biased and partisan.

By no means do i mean to water-down the efforts of the Pakistani military and i do believe they did their job to their fullest extent during both the ambush and the Battle of Mogadishu, however, i think that the article should be revised in accordance and respect to article rules on position, bias, etc. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.111.239.58 (talk) 01:54, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

Use of the term "cherished"
I am a bit concerned by the use of the term "cherished" in the article. It seems a bit POV to me, but I'd like alternate opinions here to guess if I'm alone or not.--Nadirali نادرالی (talk) 01:08, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

Can't find any source confirming that a school was named after PAKBAT,will be removing it
"In recognition of PAKBAT efforts, a school was named, Pakistan School." this will be removed until a source can be provided DrWineBerry (talk) 12:22, 11 July 2023 (UTC)