Template:Did you know nominations/Bleed India with a Thousand Cuts


 * The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as |this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by SL93 (talk) 01:58, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

Bleed India with a Thousand Cuts

 * ... that after the defeat in the Indo-Pakistani War of 1971, Pakistan formulated a military doctrine designed to Bleed India with a Thousand Cuts? Source: Pakistan's policy of bleeding India to death through a strategy of a thousand cuts by sponsering insurgency in Kashmir, Source:2 Reuters "The defeat had two major effects: it convinced the Pakistan military that it could not beat its larger neighbor through conventional means alone, a realization that gave birth to its use of Islamist militant groups as proxies to try to bleed India"
 * ALT1:... that Bleed India with a Thousand Cuts is a military doctrine followed by Pakistan after defeat in the Indo-Pakistani War of 1971  Source: Gen Zia ul Haq, in a sinister, well thought out stratefy to "bleed India through a thousand cuts" gave form to Bhuttos promise of thousand year war., Source:2 Reuters

Created by DBigXray (talk). Self-nominated at 20:46, 14 November 2018 (UTC).


 * Symbol possible vote.svg - Looking at the article, I'm concerned as a number of the sources appear to be non-neutral (strongly pro-India) which then comes through in the article. I did a bit of cleanup but more is needed.   please see if we can find other neutral sources to add and use to bolster the article.  Thanks, Mifter (talk) 01:24, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
 * To provide some examples that might require new/expanded sourcing or rephrasing (thanks to for doing a lot of work on the article in the interim).
 * "The war clarified that Kashmir could no longer be taken from India by a conventional war." is cited to an article by a Major General in the Indian Army which is written with a pro-India tone and as an authoritative statement in the article should be qualified or bolstered with additional cites.
 * "Presently the Islamic fundamentalists in Bangladesh and Pakistan, controlled by the ISI, have joined forces to carry out terrorist attacks on India." is cited to a book that describes the war as India's "triumphant victory" which had Pakistan "down on its knees" along with numerous other clearly pro-India remarks.
 * "India was able to overcome its losses without weakening of its strength. The International community abhors Jihad. Pakistan's continuation of its covert war, called Jihad in Kashmir has caused loss of international support for Pakistan's Kashmir policy. This loss of support is evident even in the Muslim countries. Every Jihadist attack reduces Pakistan's moral high ground." needs additional citations in general, reads somewhat like an essay, and is presently cited to an article that reads like an op-ed in a section entitled "Views from Pakistan" with a subheadline that reads partly "two Pakistani commentators present the other side of the argument".
 * Best, Mifter (talk) 17:06, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Mifter, Thanks for your comments, I am working to fix these concerns.  D Big X ray ᗙ  22:31, 14 December 2018 (UTC).
 * ✅ Changes made in to the article based on the suggestion. now marking as done.  D Big X ray ᗙ  20:52, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks, given my involvement in this, I believe having a Symbol redirect vote 4.svg new reviewer would be prudent as to have a fresh set of eyes. Best, Mifter (talk) 06:42, 19 December 2018 (UTC)

Is there a link for this book "Ganguly, Deadly Impasse 2016"? Cuz the reflink leads to the bottom of the wiki page so I can't check the source. If you could add the page number for the 1st ref that'd be good too. Otherwise ALT0 is good to go. Vincent LUFan (talk) (Kenton!) 09:49, 23 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi User:Vincent60030 thanks for your kind feedback. yes, there was a link already, but I have added a more precise link in the article based on your comment. The book 1 is linked to Google books version and leads directly to the page with the said information. This book's google book version doesn't have the page number listed, I have added "Chapter 4" there, so as to help the reader with more precise information. D Big X ray ᗙ  10:04, 23 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Ping User:Vincent60030 since last ping failed  D Big X ray ᗙ  10:04, 23 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Symbol confirmed.svg alright ALT0 good to go! Vincent LUFan (talk) (Kenton!) 10:05, 23 December 2018 (UTC)