Template:Did you know nominations/Inter-Services Intelligence activities in India

Stability, possibly neutrality

Inter-Services Intelligence activities in India

 * ... that Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence agency supported the Khalistan movement, in order to take revenge against India for its help in liberation of Bangladesh?
 * Reviewed: Dakshayagnam (1938 film), Tata Jagriti Yatra, Under the Tree (film), Garin Nugroho, Dronningegården, Chairil Anwar, Geomagnetic pole, IRAS 17163-3907, Goethe–Schiller Monument (Syracuse), Wales at the 2011 Commonwealth Youth Games, 2012 LinkedIn hack, Consulate General of Germany, Bangalore

Created/expanded by Vibhijain (talk). Self nom at 08:05, 26 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Symbol confirmed.svg Article is long enough.Hooks seems good and interesting.Aye!  ≫TheStrike   Σagle≪   09:42, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Symbol question.svg Can you please correct the hook to "...that Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence agency is accused of supporting Khalistan movement...", the same way this fact is mentioned in the article. Besides the source you have mentioned in the article says this fact a little differently which you might want to look again to correct it. -- S M S  Talk 21:54, 28 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Please have an another look at the source, it clearly says,"the Inter Services Intelligence (ISI) has supported this organization for a long time". And the offline source clarifies the revenge thing. ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛  Talk Email 06:15, 29 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Can you please cite here the relevant text from the offline source for us? -- S M S  Talk 16:24, 29 June 2012 (UTC)
 * You may check it yourself, I have added the link on the article. ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛  Talk Email 17:36, 29 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Ok now that I have checked it, I think it is a case of source falsification besides the South Asian Terrorism Portal doesn't look like a reliable source. -- S M S  Talk 17:16, 30 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Could you please explain how is it a case of "source falsification". The source clearly says that it was to take revenge. ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛  Talk Email 07:52, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
 * The source you have used says: "... the key policy-makers in Pakistan, have a number of incentives to support the Khalistan Movement, either covertly or overtly. These are: To seek revenge against India for its help in creating Bangladesh...", not what you have presented as a fact. -- S M S  Talk 16:37, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I have said that only. ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛  Talk Email 17:12, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Symbol delete vote.svg Incentives do not equal actual support... something like hanging any one who had a motive for the crime without evidence. That is falsification... or WP:SYNTH at the very best. -- lTopGunl (talk) 08:02, 5 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Its a case of WP:IDONTLIKEIT. Jumping in and rejecting the nom will do nothing in your favour. Tell how is this article non neutral. All your concerns have been already addressed. ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛  Talk Email 08:21, 5 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Your comment is only redirected at me and has nothing to do with addressing my objection above. -- lTopGunl (talk) 08:24, 5 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Objection? Everything is sourced. I write what the source says. If it says "alleged", its has been presented as "alleged". If its proven, its presented as proven. ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛  Talk Email 08:27, 5 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Alleged or proven is a debate for later... it isn't even being said in the source SMS pointed out.. that only says there's incentive. -- lTopGunl (talk) 08:30, 5 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Symbol confirmed.svg The did you know nomination looks like an interesting, new fact and meets criteria. I think this can be promoted. 91.203.96.13 (talk) 08:53, 5 July 2012 (UTC)
 * The fact is not even supposedly new, and does not meet the criteria anyway.. it is not in the source and not to mention neutral. -- lTopGunl (talk) 08:59, 5 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Incentive means "something that motivates". Its clear that "revenge" was one of the reasons or which ISI helped the Khalistan movement. ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛  Talk Email 09:13, 5 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I know what incentive means.. but the source says there was incentive, not that they did it. -- <b style="color:#060">lTopGunl</b> (<b style="color:#000">talk</b>) 09:15, 5 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Other sources have been given which proves that they did it. ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛  Talk Email 09:19, 5 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Symbol delete vote.svg I have looked at arguments of top gun and user:mar4d and have decided to change my mind. I think they have good points. It is our duty to see all facts accurately and correctly. If something is disputed, I do not feel right that we promote. Thank you sirs for opening my eyes and working for neutral encyclopedia! I will like to erase my previous comment and replace with this now. My best wishes ... 91.203.96.13 (talk) 12:27, 5 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Symbol delete vote.svg ❌ Several reasons why this should not be promoted. Firstly, this very nomination is an Indian point of view, thus featuring it on the main page when there are counter-views to it would be a core violation of WP:NPOV. Since this is an allegation, it is obviously disputed. You want the real story? Here's what academic sources say, regarding the official viewpoint concerning ISI, and to present the other side:

Bernhard Claussen and Horst Mueller in Political socialization of the young in east and west

This one by Ganguly discusses India's allegations and of Pakistan rejecting them.

Quoting a passage from Sarbjit Johal's book:

Here is another neutral source which clearly says Pakistan has maintained its stance, despite India's contrary claims:

This book by Verinder Grover and Ranjana Arora has the the Prime Minister of India, Indira Gandhi, during whose term the Khalistan movement was at its peak, openly denying that her government blamed Pakistan. This one takes the biscuit and I think there is no room for further comment.

As can be seen from several notable sources presented above, this very allegation itself is disputed. POV-pushing dustbin material like this has no place when it comes to the main page. DYK facts must be presented uncorrupted and free of an inclination towards a single point of view which is categorically refutable and has been rejected. That is obviously not the case with this DYK. I have not yet fully screened through the main article for this DYK, but I am confident that it most likely has the same problems in its content which are inherent in this nomination.  Mar4d  ( talk ) 09:50, 5 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Sorry but all your hardwork goes into waste. I have provided sources which proves the allegations. Simply tag teaming will do nothing in your favour. ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛  Talk Email 09:54, 5 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Stop commenting on other editors.. see WP:AOBF. The comment clearly disproves it even though I don't see how it was proved in the first place. -- <b style="color:#060">lTopGunl</b> (<b style="color:#000">talk</b>) 10:16, 5 July 2012 (UTC)


 * @Vibhijain: Irrelevant and off-topic reply as usual, comment on the content not the contributor for once. The sources I have given are enough to prove that this is an allegation that is widely disputed and the Indian prime minister is denying it too. Sorry, but this DYK is ineligible to be featured, due to WP:SYNTH and factual inaccuracy/falsification issues.  Mar4d  ( talk ) 10:30, 5 July 2012 (UTC)