Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Peer review/Military history of Pakistan

Military history of Pakistan
Hi Guys, I wrote this article. I want to see what flaws (if any) are in this article. What could I do to improve this article before I submit it for FAC. Thanks

Mercenaryk2k April 18, 2006 6:05 PM

Kirill Lokshin
Nice work with the article, but there are still some things I think would need to be improved before it could succeed at FAC:
 * Lots of very short sections, leading to both choppy prose and a giant table of contents. Instead of breaking things up by war, I would combine neighboring sections into a breakdown by somewhat broader periods.
 * The distinction between the main history and the involvement in foreign conflicts section is unnecessary; I would convert the article into a single chronological chain.
 * The template at the top should have the individual wars removed, as that's redundant with both Category:Wars of Pakistan and Campaignbox Indo-Pakistani Wars. (You might want to add the second one to the appropriate section in the article, incidentally.)
 * I've trimmed the listing of wars and replaced it with a link to the appropriate category. You may still want to take a look at organizing that template somewhat more cleanly. Kirill Lok s  h in 00:08, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

It's a fairly decent article, but it still requires some more work, I think. Kirill Lok s h in 23:53, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Lots of uncited and potentially biased statements scattered throughout the article. Some of the more flagrant examples, all of which need to be cited to specific sources, at the least:
 * "The Pakistan Army covertly trains the Indian based Kashmiri separatists in their war against the Indian Army but on the international stage denies this by saying it only gives them moral support."
 * "Many Afghans had rendered the 19th century Anglo-Afghan border treaties as void and were trying to re-draw the borders with Pakistan and trying to create an independent nation of Pakhtunistan."
 * "Both nations offered important concessions and solution of the long-standing dispute seemed imminent."
 * "The expansion of the Indian armed forces was viewed by most Pakistanis as being directed towards Pakistan rather than China."
 * And so forth.
 * The UN missions table should be converted into a normal prose section.


 * Thanks a lot for your detailed analysis. 1 Question though.  You said that this article has too many sub-sections and I should combine them to somewhat borader periods.  Thats fine.  But should I keep the sub-headers, I mean, should I have a small title, not the ones with equal, but an bold or Italics above certain paragraphs which were once independent sub-sections??
 * For example, lets say I combine all the sub-sections that deal with the military of pakistan in the 1970's, into one main sub-section. Do I just get rid of the headers.
 * 1970's, with no sub-headers underneath it, or 1970's with Baloch nationalist uprising, yom kippur war, black september in jordan, all either bold or italicized?
 * Let me know,
 * Thanks
 * Mercenary2k 5:00 PM April 21, 2006 (UTC)


 * I would remove the headings entirely, since the sections aren't really that long, and headings break up the prose, making the article seem disjointed. Kirill Lok s h in 21:02, 21 April 2006 (UTC)