Talk:Dhofar Rebellion

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.

Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.

Additional information and associated task forces:

	This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked To fill out this checklist, please add the following to the template call: `<!-- B-Class-1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points have appropriate inline citations. -->` `\|B-Class-1=yes/no` `<!-- B-Class-2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain obvious omissions or inaccuracies. -->` `\|B-Class-2=yes/no` `<!-- B-Class-3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. -->` `\|B-Class-3=yes/no` `<!-- B-Class-4. It is free from major grammatical errors. -->` `\|B-Class-4=yes/no` `<!-- B-Class-5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. -->` `\|B-Class-5=yes/no`
Associated task forces (nations and regions):
	British military history task force
	Middle Eastern military history task force

[edit] (Imperial) Iranian committment

The numbers given for Iranian forces involved seem excessively large; over three times the strength of the Sultan of Oman's army committed to the campaign. Perhaps the verbatim quote ought to be given. Did the figure perhaps refer to the total number of Iranian soldiers who were "rotated" through Dhofar over several years, rather than the maximum strength at any one time ? HLGallon 02:50, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Balance?

PFLOAG known widely as "adoo"? This wouldn't happen to be the Arabic word "adw", or "enemy"? If so, slightly one-sided... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.95.69.221 (talk) 13:50, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Quite possibly; when I started the article, I wasn't aware of the term's connotations. I relied heavily on British military sources, which used POV terms but presented matters generally in a neutral style. I wanted to get away from the Boys' Own World style of the article on the Battle of Mirbat, which is so warped I don't want even to touch it. HLGallon (talk) 21:33, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

There is a clear problem in relying exclusively on British military sources. Even by removing POV statements, you cannot get to the truth, just because of the structural bias of the sources. I'm about to finish a research paper on the subject that exposes the British propaganda on the war (ie. the bullshit about "hearts and minds" which in fact was pure repression, also the characterization of the PFLOAG as "atheist" even though it was merely secular). I don't feel comfortable editing the page though, because I'm not a wikipedian and because of the "no original research" policy of wikipedia. Perhaps I could send you my paper so that you have an idea of other sources on the subject? JB157.150.192.237 (talk) 16:37, 10 April 2008 (UTC)