Talk:Indian Peace Keeping Force

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

↓    Skip to table of contents    ↓

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale. (add comments)
More information about this article... ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.

	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: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion met Grammar: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met Associated task forces (nations and regions): Indian military history task force

This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Sri Lanka Reconciliation, a collaborative, bipartisan effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of the Sri Lankan Civil War. For guidelines and a participants list see the project page. You can discuss the project at its talk page.

Contents 1 LTTE casualties 2 Addition of NPOV tag 3 Edits 4 Civilian deaths caused by IPKF 5 Removed Rapes by IPKF 6 Incomplete and biased 7 Links do not work 8 Contributions of 130.209.6.40 9 wuddup with wiki facts? 10 Special Forces 11 Dispute

[edit] LTTE casualties

There is no mention of LTTE casualties on this page. It almost makes it seem as if the LTTE emerged unscathed from the conflict besides presenting Indian and the IPKF in a very negative way.

[edit] Addition of NPOV tag

An NPOV tag has been added (by me) to the section dealing with massacres. This is because, first the section of th article uses a number of weasel words, with or without intent of exaggeration, in violation of the NPOV policy. Secondly, the reference (ext link) it provides cites one massacre (I am not trying to justify this barbarism) but goes on to claim numerous massacres.Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and not a propaganda tool, please keep this in mind when you write.130.209.6.40 20:00, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

Removed tag as content improved RaveenS 17:17, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Edits

Hi SINHALAPOWEr, You seem to mark some of your edits as minor edits, when they may be thought of as otherwise. Usually, it's safer to err on non-minor side; there's no real harm of not marking a real minor edit as a minor one. Usually, if you add something new, or reverted a deletion, think twice before marking it as a minor edit. Guideline is at Help:Minor_edit. It says, "any change that affects the meaning of an article is not minor, even if it is only a single word.".

thanks, Greenleaf 04:31, 8 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Civilian deaths caused by IPKF

Re: "Indian People Killing Force", the text seems misleading. Isn't one of the main reasons for the nickname the deaths of Sri Lankan civilians, not just IPKF troops?

For stats on IPKF-caused civilian deaths, see work by the North East Secretariat on Human Rights (NESOHR), for example "Statistics on Civilians Affected by War in Northeast, 1974-2004: Disappeared, Deaths, Torture, Disabled, Arrested, Mentally Affected." January 2005. http://nesohr.org/human-rights-reports/StatisticsOnCiviliansAffectedByWar.pdf?PHPSESSID=

[edit] Removed Rapes by IPKF

The follwing para was removed The number of rapes committed by the IPKF is innumerable. They have scarred the tamil people, by notoriously raping tamil women during their operation, whether young or old. The physcological damage left by them on these young women were immense. Thousand are thought to have been raped during the IPKF occupation. Because no citations yet. Please add back a version of credible citations are found. Thanks RaveenS

[edit] Incomplete and biased

a)it doesnt list out the major operations conducted and there outcome b)order of battle c)what was the role of sri lankan army d)who was incharge of what ,who commanded the IPKF, and the sri lankan army. e)any medals given f)important events setbacks ,achievements, turning points. I have some of that info but primarily from bharat rakshak :-/ I would be uploading that in some time. Any other gud source let me know.

The only thing it has highlighted is the IPKF was a failure and they were a bunch of rapist.I think this page seems to be a propoganda page primarily for LTTE :P. Armybrat 12:53, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Links do not work

Links given do not lead to the article hence asked for cleanup if there is a better tag please mention it.59.144.15.223 13:31, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Contributions of 130.209.6.40

Someone may want to recheck the contributions of User:130.209.6.40 that I have reverted. They do not fit the pattern of vandalism I've been reverting and may have been actual contributions of content. -- Strangelv 18:00, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

There are other, earlier additions by 130.209.6.40 that I am unable to untangle here. -- Strangelv 18:15, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] wuddup with wiki facts?

The LTTE article claims that 24 hours after Oct 5th 1987, the LTTE had killed 167 ppl and 5 IPKF military troops, leading to the end of the Indo-Sri Lanka Accord. It also says that this is what lead to Operation Pawan. This page, on the IPKF, does not mention that - which Wikipedia source is reliable????????? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.157.232.246 (talk) 01:18, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Special Forces

They were also special forces including Sikh Infantry who were the main cadets--DSuran (talk) 03:34, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Sikh Light Infantry was not and is not a part of Indian special forces. IPKF special forces included Paracommandos, MARCOS. Sikh LI was not the main cadet of the IPKF, it was a multi-component force with a number of different units from different regiments, as the article content will tell you. You have tried to introduce this unsubstantiated and blatantly wrong and biased points into the article before. Please read (or reread) the IPKF history sources you may have to ascertain the facts. rueben_lys (talk · contribs) 11:34, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

For those editors who are unfamiliar with the situation, but might wish to help out with a third opinion, it might be helpful to produce a source, so that they could come up to speed? Thanks, Elonka 15:15, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Here is a source on Indian Special Forces. The website is Bharat-rakshak.com. Here's another.If you have access to a library, there's "Directory of Special Forces-Ray Bonds, David Miller.2002. ISBN:0760314195 rueben_lys (talk · contribs) 16:33, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Dispute

I'm still having trouble understanding what exactly is being disputed on this article? Is it simply on what forms of the name to use? --Elonka 20:13, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

The dispute (I think) is with making generalising and/or factually incorrect statements, eg that Sikh LI were part of the special forces deployed within the IPKF, or that the Sikh LI was a seperate entity and belligerent force seperate from the rest of the troops of the IPKF (and the Indian Army). See for example Harkirat Singh, where the attempt has been made to include and emphasise the fact that he is a Sikh although that is not his encyclopaedic notabillity and moreover does not do anything to improve the article. Similar statements and comments (soundbites, if you like) has been attempted on other articles eg Indian National Army, Indian Army etc (not neccessarily by DSuran). A very common example is the inclusion of the statement "60% of it was Sikh" which has been done in a number of articles in the past. I dont have a problem if the edits were substantiated, but they have not been so.I tried to verify these and have found such statements to be in most (if not all) instances incorrect. Moreover, the emphasis has always been on the Sikh identity and a "lion's share of the fighting burden being bourne by Sikhs", which is were the Sikh Nationalism issue comes in. This will in turn be drawn out to (or has been drawn out from) the idea of Sikhs being wronged against by "Indians". I am entirely naive on the latter topic and would not at all wish to make any comments, but the edits here do nothing to improve the articles I am contributing to, and moreover is being converted to a platform for making incorrect and propagandist statements. rueben_lys (talk · contribs) 21:13, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Well, if you see something wrong, go ahead and fix it.  :) If someone disputes your changes, then take it to the talkpage. If the dispute escalates from there, or you see an editor making a "sweep" of biased changes, then first contact that editor to tell them to cut it out, and if they don't, then alert an administrator about who is doing it, and provide a few diffs to show that someone is being uncooperative. Generally however, administrators aren't going to get involved in fixing content, unless there's an egregious policy violation (such as potential libel about a living person). For most other content disputes, we rely on the steady flow of editors coming through Wikipedia, to fix things as they see 'em.  :) --Elonka 21:19, 12 June 2008 (UTC)