Talk:Pakistan Studies

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This topic contains controversial issues, some of which have reached a consensus for approach and neutrality, and some of which may be disputed. Before making any potentially controversial changes to the article, please carefully read the discussion-page dialogue to see if the issue has been raised before, and ensure that your edit meets all of Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Please also ensure you use an accurate and concise edit summary.

This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects:

WikiProject Pakistan     (Rated B-Class) This article is part of WikiProject Pakistan which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Pakistan and Pakistan-related topics. For guidelines see WikiProject Pakistan and Wikipedia:Contributing FAQ. B This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale. (If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.) Additional information This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Article is property cited: criterion met Article has one or more sections including LEAD: criterion met Article is comprehensive: criterion met Article includes some graphics (i.e., pictures or infoboxes): criterion met Article is free of grammatical errors: criterion met High This article has been rated as high-importance on the importance scale. WikiProject Religion (Rated B-Class)   Religion Portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Wikipedia's articles on Religion-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details. B This article has been rated as B on the Project's quality scale. (If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.) This article falls within the scope of the Interfaith work group. If you are interested in Interfaith-related topics, please visit the project page to see how you can help. If you have any comments regarding the appropriateness or positioning of this template, please let us know at our talk page.

Archives

Archive 1 - July 2007 talks

Contents 1 Expansion? 2 Original Research tag 3 Textbooks VS. Disciplinary study 4 Pakistan Studies?

[edit] Expansion?

Any additional sourced material is most welcome :) --TreeKittens 22:57, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Original Research tag

I think this entry merits one. Observe this completely unreferenced, but weighty claim:

Pakistan Studies departments and curricula have been criticized by numerous academics and scholars in Pakistan itself, as well as the west, for propagating jingoist and irredentist beliefs about Pakistan's history and culture.

Who are these "numerous" scholars, Pakistani, Western, or otherwise?

--Kitrus 08:45, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

One phrase doesn't mean you tag the whole article which is in fact referenced. Place a disputed tag at the statement, or even better find a source for it. Prester John ^{-(Talk to the Hand)} 14:06, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

That paragraph cites "Cognitive Dissonance in Pakistan Studies Textbooks: Educational Practices of an Islamic State." Journal of Islamic State Practices in International Law as its source. I have not read the article so I can't verify whether or not that phrase represents fair paraphrasing of the source, but I see no reason not to assume good faith in the editor who wrote it. Would a specific citation for that sentence make it OK with you? You could always use a {fact} tag if that is the case. Thanks --TreeKittens 20:30, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Yes, as far as I think, I saw citations from journals and they were pretty solid. Arun Reginald (talk · contribs) 09:31, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Textbooks VS. Disciplinary study

Most of the Criticism section discusses textbooks in Pakistani schools. This article is about an academic discipline. The former topic has no place here.--Kitrus 08:52, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Hello Kitrus :) I am not knowledgeable in this subject, but if scholarly peer-reviewed sources think that Pakistan Studies text-books are relevant to the analysis and criticism of Pakistan Studies, then we are in no position to argue about that. We paraphrase what reliable sources have said. No more, no less. If you can find sources which contradict this view, then you are encouraged to add that analysis to the article. A similar issue was raised before - see Archive 1. Thanks, and best regards --TreeKittens 19:43, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Pakistan Studies?

As I see it, in the version I started editing on 4th June, there was only one citation from a peer-reviewed source! The topic has been very narrowly described so far. The Study of Pakistan is much more than mere school curricula. Most of the criticisms on curriculum appear to be outdated now. So, that section also needs an overhaul.--IslesCape^Talk 08:35, 5 June 2008 (UTC)