Talk:Balochistan Liberation Army

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Comment[edit]

Also the flag of Balochistan. last time i visited ne site containing flag of Balochistan I think there was a five sided star in the blue portion instead of the sun. Can any one check it out. And there are also many gramatical mistakes in the article. OmerKhetran 14:26, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]


baluchistan is the fourth and the largest province of pakistan. this is a terrorist organization that takes its root from the extortion by the bugti, mari and mengal sardars, who, while being cruel feudal landlords, claim republican ideology. they kill with impunity and rule like medieval lords, over life and limb of their subjects. once the extortion by these sardras was disallowed, they started this terrorist campaign against their own people, on the lines that taliban of pakistan perpetrated on the people of khyber pakhtoonkhwa province. these sardars have not allowed schools, colleges and are against allowing women out without purdah, not for religious reasons but for feudal oppression. they bury women alive if accused of immodesty and suspicions of liking someone other than allowed by their sardars; there was a case of four young women buried alive when they were accused of flirting with some men in the village; they have not allowed any development in the province as they mobilize their 'troops' against any such moves. BLA is now playing in the hands of foreign intelligence agencies trying to destabilize pakistan. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.27.184.202 (talk) 17:55, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Edit by User:subash.chandran007[edit]

About this revert : [1], I'm interested to know what's the reason to revert?Thank you--Alborz Fallah (talk) 17:13, 18 May 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 116.71.150.49 (talk) 10:16, 23 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Removed some POV[edit]

Ok, I have edited the parts of this article which could be perceived as POVs. If anyone has any objections regarding my edits please let me know. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Morara (talk • contribs) 01:33, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Long Live Humanity. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.16.156.69 (talk) 04:03, 27 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The article is not about what we believe to be true, it's about summarising facts. The term "terrorist" is appropriate to use in contexts such as "such and such government has listed the BLA as a terrorist group (footnote)." Use outside that context is controversial, and I think most folks would support your removing it when not linked to a specific fact or official declaration as terrorism by a mentioned party. Meanwhile, the category Category:United Kingdom Home Office designated terrorist groups is totally appropriat e becaust the UKHO did indeed declare the BLA a terrorist organisation. That doesn't mean they are, but neutral persons must agree that the UKHO did indeed declare such. Make sense? MatthewVanitas (talk) 04:24, 27 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
A couple of issues with this article:
  • the external links reads like an advert for all things Balochi, ive trimmed it down
  • I've altered the use of the words terror to something less POV and left it where cited and appropriate.Lihaas (talk) 08:04, 25 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Tag why[edit]

For reasons known only to himself Mar4d has reverted the change from terrorist to militant, which is strange as not so long ago he was insisting on Lashkar-e-Taiba that WP:LABEL was important enough to not call them terrorists[2] So the article is obviously not neutral and as such I have tagged it. Darkness Shines (talk) 14:19, 1 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • As Mar4d has not responded to this thread I have self reverted the POV tag and restored my edit. Darkness Shines (talk) 14:14, 2 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of references[edit]

So when I take time out to find a reference I do not expect it to be removed. Would our tag teaming couple please explain as to why the reference for separatist has been removed? Darkness Shines (talk) 11:00, 11 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ignore, I looked at the wrong diff. Darkness Shines (talk) 11:02, 11 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Edits by User:Faizan[edit]

User:Faizan repeatedly keeps modifying the article by inserting the "terrorism", "terrorist", etc., labels with relation to BLA, thus promoting WP:POV of the current Pakistan's government. WP:TERRORIST has a clear guidance when such POV terms can be used - i.e., only with attribution to the POV holder(s). Nevertheless, Faizan keeps reverting any attempts to replace the term with more neutral wording.

Of note, even the lede of Osama bin Ladin does not resort to the "terrorist" brand.

Thanks for your comments. kashmiri TALK 15:14, 17 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Edit revert[edit]

Can you explain the reasons of you reverting my edits to the article? As far as I am concerned, nothing relevant was dropped out of the article except multitude of headers and repeat information contained in a linked article. Can you specify what you didn't like about the edit? kashmiri TALK 12:49, 27 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Well the talk page of the article was a better place for this. Most probably you are talking about this edit? Such large-scale edits should be made with consensus. You blanked a section named "Claimed attacks", which covered an important terrorist attack on the Quaid-e-Azam residency. I reverted due to this "Unexplained section blanking". My regards. Faizan 12:57, 27 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I shortened the section to practically one sentence. For example, saying that "BLA claimed responsibility for the attack" was superfluous as the talk is about attacks by BLA (else there would be no point of discussing the event in the article). Other sentences just copied the sources with the description of the attack (flag replacement, etc.) - unnecessary for the article on BLA when there is a separate article on the attack itself.
There is no need for consensus when edits don't involve significant loss of information. See WP:BOLD for policy details.
I have a feeling you reverted my edit just because you don't like me editing this article altogether. kashmiri TALK 14:11, 27 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
BTW, I think we disagree as to the definition of "large-scale edits". These are all in all 13 lines of a start-class article! kashmiri TALK 14:24, 27 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Well, There is a separate article for the attack, but we will need its summary here too, because BLA was it preparator. Besides I am not concerned with the "13 lines", "large-scale changes" can be made with 5 lines even. I am not talking about "large-line changes". You are Welcome to restore your edit, but the unexplained section blanking is not acceptable. My regrets for the revert, but please restore the section if you edit the article, I am not your enemy, or this is not that like I dislike your editing. My regards. Faizan 12:09, 28 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
It wasn't "unexplained" - the reorganisation of the article was mentioned in edit summary: [3]. Apart from that, the article still lacks key information on its subject the Baloch Liberation Army: its genesis, history, messages/appeals, leadership succession, weaponry sources, reception in the province and country, etc. Devoting 1/3 of the article to a single attack (out of several dozens carried out by the group, and one that already has an entry on its own) is completely out of proportion IMHO - see WP:RECENT for an excellent guidance. I will think of ways to restore the article so as to preserve newer edits.
Thanks for moving the discussion here. Regards, kashmiri TALK 13:37, 28 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Assessment comment[edit]

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Balochistan Liberation Army/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

All the postings on this page are based on facts and are truth. A Wikipedia user from Balochistan.

Last edited at 19:16, 6 December 2007 (UTC). Substituted at 08:54, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

BLP[edit]

I removed a bunch of BLP violations, which were promptly restored, why restore BLP violations? 2A00:11C0:63:794:0:0:0:7 (talk) 14:20, 16 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Balochistan Liberation Army. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:19, 20 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Balochistan Liberation Army. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:24, 24 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Use of Unreliable Sources with Unverifiable and unsubstantiated claims in the article[edit]

The article mention sources such as http://balochwarna.com/about-us/ which claims itself to be the media wing of the BLA & BRA (secessionist groups in Pakistan`s Balochistan province). Most of their claims are unsubstantiated and they are known to highly exaggerate their claims. One such claim from the article is "On 21 December 2015, BLA militants bombed and then shot and killed 16 soldiers, wounding an additional 13 soldiers in two attacks in Marwar and Chamalang." which can`t be substantiated from other verifiable, scholarly and reputable sources. Please remove such unsubstantiated claims from the article especially the ones made by such websites from the article. Please stick to scholarly and authentic sources. I would have done that myself but I believe there is some sort of a restriction on editing the article.

Kindly look into it and remove such unsubstantiated and unverifiable claims made from sources which themselves are highly biased in nature and goes against Wikipedia`s policy of using scholarly sources and maintaining NPOV. 91.212.53.252 (talk) 13:14, 1 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Pashtun[edit]

please change ((Pashtun))s to ((Pashtuns)) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:541:4500:1760:cc28:f543:ffcf:3f5e (talk)

 Done, thanks! ‑‑ElHef (Meep?) 18:11, 13 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 14 March 2019[edit]

In "Area of operations", country India is named without citing source. This is in violation of Wikipedia guidelines "Please provide reliable sources if appropriate. All information in Wikipedia articles should be verifiable from reliable sources which are independent of the subject". 2405:204:5608:C83:CDAB:27EB:6391:E7BD (talk) 18:20, 14 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

 Done DBigXrayᗙ 19:46, 14 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Allies- India??[edit]

Can someone please explain, how PAKISTAN is mentioned ally of BLA, as it's only the accusation by Pakistan, but there's nothing as such mentioned here and India is clearly mentioned as the Ally of BLA without any proper proofs and facts. I'll strongly recommend to modify or delete it. Lovegargasya (talk) 21:29, 9 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 4 December 2021[edit]

103.138.162.10 (talk) 08:07, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

state have no avidance about BLA and his leaders

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Cannolis (talk) 08:47, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Terrorist organisation designation[edit]

I can’t find any official EU documents mentioning BLA as a terrorist group. The sources in this article are two news reports. This is also inconsistent with this Wikipedia list https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_organisations_designated_as_terrorist_organisations_by_the_European_Union. Dachooga (talk) 10:37, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Replacement of country section in collapsable bar with state allies and state opponents[edit]

Kindly use this | allies = State allies

Hyrbyair Marri's Involvement[edit]

The article seems to contradict itself when it comes to Hyrbyair Marri's involvement, the brother of a former leader of the BLA. In the introductory section, the article states, "Some have reported that Hyrbyair Marri has been the group's leader since 2007. However, in an interview in 2015, he denied having any contact with the group." However, under the section "Terrorist designation", it states, "However, the U.K. harbored Hyrbyair Marri, leader of the BLA, as a refugee, despite Pakistan's protest."

To reconcile this conflict, I decided to rewrite the latter sentence to "However, the U.K. harbored Hyrbyair Marri, suspected leader of the BLA, as a refugee, despite Pakistan's protest." Without knowing anything about this topic, I think it may be better to be vaguely correct than precisely wrong. IrateSpecialist (talk) 08:42, 1 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Shakur ullah[edit]

Boluchistan to duki He was the yesterday in absent he is not about 103.203.88.207 (talk) 16:14, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Shakur ullah in the absent yesterday 103.203.88.207 (talk) 16:15, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes[edit]

description Shakur ullah in the present he is not present talk about it 103.203.88.207 (talk) 17:43, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Balochistan_Liberation_Army&oldid=1215360191"