Wikipedia:Peer review/Terrorism in Kashmir/archive1
Terrorism in Kashmir[edit]
For over 2 decades now, Kashmir remains as one of the most heavily militarised zones on planet Earth. With more than a million troops of both India and Pakistan deployed in the region and several more terrorists targeting innocent civilians, Kashmir might well be the most dangerous region in the world. I would like fellow wikipedians to review the article and make necessary changes to improve its content. IncMan 13:37, May 27, 2005 (UTC)
- Well it's just my opinion, of course, but the article loses its neutral PoV in the first sentence with the word "vicious". Not to seem trite about it, but all warfare is vicious to varying degrees. It probably goes without saying that terrorism is decidedly vicious by its very nature. Anyway, as this article is a current and on-going event, it needs careful checking for neutrality. It probably also needs an appropriate warning template at the top. Other than that, I noticed a slightly odd formatting tendency with spaces before the commas and periods in some places. The page could also use at least one category. Overall it looks good, as well as informative. Thank you. :) — RJH 15:49, 27 May 2005 (UTC)
- As suggested, I have removed the word vicious from the 1st sentence. Well, one can say that the article is not neutral as it critices the militants in certain sections. However, I have tried my level best in maintaing neutral viepoint from both Indian and Pakistani prospectives on the terrorism. I have also tried to correct the odd format of the article. Thanks :-] IncMan 17:49, May 27, 2005 (UTC)
- Could you present the "Facts on Terrorism in Kashmir" section a bit better? It looks like a straight copy-and-paste job at the moment. Harro5 22:27, May 27, 2005 (UTC)
- I have copy edited as far as ==Recent Peace Efforts==. When does the "recent past" start in this context? --Theo (Talk) 11:42, 28 May 2005 (UTC)
- 1) It needs a copyedit. The language could be improved slightly. 2) The lead-in should be two-three paragraphs. 3) Have you asked for Pakistani opinion on the article to certify that this is not a POV? See Wikipedia:Wikipedians/Pakistan. This is a contentious issue and it best not be a POV if it has to get featured. =Nichalp (Talk)= 11:40, Jun 2, 2005 (UTC)
- At least the article is better than that on Kashmir. I have tried my level best on representing Pakistani viewpoint also . --IncMan 13:55, Jun 21, 2005 (UTC)
- I don't like the Re-Evaluation section; the whole thing seems POV. I suggest removing it. Ben Standeven 04:13, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- Removng it is not a good idea. Prefer if it is edited. --IncMan 12:57, Jun 21, 2005 (UTC)