:::The government may use "occupied" exclusively, but non-government pro-India sources, such as the quoted Indian news agency, may use "administered". For both such Indian-biased sources, "Pakistan administered/occupied Kashmir" includes Gilgit Baltistan, while for Pakistan, the United Nations and other international sources, "Pakistan administered Kashmir" does not necessarily include Gilgit Baltistan. My concern is that some articles on Wikipedia juxtapose the term "Pakistan-administered Kashmir" against "Pakistan-occupied Kashmir", using both to describe India's claims and promoting the former as a neutral/international term for Azad Kashmir-plus-Gilgit Baltistan, when the latter's inclusion within "Kashmir" is a contention directly connected to India's claims (which don't respect Pakistan's administrative separations since 1947).