Talk:1999 Pakistani coup d'état

message: Coups are fascinating and this article could greatly benefit from more input. Hopefully it will eventually be as descriptive and detailed as the 2002 Venezuelan coup d'état attempt. ~ Rollo44 22:34, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: They're not that fascinating. --NEMT 04:31, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: But they are certainly more complex than this, I imagine.  This is practically a stub.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.235.89.73 (talk) 09:58, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  More details and information needed 

message: Its mentioned wrong here in the article that General Musharraf launched a coup against the government of the then Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif, rater PM Nawaz Sharif launched the coup and in response to that General Musharraf launched a counter-coup. I am adding POV template to the page to discuss the neutrality of the article. --Sarmad (talk) 18:56, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Does the Pakistani PM not have the power to dismiss the Chief of Army Staff and replace him with whomever the PM choses? 92.232.36.159 (talk) 17:14, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: You are right Pakistani PM has the power to dismiss the COAS but what Nawaz Sharif did on 12 October was not just a simple dismissal of COAS. He also tried to dismiss a dozen generals and also not allowing his plane to land in Pakistan. SMS  Talk 09:28, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Must have heard of Self coup. Btw, the military conflict template might still be appropriate as there were a few stand offs between Army and Punjab police. --lTopGunl (talk) 00:31, 13 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Coup or Counter-Coup

message: Like it has been stated above, it should be mentioned that this could be seen as a reactive coup, considering Sharif was about to consolidate all all the power in the P.M.'s office.  As wee, use of a word like "routed" to describe Kargil is obviously biased wording.  It also states that Musharraf went forward with the operation without the knowledge of government, which is also disputed, as well as unproven, so should probably be left out.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.249.185.205 (talk) 06:26, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: If it is sourced, it can be used whether disputed or not. This isn't an NPOV issuesDrew Smith   What I've done 06:01, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Some neutrality issues

message: There are issues all over but the first paragraph of "The Coup" is the most egregious. Nothing is sourced and there are weasel words all over the place ("kangaroo courts" anyone?) This isn't my area of expertise but someone has to know enough about this who can fix it. The neutrality tag will stay until it is fixed. Hammy (talk) 10:30, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed.  Someone with the knowledge ought to fix this.  Nawaz Sharif's name isn't even **capitalized**! 131.107.0.73 (talk) 17:21, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Serious neutrality issues

message: During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!
* http://www.saag.org/papers12/paper1138.html
** In 1999 Pakistani coup d'état on 2011-05-25 06:42:42, 404 Not Found
** In 1999 Pakistani coup d'état on 2011-06-08 23:40:07, 404 Not Found
--JeffGBot (talk) 23:40, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dead link 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on 1999 Pakistani coup d'état. 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:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130919042907/http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2009%5C08%5C09%5Cstory_9-8-2009_pg3_5 to http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2009%5C08%5C09%5Cstory_9-8-2009_pg3_5
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:40, 16 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on 1999 Pakistani coup d'état. 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:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070927194712/http://www.saag.org/papers12/paper1138.html to http://www.saag.org/papers12/paper1138.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:36, 19 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified (January 2018) 

message: Confused as to why the result of the coup seems to entail a timeline of the entire 9 year military dictatorship? Surely only the immediate results of the coup, such as musharraf assuming power and sharifs being arrested, should be in the result section? маsтегрнатаLк 16:49, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Result 

message: I vaguely remember that at the time, one of the justifications/excuses given for the coup was that when Musharraf's place was prevented from landing and ordered to divert, there wasn't actually enough fuel for it to do so.  (I.e. if Musharraf hadn't taken action, the plane would have crashed and he would have been killed).  There is a brief mention of fuel issues in the linked BBC article ("Independent reports confirm that the plane on which General Musharraf was travelling was very low on fuel when it eventually managed to land.") but no more, and no mention of it here.  Is there any more information on this that could or should be included here? Iapetus (talk) 07:54, 16 October 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Plane running out of fuel? 

message: Hello, I looked at the lead and saw some errors in sentences so I corrected them. Also, I was wondering if it is possible to remove some info in the lead because it was getting too long... Ideally we should leave the juicier stuff of the event to other sections because the lead should just cover the gist of the topic... I didn't make any major changes but these are just my thoughts, please review my changes though, thank you. Ronaa22 (talk) 00:58, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Corrected some typos in the lead