Talk:Siege of Lal Masjid

message: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/6288704.stm  I'll let someone who's been working on the page add it. Akubhai 14:22, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cleric is dead 

message: Casualties are a big problem in this article. Some casualty numbers are a few days old when the numbers were still coming in and some are up to date and some are speculation and thus all casualty numbers differ from each other. And these numbers are spread all over the article. It makes it very confusing for the reader to understand how many people got killed. So we need to fix all this. Mercenary2k 16:08, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: has a difinitive total of casualties been given yet? Sue Wallace 22:22, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: article is looking much better now well done Mercenary2k Sue Wallace 00:01, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Casualties 

message: This is to point out that any religious militancy doesn't necessarily got any relationship with Al Qaida as quoted in the Information Box at the top right corner of the page. Thus, I think it leads to dispute of neutrality of the facts. Further, not always European media reports are neutral for describing events and facts about Muslim countries. Muhammad Shoaib 08:31, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes but ISI found letters inside the mosque stating that the Red Mosque uprising was directed by Al Qaeda terrorits Zawahiri and Bin Laden and furthermore 18-20 Al Qaeda terrorists from Egypt, Central Asia went to the mosque to train the students and fought alongside the lal masjid students. And thus Al Qaeda is part of the battlebox. Mercenary2k 19:07, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

text: The references I have cited state they found egyptians, uzbek and central asians. If you can find a reference which disproves that then that fine. This is an encyclopedia and this should not be used as an avenue of showing of our political opinions. Find me a refernence that states that no foreigners were found and I will gladly approve you adding that in into the aritlce Mercenary2k
Basically all references will say what Govt had lied about. Hence they could be even had contact with OBL, what we need is some Govt offical saying it and then some Newspaper quoting him. That is the fun of wikipedia. --- A. L. M. 08:03, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

text: The government will not admit that there were not any foreigners in the Masjid hence on the governments part it is merely an allegation. Merely repeating a lie enough times does not make it proof. :) Shehzadashiq 10:50, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: What are you talking about? The Government already reported that they found bodies of 10 foreigners and are going through the rest. Once the final verdict is in, I am gonna add that into the article whether you like it or not. Mercenary2k 17:34, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Links with Al Qaida 

message: 1. Well written?: Pass
:Although the prose could benefit from a copyedit before going for A-Class or FA-Class, it is definitely good enough for GA-Status.
2. Factually accurate?: Pass
:Is very thoroughly cited throughout.  Good work on this criterion!
3. Broad in coverage?: Pass
:Coverage is extremely broad & quite comprehensive.  No objections here.
4. Neutral point of view?: Pass
:No evidence of bias or advocacy. (just as a side-note, I'd be interested to see whether there were any governments that condemned Pakistan's response to the militants)
5. Article stability? Pass
:No evidence of recent edit-warring on this article.  Although this has been an issue in the past, I get the feeling that it has now subsided.
6. Images?: Pass 
:Those images that are within the article are appropriately tagged with copyright status, and are well-used.
Congratulations.  This article has passed GA! Cheers! Cam (Chat) 17:25, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks, I don't think there were any governments that condemned the attack on the mosque, I'll try to find one but I highly doubt it. --→ Ãlways Ãhëad (talk) 18:19, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: go ahead with the copyedits this is a future FA--TheFEARgod (Ч) 12:19, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, it has potential, but I am not sure if I will be on wikipedia over the summer, so if you don't see any changes in the next 2 weeks or if you don't hear from me, than its likely that I won't respond until September. Feel free to work on it. (Also I keep getting annoyed that they delete the images I put on even though I did my best to find license-free pictures) --→ Ãlways Ãhëad (talk) 01:48, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  GA Review 

message: Dont know how the prose part passed (although there is a caveat above), but i just edited 2 parts with some copy edits. The rest of the article may need to reviewed in this department. Doesn't seem to be poor in a general sense, just Desi English, which may or may not be most legible to other speakers of English.Lihaas (talk) 23:28, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Grammar

message: Can somebody explain the mention of Taliban under the belligerents in infobox? I cannot find any evidence that states that Taliban were involved in the siege. The clerics were pro-taliban and that, I believe, does not mean that they were Tabliban themselves.180.178.149.36 (talk) 04:10, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Taliban involvement in siege

message: Why does it say 60000 under Pakistani Army Strength, for something that is not an large scale multi divisional operation?
141.70.3.106 (talk) 05:53, 15 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Troop Strength

message: Some IP users have been blanking sections of this article. Is this part of some decision I'm not aware of? I'm assuming that these edits should be reverted, and the user page should get a Uw-delete. However, my latest reversions have been flagged as "non-autoconfirmed user making rapid reversions." I'm pretty sure that an anon IP user is less credible than an un-autoconfirmed user with quite a few edits that have been accepted as constructive, but I could be wrong. Could anyone shed some light on this so I don't feel like I'm doing something wrong here? Either way, I'm going to go confirm my account now. WikiSpamIsFun (talk) 06:40, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Mass Anon Blanking

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Siege of Lal Masjid. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070716201848/http://dawn.com:80/2007/07/14/top1.htm to http://www.dawn.com/2007/07/14/top1.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070927233558/http://www.dawn.com/2007/08/18/top3.htm to http://www.dawn.com/2007/08/18/top3.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 03:39, 21 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Siege of Lal Masjid. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070716161749/http://www.dawn.com:80/2007/07/14/top2.htm to http://www.dawn.com/2007/07/14/top2.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090223212603/http://thenews.jang.com.pk:80/updates.asp?id=25443 to http://thenews.jang.com.pk/updates.asp?id=25443
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090223223430/http://www.ambafra-pk.org:80/article.php3?id_article=1190 to http://www.ambafra-pk.org/article.php3?id_article=1190
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080904034504/http://rawstory.com/news/afp/US_backs_Pakistan_s_storming_of_rad_07102007.html to http://rawstory.com/news/afp/US_backs_Pakistan_s_storming_of_rad_07102007.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 03:54, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Siege of Lal Masjid. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive {newarchive} to http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory?id=3367353
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 13:43, 1 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 16:04, 20 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion