Talk:12 May Karachi riots

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the 12 May Karachi riots article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Pakistan Low‑importance

	Pakistan portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pakistan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Pakistan on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PakistanWikipedia:WikiProject PakistanTemplate:WikiProject PakistanPakistan articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article has been marked as needing immediate attention.

Karachi (inactive)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Karachi, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.KarachiWikipedia:WikiProject KarachiTemplate:WikiProject KarachiKarachi articles

This topic contains controversial issues, some of which have reached a consensus for approach and neutrality, and some of which may be disputed. Before making any potentially controversial changes to the article, please carefully read the discussion-page dialogue to see if the issue has been raised before, and ensure that your edit meets all of Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Please also ensure you use an accurate and concise edit summary.

Untitled

To the sysops/senior editors--this is a very hot topic. I put in a block notice on new users/unregistered readers for editing. Is there anything I need to do beyond this?

Abdullahsohail 05:40, 13 May 2007 (UTC) Wasn't the chief justice visit planned from before? and later the MQM decided to take out a rally on the same day. Not blaming anyone but just saying that why does everyone have to act like a child, show-up each other and establish their superiority at any cost. Our City. Oh and the police lay sleeping :P Abdullahsohail 05:40, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not great with Wikipedia, but there's a link here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/5-12 which seems to be a virtual copy of this article. I checked the history and it seems that this one was started first. Mohsin.Siddiqui 07:55, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

the article appropriately cited my contributions when i saw it. not a problem. i think someone wanted to merge it into this one, which i am fine with. however, i had to clean it up as much of the article was unsourced and biased. Chantoke 22:28, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Article start and improvement suggestions

12 may was a massecare not riots, your article suggest that there were some arrests on that day but in reality no one arrested on that day nor until now, — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.114.164.41 (talk) 15:41, 20 September 2011 (UTC) I suggest we should include the pictures of MQM too--Cyberjunkie85 19:22, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The start of the article is too abrupt. A small history should be put in first, then the causalities should be listed under it's own heading. I strongly advise using the article on VT Massacre as a guide for writing this article.

History of MQM and it's terrorist activities should also be provided alongside all the involved viewpoints to ensure all viewpoints are given fair opportunity. 450w 08:32, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

thanks for the suggestions. as the event evolves and more history surfaces from unbiased sources, i will join everyone here in reflecting the reports of the most unbiased news media sources i come across. Chantoke 22:30, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly, the fatalaties could be mentioned in the second or third sentence, instead of the first. Addhoc 10:22, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Good suggestion. I re-worded the introduction a bit. Chantoke 07:27, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Name change?

Perhaps a name change should be made? "Karachi Massacre" seems more appropriate. 450w 08:33, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I can't say I agree with this. Both sides were armed and victims were from multiple political parties. Chantoke 22:30, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Also, don't agree with a name change. Addhoc 10:22, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't agree with name change. I was in Karachi on this day. I saw all political parties with weapons.

Word "Riot" plays down the severity of the incident. That was CARNAGE. Question is not whether all party had weapons, of course politicians were traveling with bodyguards. The fact that MQM did it systematically, and all victims were from opposition, puts a huge question mark on the use of word "riot".

Political Agendas

I think I need to reemphasize that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not an editorial. You can compare people's opinions and editorials, but if what you write is too biased, it is difficult to read and, frankly, distasteful.

Consider Wikipedia the United Nations of information--or Sweden if you prefer. Its main purpose is to serve as a forum from which to create a brief amalgamate of current opinion on a certain subject. Not a forum for argument about who's at fault. Or a forum to start name calling. And it is absolutely not appropriate to delete appropriately cited opinions that do not coincide with yours without justifying why you believe they are inaccurate with appropriately cited sources. There is a standard of professionalism implied even on an open forum like Wikipedia. It is understandable and reasonable to be emotional about current events. Arbitrarily deleting the articles of others that you do not agree with is tantamount to book burning. I understand that there are many Muslim users on this forum that feel that Jamaat-e-Islam should not be implicated in the attacks. That does not mean you can delete the reports by Dutch news agencies or the BBC, or even the New York Times. They are all three relatively unbiased third party observers that have claimed involvement. It takes considerable work to find a reference, appropriately cite it, and include it in an article's formatting.

There are several other very active venues online with which you can participate in if this is your preference. I am going to attempt to clean up the last revisions with carefully cited work. I have contacted an objective 3rd party source to help mediate the discussion. Please do not add your opinion unless you can appropriately cite your reference. Chantoke 21:07, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Peshawar bombing

Has nothing to do with this article, and should be removed. IP198 16:28, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

   Find a reliable source that says so, and it will be. Chantoke 06:57, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mr. Chantoke, find a reliable source that says Peshawar bombing is related to Karachi riots? Please leave the shadow of insanity. Most sources are now confirming that Peshawaw bombing was a terrorist attack with to relationship with riots between secular political parties. BTW, you are bent upon relating apples and oranges here!

Indian bias creeping in....

there are incidents of indian bias being used in this article.User talk:Yousaf465

Yousaf465, I have sincerely tried to be as rigorous as possible in reflecting the international opinion of news organizations in this article. Wikipedia works by building consensus. If you can find objective and credible sources that agree with you, let us know. In the mean time, please stop vandalizing the article or someone more important than me might get annoyed.

And in regard to your suggestion of "indian bias"--every party discussed in this article has at one point or another used anti-Indian rhetoric as part of their propaganda. It's an effective political tool that seems to polarize some Pakistani audiences.

That does not mean these parties have been consistent in their approach to the 'Indo-Pak' issue. The issue is very complex, but has little, if anything, to do with this discussion.

But to be brief, and to confine it to this small corner of the Talk page: one could not logically support any party or group mentioned in the body of this article with the presumption of being 'pro-Indian'. However, this is my opinion and has no place in article text itself. If I did in fact include it, I firmly believe it would debase this article's credibility on Wikipedia, and I am not willing to graffiti the project by including my own relatively ungrounded thoughts. Maybe one day when the editors at the Republic or the New York Times, compelled by my wonderful Wikifications, decide to hire me--perhaps then. But not now, and definitely not here. Chantoke 07:04, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In the early days of this article there was statement being used again and again mentioning that "some "religious party" members clashed with MQM," and the ref mentioned with it described the religious party members as having links with terroist.The ref claimed that they are teeroist for indian.the source in itself was indian.While the MQM blame the rival secular parties for violence.

The summarey is that indians were trying to gain their benefit fro mthese roits and cite this as an example of " religious parties" using violence.

So is the use of indians newspaper sources which are cleariy biased.The indian newspaper i read while in India clearly mentioned every attack as work of "Pakistani elements".User talk:Yousaf465

Hopefully the bias you described is no longer there. I think I removed the link you're referring to out, although you need to be more specific. I did source Indian newspapers in my discussion, but I also used Pakistani, British, American, and European newspapers as references. There's really no reliable way to state a certain country's newspapers are more valid than another's on an international forum like this. And with all due respect--I'm not sure if I'm answering your objection because I can't really understand your English. It seems like you were in a hurry when you wrote your comments. Chantoke 08:13, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mr. Chantoke claims to have a Pakistani Muslim friend assisting him. How ignorant his Pakistani friend is regarding the matters of his home country are bone of contention. In my view, Chantoke is citing false articles for example, he added that sale of steel mill was to a friend of Musharraf. I read the whole article he sourced and no where was mentioned that sale of steel mill was to a friend of President Musharraf instead it mentioned that it was done at a low rate. I am astonished that users are citing false or unreliable articles. For example, some articles are scoops of Indian tabliods! I also see feel-good Indian articles here!

Ya i think so it stand removed.again in a hurry.User talk:Yousaf465

Karachi's violent Past

This section should be removed from this site which is about the riots between armed gunmen of political parties. The international terrorists who have terrorized the secular city of Karachi has nothing to do with this page. Karachi has been prone to ethnical riots but after 9/11, it has been targeted by international terrorists and Kashmiri militants (who has turned their attention to jihad against Pakistan). Karachi is being targeted because of its importance to economy of Pakistan and destabilizing Karachi means destabilizing Pakistan. But this section has nothing to do with riots of Karachi.

According to newspaper interviews with the people rioting, religious strife had a lot to do with the contentions between the 'terrorist' groups you discussed. The purpose of this section is not to attribute blame to a specific religion or secular government, but to place perspective on the rash of violent incidents that have recently plagued the city, religious or otherwise. Please do not delete Wikipedia sections arbitrarily until you have familiarized yourself with the editing process on Wikipedia (ie. press "Page Up" on your keyboard till you see the notice at the top of this discussion page). Unless you can source it, Wiki can't include your opinion on a recent news event. Chantoke 19:00, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mr. Chantoke, rather than asking others to prove, since you added this section, I ask you to prove that the terrorist attacks on the secular city of Karachi has any relationship with the May 12, 2007 riots? All supporters of political parties fighting in this battle did belong to same religion so what type of religious strife are you talking about!

Latest

Can someone add following http://www.dawn.com/2007/06/09/top11.htm in the article. I wish to move the article to "May 12 Karachi riots" because that is how it is reported in press. --- A. L. M. 09:32, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Karachi dose this article make any sense

Dose any of the above make any sense please try and examine the facts and be sure of of what you want o say before putting ink to paper. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Saza125 (talk • contribs) 08:39, 22 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

this is not at all related to this article.

it's seems MQM supporter don't know the rules here! ANP is headquartered in Peshawar, the capital of North West Frontier Province (NWFP)^[1], where Russian-made, authentic Kalashnikovs could be had for about $250.^[2] NWFP is considered the center of the Gun culture in Pakistan. Darra Adam Khel, near the provincial capital, Peshawar, was historically known for manufacturing the Lee Enfield .303. However, the town now produces guns, such as, AK-47, the mini-Kalashnikov, and hand-held firearms, including the James Bond pen gun. A network of manufacturers, middlemen, brokers and transporters can deliver illegally manufactured weapons at cheap rates anywhere in Pakistan. ^[3] The ANP enjoys widespread support among secular Pashtuns. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.103.58.168 (talk) 04:45, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

References

Pl don't remove Npov until

The artlice is ridden of the biased comments, it's seems those have been simply copy pasted here form political party's website. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.103.58.168 (talk) 04:51, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]