This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles
This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
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
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.
Fixing of spelling, grammar, and heading issues. Some matters in the page that are not related to the person at all. I’m a family member, I know what’s correct and what isn’t. IcedOutDevil2 (talk) 10:27, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
This likely relates to whether or not to describe their deaths as “martyrdom” or “deaths”. I appreciate that martyrdom is the terminology used by some of the sources, but for me it’s not encyclopaedic, or appropriate for the English-language Wikipedia. Deaths in an aviation accident, while clearly tragic, are deaths, not martyrdom. The position on the Urdu Wikipedia may be different. It’s also worth noting that the term used was “death” until “martyrdom” was introduced on 15/9/22 by a, now-blocked, sock puppet. KJP1 (talk) 14:20, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia certainly isn't going to describe individuals as 'martyrs' in its own voice. That is opinion, rather than fact. Opinion based around specific religious faith, which Wikipedia has no mandate nor authority to impose on anyone. AndyTheGrump (talk) 17:49, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
For the benefit of other editors, this issue was raised at the Helpdesk, where there was a clear view that we should not be describing the deaths as martyrdom, [1]. KJP1 (talk) 18:36, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 26 November 2022
This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.
Change “Death” to “Martyred”. I’d also like to correct the 111 Brigade section. Was not able to correct the previous sections due to persistent and constant disruptive editing. IcedOutDevil2 (talk) 13:00, 26 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
IcedOutDevil2 This edit request is premature. As you can see in the section above, there are editors who disagree with this wording. You need to discuss it with them, and come to a consensus position: once that consensus has been achieved, you may then make the edit request. GirthSummit (blether)13:19, 26 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
IcedOutDevil2 - I’ll have another go at setting out my view:
The late general’s death in a helicopter crash, and the deaths of those travelling with him, are objective facts;
Whether the deaths constitute martyrdom is a subjective opinion;
Wikipedia articles should be written from a neutral standpoint;
For that reason, Wikipedia should use the objective/neutral term “death”, not the subjective/emotional term “martyred”;
I appreciate that some of the newspaper coverage used as sourcing does use the term “martyred”. That’s why I raised the issue at the Helpdesk. There was a clear consensus that Wikipedia should use the objective term.
If, as you say, you are related to the late general, I am sorry for your loss. But editors with personal links to article subjects are often not best placed to write objectively about them. That’s why we have the Conflict of interest guidance. KJP1 (talk) 14:06, 26 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]