Talk:Inter-Services Public Relations

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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Military history: Asian / South Asia

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

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Asian military history task force
	South Asian military history task force

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 25 August 2020 and 8 December 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): DominatorST.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 00:36, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:PakArmy.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:PakArmy.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations

What should I do?

Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.

If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.
If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Commons Undeletion Request

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 09:57, 15 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Inter-Services Public Relations. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080212130910/http://www.ispr.gov.pk:80/General/ex_dgs.htm to http://www.ispr.gov.pk/General/ex_dgs.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 04:09, 18 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Controversy Section

The Controversy section reference is just based on allegation. 194.61.40.101 (talk) 08:13, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The ISPR have been under controversy, with even foreign sources pointing it out. Please look at the citations, instead of erasing the section. VirtualVagabond (talk) 10:47, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Controversy section and allegation about green entertainment. CPPConstruct (talk) 05:28, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Even foreign sources does not mean that its true, Allegation does not be necessarily true. plus its producing a negative image of our nation, which goes against our national interest. CPPConstruct (talk) 05:35, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I’m not here to work for a national interest, im here to lay down facts. VirtualVagabond (talk) 08:13, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Request for page protection.

I want to bring attention to the concerning issue of persistent vandalism and disruption. The page has been subjected to frequent instances of edits and disruptive behavior, compromising the integrity of the information presented.

Despite efforts to revert these edits and maintain the accuracy, the frequency and severity of vandalism have escalated, necessitating stronger measures to ensure its protection. As such, I request that the Wikipedia page be placed under protection lock to prevent further modifications. Atif ahmad8 (talk) 06:35, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Article issues

This article has a multitude of problems. Of the nine sources on the article (needs more) one is a PowerPoint dead link, three are press releases, and two are IMDB, that is a user generated source. This is approximately 67% (.66666... rounded up) questionable sources.

While the reliable sources guideline is somewhat confusing, under the "User-generated content" subsection switching between generally unacceptable (1st paragraph indicating there can be some exceptions), to the second paragraph including IMDb in "unacceptable user-generated sources".

The bottom line is that the source, along with some examples below (promotional) are "generally" considered WP:INAPPROPRIATE, using wording "it shall be removed.".

The lead and the entire "Overview" section is sourced by the book, The Military and Public Relations, and includes "aims to safeguard the military interests of the armed forces from negative sentiment." This is promotional wording indicative of censorship. The book (and author) are biased so hardly neutral.

"Operations" section: "...as well as strengthening their resolve to accomplish the assigned mission while undermining the will of the adversary." and "...safeguards the armed forces from negative influences...". More indication of censorship

"Principal media network" section: "...about the ingenious strategic arsenal testings". peacock wording.

"Media productions" section: It refutes misinformation by miscreants and foreign enemies, keeps alive the selfless sacrifices of Pakistan Army, and garners support for the military, increasing troops' morale, and develops documentaries and songs to remind Pakistanis of their nation's history and heroes. This is peacock wording indicating censorship. -- Otr500 (talk) 19:17, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]