Talk:Operation Blue Star

src: i.ytimg.com

Video Talk:Operation Blue Star

Casualties

This article is highly opinionated and lacks the neutrality that is required from a wikipedia article. Sounds like a emotionally charged person writing it. Lacks credibility from the onset. -- Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.34.117.5 (talk) 18:41, 5 April 2018 (UTC)

Why is some sick bot bent on denoting the Army casualty figures at 7000 whereas total army deployed was around 1000? Why isn;t Wiki administrator taking any action on them for this repeated agonizing post. I am tired of editing it again and again. There were 83 casualties on army side and total of 350-400 combatants were killed on the belligerent's side. Why is this indigestible to some? Shashank5988 (talk) 16:42, 22 June 2016 (UTC)shashank5988 Just discovered that the casualties from an Indian Army official website is 136 dead. So, the infobox needs to be changed. Please follow the link "http://indianarmy.nic.in/Site/martyrs/home.aspx" and select the "OP BLUE STAR" from the drop down menu. All the names of the dead is listed. Hope there shall be no more controversy on it, as it is an official Indian Army website. Also this shall bring a tag non-legitimacy or a misinformation campaign by General K S Brar through his book. -- Preceding unsigned comment added by All accounts taken (talk o contribs) 08:06, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

I strongly believe the "8000 civilian casualty" figure should be removed. That figure is simply impractical and unsubstantiated. Also, why do you dislike it when I use Indian sources, yet you yourself also use them? JDiala (talk) 22:31, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

There were around at least 5000 Sikh causalities there at Harmandir Sahib complex, The Mangee Sahib, (hotel like building) Guru Nanak Newas (another hotel like building) and 83 other buildings were completely destroyed from the inside with bombs shifting the ceiling fans etc.. you can add up the numbers. Hostages were shot dead and woman and children were killed. Try to think about how many pilgrimages are normally at Harmander Sahib.. 80,000 to 200,000 daily visitors. 3rd party sources (non sikh and non indian) normally state 5000 civilian causalities the US Government states around 20,000 Sikhs were killed in all the attacks during June including Harmandir Sahib and the 150 other Gurdwaras around Punjab that were attacked. Jujhar.pannu (talk) 17:03, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

Alright, show me the WP:Reliable sources. Indian Government sources are *official* sources. There are "third party sources" for virtually every event; however, official sources are the only ones to be used. For example, some third party/independent source may state that the casualties during the September 11 attacks were 10,000, or that it was a conspiracy theory, but these sorts of hypotheses are dismissed on Wikipedia because of WP:Fringe. JDiala (talk) 17:59, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

The problem is of Neutrality, and thus the most fair way is not to judge who is right and who is wrong but to include both sides. This is not a Fringe theory because numerous Governments, eg Australia, UK, Canada, America are saying that the Indian government is distorting what happened, why do you think there was a media blackout? A Fringe theory is much much much more low level. Please read WP:Fringe Jujhar.pannu (talk) 19:22, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

Do you have sources for the claim that numerous governments believe the Indian government is distorting what happened? The media blackout was for an obvious reason; if Sikhs in the Punjab knew what was going on at Amritsar, they would have went there by the thousands with weapons and the casualties would have been much higher. The army you despise so much did this to prevent more Sikhs from dying. JDiala (talk) 00:08, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Contradictory figures. At one point the article says that casualty estimates run as high as 5,000 and later in the casualty section it says it's 20,000.

though some independent claims run as high as 5000.

Some suggest that civilian causalities numbered 20,000.

Need to choose one as the maximum figure or say something along the lines of "some claim that actual casualties were in the thousands." Ileanadu (talk) 17:34, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

intentions are a hard thing to prove since it requires you to 'weigh and judge' contradictory statements by those in charge, rather than picking or choosing which side to represent pass both sides and all statements made by the same person and what their true motive was. and your claim that thousands would have gone is also needing evidence, WP needs proof not conjecture and speculation, it seems it is drifting from facts to speculation of intent and reason which does not seem helpful 70.69.172.92 (talk) 23:55, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

Maps Talk:Operation Blue Star

Lede

Why are there so many citations? (re: WP:MoS etc) _Fortuna ^{Imperatrix Mundi} 18:11, 6 December 2014 (UTC)

src: static.dnaindia.com

Refs

src: i.ytimg.com

Links modified on main page

Please review the links modified on the main page...--^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 21:08, 4 June 2016 (UTC)

src: www.lhouse.co

Special Air Service

The Accuracy dispute template is funny, everybody know that, the SAS advice the Indian government. Put that template in fact is a not neutral POV. Why some sources are good for some articles but not accuracy for others??-BBC, The Guardian, etc,etc--152.170.24.22 (talk) 19:49, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

src: i.ytimg.com

Indian military casualties

When I last edited the article the casualties cited for the Indian military were '83 killed' (with no mention of injuries), however a recent edit by User:Materialscientist changed that to '700 dead'. That figure seemed unrealistically high to me but I saw his edit mentioning it was restoring the old figure (although the citation referring to the lesser casualty figure was not removed) so I went to older revisions and did see the 700 claim. I decided to investigate the casualty figures and could not find any sources using the higher claim, but I found multiple sources claiming '83 killed, 220 injured' (the Indian government estimate). As to avoid an edit war I suggest using the Indian government's estimate but making it clear that it is the Indian government estimate (to attempt to maintain neutrality). EDIT:I see that this was being discussed in the page already, and that it's a heated issue. - Sunomi64 (talk) 11:48, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

Source of the article : Wikipedia