| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Datta Khel airstrike article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | A news item involving Datta Khel airstrike was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the In the news section on 17 March 2011. |  |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
_without_national_boundaries.svg)
largest drone strikes
editBBC's Ilyas Khan seems to have it wrong this time. 23 June 2009 Makeen airstrike killed >60 and happened in 2009.--Wikireader41 (talk) 19:47, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
Type of drone
editThe note about a Predator drone being involved in the attacks was removed with the comment "I cannot find any reliable source that says this was the drone used; the article on these drone attacks say that another drone has been used in recent times." According to the Telegraph, "militants were killed by US Predator drones," which was the source I used (and then forgot to cite, oops) for the claim. I don't want to add the bit right back in, because I haven't actually been able to find another source, but I'd appreciate thoughts. C628 (talk) 22:58, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
- I don't dispute that it was a U.S. predator drone. My point was that it's unclear whether it was the MQ-1 predator drone that was pictured or the MQ-9 Reaper that the Drone attacks in Pakistan article says has been used more recently. I cannot find a reliable source that says what type of drone it was. I edited the intro [1] to remove any doubt that this was an American airstrike.--Chaser (talk) 23:06, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
- it would be hard to tell which exact drone ( MQ-1 or MQ-9) was used since CIA/US does not provide details on the type of drone or the weapons used.--Wikireader41 (talk) 00:02, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
POV?
editThe term blood money is used in the opening paragraph. Is this not a loaded term? Could the author just say that money was paid? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.70.133.9 (talk) 14:13, 19 March 2011 (UTC)
- Perhaps. My guess is it was added because that's the term the main article on the incident (Raymond Allen Davis incident) uses. Don't see any reason it couldn't be removed if you find it objectionable. C628 (talk) 14:44, 19 March 2011 (UTC)
- In fact, I've swapped the term diyya for blood money, as it's both more neutral and more precise. C628 (talk) 14:48, 19 March 2011 (UTC)
No my point was that it is editorialising - this is an encylopedia. We are not analysing the event. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.70.133.9 (talk) 08:21, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
- The articles, diyya and Blood money (term) don't seem to indicate it's a loaded term.-RDavi404 (talk) 13:29, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
- Blood money I could see as perhaps editorializing, but certainly not diyya, that's the exact term for what happened and I don't see how that comes across as analysis. C628 (talk) 14:30, 24 March 2011 (UTC)