Talk:Pakistan Air Force/Archive 1

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Once more, references please

There is no use shouting at the top of your voice. If you have something to say, please substantiate it with proper references. Otherwise, kindly do not waste everyone's (and especially your own) time. Cheers! chem1 15:55, 12 July 2006 (UTC) indians couldnt fly straight even if thier lives depended on it..

dubious claims on an independent source

I had to tag the following line "Independent observers credit PAF with a three to one kill ratio." as dubious cause I couldn't find any "independent observers" with source saying a 3:1 kill ratio. --Idleguy 09:51, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Do you need a personality bigger than Chuck Yeager or Lt Gen Charles Horner to verify the claims, come on man grow up. Do some research yourself or atleast google for something for God's sake.

Paf squadrons

I have information about each squadron about when they were raised current location and fleet. Please tell me in place of article i should put them —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Sulaimandaud (talk • contribs) 07:21, 3 April 2007 (UTC).

Pakistan Airforce day

Isn't Pakistan Air Force day is being held on 7th of September. While 6th of Sep is for army. §Sulaimandaud 10:46, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

How many C-130s?

How many C-130s does the PAF currently operate? The chart shows 30, but the logistics section says that after the PAF acquires 6 new C-130s, the number in service will rise to 12. Somehow I doubt the number currently serving is that low. Someone please fix the figure in the logistics section, thanks. Zaindy87 20:18, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

You'd better ask Pakistani wikipedians about your matter.--NAHID 18:10, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

A few corrections...

The missile system being acquired is the SPADA not SPYDER. The SPYDER SAM is Israeli and is also being acquired by the Indians. The MISTRAL is a navy system and is not a airforce asset.Keysersoze25 02:56, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Paf saab2000.jpg

Image:Paf saab2000.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 20:53, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Womenpilotspaf.jpg

Image:Womenpilotspaf.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 21:48, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:PAFSherdils.jpg

Image:PAFSherdils.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 17:02, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Paf saab2000.jpg

Image:Paf saab2000.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 21:06, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Shenyang J11B in the PAF?

I sometimes drop by and read about the PAF and usually somethings change gradually.One day it was written that the PAF is gonna receive 120 J-11Bs and the next day that information was removed.Is the J-11B rumor true? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chadaface (talk • contribs) 03:16, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

I doubt it if only because Russian still has (in theory)some say in who China could reimport that design to. Given Russia's profitable relationship with India, they would most likely do everything to block the sale. Whether China would respect its license agreements or find a way to creatively interpret them to allow J-11Bs to Pakistan is anybody's guess at this point. I do keep hearing persistant rumors about Pakistan getting second hand Mirage-2000s from France to replace some of its aging Mirage III aircraft. Anyone able to confirm that?216.181.47.130 (talk) 20:23, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:IAFshotdown.PNG

The image Image:IAFshotdown.PNG is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --18:03, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

F16's fitted with nuclear weapons in 1989

The book "Deception: Pakistan" claims that Pakistan fitted F16's with nuclear weapons in 1989. ( Martin | talk • contribs 04:22, 31 October 2008 (UTC))

The way things are

I like the PAF. The only AF in any muslim or muslim-dominated country that can -and had fight- , but thee way things are I have great doubts about its ability for further aircraft procurement, training & maintenance. I'm talking about economy here. Is Pakistani economy strong enough to finance its excellent AF? 1. How much money does AF spends on procurement, training & maintenance of its airfleet? 2. Is it enough? 3. How many hours the pilots have in training per month? 4. Does PAF pay the pilots well? (Pakistani standard of course) 5. What about the pay for everybody else in PAF? Thanks! Rad vsovereign 18:31, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Almost a year later and frankly the answer is yes, the Pakistani's are able to procure more aircraft and finance the AF. They've just started mass producing their first ever top grade JF-17 joint fighter jet with China and have a few other deals slowly coming in.

And Pakistan is not the only Muslim country with an AF, maybe you've missed the Saudi's they have decent equipment, Turkey (though secular, increasingly being more Muslim) has a decent AF and Algeria's is not too shabby. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.194.21.39 (talk) 15:30, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

don't forget egypt. they probably have the best air force in africa. Cheese1125 (talk) 00:15, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

Chuck Yeager

Attempts have been made repeatedly to add Chuck Yeager's account of the aerial battle during 1971 war. His account cannot be considered to be a reliable one because a) it contains several inconsistencies b) it is his personal account and quotes only PAF officers and hence cannot be considered to be neutral c) the second point becomes more important considering the fact that his grudge against the IAF, especially after it destroyed his Beechcraft, is well documented d) not a single major, neutral war historian has stood by Yeager's account. As a matter of fact, apart from Pakistani forums, Yeager's account of the war is barely documented reflecting its credibility. Therefore, any attempts to insert Yeager's account of the 1971 war would be reverted. The current paragraph contains material from several independent sources. --Incidious (talk) 23:53, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Poor proofreading

Please put your article through the spelling checker! This article is riddled with grammar and spelling errors. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.164.195.240 (talk) 08:41, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Hi, mate. I know this response is a belated, however, if you spot any errors, please feel free to correct them yourself. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia put together by the contributions of Internet users just like yourself. It is not a commercial organisation and does not pay people to put articles together, or to proof them before they are uploaded. As such, we are reliant upon people who read the articles to fix up errors that might arise. If you are unsure how to edit an article. Please take a look at WP:HOW. Cheers. — AustralianRupert (talk) 02:57, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Why Indian sources for PAF kills/losses?

Why are the PAF kills and losses attributed to Indian sources or Indian websites (like ORBAT), which are obviously biased against Pakistan? Sources on PAF kills and losses should be non-Indian. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.152.32.250 (talk) 05:43, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

J-10B (FC-20) not yet in PAF's Inventory

Please don't count your chickens before they have hatchehd. J-10B (FC-20) should not be put under PAF's current inventory list. It can be mentioned in the "The Future" section. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.167.70.97 (talk) 18:39, 24 May 2009 (UTC) Don't be so racist, or ill kill break all your eggs, stupid indian

Please put a disclaimer on J-20 photo stating that it is artist rendering, it gives the impression that it is an actual photo. Otherwise, please delete the photo.

In need of a major clean up

I'm sorry, but this article is complete and utter crap. Literally half of what's in there is uncited. How is it this is allowed to pass? IMO, anything with a citation tag should be deleted until a reliable source for the info can be found. I'm not accusing...oh, okay, I am. I think most of this article is mostly wishful thinking and lame prideful national boast on some Pakistani users' part. Anyone else agree that this article needs a major overhaul? If so, I'll get to work on trimming down a lot of the uncited stuff. SoulBrotherKab (talk) 00:47, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Agree, perhaps consider the cited history info could be moved to a History of the Pakistan Air Force. MilborneOne (talk) 18:52, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Whatever works. This article is too long, and almost completely made up. If we did something similar to the US Air Force article that these people have done to the PAF article, it would be full of secret UFO flights, super special jets that have been worked on, laser weapons, and space planes. Essentially what I'm saying is that this article is ridiculous. SoulBrotherKab (talk) 22:34, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Okay, I went ahead and just deleted pretty much everything that had no citations. I guess sooner or later some PAF fan is going to come back and undo it all, but for people that don't care either way, please help keep this article as straightforward as possible and not get cluttered up with the unsourced or made up crap. Anyone that has a problem with what I did let me know.

P.S. to PAF fans...I don't care. I don't want to hear it. If you want something included HAVE A CITATION READY. Thanks. SoulBrotherKab (talk) 22:51, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Please note just having a citation is still not an open door it must also be relevant, notable and all the other good things. MilborneOne (talk) 11:39, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Of course. But just right now I'm worried about the overt bullcrap. Once I get that done, then I'll go back and comb some of the less noticeable things out. Or even better, if you find something I missed, go for it. I'm new to the whole Wikipedia editing thing and I'm not an expert, or even that knowledgeable about the PAF. But I went ahead and started editing this article because 1) builds experience and 2) is glaringly bad. SoulBrotherKab (talk) 13:35, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Okay, I have a problem with the "The Future" part of the article. It apparently more than just text. There's a whole table of aircraft in there that doesn't actually show up. Why? SoulBrotherKab (talk) 13:51, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for clearing up the code, MilborneOne. I was able to delete the procurement section that I originally wanted to get rid of. As it was just a buncha wishful thinking on the part of some PAF fan. SoulBrotherKab (talk) 14:39, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

All "Mirage V" entries should be changed to "Mirage 5", according to the Dassault website the designation is the number "5" not the Roman numeral "V".--Hj108 (talk) 13:15, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

If that's the case, then go for it. SoulBrotherKab (talk) 15:25, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Ha, whoever made the edit to the picture caption of three aircraft, good job in catching that. I don't know how I missed that it was a MiG-19 instead of a F-86 Sabre. I should have considering IMO I'm good at IDing fighters. SoulBrotherKab (talk) 22:11, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Indian Sources

For the 1971 section I have sourced from the autobiography of a famous american test pilot who first hand witessed the wreckage of all indian aircraft downed. Indians please do not replace with indian sources. My source is as neutral and authentic as it gets!

That is the usual hue and cry: "No Indian sources!". Well, I've added numerous Pakistani and Western sources. And neutral? That American pilot, called Yeager, asked USA to invade India just because the IAF destroyed his Beechcraft plane during '72 war. Please, Chuck Yeager's account is a joke. Any person can write whatever he wants. And Yeager's only claim to fame was his sound-barrier breaking stunt. We cannot rely just on one source BS. No notable western historian has ever documented Yeager's account. --Incidious (talk) 05:07, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

While I agree Yeager does have reasons to bare a grudge, his fame is well deserved. His World War 2 service record alone deserves honoring, particulary his shooting down 5 enemy fighters during a single enagagement in 1944. And as for what you calously refer to as a "stunt", certainly breaking the sound barrier is routine now, but many pilots died in the attempting what Yeager accomplished. So crticize the man for his biases, but show some respect. Neither you or I are likely to acomplish as much in our entire lives put together than what Yeager did before he turned 30.151.207.244.4 (talk) 14:23, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

References, please

Instead of ranting about the incident you can help everyone by giving references to third party/neutral sites/literature where these 'fairy tales' have been discussed. I have personally seen Indians hotly disputing this incident but have not found one single neutral reference which disputes it. But I do accept that the IAF kicked PAFs asses in the 1971 war. No doubt about it. All the neutral sources indicates so as well.chem1 13:38, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Where do you people learn to talk like that ?? I don't need references, the Pakistanis who claim a MM Alam guy saved them during the war do.

Go get a western source to substantiate the claim, get the pics of the debris MM Alam's "ace" kills, in case you did'nt know he said he shot a few planes and radio pakistan was running his "great military achievements" before he even did land, the verification never happened.

The Pakistan govt never speaks of either any of this outside of their country, neither have they officially tried for an "ace" status for that MM Alam guy.

Get the facts and come talk to me, before then the MM Alam guy is just a fabrication of a Pakistani force which lay devastated in a war and needed an urban legend to save their face. Freedom skies 13:26, 8 July 2006 (UTC) The fact that the Indians here talking about M.M Alam in such a way shows me he has struck fear in their hearts.24.90.163.84 03:14, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Do you need a personality bigger than Chuck Yeager or Lt Gen Charles Horner verify the claims, come on man grow up. Do some research yourself or atleast google for something for God's sake —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wasiimabbas (talk • contribs) 15:47, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Issues with "1965 India-Pakistan Rann of Kutch Border Skirmish"

This section needs attention:

No credible sources are listed.
The tone of the section is highly un-encyclopedic and hints POV. For example, "..pilot lowered his aircraft's landing gear (an indication of surrender)".
Contradictory - "..much to his amusement and surprise, the Indian pilot lowered his aircraft's landing gear (an indication of surrender) and was forced to land at an open field near Jangshahi village." So, it first suggests that the concerned pilot voluntarily lowered his aircraft but later on says that he was forced to surrender.

--Nosedown (talk) 20:53, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

This section has been sorted out and the above criticisms have been addressed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.152.63.216 (talk) 08:34, 26 May 2009 (UTC) Source is this UK based website http://www.ejection-history.org.uk/Aircraft_by_Type/OURAGAN/ouragan.htm "..pilot lowered his aircraft's landing gear (an indication of surrender)". or lowered his aircraft's landing gear (an indication of surrender) and was forced to land at an open field near Jangshahi village." its meaning remain the cowardly act of the pilot,,that cant be denied. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.155.96.4 (talk) 17:24, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

What?, NO pictures?

come on man put up some PAF pictures up....it looks boring without it....people need to see an example. the INDIAN AIR FORCE page has plenty of pictures. put some up please why did you have to write indian air force in all capitals tents of the box above will be treated as your nickname and link automatically to your user page. If checked, the above markup will be used for your name when you sign with or ; including any Wiki markup, links, or other valid formatting that it i (talk) 16:30, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Number of combat aircraft mentioned in the lead paragraph

I'm not getting 620 from the cited source. Could someone check that this number is correct? Thanks! Susfele (talk) 00:12, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

It's high. Especially compared to the count given in the List of aircraft of the Pakistan Air Force article - which is very well cited. I'm inclined to believe the individual breakdowns given there which puts the total count of combat aircraft more in the neighbourhood of 475, give or take 3. - Jonathon A H (talk) 12:46, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

The source indicated in the lead (globalsecurity.org) says 371, so I have gone with that. A second source (aaj tv) says 320, but that was in 2007 and even they indicate no more than 400 aircraft by 2015. Green Giant (talk) 13:30, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

IS THERE ARE DENTIST IN PAF? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.159.193.5 (talk) 08:53, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

PAF role in averting an Israeli attack on Kahuta

I suggest PAF involvement in averting an Israeli air attack on Kahuta nuclear facilities during the 1980s be written too. See Israel–Pakistan relations#Israel hostility towards Pakistan (Jalal0 (talk) 17:26, 9 January 2011 (UTC)).

1971 Pakistan/India War

I'd like to suggest that the section on this page on the 1971 War be cut way down. Considering there is already a whole page on just this subject, I don't understand why the article gives so much specific info - and editors are continually adding to it. Suggestions? Ckruschke (talk) 13:18, 26 January 2011 (UTC)Ckruschke

Engagements of the PAF with the IAF

I came across the article according which alleged engagements between the Israeli and Pakistani air forces took place during the different wars of Israel, when allegedly Pakistan sent volunteering pilots to support the Arab armies which were in war with IDF. The article proclaim a fantastic outcomes of these supposed engagements, that is, according the article the Israelis suffered many of their aircrafts being shot down by Pakistani pilots while the IAF just couldn't give a fair fight and its pilots were amazingly outclassed by the PAF pilots. The problem is that all sources given in the article come from Pakistani military/governmental sites/journals or from sources which rely and mirror them. The claims made in this article, in regard for the alleged engagements between PAF and Israel's air force -are exceptional by themselves. According to Wikipedia exceptional arguments must be backed with exceptional sources and these given in the article are not only not exceptional, they are not even standing in the standards required for one source to be considered a reliable source. There are no western RS which support the history depicted in this article in regard to the Israeli air force, the arguments made in this article are just outrages-change it now, or back them with exceptional reliable sources and save the need for WP boards involvment. --Gilisa (talk) 10:01, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

China gives 50 jets to Pakistan for free

China will give Pakistan 50 JF-17 Thunder with more advanced avionic's for free. http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/20/world/asia/20pakistan.html?_r=1&emc=eta1 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.118.168.184 (talk) 12:54, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

uncited change in the number of planes

[| the edit ] seems to be uncited . the reference text states that the number of aircraft be 383 acc. to 2010 data. Editors are requested to review and update the same. --Dℬig XЯay 21:15, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

Complete and Total Fairy tale

No offense but half the things on here are made up and don't even relate to history and this article needs a MAJOR CLEAN UP

for example during the kargil conflict no PAF planes were used to shoot down any IAF planes one MiG-27 was lost to engine failure the other MiG-21 which was piloted by Ajay Ahuja was shot down by a militant who had a shoulder fired FIM-92 stinger no F-16's shot down any IAF planes and that chuck yeagar report is CRAP i checked the source for it and it isn't even real i'm surprised this article hasn't been edited by anyone with half a brain

There is so many holes and errors in this article plus the lack of any reliable sources or references it seems that a 5 year old kid wrote this article from scratch there is way to much hyperbole and the writing syntax makes it seem the PAF has the best pilots and the best planes (Which they don't) and the articles on the indo pak wars is highly biased with made up crap and doesn't even relate to any history

i'm asking for help to clean up this article and to actually find some reliable and true sources — Preceding unsigned comment added by Buklaodord (talk • contribs) 23:06, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

'SUPPORT' most of the content in the article is taken from forums blogs and other self-published sources (Wikipedia:Reliable_sources#Self-published_sources_.28online_and_paper.29 ) for eg www.PakDef.info . They dont fall under the category of Wikipedia:Reliable_sources. Editors must have a look on these issues. --Ðℬig XЯaɣ 17:44, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

If you feel a source is obviously unreliable (forums, blogs) - delete it; mark the ones you aren't sure about with an {{rs}} tag. If this leaves unsupportable text, either delete it, or mark it with a {{cn}}, or its section with a {{refimprove}}, etc. (Hohum ^@) 18:50, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

I just searched the edit page for forums and blogs and found none. (Hohum ^@) 14:54, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

'AGAINST' - If the original poster has problems with the article's content and references, why doesn't he post any specific examples? As far as I know, PakDef.info has only been declared non-RS by those who support Indian sources, not any neutral party - interesting.

--Hj108 (talk) 12:47, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

File:JF-17 background Mirage 5 ROSE foreground.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:JF-17 background Mirage 5 ROSE foreground.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) 12:42, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

No credible and RELIABLE link/peoof pretaining to last paragraph of 1965 conflict

Please take note and do the needful.Expected Quality of wikipedia cannot be compermised. Regards and well wishes — Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.122.21.2 (talk) 08:25, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

File:PAFF-86s.jpg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:PAFF-86s.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests January 2012

What should I do?

Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.

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.

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 17:50, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

File:SeaFuryT61 Pakistan 1948.jpg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:SeaFuryT61 Pakistan 1948.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests January 2012

What should I do?

Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.

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.

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 19:07, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

I can't see infobox in the editor

Hey everyone. I was trying do a little edit in the infobox of this article but couldn't locate the infobox's code. can someone guide me on this? In most articles it's on top. But I couldn't see it. Thanks.
M Younis 20:18, 12 February 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mysoomro86 (talk • contribs)

The infobox in this article is transcluded from Template:Pakistan Air Force sidebar. You need to edit this template to make the changes appear in this article's infobox. --SMS ^Talk 20:32, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

lending help

admin i hav pictures of PAF warplanes and destroyed indian warplanes of 1965 and 1971 war and even the wrechkege picture of an IAF searcher drone shotdown in 2002. how can i giv u these pictures? plz tell me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 182.185.6.244 (talk) 09:02, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

You can upload images at Wikipedia or at Wikimedia Commons and add them here by following Image guideline. --SMS ^Talk 19:48, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

Protection

Due to the current edit war I have semi-protected the article, it would help if users can discuss the requested change and gain consensus for changes or otherwise, thanks. MilborneOne (talk) 12:28, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

(edit conflict)Thanks for protecting, but just a note (so IP user may not get it wrong): it wasn't a content related edit war, rather reversion of disruptive edits that added content copied from the article Muhammad Mehmood Alam. Alam already gets a mention in the article, adding his biography repeatedly is disruptive after being told not to do so. If that was a content related edits that I objected, I never would have reverted this much. --SMS ^Talk 12:36, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

Ok I was wrong, though the content addition was disruptive but my reversion of it again made it an edit war. --SMS ^Talk 12:58, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

Understood, time for you to walk away and leave this to the other regular editors to handle. --Dave ^{♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫®} 14:41, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

Dead link

During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

http://www.strategycenter.net/research/pubID.48/pub_detail.asp/
- In Pakistan Air Force on Mon Jul 17 15:33:47 2006, 404 Not Found
- In Pakistan Air Force on Thu Jul 27 00:50:06 2006, 404 Not Found

maru (talk) contribs 04:50, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

44/ The News - Link is dead. Find article here instead: http://www.defence.pk/forums/pakistan-air-force/53533-airpower-coin-operations.html

Please update this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.185.25.69 (talk) 17:49, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

Edit request on 23 February 2013

‹ The template below (Edit semi-protected) is being considered for merging. See templates for discussion to help reach a consensus. ›

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Air Vice Marshal Farooq Umar Royal College of Defence Studies London:- He was the First and Only Asian student who was Honoured and was Requested by the British to give a Presentation to the Queen of England and the Prime Minister of England( Mrs Margaret Thatcher) regarding “Pakistan’s Importance for NATO” and the Need for Pakistan to rejoin the British Common Wealth”. (While in RCDS London 1982). Operational Combat Record :- In order to defend our motherland AVM Farooq Umar has fought many Major and Minor battles as a Thorough Bred Combat pilot. He defended Pakistan against India in the battle of “Biar Bet” in the “Runn of KUTCH”After that in Kashmir Operations and the Battle of Akhnur near Jammu, followed by Active participation in the Indo_Pak war 1965, and Indo-Pak war 1971, as well as the Arab-Israel war 1973. (Air Defence Operations only) ^[1] Tahir97m (talk) 06:39, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

Not done If you can find a reliable source that confirms this information, I will grant your edit request. Camyoung54 talk 14:36, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

This is his Website, may be official or not! Try if you could find the concerned content there! Faizan (talk) 13:55, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

Nationalism

It seems that silly, pathetic nationalism has taken precedence over the desire to put forward factual, neutral and accurate information. Time and again, information from multiple, neutral sources is systematically removed and replaced by Chuck Yeagre's account. Chuck's account is not backed by a single credible war historian and the fact that it hasn't documented outside Pakistani media proves it. Please, only add information from credible sources. The only thing at stake here is this article's credibility. This is an encyclopedia, not some Pakistani media article. --128.211.201.161 (talk) 04:12, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

Why is Pakistani Media not reliable? Is there a blanket stereotyping here? Earlyriser10 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 10:46, 20 November 2011 (UTC).

Why is Pakistani media not reliable...? AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!! (121.45.25.238 (talk) 11:52, 26 September 2012 (UTC))

Why? Because its not a third party source. Too often nationalism trumps objectivity. A source from a third party without a vested interest in the discussion will always trump sources with a built in bias. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.241.127.11 (talk) 03:20, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

PAF logo usage

I want this image File:Pafbadge.png to be used as a logo for Pakistan Air Force sidebar. Last year I edited the sidebar and added this image as PAF's logo but it was later removed. After removal I once again read it's license as is it free/non-free to use and found it Ok to use here, at-least here, anyone may discuss this issue at this talkpage if he/she else also think that if this image is fair to use.

REGARDS !!

Farhan Khurram (talk) 08:19, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

I am not sure why it was removed. I have added it back. -- SMS ^Talk 13:26, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Ok, so WP:NFCC#9 explains why it was removed. -- SMS ^Talk 10:08, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

Blacklisted Links Found on the Main Page

Cyberbot II has detected that page contains external links that have either been globally or locally blacklisted. Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed, or are highly innappropriate for Wikipedia. This, however, doesn't necessarily mean it's spam, or not a good link. If the link is a good link, you may wish to request whitelisting by going to the request page for whitelisting. If you feel the link being caught by the blacklist is a false positive, or no longer needed on the blacklist, you may request the regex be removed or altered at the blacklist request page. If the link is blacklisted globally and you feel the above applies you may request to whitelist it using the before mentioned request page, or request its removal, or alteration, at the request page on meta. When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags. The whitelisting process can take its time so once a request has been filled out, you may set the invisible parameter on the tag to true. Please be aware that the bot will replace removed tags, and will remove misplaced tags regularly.

Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:

http://www.airforce-technology.com/news/news107407.html
Triggered by \bairforce-technology\.com\b on the local blacklist

If you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.

From your friendly hard working bot.—cyberbot II ^Notify_Online 11:44, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

Resolved This issue has been resolved, and I have therefore removed the tag, if not already done. No further action is necessary.—cyberbot II ^Notify_Online 19:35, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

AIRCRAFT LOSSES IN 1971 WAR

The following is missing, how many Aircraft PAF managed to shot down. I found following link can somebody please add it in the article. http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/IAF/History/Misc/Loss1971.html http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/IAF/History/1971War/Appendix3.html

Sign to allow for archiving. Darkness Shines (talk) 06:50, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 29 May 2014

‹ The template below (Edit semi-protected) is being considered for merging. See templates for discussion to help reach a consensus. ›

This edit request to Pakistan Air Force has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Please add the logo of PAF 2.50.253.86 (talk) 12:24, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

Not done: Vague requests to add, update, modify, or improve an image are generally not honored unless you can point to a specific image already uploaded to Wikipedia or Wikimedia Commons that you would like included on this article. Please note that any image used on any Wikipedia article must comply with the Wikipedia image use policy, particularly where copyright is concerned. Thanks, --ElHef (Meep?) 12:49, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

Page Flagged for cleanup

(i) Many of the claims associated with the article is disputed and seems to be written from the point of view of the author (ii) Many of the references cited in support of the claims are sourced from partisan websites or posts by individuals with no cross verification or citations from reliable sources

Examples : One aircraft was identified as a US AWACS and the remaining five were recognized as F-18 jets of the US : Positive identification is not possible with the aircraft type, F-18s are used by the USN and will be launched from the sea

awarded for downing nine fighters,[57] five in a minute,[58][59][60][61][62] of the Indian Air Force in air-to-air combat. : All references (except award) cites partisan sources or blogs

Reverted to original version by Topgun ignoring comments in talk page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Deepsikha (talk • contribs) 22:47, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 19 April 2015

‹ The template below (Edit semi-protected) is being considered for merging. See templates for discussion to help reach a consensus. ›

This edit request to Pakistan Air Force has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Account of the 1965 air war is highly inaccurate to state PAF recorded superior kills on ground. From start of hostilities to the end Pakistan Air Force proved its superiority to the world by outclassing the enemy in every op. On sep 1 1965 just 5 days before war happened the first encounter between four IAF Hawker Hunter and two older PAF F86 Saber aircraft. All four IAF planes were shot down. Western journalists called it a complete sweep against a larger opponent, a sweep matched only by Israeli dominance of Arab skies two years later. PAF performance was praised throughout the world.

The ground attacks annihilation came the night PAF struck nearly the entire IAF fleet of Mig 21s on the ground.

Gnat aircraft termed Saber slayer is also highly contested. More Gnats were shot down for each Saber loss.

Skybolt747 (talk) 12:33, 19 April 2015 (UTC)

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. Edgars2007 (talk/contribs) 14:41, 19 April 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 30 May 2015

‹ The template below (Edit semi-protected) is being considered for merging. See templates for discussion to help reach a consensus. ›

This edit request to Pakistan Air Force has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Size of Aircraft fleet:
608 aircraft^[2] 14.139.160.230 (talk) 00:01, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

Done (by someone else) -- Orduin ^Discuss 22:17, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

Edits by Zexonas

From User talk:Faizan

This article has factual discrepancies. The article was corrected of dead links and added more independent researched numbers. Ironically the article has become more non-neutral to a user by your rolled back edits. Are more independent research papers giving out figures not acceptable than websites with no referenced figures? ^[3]1971 war witnessed the most action by PAF yet it has the smallest space given? It makes me wonder. You rightly said "Wikipedia is written by people who have a wide diversity of opinions, but we try hard to make sure articles have a neutral point of view" yet I see it more as Pakistani side of view. 2008 air alert:- You edit the article and write "...after Indian Foreign Minister Pranab Mukherjee threatened Pakistani President" and yet provide the reference where it is reported as hoax.

I am amused by the explanation given out to roll back the edits as being neutral which itself either suppresses the information or gives out only one side of the view. That being said I am undoing the roll back for the neutrality of the article. Zenoxas (talk) 10:15, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. Regarding the edit, I in fact restored the figures from the concerned Wikipedia article on the Indo-Pakistani War of 1971. Further discussion to take place at the article's talk. Opening a thread there. Faizan (talk) 10:24, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Zenoxas is unilaterally changing the losses of the IAF in 1971. He replaced a figure 130 (a claim made by PAF) with 54. My point is that these figures are purely "claims" and they need to be cited as such. Replacing the Pakistani claims with another source would not be a good option. The edit also cited official website of the IAF. Faizan (talk) 10:33, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Faizan please read the sentence which I have corrected before going gung-ho. At the end of the war, the Indian Air Force claimed that it had shot down 94 PAF aircraft (including 54 F-86 Sabres) compared to 44 to 54 IAF aircraft losses These are the figures stated by IAF. Also referenced article was cited. The number 130 was Pakistani claim which was incorrectly inserted to the Indian claim. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zenoxas (talk • contribs) 10:53, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

@Zenoxas: I have modified and amended the statement to include the Pakistani claims. Faizan (talk) 10:58, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Independent research, conducted after the war reported 29 PAF aircraft lost including 10 F-86s left on the ground in the East compared to 59 IAF aircraft lost. Only the figures from Eastern theater of war has been sourced picked rather than the whole sector of war. Suppression of information or incorrect figure taken from the cited source. Zenoxas (talk) 11:07, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

It's not "source picking" but rather it says that "Independent research" was specifically conducted in the eastern theatre where most of the fighting took place. Faizan (talk) 11:39, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

@Faizan: When writing about PAF and its history of 1971 war one cannot simply omit loss of PAF aircraft during action in different sectors of war. Also the referenced article is wrongly stated justifying the edit. Zenoxas (talk) 12:03, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Faizan is rolling back the edit of sub article 2008 air alert: in such a way to imply that the event has occurred, removing the important information that it was a hoax making the article factually incorrect and non neutral.^[4]^[5]^[6] "...after Indian Foreign Minister Pranab Mukherjee threatened Pakistani President." Zenoxas (talk) 12:10, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

I am not removing anything, in fact, I have clarified here that the call was hoax and not the PAF order. Faizan (talk) 12:19, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Of course after two roll backs.. Zenoxas (talk) 13:40, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Faizan Wrong Figures on PAF 1971 War Violation of Wikipedia policies @ WP:FAKE As per as the Indo-Pak War of 1971 Air War Section Neutral Claims is mentioned with Neutral Source. 65 IAF aircraft were lost (54 losses were admitted), perhaps as many as 27 of them in air combat. Pakistan lost 72 aircraft (51 of them combat types, but admitting only 25 to enemy action). Of the Pakistani losses, at least 24 fell in air combat (although only 10 air combat losses were admitted, not including any F-6s, Mirage IIIs, or the six Jordanian F-104s which failed to return to their donors). But the imbalance in air losses was explained by the IAF's considerably higher sortie rate, and its emphasis on ground-attack missions. On the ground Pakistan suffered most, with 8,000 killed and 25,000 wounded while India lost 3,000 dead and 12,000 wounded. The loss of armoured vehicles was similarly imbalanced. This represented a major defeat for Pakistan. ^[7] as per as Indo-Pak War of 1971 this same would be written in the Pakistan Air Force 101.62.250.81 (talk) 18:05, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

obvious gap in article

Nothing on formation in 1947 and then up to 1959. GraemeLeggett (talk) 08:02, 22 August 2015 (UTC)

Partial description of role in 1971 war. Indian air force barely suffered any losses in the initial Pakistani strikes and later dominated the skies throughout the war. Sssinha (talk) 09:09, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Pakistan Air Force. 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/20061105001826/http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/IAF/Books/Review-Airwar65.html to http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/IAF/Books/Review-Airwar65.html

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: 18 January 2022).

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} 17:38, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on Pakistan Air Force. 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:

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: 18 January 2022).

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} 21:56, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Pakistan Air Force. 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 http://web.archive.org/web/20120112204823/http://www.thenews.com.pk/daily_detail.asp?id=202665 to http://www.thenews.com.pk/daily_detail.asp?id=202665

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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: 18 January 2022).

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} 08:27, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Pakistan Air Force. 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:

Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.ainonline.com/news/single-news-page/article/saab-2000-aewc-prepares-for-duty-16661/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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: 18 January 2022).

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} 16:27, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Pakistan Air Force. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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: 18 January 2022).

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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:48, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 8 April 2017

‹ The template below (Edit semi-protected) is being considered for merging. See templates for discussion to help reach a consensus. ›

This edit request to Pakistan Air Force has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

I am requesting the editor to edit the portion of number of aircraft in pakistan air force. this is because there are 1,032 aircraft but it is written 973 aircraft. It even says in the description that PAF operates 1,032 aircraft. so please change number of aircraft from 973 to 1,032.

The PAF employs approximately 65,000 full-time personnel (including approximately 3,000 pilots) and currently operates 1,032 aircraft. this is the reliable and verified source from pakistan air force.

i will be greatly thankfull. The Hasnain Aslam (talk) 10:19, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Rivertorch^FIRE _WATER 13:49, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 34 external links on Pakistan Air Force. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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: 18 January 2022).

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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:16, 4 September 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Pakistan Air Force. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Corrected formatting/usage for http://uk.encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_781531179/indo-pakistan_wars.html
Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?i=3482821&c=EUR&s=AIR
Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?i=4572173&c=EUR&s=AIR
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080919152156/http://www.missilethreat.com/missiledefensesystems/id.20/system_detail.asp to http://www.missilethreat.com/missiledefensesystems/id.20/system_detail.asp
Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?i=4478934&c=FEA&s=SPE

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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: 18 January 2022).

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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:25, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 7 February 2018

‹ The template below (Edit semi-protected) is being considered for merging. See templates for discussion to help reach a consensus. ›

This edit request to Pakistan Air Force has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Number of active JF17 is now 100, the 48 in article is a really old nr which should be updated! 77.40.157.56 (talk) 10:13, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Adamgerber80 (talk)

https://thaimilitaryandasianregion.blogspot.com/2018/01/100th-jf-17-fighter-built-for-pakistan.html

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/acm-at-rolling-out-ceremony-of-100th-jf17.536289/

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made.. These are blog pages or defence forums and are not acceptable reliable sources here on Wikipedia. Adamgerber80 (talk) 14:30, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 19 March 2018

‹ The template below (Edit semi-protected) is being considered for merging. See templates for discussion to help reach a consensus. ›

This edit request to Pakistan Air Force has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Please i want to edit this page .I assure you i will contribute the best. Abc16174 (talk) 06:00, 19 March 2018 (UTC)

Not done: this is not the right page to request additional user rights. You may reopen this request with the specific changes to be made and someone will add them for you, or you can wait until you are autoconfirmed and edit the page yourself. DRAGON BOOSTER ★ 06:43, 19 March 2018 (UTC)

Updates Request in Pakistan Air Force

The source of Aircraft quantities in Aircraft Current Inventory Section are of 2017 article, now it should be revised by new updated 2018 article. Here is source https://www.flightglobal.com/asset/21905/waf/ Mtkhan1989 (talk) 07:00, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 25 July 2018

‹ The template below (Edit semi-protected) is being considered for merging. See templates for discussion to help reach a consensus. ›

This edit request to Pakistan Air Force has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

1-star Officer to 1-star Air Officer change 1-star Officer to 1-star Air Officer Mr sikandar (talk) 19:56, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Adamgerber80 (talk) 00:47, 30 July 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 1 March 2019

{{Closed|

‹ The template below (Edit semi-protected) is being considered for merging. See templates for discussion to help reach a consensus. ›

This edit request to Pakistan Air Force has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Request for New Headline and content under the main "2001–present Counter-insurgency operations in northwest Pakistan"

Pakistan-India Military Standoff February-March 2019

The 2019 military standoff between Pakistan and India once again brought the PAF into operational status. On 26 February, twelve Mirage 2000 jets of the Indian Air Force (IAF) dropped bombs on a remote village in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province near the disputed border of Kashmir that India later claimed killed 200-300 Daish-e-Mohamed TerroristsCite error: A <ref> tag is missing the closing </ref> (see the help page). Their primary role is Air Escort. On 26 and 28 Feb 2019, the nearest MiG-29 were on ground at three frontline IAF Bases in the Punjab, with two aircraft at each base dedicated to the top cover of the IAF AWACS, AAR and AEW&C aircraft. No MiG-29 took to the air on those two days. SU-30MKIs did.
The said quote may please be deleted.

--Moitraanak (talk) 12:37, 4 June 2019 (UTC)

Total aircraft number

As per 2019 worldairforces pdf PAF has approx.775 Aircraft https://www.flightglobal.com/asset/26019/waf2014/ and as per the wiki page of Active aircraft of PAF it is 1,011 Aircraft.... Aircrafts of Pakistan Army Aviation and Pakistan Naval Air Arm are not be included in Airforce then why it has been denoted as +1343 Aircrafts?(source/link) Mayank Prasoon (talk) 05:40, 21 June 2019 (UTC)

PAF admission

Hello , I want to know about admission in PAF Sana Honey bunny (talk) 16:02, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

This is not the right place, try http://www.paf.gov.pk MilborneOne (talk) 16:57, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

Incorrect crest/emblem

The emblem used has a number of inaccuracies: 1) the motto being "پاک فضائیہ اسلامی جمہوریۂ پاکستان" in the image and "قوم کے لیے فخر کی علامت", translated to "A symbol of pride for the nation" in the infobox. The correct one should be "صحراست کہ دریاست تہ بال و پر ماست", translating to "Be it the desert or the river, it all lies beneath my wings". 2) The colour scheme is wrong, the only blue on the correct badge is the inner circlet, the outer marginal circlet, the motto and the eagle are all in yellow (not gold), and all elements have red outlines except the eagle which has black ones. The eagle's feet do not face the viewer, they face down and the superimposed star is also incorrect.

Example of correct logo --Shaheer Asghar (talk) 09:05, 25 September 2019 (UTC)

Numerical discipline (for future editors)

So far, the rule that is being followed for numerical values on this page are as follows:

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 will be typed as: one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine, ten

Any numbers 11 or greater will simply be typed as the number value itself.

The idea is to keep a linear cleanliness and easy ability to read in regards to numbering (especially in sections such as aircraft, where aircraft models have heavy numerical usage) and prevent numbers from appearing side-by-side or close to each other with minimal or no separation.

EXCEPTION: When two numerical values——one that is 10 or less and another that is 11 or greater——are mentioned together (e.g. the PAF procured 6 and 34 variants of [aircraft variant 1] and [aircraft variant 2], respectively.), then the value that is 10 or less should also be written as just the number and not the word.

However, if two numerical values that are ten or less are mentioned together in a similar case, then the words (e.g. ten and six, etc.) should still be used.

07:33, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

it was already covered in MOS:NUMERAL Ckfasdf (talk) 12:26, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

Preventing an edit war

@Ytpks896

I am starting a talk discussion on this page as I have seen that we have reached an inconclusive agreement as to our editing on the Pakistan Air Force. I would like to inform you that I am currently in the process of restructuring and overhauling this page and I have no intentions of starting an edit war. Your constant refusal to cooperate with me and consistent accusations of vandalism are unprofessional given the circumstances.

Xeed.rice (talk) 12:33, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

Reaching out to prevent an edit war

Seeing the situation that is transpiring between a user that dislikes my edits, I would like to reach out to any other users that may feel the same way in the future. A few days ago, I set out to restructure this page as I felt its presentation was not the highest standard of quality (and I am not implying that only I am capable of creating high quality content, but rather that I am attempting to contribute in whatever way possible), and therefore a complete re-haul and reorganization would be needed. I was not finished with this task when a user by the ID of Ytpks896 began to wage an edit war with me and reverted all of my edits on this page as well as others (such as the Pakistan Navy). For anyone that may currently largely disagree with my edits, I would like to declare here that I am not yet finished with my work, including any citations and fixing of information. Once I do finish (if I can get the opportunity to without having my work reverted constantly), I encourage anyone who disagrees to try and improve the work I am doing here instead of reverting the entire thing (as my intention never was vandalism and all edits I have performed before have helped improve other pages greatly). I am responsible for the restructuring of the Pakistan Rangers page before I took on the task of doing the same with the Pakistan Air Force's page as well as the others I had intended to fix in the future.

If the user Ytpks896 is reading this, I once again am requesting you to reach a consensus with me on this talk page and actually give me reasons as to why you are in such a disagreement with me rather than not responding to my attempts at discussion with you and constantly reverting all of my contributions on this page as well as others. Simply accusing me of vandalism without justification is not a solution to the conflict and neither is an edit war.

Xeed.rice (talk) 03:48, 19 May 2020 (UTC)

Official badge

The current file used File:Badge_of_the_Pakistan_Air_Force.svg has many inaccuracies: the colours are wrong, the structure of the eagle is wrong, the slogan is wrong, the star on the crest is wrong and so is the font. There is a more accurate file available File:Pakistan_Air_Force_Official_Logo_White_Background.jpg but the quality of the image decreases in the preview. These files have been replaced with each other a number of times. Should the current (inaccurate) file be kept in use or should it be changed to accurate but lower quality one?Shaheer Asghar (talk) 17:02, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

@Shaheer Asghar: It seems this logo is the correct one (as shown on here, here, and here). It is quite difficult to find logo that is large enough to point out the difference, but the first letter on logo is ص not یـ. And refer to MOS:IMAGES, Pages using seals, flags, banners, logos, or other symbols to represent governments, organizations, and institutions should use the version prescribed by that entity when available. These are preferable to amateur creations of similar quality, including photographs of physical representations of emblems. So, I think it was OK to use lower quality image as long it was the correct logo. Ckfasdf (talk) 08:09, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

Per the official website none of the colors match, and I think adjustment should be made to current file to match any change(s). - FOX 52 (talk) 19:34, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

Numerical discipline (for future editors)

So far, the rule that is being followed for numerical values on this page are as follows:

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 will be typed as: one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine, ten

Any numbers 11 or greater will simply be typed as the number value itself.

The idea is to keep a linear cleanliness and easy ability to read in regards to numbering (especially in sections such as aircraft, where aircraft models have heavy numerical usage) and prevent numbers from appearing side-by-side or close to each other with minimal or no separation.

EXCEPTION: When two numerical values——one that is 10 or less and another that is 11 or greater——are mentioned together (e.g. the PAF procured 6 and 34 variants of [aircraft variant 1] and [aircraft variant 2], respectively.), then the value that is 10 or less should also be written as just the number and not the word.

However, if two numerical values that are ten or less are mentioned together in a similar case, then the words (e.g. ten and six, etc.) should still be used.

07:33, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

it was already covered in MOS:NUMERAL Ckfasdf (talk) 12:26, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

Preventing an edit war

@Ytpks896

I am starting a talk discussion on this page as I have seen that we have reached an inconclusive agreement as to our editing on the Pakistan Air Force. I would like to inform you that I am currently in the process of restructuring and overhauling this page and I have no intentions of starting an edit war. Your constant refusal to cooperate with me and consistent accusations of vandalism are unprofessional given the circumstances.

Xeed.rice (talk) 12:33, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

Reaching out to prevent an edit war

Seeing the situation that is transpiring between a user that dislikes my edits, I would like to reach out to any other users that may feel the same way in the future. A few days ago, I set out to restructure this page as I felt its presentation was not the highest standard of quality (and I am not implying that only I am capable of creating high quality content, but rather that I am attempting to contribute in whatever way possible), and therefore a complete re-haul and reorganization would be needed. I was not finished with this task when a user by the ID of Ytpks896 began to wage an edit war with me and reverted all of my edits on this page as well as others (such as the Pakistan Navy). For anyone that may currently largely disagree with my edits, I would like to declare here that I am not yet finished with my work, including any citations and fixing of information. Once I do finish (if I can get the opportunity to without having my work reverted constantly), I encourage anyone who disagrees to try and improve the work I am doing here instead of reverting the entire thing (as my intention never was vandalism and all edits I have performed before have helped improve other pages greatly). I am responsible for the restructuring of the Pakistan Rangers page before I took on the task of doing the same with the Pakistan Air Force's page as well as the others I had intended to fix in the future.

If the user Ytpks896 is reading this, I once again am requesting you to reach a consensus with me on this talk page and actually give me reasons as to why you are in such a disagreement with me rather than not responding to my attempts at discussion with you and constantly reverting all of my contributions on this page as well as others. Simply accusing me of vandalism without justification is not a solution to the conflict and neither is an edit war.

Xeed.rice (talk) 03:48, 19 May 2020 (UTC)

Changed the archive timeout

To assist with discussion of some disputed issues, I changed the archiving timeout from 20 days to 180 days, and brought back some recent posts. EdJohnston (talk) 18:14, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

Official badge

The current file used File:Badge_of_the_Pakistan_Air_Force.svg has many inaccuracies: the colours are wrong, the structure of the eagle is wrong, the slogan is wrong, the star on the crest is wrong and so is the font. There is a more accurate file available File:Pakistan_Air_Force_Official_Logo_White_Background.jpg but the quality of the image decreases in the preview. These files have been replaced with each other a number of times. Should the current (inaccurate) file be kept in use or should it be changed to accurate but lower quality one?Shaheer Asghar (talk) 17:02, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

@Shaheer Asghar: It seems this logo is the correct one (as shown on here, here, and here). It is quite difficult to find logo that is large enough to point out the difference, but the first letter on logo is ص not یـ. And refer to MOS:IMAGES, Pages using seals, flags, banners, logos, or other symbols to represent governments, organizations, and institutions should use the version prescribed by that entity when available. These are preferable to amateur creations of similar quality, including photographs of physical representations of emblems. So, I think it was OK to use lower quality image as long it was the correct logo. Ckfasdf (talk) 08:09, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

Per the official website none of the colors match, and I think adjustment should be made to current file to match any change(s). - FOX 52 (talk) 19:34, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

I just took notice of the logo's inaccuracy when compared to the official website. There seems to be at least one file that displays a more accurate logo when compared to the current one but the image quality is extremely low. I think for the sake of accuracy, the low resolution file should be used, but then again, the current one is up to quality standards. I will continue to try and find a suitably accurate and high-quality logo but unless the Pakistani government uploads a file of their own work, it is unlikely that I will be able to find one that suffices. Xeed.rice (talk) 21:38, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

UPDATE: I managed to find a logo that is more accurate and closely resembles that of what the official logo looks like on the Pakistan Air Force's official website. With some refinements it's uploaded and I put it up on the front infobox of the page. It seems to be of pretty high quality (given that we don't have any means of accessing official government-produced files) and more accurate than the previous one. Give it a look. Xeed.rice (talk) 22:01, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

Also, feel free to revert the logo change if there's a disagreement. Xeed.rice (talk) 22:10, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 19 March 2021

‹ The template below (Edit semi-protected) is being considered for merging. See templates for discussion to help reach a consensus. ›

This edit request to Pakistan Air Force has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Anmolsahar (talk) 10:44, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Pl correct the link of PAF Commander Zaheer Ahmad Babar it’s was wrongly added in infobox

All set. Thanks. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 10:54, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 26 May 2021

‹ The template below (Edit semi-protected) is being considered for merging. See templates for discussion to help reach a consensus. ›

This edit request to Pakistan Air Force has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Air Marshal Syed Noman Ali, HI(M) is the incumbent Vice Chief of the Air Staff (VCAS), Pakistan Air Force. You have mentioned Air Marshal Syed Noman Ali, HI(M) as the VCAS - he is currently serving as the Deputy Chief of the Air Staff (Support). 122.254.75.190 (talk) 15:37, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. — IVORK _Talk 22:36, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

Wrong Badge

Despite the the correct version of the badge having already been uploaded and in use previously, it has been replaced by a tweaked version of a previous variant that had already been deemed less appropriate to display than the correct one. This current image has it's source listed as the official website https://paf.gov.pk but the image is nowhere on the website. The same issue was already answered on this talk page previously. Considering this, should it be okay to revert back to the previous, correct, image. Shaheer Asghar (talk) 17:34, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

It's there in the website paf.gov.pk on the top left hand corner rotating gif - FOX 52 ^talk! 21:13, 17 September 2021 (UTC)

I have seen that but the details i.e. the motto are incorrect. If the other file was to be edited to show the current colours or the motto corrected on the current one it will fix the problem. The motto on the current one translates to "Pakistan Air Force Islamic Republic of Pakistan in Urdu which is completely wrong whereas the correct one which you can find on official publications such as books, calendars and tender notices display the correct one which translates to "Be it deserts our the sea; all lie beneath my wings" in Persian. Shaheer Asghar (talk) 19:22, 18 September 2021 (UTC)

@Shaheer Asghar: can you type is here in arabic font so i can copy and paste to make the change? - FOX 52 ^talk! 05:28, 19 September 2021 (UTC)

صحراست کہ دریاست تہ بال و پر ماست‎ Shaheer Asghar (talk) 06:45, 19 September 2021 (UTC)

OK should be good now Badge of the Pakistan Air Force (file) - FOX 52 ^talk! 07:43, 19 September 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 10 October 2021

‹ The template below (Edit semi-protected) is being considered for merging. See templates for discussion to help reach a consensus. ›

This edit request to Pakistan Air Force has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

There is a lot of suggestions on this page, which I would like to update. Under Structure/Commands, there is a 1. Western Command also

Under Civilian occupations, there is 2. IT Specialists also

Under Notable personnel 3. Rashid Minhas (Nishan-e-Haider) Hameed Asghar (talk) 12:26, 10 October 2021 (UTC)

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 12:52, 10 October 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 20 October 2021

‹ The template below (Edit semi-protected) is being considered for merging. See templates for discussion to help reach a consensus. ›

This edit request to Pakistan Air Force has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

vice chief of air staff Syed Noman Ali Umar1111111 (talk) 09:01, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. —twotwofourtysix^{(My talk page and contributions)} 10:24, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 9 November 2021

‹ The template below (Edit semi-protected) is being considered for merging. See templates for discussion to help reach a consensus. ›

This edit request to Pakistan Air Force has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Change the number of F-7P interceptors in Pakistani inventory from 135 to <60 as the retirement and conversion programs for these aircrafts are nearing completion. 182.190.206.194 (talk) 17:29, 9 November 2021 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 17:36, 9 November 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 12 November 2021 (2)

‹ The template below (Edit semi-protected) is being considered for merging. See templates for discussion to help reach a consensus. ›

This edit request to Pakistan Air Force has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

change a fierce dogfight ensued and Pakistani JF-17s shot down an Indian MiG-21 to a fierce dogfight ensued and Pakistani f16 shot down an Indian MiG-21^[1] Sachin007kaushal (talk) 09:50, 12 November 2021 (UTC)

Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit semi-protected}} template. BilCat (talk) 10:12, 12 November 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 12 November 2021

‹ The template below (Edit semi-protected) is being considered for merging. See templates for discussion to help reach a consensus. ›

This edit request to Pakistan Air Force has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

change a fierce dogfight ensued and Pakistani JF-17s shot down an Indian MiG-21 to a fierce dogfight ensued and Pakistani f 16 shot down an Indian MiG-21 Sachin007kaushal (talk) 09:42, 12 November 2021 (UTC)

Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit semi-protected}} template. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 10:39, 12 November 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 15 November 2021

‹ The template below (Edit semi-protected) is being considered for merging. See templates for discussion to help reach a consensus. ›

This edit request to Pakistan Air Force has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

"Please change vice chief of air staff name Air Marshal Haseeb Paracha to Air Marshal Syed Noman Ali" ^[2] Umar1111111 (talk) 15:30, 15 November 2021 (UTC)

Done Signed, I Am Chaos (talk) 20:52, 19 November 2021 (UTC)

References

Semi-protected edit request on 16 November 2021

‹ The template below (Edit semi-protected) is being considered for merging. See templates for discussion to help reach a consensus. ›

This edit request to Pakistan Air Force has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

"please change name of Vice chief of air staff Air Marshal Haseeb Paracha to Air Marshal Syed Noman Ali" ^[1] ^[2] Salman Iftikhar (talk) 09:01, 16 November 2021 (UTC)

Done Signed, I Am Chaos (talk) 20:52, 19 November 2021 (UTC)

References

Semi-protected edit request on 5 December 2021

‹ The template below (Edit semi-protected) is being considered for merging. See templates for discussion to help reach a consensus. ›

This edit request to Pakistan Air Force has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Change the number of aircrafts in Pakistani inventory from 816 to 1364. Source: https://www.globalfirepower.com/country-military-strength-detail.php?country_id=pakistan 59.103.196.59 (talk) 15:17, 5 December 2021 (UTC)

It is a huge jump in numbers which dont match the table of aircraft in the article. Probably need a lot better sourcing to change the number and update the matching table. MilborneOne (talk) 16:41, 5 December 2021 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

Shahpar-II UAV.jpg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 18:53, 12 May 2022 (UTC)

Image of Shahpar UAV

File:Nescom Burraq.jpg

The GIDS Shahpar UAV in service with the PAF since ~2012.

Someone has uploaded a decent photo of the Shahpar UAV stated to be in service since ~2012. Worth adding to the article IMO. A noteworthy achievement for the country's engineering industry considering their resource constraints.

It’s not entirely correct about the war in Afghanistan, since all the same, the losses of the Pakistani air force itself and the losses of the Soviet and Afghan forces are based on the data of the Pakistani armed forces themselves, which are biased and biased, and the Mujahideen themselves fought not only against Soviet but also Afghan pro-Soviet troops, since at that moment there was a civil war in Afghanistan in which the USSR took the side of the DRA  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Цйфыву (talk • contribs) 20:51, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

Афганская война 1976-1992

It’s not entirely correct about the war in Afghanistan, since all the same, the losses of the Pakistani air force itself and the losses of the Soviet and Afghan forces are based on the data of the Pakistani armed forces themselves, which are biased and biased, and the Mujahideen themselves fought not only against Soviet but also Afghan pro-Soviet troops, since at that moment there was a civil war in Afghanistan in which the USSR took the side of the DRA and overweighted Цйфыву (talk) 20:52, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

IAF-mig-21-wreckage.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 18:23, 15 January 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 23 August 2023

‹ The template below (Edit semi-protected) is being considered for merging. See templates for discussion to help reach a consensus. ›

This edit request to Pakistan Air Force has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

The redirect name "Chief of Air Staff" should replace with the official office name "Chief of the Air Staff" in the article. 223.123.86.82 (talk) 02:47, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

Done Pinchme123 (talk) 23:37, 26 August 2023 (UTC)

[1] ~~~~

[Flightglobal-2] Flightglobal - World Air Forces 2015 (PDF), Flightglobal.com

[3] ttp://orbat.info/cimh/iaf/IAF_1971_kills_rev1.pdf

[4] ttp://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/wikileaks/8401391/WikiLeaks-hoax-phone-call-brought-India-and-Pakistan-to-brink-of-war.html

[5] ttp://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/pakistan-on-full-military-alert-after-hoax-call-1055705.html

[6] ttp://www.commondreams.org/news/2008/12/07/hoax-phone-call-almost-took-pakistan-war

[7] Https://books.google.co.in/books?id=kya8AAAACAAJ&dq=isbn:1904687261&hl=en&sa=X&ei=DB2YVdXxJo29uASgv7OgAw&ved=0CAoQ6AEwAA

[8] ttps://www.dnaindia.com/india/report-false-notion-of-victory-india-calls-pakistan-s-feb-27-memorial-a-lie-deceit-deception-cast-in-stone-2789799

[9] ttps://92newshd.tv/about/vice-chief-of-air-staff-syed-noman-ali-reviews-aces-meet-2021-1-at-airpower-center-of-excellence

[10] ttps://nation.com.pk/22-May-2021/paf-hands-over-three-jf-17-thunder-aircraft-to-nigerian-air-force

[11] ttps://92newshd.tv/about/vice-chief-of-air-staff-syed-noman-ali-reviews-aces-meet-2021-1-at-airpower-center-of-excellence

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]

[7]

[1]

[2]

[1]

[2]