Imran Khan is currently a Politics and government good article nominee. Nominated by Titan2456 (talk) at 01:40, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
Any editor who has not nominated or contributed significantly to this article may review it according to the good article criteria to decide whether or not to list it as a good article. To start the review process, click start review and save the page. (See here for the good article instructions.)
Short description: Former Pakistani cricketer and former prime minister (born 1952)
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Imran Khan article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. This article is related to India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan, which is a contentious topic. Furthermore, the following rules apply when editing this article:
You must be logged-in to an extended confirmed account (granted automatically to accounts with 500 edits and an age of 30 days)
This article is written in Pakistani English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, realise, travelled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.
Imran Khan was a Sports and recreation good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourcedmust be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.
This page is about a politician who is running for office or has recently run for office, is in office and campaigning for re-election, or is involved in some current political conflict or controversy. For that reason, this article is at increased risk of biased editing, talk-page trolling, and simple vandalism.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject University of Oxford, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the University of Oxford on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.University of OxfordWikipedia:WikiProject University of OxfordTemplate:WikiProject University of OxfordUniversity of Oxford articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pakistan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Pakistan on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PakistanWikipedia:WikiProject PakistanTemplate:WikiProject PakistanPakistan articles
This article is part of WikiProject Cricket which aims to expand and organise information better in articles related to the sport of cricket. Please participate by visiting the project and talk pages for more details.CricketWikipedia:WikiProject CricketTemplate:WikiProject Cricketcricket articles
There is a toolserver based WikiProject Cricket cleanup list that automatically updates weekly to show all articles covered by this project which are marked with cleanup tags. (also available in one big list and in CSV format)
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
Imran Khan is part of WikiProject Pashtun, a project to maintain and expand Pashtun-related subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.PashtunWikipedia:WikiProject PashtunTemplate:WikiProject PashtunPashtun articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Conservatism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of conservatism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ConservatismWikipedia:WikiProject ConservatismTemplate:WikiProject ConservatismConservatism articles
@Titan2456 He did not campaign from jail; this is a misconception. Instead, his supporters and party members, including Gohar Ali Khan, campaigned for him during the past election, while the campaign for the chancellorship is currently ongoing from outside Pakistan. Additionally, the section heading should accurately reflect the content, which largely consists of allegations regarding the political motivations behind his imprisonment. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 00:41, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Gohar and his party contested in elections, I am talking about campaigned, Imran Khan is campaigning as chancellor, for democracy, rule of law and certain anti-army viewpoints from jail, that is a fact. The content entirely talks about how Khan is still active in campaigning from jail. Campaigning is used in the term of being politically active, which the section solely talks about. Titan2456 (talk) 01:24, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Avoid making general statements; he did not actively campaign for anything. Please specify from the sources how he engaged in campaigning or promoted his candidacy. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 01:50, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Campaign Definition: an organized course of action to achieve a goal. Imran Khan has been campaigning for rule of law and democracy, that is what campaign means, all the statements he gives, the rallies he organizes, the interviews, he is campaigning. Titan2456 (talk) 01:54, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Once more, this is a general assertion. Please specify particular issues, and I will respond accordingly. The opinion piece reflects Imran Khan’s views and statements he has actually made. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 01:52, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You cannot use an opinion piece as a citation, that is the bottom line for Wikipedia. If you want to, write that it is an opinion piece and write that all the info is sourced from that. Titan2456 (talk) 01:55, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You did not make corrections; instead, you reverted the streamlined version of the content entirely, which I do not agree with. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 03:09, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What do you mean streamlines you literally removed all indication that its an opinion piece? Also why did you select the most negative anti-Imran Khan one, there are so many more like these, can they be used according to you?
Have you double-checked your revert diff? You didn’t just restore the attribution—you reverted the streamlined version. Your question about choosing the most negative perspective is illogical. Why do you consistently choose the most positive angles for PTI and Imran Khan and never balance it with contrary views to maintain neutrality? I am simply correcting the one-sided narrative, which came across as a chancellorship campaign, portraying him as suffering and still fighting and campaigning from jail. Why didn’t you include the opposing perspective from the start so I wouldn’t have had to step in? Why do you always behave as if you’re working for them? Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 13:12, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What are these assumptions? Campaigning isn't even a positive or negative word, and you didn't correct a one-sided narrative, you cited an OPINION PIECE. When did I portray him as suffering? this is another baseless assumption. Titan2456 (talk) 13:52, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Avoid making assumptions about others if you don’t want assumptions to be made in return. Opinion pieces are permissible as long as they are supported by other sources and it can be demonstrated that he actually made those statements about Osama bin Laden, the Taliban, and rape victims. The opinion piece is merely referencing his own statements. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 14:01, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No, you used words like "widely raised concerns" or "widely condemned" when it was only Catherine Bennet who wrote that, I have not removed the opinion piece entirely but I have made it neutral like the rest of the article removing NPOV or claims that it was 'widely viewed' to 'she viewed'. If you do not have a response to the "Jail Campaigning" title then I will change it back. Titan2456 (talk) 14:03, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Did you bother to check your edit diff to see what you changed? For section heading, I might be willing to step back a bit in favor of "2024 election campaign" instead of your preferred one until I review all the sources in that section. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 15:15, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The section talks about his campaigning for democracy/rule of law, not the 2024 elections. The non-streamlined version is better, but that we can discuss, Titan2456 (talk) 15:20, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We can modify it to “Campaign from jail” for the time being. Why are you removing the final paragraph, which sums up the reasons he is not a suitable candidate? Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 15:25, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It is completely opinionated and sourced from the opinion article. There are many articles explaining how he is a good candidate and many that explain he is a bad, I would suggest keeping one short paragraph per opinion Titan2456 (talk) 15:42, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@SheriffIsInTown I cannot find a mention of personal ambition by Khan in the 3 citations you gave in your recent edit, can you copy-paste the text from the citations talking about his personal ambitions and self-interest for verification. Titan2456 (talk) 02:11, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have added the changes, you can restore your info about why he is a bad pick according to Catherine Bennet as long as you maintain it is her opinion. Titan2456 (talk) 15:51, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I removed the statement about "ambition and self-interest" before I saw this discussion. Neither of the 3 sources mention these terms in relation to Khan's term in gaol. One source was published before he went to gaol, another was published just after he went to gaol and does not mention his actions while in gaol. The third source (the BBC) does mention what could be interpreted as "ambition and self-interest" but is talking about the views of his opponents, not critics, and is discussing his time while in office, not while in gaol. Burrobert (talk) 10:09, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Such an attitude is completely unacceptable for someone considering becoming an admin here. How can anyone expect the community to support someone’s bid to become an admin while using fake references to promote propaganda on a crucial BLP? @SheriffIsInTown: I suggest that you revert your edits if you haven't done so already because our admins are held in very high regard, and we do not expect such editing behaviour from them. I’d be willing to support your admin nom, but only if you stop your biased POV editing that’s been occurring on many pages, including 2024 Pakistani general election. — Saqib (talk I contribs) 16:09, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It was a bit of an oversight on my part. My modification was based on a source discussing his political struggle, which confirms, as stated by Burroburt, that his time in government can be interpreted as motivated by personal ambition and self-interest. While it did not fit the specific section, it was relevant to the article as a whole. Section headings can sometimes be misleading, but that does not mean the content about the person was untrue or unsupported by the source. That being said, I accepted the correction from Burroburt, and that should have been the end of it instead of both of you continuing to beat the dead horse. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 16:36, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
SheriffIsInTown, Yes, you realised it was an oversight after @Burrobert: had to intervene. By the way, this isn’t the only instance, and I’m not trying to beat the dead horse, but I just want to remind you that admins are not expected to engage in this kind of POV editing behavior. — Saqib (talk I contribs) 16:44, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't have access to Murdoch's Wall St Journal. It is being used here to say that Khan told the Supreme Court that Pakistan is under what he describes as an "undeclared martial law". The limited access I have to the WSJ shows the following text:
Former Pakistan Leader Imran Khan Says Country Is Under ‘Undeclared Martial Law’
Khan, effectively under house arrest, says democratic progress is in jeopardy as country teeters on brink of default
Former Pakistani Prime Minister Imran Khan—effectively held under house arrest by the army-backed government - said his country was under an "undeclared martial law".
In an interview from his police-ringed home in the eastern Pakistani city ...
Can someone who has access copy and paste the relevant section of the article here please? My limited access seems to indicate he may have made the statement in an interview from home, but, on the other hand, perhaps not. It seems an odd thing to say to the Supreme Court. Anyway, if the WSJ does confirm the statement was made to the Supreme Court, we should replace the wording "While he was brought before the highest court of the country by the jail authorities ..." with something like "In a statement to the Supreme Court, ... ". Burrobert (talk) 15:41, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Burrobert You can check either of the two sources to gather information. If access to one is restricted, the other can serve as an alternative. Both sources should provide the necessary details. Obviously he made the statement to someone, the other source states SCP, he could not have just yelled out the window? Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 16:01, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, I didn't notice the second source, which does support the current wording. From the small part that I could see of the WSJ source, it seemed that the statement was made in a telephone interview, not by yelling out the window. Anyway, we should just say he made the statement to the Supreme Court. Burrobert (talk) 16:26, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What is the relevance of the following sentence to Imran's bio? If there is some connection, it needs to be better explained using a source which makes the connection.
Her personal secretary, Noor Zaman, alleged that she had met with Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Governor Iqbal Zafar Jhagra and Amir Muqam several times, along with her father. Zaman does not specify the timing of these meetings. Burrobert (talk) 03:59, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Why did you nominate it for GA? I don’t think it’s ready. There’s too much POV, not just in this section but in other areas as well. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 17:08, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
How exactly? Nawaz Sharif’s, Shahid Khaqan Abbasi’s, they all include the government’s achievements and tenure, not criticisms, that too this is a summary not the full article. The section mentions how the government faced financial problems which led to an IMF loan and even says it faced criticisms for policies and comments. If you are saying this section includes POV then basically all other articles do, you said it was good and approved it, but now are reversing your statement? I do not understand what POV you mean, all other articles follow this level of wording all prime ministers and political parties.
For example:
Pakistan Muslim League (N): It says “PML-N struck its remarkable, biggest, and most notable achievement in the 1997 parliamentary election”, this is POV and the section does not mention any allegations of rigging despite Dawn deeming it the most rigged election in Pakistan’s history. This section not flagged for POV but PTI’s Imran Khan government section which has no POV does?
I know you will say “free feel to add POV tags to those pages” but this is a clear editing pattern of demoting PTI-related pages. I have tried to WP:AGF with you but the editing pattern is to clear in trying to demote PTI. Titan2456 (talk) 19:24, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Why do you argue over everything? Do you think you own all articles related to PTI? What do you mean by saying you’ve “tried to AGF” with me? How is that relevant to me? Focus on addressing the issues, not the editor—if you can’t, then allow someone else to handle it when they can. Remember, you’re not the owner of these articles, so let the tag remain if you can’t resolve the issues. Also, why do you keep referencing other articles? Those aren’t infallible either and can be improved as well. Anytime anyone makes changes to a PTI-related article, you start arguing over it. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 20:21, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I am not arguing this is a discussion. I have remained WP:CIVIL always in discussions in response to you. Anyways forget about this and lets focus on removing the template. What is POV in this page, it already says criticisms, copy and paste all the sentences you believe are POV. Titan2456 (talk) 23:59, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As mentioned on the other talk page, the entire section reflects a POV and needs a more neutral perspective. It currently presents a one-sided view, making it resemble a fanpage. To balance it, the opposing perspective should be included. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 00:45, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There have been reports which indicated that during his tenure, he largely depended on military support to gather votes for legislative matters. He also faces multiple corruption allegations, for which he is currently being tried in several cases. Journalists were reportedly targeted, and their shows were blacked out if they criticised his government. Opposition leaders were allegedly framed in fabricated cases, including one against Rana Sanaullah, among others. Additionally, it’s necessary to include the country’s corruption index ranking at the start and end of his tenure, as well as an economic comparison from when he took office to when he left. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 01:20, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
level-5 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
