Talk:Attempted assassination of Imran Khan

Suggested move

I suggest moving this page to "Assassination attempt of Imran Khan" or "Attempted assassination on Imran Khan," or something of the sort. Quantum XYZ (talk) 14:07, 3 November 2022 (UTC)

Why so? gtgamer79 (talk) 14:18, 3 November 2022 (UTC)

The reliable sources seem to have started to refer to it more as an assassination attempt directly now. Earlier it was "his supporters said it was an assassination attempt", but that has changed in the last few hours and I'd support a move now. I think the title should be Attempted assassination of Imran Khan, similar to Attempted assassination of Ronald Reagan. For now, the current title is OK, but this will need moving at some point. Mako001 (C)  (T)  🇺🇦 14:50, 3 November 2022 (UTC)

Attempted assassination of Imran Khan is a suitable title as atleast two of the country's top English dailies Dawn and Express Tribune and many other international news outlets CNN Financial Times Guardian etc are calling it assasination attempt. USaamo ^(t@lk) 19:13, 3 November 2022 (UTC)

Yes, it is a suitable title. IrfanYashkun (talk) 21:34, 3 November 2022 (UTC)

This move was requested to be undone at RM/TR. I have done so. Please open a formal RM. - UtherSRG (talk) 13:55, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

@UtherSRG: Done, but that strikes me as a bit of a disruptive (ab)use of process by the IP. They claimed very explicitly that this was undiscussed, when it was clearly a discussed and (by then) uncontroversial move, if not formally so. Wouldn't that disqualify it from having the move requested in such a way? Mako001 (C)  (T)  🇺🇦 15:01, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

Perhaps their description was less than accurate. Still, having the formal discussion won't hurt. I'll give them a warning (and myself) to look more closely before crying wolf... - UtherSRG (talk) 15:17, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

It might even qualify as a WP:SNOW move... - UtherSRG (talk) 15:19, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

Move was discussed hereinabove before, that IP has a history of disruptive contributions which should have been checked before going for it! USaamo ^(t@lk) 17:07, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

Ah well, all's well that ends well. As UtherSRG said, the RM has now made it absolutely clear what the consensus title is. Mako001 (C)  (T)  🇺🇦 03:40, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

Reaction section

As usual, this has become too huge, we have placed comments from Pakistani cricketers as well. Is this necessary? Sherenk1 (talk) 05:49, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

Draft:Faisal Naseer

Faisal Naseer was accused by Imran Khan for plotting this assassination. There's a Draft:Faisal Naseer. Anyone willing to work on it and publish? 39.44.114.210 (talk) 13:10, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

Not convinced there's a need for a standalone entry at this time. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 16:17, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

Requested move 4 November 2022

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved per WP:SNOW, unanimous consensus to move. (closed by non-admin page mover) — Ingenuity (talk • contribs) 18:17, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

---

Shooting of Imran Khan → Attempted assassination of Imran Khan – Moved earlier following an informal move discussion. Was then reversed. As discussed earlier, the sources are now referring to it as an assassination attempt. Mako001 (C)  (T)  🇺🇦 14:55, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

Pinging earlier participants, sorry you have to do this again. @Quantum XYZ@Gtgamer79@USaamo@Kskhh Mako001 (C)  (T)  🇺🇦 15:07, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

• Support move as this is what sources refer to it as now. Quantum XYZ (talk) 15:13, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

Comment: This is also what most governments in the Reactions section call it. Quantum XYZ (talk) 15:15, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

• Support move: governments and sources refer to it as an assassination attempt, and it sounds much better. "Shooting of ____" could be easily interpreted as a shooting (up) of a place (such as a town or building) to a reader unfamiliar with the subject. NipponGinko (talk) 16:49, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

• Support: sounds better, other similar articles say “assassination of…” CanO27sprite (talk) 16:59, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

• Support as many of the sources till now have reported it to be assasination attempt including two of the country's top English dailies Dawn and Express Tribune and various other international news outlets CNN Guardian ABC News etc are calling it assasination attempt. USaamo ^(t@lk) 17:19, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

• Support — PerfectSoundWhatever (t; c) 17:27, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

• Support- as per the nomination.BoyHayHay (talk) 17:32, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

• Support Many News sources are reporting it as an assassination attempt. ArsenalGhanaPartey (talk) 17:38, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

• Support The current phrasing is awkward, and doesn't match sources (see for example [1]) DFlhb (talk) 18:15, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Flag salad quotefarm

As you may know, many editors despise the flag salad "Reactions" section, which violates a number of Wikipedia guidelines. It should be converted into prose. Abductive (reasoning) 18:49, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

I do agree Bookku (talk) 03:14, 6 November 2022 (UTC)

Inquiry: what guidelines are violated by this 'flag salad' format of the section? Quantum XYZ (chat) 12:01, 6 November 2022 (UTC)

How I view it is, an encyclopedia is expected to be in encyclopedic prose form as much as possible, not that total no to quotes.

Usually reactions sections are in forms of quotes. List of quotes belongs Wikiquote project. IMHO keeping them in list form for ever denotes lack or lag in developing encyclopedic writing. If not immediately then over a period of time reaction sections preferably need to be converted to encyclopedic prose. Bookku (talk) 12:47, 6 November 2022 (UTC)

Why only one sided statements and allegations

This article only contains Imran Khan's and his party statements and allegations why nothing is mention about Pakistan's Federal Interior Minister and other Government officials Statements and rised questions over shooting incident & allegations [2][3] and also Pakistan army's demands from government for legal action against baseless allegations. [4][5]. 111.119.178.155 (talk) 19:11, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

Imran Khan's own statement

• Imran Khan speaks publicly for first time since surviving shooting, BBC
• Pakistan’s Imran Khan says he knew of assassination plot before shooting, Washington Post
• Imran Khan says Pakistan PM Sharif involved in plot to kill him, aljazeera
• Former Pakistan Prime Minister Imran Khan blames establishment figures for plot to kill him, CNN

IMHO Imran Khan's own statements need mention in the article, of course while taking WP BLP policies into account. Bookku (talk) 10:22, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

I also agree with expectations of above IP post that position of other side too should find space. Bookku (talk) 10:25, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

Perpetrators?

Imran Khan named 3 persons (Prime Minister, Interior Minister and an intelligence officer) plotted to have him killed and have it blamed on Muhammad Naveed (mentioned in the infobox). Can we mention the names of these 03 accused persons somewhere prominently on the page, let say in the infobox? 39.44.96.19 (talk) 09:45, 6 November 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 6 November 2022

In the infobox in the deaths section where it says "1", could you replace that with the name of the victim which is Muazzam Shahzad Gondal? Thanks. Cactihasbik (talk) 11:49, 6 November 2022 (UTC)

 Not done because we shouldn't name non-notable victims. Jim Michael 2 (talk) 15:06, 6 November 2022 (UTC)

References