Talk:Musharraf high treason case

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Cwmhiraeth (talk) 07:04, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that Pervez Musharraf is the first former military ruler in Pakistan's history to face a trial for treason? Source: "it will be the first time in Pakistan's history that a former military ruler will face trial for treason." (BBC)

Created by Vegan Gypsy (talk). Self-nominated at 21:25, 22 December 2019 (UTC).

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Neutral: Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Cited: Interesting:

QPQ: None required.

Overall: Article is long enough (~4000 chars readable prose) and was new enough when nominated. No QPQ needed, as it is the nom's first DYK nomination. The first sentence refers to Musharraf as a former "dictator", which is pretty aggressive language to use without a citation; likewise, an item in "Timeline" says that he "fled the country", which is a bit too tendentious. The first sentence of "Background" is almost word-for-word identical to a sentence in this article, but based on the dates it looks to me as though that news website plagiarized this WP article, rather than the other way 'round. The claims all have suitable published sources, excepting the two non-neutral phrases indicated above. The hook is likewise supported by a citation and interesting. Once the tendentious phrases are neutralized, this should be good to go. Bryan Rutherford (talk) 03:56, 31 December 2019 (UTC)

@Bryanrutherford0: The word "dictator" is now cited and the phrase "fled the country" has been toned down. All good? Please let me know. Vegan Gypsy (talk) 21:16, 1 January 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for responding! This is a little subtle, but adding a citation to the word "dictator" still isn't going to do it. The fact that one writer once referred to Musharraf as a dictator doesn't mean that it's okay for Wikipedia to assert, in the encyclopedia's voice, that he is one; whether this fellow was indeed a "dictator" (I personally think so) or merely a military leader taking necessary steps in a time of emergency is a matter of opinion, and Wikipedia doesn't publish original research or opinions. For a short, simple article like this, let's just stick to something neutral and factual like "military ruler", a phrase used repeatedly in the sources you've already cited. -Bryan Rutherford (talk) 21:43, 1 January 2020 (UTC)

@Bryanrutherford0: Done as recommended. Now are we good to go? Vegan Gypsy (talk) 22:20, 1 January 2020 (UTC)

Yes, the article nwo meets the standard for DYK and is good to go! -Bryan Rutherford (talk) 03:20, 2 January 2020 (UTC)

Bryan Rutherford, since there is an "again" icon superseding your original checklist tick, you will need to place a new tick below to indicate your approval, assuming the article is indeed ready. Thanks, and sorry to bother you, but for DYK it's the lowest-posted icon that rules. BlueMoonset (talk) 06:37, 4 January 2020 (UTC)

Oh, apologies! -Bryan Rutherford (talk) 15:53, 4 January 2020 (UTC)

Notice for Merger proposal

There's a merger discussion taking place regarding a sub article about this case. Give your comments about it on Talk:Para 66#Merger with main article. USaamo ^(t@lk) 06:28, 7 January 2021 (UTC)