Talk:Anwaar ul Haq Kakar

Requested move 16 August 2023

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. (closed by non-admin page mover) – MaterialWorks 18:16, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

---

Anwar ul Haq Kakar → Anwaar ul Haq Kakar – move to correct official name per PM office[1] and Senate of Pakistan[2] TheNewYork Times[3], Reuters[4], Dawn[5] 2402:E000:601:5955:F8C:531:D3D5:61E6 (talk) 18:04, 14 August 2023 (UTC) This is a contested technical request (permalink). SilverLocust 💬 15:02, 16 August 2023 (UTC)

Seems fine then, contact an admin to move the page. ⭐️ Starkex ⭐️ 📧 ✍️ 20:27, 16 August 2023 (UTC)

Agree. "Anwar" is a different name than "Anwaar". Persona2two (talk) 06:45, 17 August 2023 (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.

Semi-protected edit request on 13 September 2023

He has never met waqas ashraf even though waqas might claim that he has 2A00:23C8:4C82:9001:84DB:48C9:710D:4FCB (talk) 19:12, 13 September 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: It's unclear what you're asking for - nowhere in the article does it claim that he has met them. Tollens (talk) 20:13, 13 September 2023 (UTC)

Anwaar ul Haq Kakar lived as an Afghani refugee in the United Kingdom

Can we add in this article of Mr. Kakar that, before returning to Pakistan in 2005, he lived in the UK as an Afghan refugee or asylum seeker? [6]HarryDaBunny101 (talk) 10:53, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: The information you trying to request is without a source/comes from a YouTube video which can't be trusted and is meant for stretched claims, also see WP:PEACOCK. Starkex (talk) 19:07, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

Unneeded removal and POV tag

@Saqib Why have you removed this section of the article?: [1] I inserted that ALONG with his criticism, not only that, you put a POV tag. I used sources, and you never really explained why you removed it, nor did you try to discuss it. You did the same thing on the Asim Munir page, until I called it out and the article was fixed. I need you to remain balanced and impartial please, even if it’s on figures that you don’t particularly have a liking towards. VirtualVagabond (talk) 10:54, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

Also, POV tag was added without any discussion, see :WP:DRIVEBY-TAGGING VirtualVagabond (talk) 10:58, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

@VirtualVagabond: I removed it because the verification cleartly fails. Can you please point out where in the cited reference it verifies the claims? The source doesn't even mention Kakar at all. Let's refrain from making baseless accusations about personal preferences without evidence. --Saqib (talk) 11:01, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

I never said it was Kakar himself, I said it was under his tenure. VirtualVagabond (talk) 11:02, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

You cannot cite this reference here unless Kakar is explicitly mentioned in the source. Otherwise, it could be considered OR. And by the way, on how many pages, have I added tags in the last 30 days? I believe it's only been on a couple of articles, so it's inaccurate to suggest that I'm engaging in WP:DRIVEBY. --Saqib (talk) 11:05, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

There isn’t a minimum amount of edits that you have to tag without discussion to achieve WP:DRIVEBY. I’m assuming good faith from you, so please discuss such measures in the future. Thank you. VirtualVagabond (talk) 11:08, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

Also, one question. You didn’t remove his criticism, despite those sources not mentioning a kakar as well. Could I please ask why? VirtualVagabond (talk) 11:10, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

I haven't reviewed all the references, but a majority of them fails verification. That's why I added the tag. It should remain there until the issues are resolved. I did some cleanup, though. --Saqib (talk) 11:20, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

Seems awfully convenient that you so just happened to skip the criticism that was actually there before the appraisal. Nevertheless, I’ll take your word on it, thank you. VirtualVagabond (talk) 12:19, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

I would say Wikipedia:Assume good faith. Also why you keep on removing tags even though the concerns aren't addressed yet. --Saqib (talk) 11:39, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

I thought you put it on because of his public life section, when we removed it altogether, I thought the issue was resolved. Is there anything else that you think warrants the tag? VirtualVagabond (talk) 13:50, 3 March 2024 (UTC)