Talk:Ishaq Dar

message: This article does not discuss any early life, childhood and background of the person. Even his father name is not mentioned in a single time.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.152.36.109 (talk) 16:06, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Missing Background & Early Life

message: This article is ridiculously biased in favour of Dar and his policies. "leading financial-cum-economic expert", "From his enviable educational record to professional acumen, and from his peerless political career to holding various important portfolios, Senator Dar stands out par excellence", "Dar was once again called upon to rescue the nose-diving economy". And those are just the lede. I don't know very much about Dar and his work in Pakistani politics but this is really clearly over the line. Therequiembellishere (talk) 18:42, 10 June 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: These are simply excerpts from Dar's published profile in the Senate Newsletter. But coming from your point of view; totally understand where its coming from. Will try not to duplicate the published profile into main content and try to keep it neutral. Thanks for your input.Pakistani88 (talk) 08:21, 11 June 2013 (UTC)
replies: text:  If you dont know much then do your research. No one is stopping you to add any controversial reported material on Dar. Make a new heading "Controversies" and list them with references. writing only the positive does not make it wrong or bias. And for God sake stop removing the political offices, "plethora of minor unneeded offices" are NOT MINOR. Clearly Federal Commerce Minister and Leader of the Opposition in the Upper House of a country is NOT MINOR. Its just good information for people to know; why does it bother you! I dont want to get into an edit fight with you so just make useful contributions! I left you a message on your talk page but clearly you just ignore!Pakistani88 (talk) 16:26, 11 June 2013 (UTC)
replies: text:  I agree, Ishaq Dar is a credible man. Writing facts with references does not make it bias! The more information there is, the better! Dude the political offices are at the bottom, no one even looks there! leave it as is! Economicchange (talk) 16:44, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

text: I agree with Therequiembellishere; terms like "leading financial-cum-economic expert", "called upon to rescue the nose-diving economy of Pakistan" and "tenure was unfortunately cut short" should be converted to "leading financial-cum-economic expert", "called upon to rescue[d] the nose-diving economy of Pakistan" and "tenure was unfortunately cut short". These are all words that are not allowed under the WP:PEACOCK guidelines. Therefore, I put up a Peacock template on the article context — Arun Zaheeruddin (talk) 08:07, 22 December 2013 (UTC)
replies: text:  I have fixed the article's lead and a few paragraphs in the article. There are still quite a lot of issues with the article and I would be fixing them later. I urge authors and editors to not just straight-forwardly undo the revisions and first discuss why they are not happy with the edits – Arun Zaheeruddin (talk) 06:54, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
replies: text:  Fixed the article in its entirety. — Arun Zaheeruddin (talk) 02:03, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Bias

message: This article features content from various news stories in the papers and are a stark example of blatant plagiarism, thereby violating the WP:PLAG guidelines. Article content must not be copy-pasted from various URLs but need to be written in a comprehensive manner usually including citations to those sources in that particular context. If there is no change in the text and if the article is not correctly resolved, there would be no better way than to delete this information in its entirety. — Arun Zaheeruddin (talk) 08:26, 22 December 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I have taken out all the copyvio content from the page. Most of it was not even related to the Ishaq Dar but the fiscal budget. — Arun Zaheeruddin (talk) 01:55, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Plagiarised content 

message: This article has been receiving its fair share of vandalised content. This cannot be tolerated under Wikipedia guidelines. I might just request for this page to be protected if the vandalism continues. Meanwhile, we will stick with this revision until things settle down — Arun Zaheeruddin (talk) 23:14, 16 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Consistent vandalism 

message: Dawn (newspaper) has at some point been used as a source for Dar having been born in 1950. User:Mewulwe objects to this, saying that the 1950 date has been in the Wikipedia article since 2009, that the Dawn article cited was published after this, and that Dawn's reputation is such that it is most likely that the article merely took the year from the Wikipedia article.
Dawn (newspaper) has been discussed at WP:RSN before.
How do people feel about whether this birth year should be accepted based on this evidence, or not? MPS1992 (talk) 20:27, 15 October 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually I'm not expressing a particular opinion about Dawn. I don't know any newspaper that could be trusted not to use Wikipedia. This happens all the time. The probability that such sourcing would be circular is certainly significant enough, therefore what's needed is either a source predating the original Wikipedia addition, or an official or primary one (a personal site of his, a government or parliament site, etc.). Besides, is it common in Pakistan to be at university at age 16? http://www.senate.gov.pk/en/profile.php?uid=765 says "Senator Dar has had renowned institutions among his alma maters, including Government College (now Government College University), Lahore, and Hailey College of Commerce, University of Punjab, Lahore (1966-69)." Mewulwe (talk) 02:03, 16 October 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: User:Mewulwe: This report by PILDAT says Dar was born 13 May 1950, I wonder if repot of PILDAT is reliable enough to cite here? --Saqib (talk) 09:31, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: No. You can see for other persons they give citations even for a birth date, not for Ishaq Dar. Practically certain they took that from Wikipedia. Mewulwe (talk) 09:44, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
replies: text:  You need to understand that we've plenty of RS which states Dar was born in 1950 so I object to your removal because Wikipedia:Verifiability, not truth. --Saqib (talk) 10:21, 10 September 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Doesn't apply. Potential circular RS don't verify anything. If he was actually born in 1950 and someone was able to add this in 2009, there would have to be a pre-2009 source. When all available sources are from after that time, it is almost certain these sources took it from Wikipedia. Mewulwe (talk) 10:30, 10 September 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Wikipedia:Verifiability applies. I found at least three RS which states he was born in 1950. --Saqib (talk) 11:22, 10 September 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Any such fact that is in Wikipedia for a certain length of time WILL appear in multiple "reliable sources." If Wikipedia itself is the oldest source to be found, it must be considered the origin of the others. Mewulwe (talk) 15:07, 10 September 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Birth year 

message: Copyright image removed
(talk) 06:23, 15 December 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: you have not made a request, but I have removed the image you linked to as it was a copyright violation - Arjayay (talk) 08:49, 15 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 15 December 2016 

message: Frankmister2 (talk) 17:00, 13 August 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: 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. DRAGON BOOSTER  ★ 17:04, 13 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 13 August 2017 

message: Is it just me or is the editing on this page pretty biased? No references to the corruption cases against him, including ongoing ones. No reference to the collapse of the Pakistani currency under his time as Finance Minister, Crickharte (talk) 17:03, 29 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bias 

message: # —there’s no need to bang on about how becoming finance minister four times is a record; who cares?
# —the standard spelling in Pakistani English is honour.
# This Dawn report does not actually back up the claim that . But the FT article following does. Someone has very annoyingly inserted sources in the middle of sentences when they could easily go at the end, so some sources go before , some after, and then some after . And then some of the sources are not so flattering as suggested. For example, Tribune remarks that  Yet that is not mentioned—only credit for  the economy!
#  Not in source.
 Docentation (talk) 18:57, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Some more checks on sources and removal of puffery