Talk:Imran Khan

Edit request to clarify 1983 injury timeline

Please clarify the conflicting wording in the cricket career section: "...helped him recover by late 1984. He returned under Javed Miandad's captaincy..."

This phrasing combines biological medical recovery with his actual cricketing comeback, misleading the reader. While his shin bone healed in late 1984, his actual playing return to international cricket matches took place in early 1985. I request a template editor update the phrasing to: "...helped his shin bone physically heal by late 1984. He then made his playing return under Javed Miandad's captaincy in early 1985 during the 1984–85 home series against Sri Lanka." M Aamir778288 (talk) 01:36, 27 July 2026 (UTC)

I would be happy to make the clarification but can't find a source to confirm the dates. Do you have one? Burrobert (talk) 12:08, 27 July 2026 (UTC)

Not done: your request appears to have been generated by a large language model. Day Creature (talk) 17:48, 5 August 2026 (UTC)

I've fully protected the page for two days

This is because of an edit war between two editors, both of whom have been around long enough to know better. BusterD (talk) 15:41, 10 August 2026 (UTC)

WP:SYNTH issue with Musharraf criticism part

The Musharraf criticism part added by @WikiEnthusiast1001 has a WP:SYNTH issue in the way the content is put together from different sources. I suggest simply changing that to In 2003, he joined an anti-war rally, opposing the proposed US invasion of Iraq and criticizing Musharraf's policies, which he said had put the country's independence at stake. This would clearly document the starting point of his criticism of Musharraf, avoiding WP:SYNTH and being fully aligned with the source.

References

Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 16:00, 10 August 2026 (UTC)

Video is a violation of WP:NPOV and WP:PRIMARY

@WikiEnthusiast1001 Khan's video under the section Imran Khan#Legal matters (2022–Present) is a slap in the face of WP:NPOV. It should be removed without further discussion, as WP:NPOV clearly states that all content must be based on reliable sources, and no consensus can override WP:NPOV. If you really think its inclusion does not violate NPOV, then you should be the one seeking consensus for its inclusion. If we create a transcript of this video, the content comes out to be equivalent in length to a large section. For content on Wikipedia, we prefer secondary reliable sources. This video is a primary statement by Khan published by his political party. YouTube is filled with Khan's videos, so why this particular one? We do not know. If anyone can add any video to an article, then what is stopping another editor from adding a different one? We do not know.

For the May 9 riots, there are video statements available from the authorities. Should we add one of those next to Khan's to provide balance? There is also the issue of mistranslation and misinterpretation. For example, he uses a word in Urdu with one meaning, but the translator renders it as a completely different word. At times, the translator also tries to put words into Khan's mouth by inserting words in brackets that Khan did not actually say, on the basis that the translator believes Khan meant them. The video ends with the official Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf logo. The question is: is Wikipedia a mouthpiece for political parties and their leaders? Why should we include a video produced by a political party featuring its leader? Following is my translation of that video. You can see how different it is from the translation used in the video.

What was the investigation? That a major conspiracy took place on May 9th. They were asking me if I was a part of that conspiracy. There is a Supreme Court verdict that Imran Khan was picked up illegally and unconstitutionally, was kidnapped from within the High Court. This was my plot to get picked up like this? Before I got out in the morning when I had a hunch that they will arrest me, even though there was no case against me. I was on bail in all of them. When I found out, i initially told them to show me the warrant and arrest me. If someone has a warrant, bring the warrant straight to me, my lawyers, my legal will be there, I am willing myself to go to jail. Nobody should do this type of drama. So, what was the need to beat up with sticks, break up things, breaking windows, they beat up that poor staff of the registry office, beat up the lawyers, beat up my poor guards, was I a terrorist? Just to show the visuals to the World, the way they went, the way they arrested me. They say to me, why your people went there, why they went to the cantonment, why they went to the certain place? You had it prepared beforehand, I asked them when I am being picked up by commando action there, where will people go to protest? I figured from what he was saying that we have no permission to peaceful protest in front of GHQ or cantonment. Tell me, where is this written in the constitution? It is written in the constitution that it is your right, every Pakistani's right that when injustice is done, you can peacefully protest against injustice. And injustice was done, Supreme Court said in its verdict that Imran Khan was picked up illegally and unconstitutionally. These Tehreek-e-Insaf people were they sheeps and goats that they should have sit quietly? What wrong they did that they went out for peaceful protest? Then after that, they were prepared beforehand that whatever the reaction would be, they were sitting prepared beforehand that they will burn this building. And the IG Punjab who is running uncontrolled, is nobody going to ask him that it is taking people two hours to reach there to protest, is no one going to ask him where was your police? They were teargasing everywhere, they were standing everywhere, why they did not go there? Where is that CCTV camera? Why its footage is not in front of everyone? Why there was no independent inquiry? It was a conspiracy and In Sha Allah, this conspiracy will come in front of everyone. Why they don’t ask this question? That those people, the 25 people who were shot with bullets, those people, youngsters whose legs got lost, legs of three people were cut, bedridden, got shot in waist, got paralyzed, were they not Pakistanis? Don’t they have any rights? No one is talking about them, they burned the Corp Commander House, we all, we condemn it. The Chief Justice has written in his judgement that when Imran Khan was first time, first time I found out what happened, I condemned right at that time. And I said, in 27 years, I have always told my party to stay within our law. How many people were where houses were burnt, building were burnt, how many might be, 100, 150, 200, 300, 400, 1,000 might be? Then, how 10,000 people were thrown in? And then, give them an opportunity so they can tell what was their side, yes, whoever reached there in geo-fencing was thrown in jail. Said, judge listens to both sides before giving verdicts, does not give one-sided verdicts. One judge, jury, executioner, sir you decide, this they have done, apprehend and start beating them, apprehend and create military courts, so nothing comes out, punish whoever. Instead, they were talking like, now protesting is for you like committing treason with the state. Then end the democracy, say Martial Law is imposed, say whatever they will decide, they will do, but in democracy, it is our right that when injustice is done with us and Supreme Court has confirmed, after that peaceful protest is our right. And then again i say that, whoever burned the Corp Commander House or whatever buildings they burned, action should be taken on all of them. I say it before anything else, and whatever information we have, we will help you as well to take action on them because we did not do it. Whatever these people are doing, I want to give them only one message, think about this country, do not destroy it, what you are going to do, this largest party, with whom majority public is standing, and majority public meaning with whom 70, 80 percent public is standing, attempting to finish this, finishing Imran Khan, country's democracy, country’s independence, country's institutions, country’s constitution, you keep finishing everything. With that nations do not survive, especially morality that they are finishing. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 16:12, 10 August 2026 (UTC)

Removal of content regarding relationships from lead

@WikiEnthusiast1001 The paragraph on relationships in the lead has been longstanding for months and has a presumed consensus through editing. You need to gain consensus in order to remove it. It summarises his major relationships, and there is no policy on Wikipedia stating that you cannot mention out-of-wedlock relationships in the lead, if that is your objection. By doing this, you are engaging in WP:CENSORSHIP. Without it, the lead leaves a void for the reader to assume that he only had these three marital relationships and nothing else. It is also notable to mention who those women were and what their familial and social status was. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 18:18, 10 August 2026 (UTC)

Lead changes regarding arrest

@WikiEnthusiast1001 Please see WP:LEADFOLLOWSBODY; the previous longstanding lead better followed the body than your change.

Body

On 9 May, he was arrested at the Islamabad High Court in connection with the Al-Qadir Trust case…. His arrest triggered the May 9 riots, with PTI supporters storming government buildings and military installations. The Supreme Court of Pakistan declared the arrest illegal, citing the violation of judicial sanctity by paramilitary forces. On 12 May, he received protective bail, which barred re-arrest on the same charges for two weeks.

Previous lead

In May 2023, he was arrested at the Islamabad High Court; following the May 9 riots, he was released on protective bail a few days later.

WikiEnthusuast1001 change

In 2023, his arrest by paramilitary forces at the Islamabad High Court while attending a hearing sparked the May 9 riots. Days later, he was released on protective bail after the Supreme Court ruled his arrest illegal.

The previous lead about the arrest was more neutral and more in line with the body, but the changed lead has been given a POV twist. First of all, why is it even important to mention the paramilitary force? It is always some kind of force that makes the arrest; the notable part here is that he was arrested, which was already mentioned. Also, why mention and twist the wording regarding the Supreme Court ruling? The Supreme Court did not rule his arrest illegal, but rather the manner in which it was conducted. Now, I do not think this needs to be mentioned at all in the lead, but if we must mention the ruling, then we must mention the reason why the Supreme Court ruled it illegal, e.g. violation of judicial sanctity. Otherwise, presenting only half the story would simply be a violation of WP:NPOV. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 19:23, 10 August 2026 (UTC)

Content sourced to Middle East Monitor

@WikiEnthusiast1001 See WP:MEMO, it is a questionable source. Can you find a better source if you want this included? Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 19:40, 10 August 2026 (UTC)