Talk:2024 Pakistani general election/Archives/ 1

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion:

• PM Imran Khan.png

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 23:52, 23 August 2019 (UTC)

Addition of Roshan Pakistan Opinion Polling

Roshan Pakistan conducts regular opinion polls and updates the results on Twitter. They have a Wordpress website, but it is yet to be updated. I think they are of sufficient credibility to add to this page, as their polling has been the most accurate, they are constantly quoted by Pakistani media, and have even been quoted by Bloomberg (https://www.financialexpress.com/world-news/silent-coup-imran-khan-snubbed-as-pakistan-army-chief-takes-charge-to-revive-flagging-economy/1726302/). They also featured in Gallup Pakistan's Poll of Polls before last year's general election (https://twitter.com/RPOpinionPoll/status/1021772886099587073). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.59.31.158 (talk) 10:59, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

Update Article to reflect current Scenario

@GeoffreyT2000: :@Masterpha:I suggest the article be updated with how things stand at the moment i.e Dissolution of the National Assembly as several prominent sources are available.[1] [2] [3] etc. A current event tag can be added to show information may rapidly change. Jibran1998 (talk) 19:06, 3 April 2022 (UTC)

Politically motivated cases against imran khan by the establishment and coallation parties.

everything from ousting imran khan to 9th may riots, are actions directed towards removing khan from the political canvas, including an assasination attack. 2407:AA80:126:C770:F851:2A30:CE34:E8EC (talk) 11:41, 3 June 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 28 June 2023

Rai Ali Hassan (talk) 10:12, 28 June 2023 (UTC)Add a new party called Istehkam-e-Pakistan party in the infobox related to PM candidates and seat tally. Also associate Jehangir Tareen's name and photo with the party. He is heading one of the major parties in the elections and is expected to be the PM candidate as per Aleem Khan (senior IPP member).

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Mattdaviesfsic (talk) 19:24, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

Add information

There are high chances of the elections being delayed. This info should be included 3catsmumu (talk) 18:38, 13 August 2023 (UTC)

Page move

@Masterpha: Where is the consensus for your unilateral page move? I propose the page be moved to Next Pakistani general election and let's wait until an election date or schedule is officially announced. ECP stating it's inability to hold elections this year doesn't automatically mean that the elections are going be to held in 2024. Please go through WP:NOTNEWS and WP:CRYSTAL. Pirate of the High Seas (talk) 08:09, 20 August 2023 (UTC)

Sure маsтегрнатаLк 09:26, 20 August 2023 (UTC)

2024 Pakistan General Election

The title of this page is incorrect. It should still stand as 2023 Pakistan General Election.

As per the constitution of Pakistan which is the ultimate law of the land, general elections must be held within 90 day of dissolution of early assemblies. Here is the reference: https://www.pakistani.org/pakistan/constitution/part8.ch2.html

A new Supreme Court Chief Justice will be taking over on September 17th, 2023 who will issue a ruling in this matter. Rangefinderaddict (talk) 22:03, 27 August 2023 (UTC)

Misleading Title - Equivalent to Brainwashing Masses and Rigging

The title of the page should have been 2023 General Elections and not 2024 General Elections. Why? Because as per the Constitution of Pakistan Article 48 (5) (which is governing law of the state)

"Where the President dissolves the National Assembly, notwithstanding anything contained in clause (1), he shall,— (a) appoint a date, not later than ninety days from the date of the dissolution, for the holding of a general election to the Assembly"

Now that National Assembly is dissolved already on 10th August, The elections must be held within 90 days i.e. not later than 10th November 2023. DarkSecretz (talk) 06:00, 28 August 2023 (UTC)

Date

@Dirceu Mag: Supreme Court have ordered elections within 90 days from 24/10. Panam2014 (talk) 20:49, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

@Panam2014 They have not made such an order. The most recent update is that they have sought input from the ECP and the government on the matter.

Link: [4] Muzzzmuzzmuzzz (talk) 01:06, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

crackdown on pti

why deep state is cracking down on the most popular party of pakistan. Thepakiboy (talk) 10:55, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

Who is the leader? (2)

Please have a look on the PML-N Wiki page and on PML-N official website. These articles can help you clarify the distinctions. The Lider of this Party, the President of this Party and the Chairman of this same Party is not the same person, they are 3 individuals. 109.144.30.102 (talk) 22:26, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:SheriffIsInTown#c-193.117.132.123-20231220101700-Who_is_the_leader? 109.144.30.102 (talk) 22:33, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

Who is the leader? (3)

Two edictors are, aggressively, imposing the caretaker Chairman of PTI as the Leader of the Party, instead of Imran Khan. The same concept is not applied to Nawaz Sharif, that they accept as the leader of the PML-N , a party that has different Individuals in role such as 'Chairmam' and 'President', both of them below Nawaz in the official website and on the specific Wikipedia page. This is blatantly a kind of mindless edit war. 109.144.30.102 (talk) 22:41, 20 December 2023 (UTC) I wrote a letter for one of them to no avail.

Who is the leader? (3)

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:2024_Pakistani_general_election#/editor/13 109.144.30.102 (talk) 22:45, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

@SheriffIsInTown @Wallu2 Could the IP user you’re currently dealing with perhaps be @Dirceu Mag?

I say this because both them and the IP user misspell edit the same way (i.e. as "edict"), both leave massive walls of text defending their action, and Dirceu Mag was banned for leaving unconstructive edits on this page and Opinion polling for the 2024 Pakistani general election (on which the IP user is also leaving unconstructive edits).

I don’t know how to confirm this suspicion but surely, a banned user making edits would be a violation of Wikipedia's rules.

Please let me know your thoughts! Muzzzmuzzmuzzz (talk) 22:57, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

It is obviously Dirceu Mag and I have blocked them, will revert their edits and protect the article. Number 57 23:00, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

If you have time, you also look at the IP user who left the most recent comment on this talk page. They have the same IP pattern as the IP user here. Muzzzmuzzmuzzz (talk) 23:21, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

Obviously the same editor, but hasn't edited from that IP for a couple of days so I won't block yet. If you spot them again, let me know. Cheers, Number 57 23:27, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

Gohar Ali Khan

@Abdul Salam Haldar, Muzzzmuzzmuzzz, Aréat, and Number 57:

Hi Do you have a source about the fact Gohar Ali Khan is restaured as chairman? Sources said that only electoral symbol have been retaken by PTI until end of winter holidays. Panam2014 (talk) 17:08, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

The PHC has suspended the whole order of the ECP, which included declaring the party’s intraparty elections unconstitutional and removing all the elected office bearers. Consequently, after this order being suspended, all the previous office bearers are back to their elected positions.

Source: https://www.dawn.com/news/1800848/peshawar-high-court-suspends-ecp-order-stripping-ptis-bat-symbol Muzzzmuzzmuzzz (talk) 17:10, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

@SheriffIsInTown: Panam2014 (talk) 17:10, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

So who is the PTI leader

I feel like PTI should be mentioned in this article(as it is the largest party in Pakistan)along with Imran Khan as the leader 39.37.2.169 (talk) 16:31, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

“The two major parties are PMLN and PPP”

this statement is misleading as the largest political party in Pakistan (PTI) will also be contesting the election. 148.252.157.192 (talk) 14:55, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

Should be something like "The two major parties are PMLN and PPP, with PTI candidates competing as independents" Sy.mehdi.riz (talk) 23:53, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

Removing PTI from the election map

I would just like to take the advice of other editors here about whether I should remove the PTI from the election maps (i.e. for the GEs and all the provincial elections).

I’ve already removed them from now but was considering adding back the row for the PTI with a note saying "Officially vying as independent candidates". What are people's thoughts about this?

@Saad Ali Khan Pakistan @Wallu2 @SheriffIsInTown @RaiHassan12 Feel free to ping any more users! Muzzzmuzzmuzzz (talk) 22:32, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

We cannot remove PTI from election map because it is a major party. In 1990 Pakistani general election MQM also ran as independents and their panel name was Haq prast group. It should be added as PTI but a not should be added with them saying running as independents because of supreme court and ecp case Saad Ali Khan Pakistan (talk) 09:08, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

Agreed with Saad, let see what unfolds in 2024 elections.Wallu2 (talk) 11:09, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

Alright sounds good. I’ll add them back to the maps today! Muzzzmuzzmuzzz (talk) 12:23, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

I have a very serious objection to adding PTI back in elections boxes just because one editor thinks that they are a major party. They became a major party because elections were rigged in their favor in 2018. Moreover, we should be only adding parties which are participating in the elections as a party, it does not matter whether they are barred by ECP or SCP, the fact is they are effectively barred. Some people might think they are wrongly barred, some might think they are rightfully barred but they are barred and not contesting the elections as a party. We do not right any wrongs on Wikipedia neither we carry out political agendas but adding them to election boxes while they are not participating as a party would be akin to carrying out their political agenda and would be false information. Their first chairman Imran Khan is no longer chairman due to ECP verdict and second chairman’s election is declared null and void, another question would be who would be added as their party leader. This all happened because of their wrong decisions then why should we right their wrongs here. Pinging few chosen editors out of whom you think majority will agree with you does not constitute consensus. Pinging @Number 57 for a neutral perspective. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 15:55, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

Hey, no need to be so combative! I’ll hold back on editing the maps for now until Number 57 responds. Also, there was a reason I said feel free to ping any more editors; it was so that we could get more perspectives.

Just an aside: try to avoid remarks such as "election were rigged in [PTI's] favour in 2018" or "this all happened because of [PTI's] wrong decisions" that have somewhat of a partisan flavour to them and are not objective statements. Muzzzmuzzmuzzz (talk) 16:49, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

What do you refer to specifically by "maps"? Kindly clarify to avoid any confusion. Regarding the perceived combativeness, I didn't intend that; it was merely a disagreement on my part. My response encompassed both your input and a note from another editor on your talk page, not exclusively directed at you. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 16:55, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

The concept of parliamentary party no longer applies to PTI after yesterday's controversial verdict by the Supreme Court. Therefore, the only true representation of their winning/losing candidates is "Independent". That is the characterization that the election commission would use and should be the one followed on Wiki as they are the authority on the matter. - Wiki.0hlic ^(talk) 17:27, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

PTI should be added in election box because it is the largest party of Pakistan and has representation in all provinces of the country. In 2018 Senate Election Because of Disqualification of Nawaz Sharif PMLN candidates were declared as independents but still they are shown as members of PMLN. PTI should be added in the election box and a short notw should be written which says "Running as Independents". Even in News channels candidates are shown as members of PTI. no one calls them independent Saad Ali Khan Pakistan (talk) 14:02, 20 January 2024 (UTC)

You have some valid points; however the senate election was an indirect one whereby existing PMLN members in NA and PAs elected their senators. However, if ECP notified them as independent candidates, that page needs to be updated. As someone who worked on that page extensively, I appreciate your input. I also support your idea of a footnote/further elaboration on the matter of PTI-backed independents if a sizeable majority of them win - enough to feature in the electoral box. Sanitization of PTI from the election's Wiki article and associated constituency pages will go against WP:NPOV for not being a complete representation of facts. Wiki.0hlic ^(talk) 10:19, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

This argument is baseless; if the 2018 Senate election results differ from the official designation of members, we should rectify it. In elections, we typically adhere to official designations to avoid creating a false narrative. Pakistan's largest court ruled against them, and the ECP declared their candidates as independents. Representing them differently on Wikipedia simply because some of us support them is unwarranted. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 14:48, 20 January 2024 (UTC)

PTI is still an existing party and it is not abolished to be a party. Candidates might be "running as independents" but they have support of PTI and its voters. It is supported by majority of the people. Election page is showing like there is no PTI in election race which is totally wrong. If PTI would be added along with a small note "Running as independents" that would look more realistic and to the point. Saad Ali Khan Pakistan (talk) 11:27, 25 January 2024 (UTC)

No, that is not the fact, the way you state it. The fact is that PTI is not abolished but it is also a fact that PTI has no candidates running in the elections. So, if a party has no candidates running, why it should be added, no matter what people claim that how big that party is. An independent candidate is an independent candidate, they do not belong to any party. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 13:06, 25 January 2024 (UTC)

PTI members are running as PTI backed Independents due to ruling given by Supreme court and ECP against PTI. although they are independents but they are supported by PTI. In 1988 and 1990 elections MQM (a regional party) ran as Independent candidates but they are shown as MQM and Haq prast group and also in 2018 senate elections PML(N) candidates ran as independent candidates but they are shown as PML(N) due to Nawaz Sharif cases in Supreme court in but at the same time a major party and largest party of Pakistan PTI which has support ase in all across the country is not shown in election box. Even in the news they are not called "independents" but PTI backed Independents which makes hem different from other independents Saad Ali Khan Pakistan (talk) 11:42, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

Even if PTI backed Independents join another party in future but they will still be shown as PTI backed Independents in election results because they received PTI's support. Saad Ali Khan Pakistan (talk) 22:21, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

It’s unfair Imran Khan And PTI is not visible on front content 86.19.120.181 (talk) 01:53, 22 January 2024 (UTC)

Opinion Poll

Opinion Poll looks biased and one sided story taken from one single source. Need either more resources or should be removed. Thanks Mani ^Talk 03:58, 15 January 2024 (UTC)

Agreed. There are definite issues with it as per WP:NPOV.Wiki.0hlic ^(talk) 23:47, 15 January 2024 (UTC)

Postponement on two seats

Elections have been postponed by the returning officers in NA-83 Sargodha-II and NA-85 Sargodha-IV due to the death of an independent candidate who was contesting on both seats.

Should we add a note to the seats for election parameter in the infobox saying so? Muzzzmuzzmuzzz (talk) 20:13, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

The case for postponement is still under review Rai Ali Hassan (talk) 09:03, 21 January 2024 (UTC)

Adding Candidate list

Shoud a table listing candidates of all constituencies with their party be added to this page in which the votes bagged and the margin of victory can also be added after election, what do you guys say?

Semi-protected edit request on 27 January 2024

PTI Leader Imran Khan is contesting with its contestants who are identified as independent Candidates. Kaleemsheikh.kays (talk) 04:26, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

 Not done: The information is not factual. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 14:58, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

Untitled

How can you not mention PTI of imran khan as one of the contestants in election 2024. It's the biggest political party of Pakistan which gained the highest number of seat and largest proportion of votes in 2018 elections?

And there is no mention about it in the beginning. That's absurd and is a big question mark on the credibility of Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.23.236.56 (talk) 23:25, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

You can’t just make up an undead party that has been banned by the state from running and whose candidates are running as independents who don’t even have a coherent party symbol. Stop concocting aspersions out of your personal opinions. Borgenland (talk) 00:23, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 3 February 2024

Barrister Gohar Ali Khan is running for Pm from PTI Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf 109.255.6.133 (talk) 21:55, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

 Not done: Factual issues, there is no one running from PTI. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 23:30, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

Add imran khan or pti[indipendents] leader plss

plssBold 31.156.206.24 (talk) 10:16, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

The PTI has been banned and there is no such thing as a PTI Independent party. Borgenland (talk) 00:24, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

I am NOT a PTI supporter.

However, this is a nonsensical assertion. Wikipedia is supposed to use reliable secondary sources. EVERY single reliable secondary source lists "PTI backed independants" as their own "group" (I'm not using the word party to avoid the irrelevant legalese on whether they are a party). And it is now a mathematical certainty that group will be the largest group in the election.

https://www.cnn.com/2024/02/09/asia/pakistan-election-nawaz-sharif-intl/index.html

https://www.dawn.com/

https://tribune.com.pk/

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/2/9/pti-linked-independents-take-pakistan-election-lead-as-counting-nears-e Kas1234567 (talk) 04:39, 10 February 2024 (UTC)

Add imran khan or gohar Ali khan

Like in top 3 candidate add 4th gohar Ali khan or imran khan, in party there is pti(ind) or indipendent plsss add pls 31.156.206.24 (talk) 16:24, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

PTI is not running in this election. It has been barred by the court Haris920 (talk) 18:24, 7 February 2024 (UTC)

Add PTI's Barrister Gohar Ali Khan in 1st image and move Maulana Fazal-ur-Rehman to 4th

I said 1st,since PTI is the largest party and they got the most seats in the previous elections DrWineBerry (talk) 10:46, 7 February 2024 (UTC)

PTI is not running in this election. Haris920 (talk) 18:23, 7 February 2024 (UTC)

Yes,but there are pti-backed candidates.Which should be mentioned in the infobox DrWineBerry (talk) 09:25, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

What you just said is blatantly wrong and you are misinformed. PTI is contesting the election but it's candidates are independants. The Party was not 'barred' they were not allotted their electoral symbol.

And facts on the ground have shown that PTI backed candidates have won the most seats in the Center, a super majority in KPK, and a 100+ seats in Punjab. 39.48.104.10 (talk) 21:23, 10 February 2024 (UTC)

PTI 103.82.123.35 (talk) 04:55, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

Add PPPP and Asif ali Zardari remove ppp and bilawal bhutto

Because Asif Zardari pppp

runs election not bilawal ppp 202.165.250.113 (talk) 10:46, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

Should PTI be included in the Infobox

2024 Pakistani general election/Archives/ 1

8 February 2024
All 336 seats in the National Assembly 169 seats needed for a majority
Opinion polls
Registered	128,585,760
PTI Leader None Nawaz Sharif Bilawal Bhutto Zardari Party Independent (PTI) PML(N) PPP Leader's seat Lahore-XIV (running) Larkana-I Last election 31.82%, 149 seats 24.35%, 82 seats 13.03%, 54 seats Seats needed 23 87 115
Map of Pakistan with National Assembly constituencies
Incumbent Caretaker Prime Minister Anwaar ul Haq Kakar Independent

This election faces unique circumstances. The nominally independent, PTI candidates have nonetheless campaigned as such (evident by their use of the portrait of former PM Imran Khan for example). PTI is still de facto a participating party. Not to include PTI in the infobox is, in my opinion, misleading. It gives the false impression of PMLN being victorious. 沁水湾 (talk) 18:20, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

@Mmmmmhzhz @War Wounded 沁水湾 (talk) 18:24, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

All Media channels in Pakistan have a separate Candidate box for Independent Candidates affiliated with PTI. Additionally, the PTI has officially backed these Independent candidates. Though, yes, officially PTI has not run these elections, it would be unfair to disregard them as just Independents, especially since they have continuously shown the be one of the 3 major parties. Mmmmmhzhz (talk) 23:05, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

That is just your word and I can reject your word with my word. I have watched all channels, no media channel is showing a separate box for PTI candidates. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 23:56, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

Al Jazeera is 2A00:23C5:11E:F901:11C:59BB:3588:130A (talk) 20:04, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

Geo News has put PTI independents as separate, not only that if the map itself in the infobox has put PTI Independents as separate then so should the infobox. Titan2456 (talk) 20:19, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

Answer the basic question. Do the ballots contain symbols or labels explicitly stating that they are part of the PTI? Otherwise, this proposal would be equivalent to concocting false election results that do not match what official tallies come out and contradict what is actually on the historical record in which we as editors base our judgments on, not WP:OR and opinions. Borgenland (talk) 18:25, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

Furthermore, this proposal appears to be based on a WP:OR assumption that every candidate listed as Independent on the ballot is automatically a member of the PTI. Borgenland (talk) 18:32, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

There isn't an automatic assumption that any independent candidate is a PTI member. IMO, Each elected independent MP must be examined on a case-by-case basis. 沁水湾 (talk) 18:34, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

@Borgenland: There is no indication on the ballot or official candidate listing, and this distinction won't be included in the official notification of results, clarifying who is solely an independent member and who is a PTI-backed candidate. To list them as PTI or PTI-backed would purely be speculation, violating Wikipedia's policy against original research WP:OR and compromising the encyclopedia's integrity. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 00:17, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

It's not OR.

Here's the info box for Pakistan's largest newspaper:

https://www.dawn.com/

Here's the info box for the second largest english newspaper: https://tribune.com.pk/

Here's an AlJazeera article: https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/2/9/pti-linked-independents-take-pakistan-election-lead-as-counting-nears-end

Here's a CNN article: https://www.cnn.com/2024/02/09/asia/pakistan-election-nawaz-sharif-intl/index.html

Here's a BBC article: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-68257232

WP:Reliability requires using reliable secondary sources - and every secondary source list these candidates as "PTI-backed" or "PTI-linked". 131.239.126.251 (talk) 15:29, 10 February 2024 (UTC)

If the map already shows PTI independents as separate in red, then so should the candidates in the infobox. Titan2456 (talk) 16:10, 10 February 2024 (UTC)

I think there shouldn’t be a leader but independent (PTI) should be there with their results Alexanderkowal (talk) 16:13, 10 February 2024 (UTC)

Well, there's an abundance of sources (both Pakistani as well international) explicitly identifying independent candidates backed by PTI as such. Therefore, we should accurately describe them as indicated by independent, reliable sources, rather than conforming to the preferences of the Pakistani government. And they clearly identify Imran Khan as their leader. --Saqib (talk) 16:23, 10 February 2024 (UTC)

I’ve seen your good work on the Ishaq Dar article, there is a section of the article that requires expansion, I thought I should inform you of this. Titan2456 (talk) 16:43, 10 February 2024 (UTC)

I wish I could work on it. On a funny note, I'm finding it uninterested in working on that biography, especially since the person in question has contributed to damaging Pakistan's economy. --Saqib (talk) 16:51, 10 February 2024 (UTC)

Agreed. Titan2456 (talk) 16:55, 10 February 2024 (UTC)

This falls under the category of original research. You need to cite sources confirming that each winning independent candidate identifies Imran Khan as their leader. Simply assuming that every independent identifies Imran Khan as their leader without proper sourcing would constitute original research. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 16:45, 10 February 2024 (UTC)

Kindly care to check-out some sources instead of crying everything is OR. --Saqib (talk) 16:58, 10 February 2024 (UTC)

I checked the sources, I did not find a single source stating that all 102 independents identify Imran Khan as their leader. Do you want to bring 102 sources, one for each independent confirming that each independent identifies Imran Khan as their leader? Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 17:04, 10 February 2024 (UTC)

That’s a straw man, nobody’s saying all independents are PTI affiliated. There are many reliable sources which group independent (PTI), we should use their data Alexanderkowal (talk) 17:09, 10 February 2024 (UTC)

I find it amusing that you cannot read the number of PTI-backed independent candidates are 93. --Saqib (talk) 17:16, 10 February 2024 (UTC)

I agree with you but can you not be so passive aggressive, there’s no need, assume good faith and target the points made Alexanderkowal (talk) 17:17, 10 February 2024 (UTC)

The same thing applies for the map provided in the infobox, the Independent candidates are listed as IND (PTI) Titan2456 (talk) 16:56, 10 February 2024 (UTC)

If the map says there are PTI-backed candidates then so should the candidates list in the infobox, it is contradictory to have a map saying something different and the infobox saying something different. Titan2456 (talk) 17:20, 10 February 2024 (UTC)

In the interest of reaching a consensus, who disagrees with this statement? Alexanderkowal (talk) 17:23, 10 February 2024 (UTC)

Map is wrong, it should be removed, not the other way around. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 17:32, 10 February 2024 (UTC)

Please substantiate that claim Alexanderkowal (talk) 17:33, 10 February 2024 (UTC)

? Titan2456 (talk) 18:10, 10 February 2024 (UTC)

@SheriffIsInTown, explain please. Also, this is currently being discussed for posting ITN, & I recommend updating the infobox before it is on the main page. --Saqib (talk) 18:19, 10 February 2024 (UTC)

I respectfully disagree. As I stated we are dealing with very unique circumstances here. A major party was blocked from using its symbols. But its candidates are nonetheless sticking with their party and campaigning as such. This is a reflection of reality in the ground, far from WP:OR.

Infoboxes should give readers an at-glance understanding of the election result. As much as the flaws, not including political group that won a majority of seat here would be massively misleading. What do you propose instead to aleviate this issue? I’d be eager to await your response. 沁水湾 (talk) 18:32, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

It is more misleading for us editors to usurp the ECP and make a fake set of results listing the PTI when they have not explicitly appeared on the ballot. Therefore, the PTI should remain crossed out. Borgenland (talk) 18:36, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

and at this stage you are already assuming that the majority of independents affiliated with the PTI had won, which seemingly contradicts your proposal to review the independents case by case in your other reply. Borgenland (talk) 18:38, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

“and at this stage you are already assuming that the majority of independents affiliated with the PTI had won” I never said that. Again, instead of deflecting the question, what do you propose to more accurately display the result in the info box. It’s the uneasy question we must answer sooner or later.沁水湾 (talk) 18:41, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

You cannot strictly speaking lump a bunch of independents into one group because they have their own affiliations and don’t strictly share the same party. Borgenland (talk) 18:48, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

Cross out the PTI and Imran Khan and put an others section in its place and leave a footnote instead to explain what is indeed the legal oddity that exists in Pakistan right now. Borgenland (talk) 18:50, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

Again, these is not a bunch of random independents. You can, in most districts, clearly tell who are the PTI candidates and who are the genuine nonpartisans. Not all elections have formal party symbols. Some elections don’t include formal party groupings in the official result tally. This is the only reason for more rigorous examinations. If the de facto majority-winning political group is nothing more than a footnote, the info box is IMO as good as useless. 沁水湾 (talk) 19:00, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

Again, the ability to correctly guess which candidate is PTI linked takes a back seat to what the official records say, in that there is no PTI in this election. As much as you’d think such clarity is useless, it would be a greater disservice for us to be reinventing the election results on the infobox. Borgenland (talk) 19:07, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

Looks like none of us is convincing each other any time soon. Maybe putting it to a vote is the only way forward. 沁水湾 (talk) 19:29, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/2/9/pakistan-election-2024-live-results 2A00:23C5:11E:F901:11C:59BB:3588:130A (talk) 20:07, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

Please refrain from making changes to the infobox based on personal preferences or opinions. It's crucial to adhere to Pakistan's election law, which permits independent candidates to join any party within three days of the official announcement of results. Failure to do so will result in their permanent classification as independent members of the National/Provincial Assembly.

I suggest waiting for the official results and leaving this matter to the Election Commission of Pakistan. War Wounded (talk) 19:00, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

What about including all independent, PTI or otherwise, in the infobox all together behind PMLN & PPP? 沁水湾 (talk) 19:03, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

At this moment, our only course of action is to wait, as we lack official results. It's important to note that not all independent candidates are affiliated or backed by PTI. It would be misleading to imply that all independent candidates are affiliated with PTI. War Wounded (talk) 19:31, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

Majority of Independents are backed by PTI and very few about 2 or 3 are real Independent politicians not backed by any party. Saad Ali Khan Pakistan (talk) 19:15, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

PTI should be added in election box as it is currently leading in most of the constituencies of the country. even in News channels they are shown as separate from other independents. In some seats like in Narowal former PMLN candidate Daniyal Aziz is running as Independent which is not part of PTI. PTI backed Independents being a major party should be added in election box as Independents in PTI color like in the template above. Saad Ali Khan Pakistan (talk) 19:14, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

The PTI-IND should be added as they are running as independents, and are likely to set a SIGNIFICANT weight on the future electoral results. Not adding them would be very misleading to the public as they are currently set to win a plurality of constituencies. VosleCap (talk) 19:36, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

Not adding them would mean literal obstructionism and a false narrative due to the lack of important details VosleCap (talk) 19:37, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

It would be mentioned in the article Haris920 (talk) 19:54, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

Yes It should be added because PTI lead Independents are leading in more than 100 seats of the country. Currently ECP has announced that it will announce results. All results from polling stations has been stopped. Lets see what happens Saad Ali Khan Pakistan (talk) 19:59, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

I am not in favor of including PTI in the infobox because doing that would be against the facts on paper. I am in favor of including Independents in the infobox per their position as long as all independents are counted together regardless of their unofficial position without leader or party color of PTI. Additionally, it's important to note that consensus isn't merely about the number of editors supporting one option over another. Your opinion carries weight only when backed by logical reasoning and factual evidence, rather than simply being an expression of personal preference. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 20:14, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

It is about showing real and neutral results. PTI backed Independents are leading because of votes received by voters on the name of PTI. They are different from other Independents because they got party tickets from PTI prior to the decision by ECP and SC. Not showing PTI in election box is against the real facts. Not showing PTI backed Independents in this article is against neutrality. It is not about personal preference but showing real and neutral data to the World. In 2018 Senate Elections PMLN candidates ran as Independents but they are shown as PMLN candidates in the results with a note saying ran officially as Independents. Even in 1988 Elections MQM ran as Independents but they are shown as Haq Prast group in election results. If 2nd largest party and a regional party is shown than largest party PTI also has right to be shown in election box with a note saying "Running as Independents". Saad Ali Khan Pakistan (talk) 21:18, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

The actual situation is that PTI failed to conduct their intra-party elections as required, resulting in their candidates being declared independent. Once labeled independent, they are officially categorized as such, regardless of any unofficial claims. Depicting them as PTI candidates on Wikipedia would contradict the documented facts and their official status. It wouldn't align with how they'll be officially recognized in the Election Commission of Pakistan's results notification. While the ECP will classify them as independent, a Wikipedia editor might assert they are PTI candidates. However, an encyclopedia should accurately reflect facts, not the subjective interpretations of editors. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 22:56, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

It is not appropriate to add independent candidates to the infobox, as IND's are required to join a party within a specified timeframe, as per election rules[5]. Given PTI's current status as a non-functional party, its WP:TOSOON and uncertain to determine whether PTI backed candidates will join with other parties or remain independent.

Furthermore, the article already addresses multiple instances of PTI-backed candidates contesting as independents. War Wounded (talk) 21:19, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

• Comment If reliable sources give consistent figures on the number of votes received/seats won by PTI independents, then I think they should be included. However, if sources do not give consistent figures on who is or is not a PTI independent, then I don't think it should be included as it is not clear cut enough. Separately, the comment above that we should "adhere to Pakistan's election law, which permits independent candidates to join any party within three days of the official announcement of results" is not how Wikipedia works. The results are presented on the basis of how candidates ran in the election, not whether they defected to another party shortly afterwards (the 2018 Pakistani general election lists the results as they were, not including the independents who joined the PTI after the election). Number 57 21:36, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

  Situation of 2018 was different from 2024. PTI had its election symbol in 2018 but in 2024 Its election symbol was taken back just few days before election. Candidates who received PTI tickets became "PTI backed Independents" after that ruling. See complete information of PTI ticketholders runing as independents[6] In these elections PTI backed Independents received votes and support of PTI voters. They are De-facto PTI candidates running as Independents which are even shown as PTI-backed Independents and shown different from other Independents. Currently they are leading in majority of the seats across the country. Saad Ali Khan Pakistan (talk) 21:47, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

  I'm not sure of your point (?), but just to confirm that I am aware of what happened with the PTI in this election. Number 57 22:13, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

  The Infobox deceives any person unaware of the state of the election, It appears that Fazl-ur-rehman is one of the dominating 3, when in reality is the 4th likeliest candidate. An image of Gohar Ali Khan with Independent (PTI affiliate) should be added. Titan2456 (talk) 22:23, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

  See [7] (Geo)and [8] (ARY) news channels. PTI backed Independents are shown in Red on Geo's map and other independents are shown in grey. They are also differentiating them from other independents by saying "PTI-backed Independents" Saad Ali Khan Pakistan (talk) 22:45, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

  The representation of candidates by ARY or GEO holds no significance. The Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) is the ultimate authority on elections in Pakistan, and until they officially endorse the results, they hold no validity. What do you suppose the ECP's official notification would designate those candidates as: PTI, PTI-backed independents, or Independents? Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 23:04, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

  The De-facto situation is that they are sponsored by PTI. Titan2456 (talk) 23:43, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

  We are supposed to prioritize facto situation over de-facto. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 23:53, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

  No we’re supposed to mirror reliable sources and many reliable sources have PTI (affiliated) as a grouping in their coverage. 2A00:23C5:11E:F901:11C:59BB:3588:130A (talk) 21:24, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

  Not including the PTI picture in the infobox will make it seem as these are just random unrelated independents running, which is not the case. Titan2456 (talk) 22:54, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

• Yes, we should include PTI-supported independent candidates as a separate group, since secondary sources categorize these independents distinctively and we should follow WP:DUE. One of the largest agency, Reuters, described this lead as "Imran Khan's supporters lead", one of the largest Indian newspaper The Hindu described it as Independent candidates backed by ex-PM Imran Khan’s party lead, NY Times described it as Pakistan Is Stunned as Early Election Results Look Like a Real Race, Indian Express described it as Imran Khan’s party-backed independent candidates lead in Pakistan elections, ABC News described it as Independent candidates backed by ex-PM Khan's party lead as Pakistan announces election result, Hindustan Times described it as Independent candidates backed by jailed Imran Khan's PTI claim to 'win' the general elections, Deccan Herald described it as PTI-backed candidates spring surprise. Courtesy ping to Number 57 for their thoughts. I think the consensus among editors here and independent secondary sources is clear. ECP official report is a primary source and we should not give it unnecessary weight. HistoriesUnveiler (talk) 11:39, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

  Borgenland, could you please review the coverage and accordingly share your thoughts again. Thanks. HistoriesUnveiler (talk) 11:40, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

  I support your suggestion. PTI backed Independents should be added as a separate group. Saad Ali Khan Pakistan (talk) 11:42, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

  The largest English-language newspaper of Pakistan, Dawn, categorizes them as a distinct group on its website, see dawn.com, where the term "PTI-backed candidates" is used. HistoriesUnveiler (talk) 11:43, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

  I'm inclined to include them. But only after the final results have been released and with necessary explanatory footnotes to explain why. And only once it is determined which of the candidates are plain independent and which are PTI-affiliates. Borgenland (talk) 11:43, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

  Thanks, a footnote is necessary. HistoriesUnveiler (talk) 11:45, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

  And we should replicate that on provincial election articles as well. HistoriesUnveiler (talk) 11:48, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

  Yes PTI backed Independents have already won more than 75% of the provincial assembly seats in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and also leading in many seats of Punjab as well. we should as them as "PTI-backed Independents" in that list as well Saad Ali Khan Pakistan (talk) 11:58, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

  Yes, "PTI-supported independents" or "PTI-backed independents" is fine. HistoriesUnveiler (talk) 11:59, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

  WP serves as a platform for factual information rather than being a mouthpiece for Pakistan. Our content should reflect the information provided by independent, reliable sources. And as @Number 57 and some others suggested it's appropriate to categorize independent candidates affiliated with PTI as PTI- backed candidates, as their independence does not alter their association. Saqib (talk) 18:24, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

  PTI backed Independents should be categorized separately from other Independents. Saad Ali Khan Pakistan (talk) 18:53, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

  Let us take a hypothetical example of ARY reporting a candidate winning an election but ECP ratifying another candidate winning, who would be correct? Same example will apply here, election results, candidate listing etc should follow official designations. Even if we use an unofficial source, then we need to make sure that we are following the majority of sources. We cannot just follow one unofficial source which is categorizing them as PTI backed candidates over ten sources which are simply categorizing them as independents. Doing this would be WP:FRINGE. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 21:49, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

  PTI backed Independents will be added by tallying from PTI ticket holders list, Valid news sources and Form-47 of the ECP. PTI backed Independents are Ticket holders of PTI. Real Independents which are not backed by PTI will be classified as Independents. Saad Ali Khan Pakistan (talk) 22:18, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

  Should the provisional results by party not also group PTI affiliated candidates differently? Alexanderkowal (talk) 22:30, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

I don't think we should add Independent-PTI with its color as proposed because it seem to me that it will be impossible to have detailled results in terms of votes for specifically PTI independent, backed by sources. Official sources back all the results of independents together. On the other hand, I think we could at least let go of the wiki custom of the independents line being at the bottom of the table. Considering the special context, I think we should place it like the others, ordered by votes. This way it will alleviate some of the concern that it would look misleading to have PML(N) at the top of the table as if it won, which isn't what the sources are saying.--Aréat (talk) 18:18, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

At present, I am not in favor of any inclusion, as the situation is still unclear. Not all independent candidates are necessarily supported by PTI. According to some reports, more than 30% of successful independent candidates have no affiliation with PTI. For instance, in NA-54, a PML-N worker Aqeel Malik did not receive a party ticket but still won the election as an independent candidate[9]. Furthermore, the status of independent candidates remains uncertain.[10] War Wounded (talk) 03:27, 10 February 2024 (UTC)

The fact still remains that there are PTI affiliates present expected to be out of one of the major 3 candidates, therefore it must be added to the infobox. Titan2456 (talk) 04:57, 10 February 2024 (UTC)

Yes all Independents are not PTI backed. I want to add results of each constituency by tallying them from PTI ticket holders list,Form 47 issued by ECP and valid news sources. Saad Ali Khan Pakistan (talk) 06:51, 10 February 2024 (UTC)

Same for Dawn. For infobox proposal. Panam2014 (talk) 11:24, 10 February 2024 (UTC)

I think no need now because MWM has announced unconditional support of PTI so most probably PTI backed candidates may join MWM in next 48-72 hours a/c to ECP's deadline.. In this sense, be ready to add MWM as majority party then beside PML-N in infobox of this article excluding MQM-P simultaneously. Wallu2 (talk) 16:11, 10 February 2024 (UTC)

@War Wounded: Do not continue removing PTI-backed candidates from the infobox under the pretext that not all independent candidates are supported by PTI. We are only listing specific independent candidates who are known to be backed by PTI. --Saqib (talk) 12:12, 11 February 2024 (UTC)

There is no consensus to include Imran Khan in the infobox, as he is a convicted criminal and disqualified from politics, and additionally, no citations have been provided for listing independent candidates as PTI-backed. War Wounded (talk) 12:50, 11 February 2024 (UTC)

I agree it should be heavily cited Alexanderkowal (talk) 12:53, 11 February 2024 (UTC)

@War Wounded: As for consensus, have you bothered to read the discussion above? Are you here to strip him from the infobox solely because he's a convicted criminal and barred from politics, or merely because of an absence of sources? Please clarify your stance. @Alexanderkowal: I've included some Pakistani sources that explicitly identify independent candidates supported by PTI as PTI-backed. These sources mention each candidate linked with PTI. I trust that this satisfies the requirement for now. --Saqib (talk) 14:00, 11 February 2024 (UTC)

PTI-backed Independents will remain as PTI backed independents. If they join Majlis-e-Wahdat ul Muslimeen to claim reserved seats for women than it should be added in Aftermath section. PTI backed Independents received votes in the name of PTI and Imran Khan and Majlis-e-Wahdat ul Muslimeen was in alliance with PTI and PTI supported MWM candidate in NA-37 Kurram seat. Saad Ali Khan Pakistan (talk) 14:11, 11 February 2024 (UTC)

That is a complete opinion, this is not a discussion page, of whether or not Imran Khan is a convicted criminal or not, it doesn’t matter, PTI affiliates are running as independents whether you like it or not, and they should be included in the infobox. Titan2456 (talk) 14:43, 11 February 2024 (UTC)

References

Oppose I do not believe PTI should be included in the infobox as the party did not took part in the elections but PTI-backed independent candidates did. Some of the independents, especially Waseem Qadir of NA-122, have even joined PML-N. Even if one argues PTI's independent candidates should be in the infobox, there's no chance of Imran Khan being in the infobox. He was not a participant in the elections nor is he currently the chairman or president. Jemhorrett (talk) 18:55, 11 February 2024 (UTC)

Given that PTI led independent candidates are mentioned in the infobox, Imran Khan is listed as their leader according to independent & reliable sources, even if he is not running or ineligible for the election. Independent and credible sources identify him as the leader of PTI-backed candidates, and therefore, we're doing the same. --Saqib (talk) 19:16, 11 February 2024 (UTC)

If PTI-led independent candidates are to be mentioned in the infobox, why not have Gohar Ali Khan instead of Imran Khan? As I have seen several sources considered PTI's current leader to be Gohar, who is the current official chairman of PTI, took part in the elections and won his seat. Jemhorrett (talk) 19:55, 11 February 2024 (UTC)

If PTI were to be mentioned in the infobox, Gohar would likely be listed as the leader. However, since we've listed PTI-backed candidates, I believe the de facto leader, Khan, should be included. --Saqib (talk) 20:12, 11 February 2024 (UTC)

In this case, we should add Nawaz and Benazir to 2002 election, same Nawaz for 2018. Panam2014 (talk) 21:54, 11 February 2024 (UTC)

In theory only - I don't think you can find such coverage (like "Nawaz-led PML-N won majority of the seats in Punjab in 2018") for N. Sharif or B. Benazir because their parties still participated in the election process. HistoriesUnveiler (talk) 18:47, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

Situation on that time was far different from situation of today. Benazir and Nawaz left the country after 1999 coup. In both 2002 and 2018 election neither their election symbols were taken away, nor their leaders and candidates were arrested before election. Whole World news and local news channels are now using "PTI backed Independents" and "Imran Khan led PTI" but here you are comparing situations of 2002 and 2018 with 2024. Saad Ali Khan Pakistan (talk) 21:02, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

Yes, this is truly unprecedented. Imran Khan led his party from jail, holding numerous virtual rallies and jalsas. He addressed supporters using an AI-generated voice, effectively circumventing restrictions and censorship. It seems they had answers to every obstacle. HistoriesUnveiler (talk) 21:20, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

@Borgenland, Panam2014, 沁水湾Alexanderkowal, SheriffIsInTown, Number 57, Aréat, Jemhorrett, and Ramen1071:

There is no clear consensus on the inclusion of PTI-backed candidates in the Infobox. Despite this, Saqib continues to add them, alongside convicted and disqualified Imran Khan, who has been legally barred from participating in politics by Pakistani courts. We should wait for 48-72 hours until independent candidates align themselves with parties. It's important not to add them solely based on PTI support in the elections, as legally, independent candidates have the freedom to join any political party. Currently, many PTI-supported independents are joining other political parties.[11][12][13][14] Therefore, it would be misleading to include independent candidates before their status is clear." War Wounded (talk) 19:47, 12 February 2024 (UTC)

Provide a single source which verifies many (as you claiming) PTI-backed independent candidates joined other political party. Only one did so. The remaining individuals who joined PML-N are independent and not supported by PTI. Stop misleading. I asked you yesterday to clarify your stance, but you refuse to answer there. Let me ask you again do you want to exclude PTI/Imran Khan from the infobox because of his conviction and/or disqualification, or because there aren't enough independent reliable sources to justify inclusion of PTI-Independent candidates? What exactly are you aiming for here? --Saqib (talk) 19:58, 12 February 2024 (UTC)

I and several editors have reiterated numerous times that PTI-backed independent candidates shouldn't be added to the info box until they align with a political party and their status is clarified. You persist in deliberately denying it and acting as if you don't understand it. Additionally, Imran Khan has no involvement in the elections; he's a disqualified and convicted criminal serving time in jail. Despite objections from multiple editors, you persist in including him in the info box War Wounded (talk) 18:31, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

It doesn't matter whether you agree or disagree; Wikipedia is not a democracy (see WP:NOTDEMOCRACY). What matters is what reliable sources are quoting, and that contradicts your position. That's why you're still unable to find a reference despite Saqib's challenge. We don't care what primary sources like ECP and the law says, so please refrain from using the "disqualified and convicted criminal serving time in jail" argument - we're all aware of it HistoriesUnveiler (talk) 18:40, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

In Wikipedia, decisions are based on consensus (see WP:Consensus) Many editors are clearly against it. The decision cannot be made by just the two of you. You will need to initiate a thorough discussion and reach a consensus first. War Wounded (talk) 19:13, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

You should name the editors that are against it, rather making general statements without any diff or reference. You should stop wasting community's precious time. If you're a rationale person then come up with reliable references that support your theory. HistoriesUnveiler (talk) 19:47, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

So far only 1 PTI backed Independent from NA-121 has announced to join PML(N).Rest of them are not PTI backed. Don't spread fake rumors Saad Ali Khan Pakistan (talk) 20:01, 12 February 2024 (UTC)

Given that Independents constitute the majority, I advocate for listing them in the number one position. However, I propose grouping all Independents together, as per Pakistan's election laws or the official candidate listing from the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP), which do not differentiate between regular Independents and those backed by the PTI. Under Pakistan’s election law, there's a provision for intra-party elections according to the party's constitution, which PTI failed to adhere to, resulting in the Supreme Court of Pakistan declaring their elections null and void. PTI’s constitution explicitly states that their elected chairman would be the party leader, yet they lack an elected chairman. Considering these discrepancies, my stance has consistently been to categorize all Independents as a single entity, using gray coloring typically associated with independent candidates on Wikipedia, and refrain from including any leader's name or photo. Additionally, I note that there was no consensus, as numerous editors opposed the inclusion of Independents in the infobox. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 21:02, 12 February 2024 (UTC)

Your proposal of adding all Independents into a group is not right. This will mislead readers. Every prominent Media source of the the World and Pakistan are separating PTI backed Independents from other Independents. PTI backed Independents had support of PTI and its voters which makes them different from other Independents. Saad Ali Khan Pakistan (talk) 21:39, 12 February 2024 (UTC)

You have your perspective, and I have mine. However, in terms of reaching a consensus, none was reached. The appropriate next step would have been to initiate an RFC instead of implementing changes to the article without consensus. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 21:51, 12 February 2024 (UTC)

Only you are here not getting agree on anyone's proposal. Whole World Media and even local media is showing PTI backed Independents and other Independents separately and you are showing disagreement on showing PTI backed and other Independents separate. I think this matter should be send to RFC immediately so we could stop spending our time on this discussion and start working on constituency wise election results. Saad Ali Khan Pakistan (talk) 07:37, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

Sheriff should start RfC if they strongly feel about excluding Imran Khan. Consensus based on reliable sources and editors here is pretty clear. HistoriesUnveiler (talk) 18:43, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

I still disagree with the inclusion of PTI-backed independents. However, if they are to be mentioned, as I said earlier, Imran Khan should not be the infobox as he is simply not the PTI party's chairman, not an electoral candidate no nothing right now, same as with Nawaz Sharif during the 2018 Pakistani general election. There is a reason why we have the then-official PML-N leader Shehbaz Sharif on the 2018 election article, not the de facto leader Nawaz Sharif. Same as with the 2002 Pakistani general election where we have the electoral participants, PPP's Ameen Faheem and PML-N's Javed Hashmi, instead of the PPP's de facto leader Benazir Bhutto and the PML-N's de facto leader Nawaz Sharif were not participants in the elections. The infobox of the 2008 Pakistani general election also does not include Sharif as the latter was not a participant in the elections. It seems as a consensus is hardly to be reached here among fellow editors. As SheriffIsInTown suggested, an RFC can be initiated. Jemhorrett (talk) 22:13, 12 February 2024

Symbols

Is there a publicly available set of party symbols we could add to this page for educational purposes? Borgenland (talk) 01:39, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

Yes, we do have on ECPs website. See under List of Contesting Candidates (Form-33). Saqib (talk) 18:04, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

Expect lots of changes in seats after the final results

Already many independents who lost have alleged that they were leading in their constituency, but when the form 47 was issued they were declared to have lost.So yeah these cases will be dragged in courts for a while and will probably result in many seat changes DrWineBerry (talk) 03:09, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

Constituency tables

Currently building a constituency table. Appreciate any faster hands who can collaborate for all 266 seats. Borgenland (talk) 08:58, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

I'll start working on it Saad Ali Khan Pakistan (talk) 11:04, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

Thanks! I'm currently stuck in Punjab right now. Didn't realize immediately that they had the bulk of the seats. Borgenland (talk) 11:13, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for your work on it. I think it would be more interesting to have the first column be the 2019 winner and the second the 2024 winner, though, to show which constituencies seats changed party. It's what is usually done one on FFTP election pages.--Aréat (talk) 15:04, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

I copied the template from the 2018 election. Will leave such revisions to other more experienced editors since it's actually my first time making an electoral table like this. Also, it appears that they lopped off around six seats from Khyber Pakhtunkhwa this election. Borgenland (talk) 17:04, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

where is constituency wise result table? It is not there now. Saad Ali Khan Pakistan (talk) 06:52, 10 February 2024 (UTC)

See also: List of members of the 16th National Assembly of Pakistan. Borgenland (talk) 07:16, 10 February 2024 (UTC)

There should be List of winners and runner ups by constituency. It will show the turnout, vote share and percentage of winner and runner up of each constituency. It should be there in results. Saad Ali Khan Pakistan (talk) 07:34, 10 February 2024 (UTC)

There was a short discussion in that page. I advise making your case to the editors there. Borgenland (talk) 08:03, 10 February 2024 (UTC)

Yes, table is necessary because it gives us basic overview of winner and runner up candidates, their parties, vote share and turnout of constituencies they represent. I started working of Balochistan constituencies winner and runner up list as of Form-47 issued by the ECP Saad Ali Khan Pakistan (talk) 08:43, 10 February 2024 (UTC)

Unclear column in table under the section: Parties

Under the section Parties, in the table it is unclear what the column "Seats before elections" means. Which election are we talking about? the column before lists numbers from 2018, which is the last election already, so which seats are these in the last column? Sy.mehdi.riz (talk) 23:43, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

PTI Splinter groups

PTI splinter groups i.e IPP and PTI-P(K) should be highlighted in the tables and text to give readers the view of how parties are related. These splinter groups separating from PTI held large numbers of MNAs, MPA, indicating sizeable loss to PTI in months before elections. Highlighting this in the tables and text will show how these groups performed in the elections. Sy.mehdi.riz (talk) 23:48, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

Khan is not legally a candidate

Please quit including him in the infobox.Speakfor23 (talk) 09:52, 10 February 2024 (UTC)

Him and his party are confirmed to be affiliated with several independents Titan2456 (talk) 14:56, 11 February 2024 (UTC)

Agreed. If anything Gohar Ali Khan as the party chairman should be included. There’s also precedence for this. In the article for the 2002 elections, both Nawaz Sharif and Benazir Bhutto aren’t in the info box and instead Party Chairmen at the time are. 2603:7000:8F00:1D2A:9D47:7C44:112C:AF82 (talk) 17:49, 11 February 2024 (UTC)

It is the same in Ireland but we dont calss them as being members of parties 82.39.79.164 (talk) 22:53, 11 February 2024 (UTC)

Affiliated but according to official state law they are subjected to join a party which they cannot join PTI therefore it is baseless adding khan or PTI here in the titles Iiiiiill345 (talk) 08:14, 16 February 2024 (UTC)

Every single official news agency has counted PTI as separate from other independents, also I agree that at wikipedia we are supposed to cover the de-jure situation but we can’t be completely ignorant to the de-facto situation. Titan2456 (talk) 14:57, 16 February 2024 (UTC)

So what about the other articles about previous elections which showed other parties leaders who were at the time disqualified not being shown instead the replacements are shown in the box? State Law considers Barrister Gohar as the Current Chairman of the party as de-jure. Independents however according to Pakistan do not have a leader unless they join a Party Iiiiiill345 (talk) 15:04, 16 February 2024 (UTC)

Refer to the section above called “ Should PTI be included in the Infobox”, a whole discussion has already happened on this. Titan2456 (talk) 15:09, 16 February 2024 (UTC)

PPPP

Hi @Muzzzmuzzmuzzz, Number 57, Saad Ali Khan Pakistan, Wallu2, SheriffIsInTown, and RaiHassan1: @Wiki.0hlic, Titan2456, Alexanderkowal, VosleCap, War Wounded, Borgenland, Mmmmmhzhz, and 沁水湾: PPP contested as Pakistan Peoples Party Parliamentarians. We should put it. Panam2014 (talk) 11:30, 10 February 2024 (UTC)

same @Saqib: Panam2014 (talk) 11:32, 10 February 2024 (UTC)

PPP and PPPP are same Saad Ali Khan Pakistan (talk) 11:34, 10 February 2024 (UTC)

@Saad Ali Khan Pakistan: sure, but we should put official names. Panam2014 (talk) 11:46, 10 February 2024 (UTC)

Yes, they contested as PPPP, we should include that. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 12:17, 10 February 2024 (UTC)

I agree Muzzzmuzzmuzzz (talk) 19:13, 10 February 2024 (UTC)

Removing rigging information

@SheriffIsInTown YOUR attempt to censor information on election rigging is concerning. Several credible foreign media reports directly implicate the military of rigging which took place. Please expalain why you trying to remove it. Saqib (talk) 14:03, 10 February 2024 (UTC)

Sources are misinterpreted to create a story based on WP:SYNTH, in addition to that, there are under discussion changes to infobox. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 14:23, 10 February 2024 (UTC)

Allegations of the vote rigging involving military have garnered significant attention from reputable international media outlets. You cannot simply whitewash it. --Saqib (talk) 15:07, 10 February 2024 (UTC)

I haven't come across detailed sources explaining how the military rigged the elections; most of them seem to be speculative. Have any reporters met with the Army Chief or ISI Chief, who then admitted to orchestrating election rigging? Are there any sources providing solid evidence? We shouldn't blindly include wild accusations based solely on speculative reports; not everything reported in the media is suitable for an encyclopedia. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 15:35, 10 February 2024 (UTC)

Glad that GHQ is sending people to edit Wikipedia, great use of their time and resources Tala hayat (talk) 16:04, 10 February 2024 (UTC)

Don’t make wild accusations, everyone is free to edit Wikipedia. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 16:41, 10 February 2024 (UTC)

Yet important context is being removed. VosleCap (talk) 17:33, 10 February 2024 (UTC)

@SheriffIsInTown: Are you suggesting that the military must acknowledge its involvement in rigging the election? --Saqib (talk) 17:49, 10 February 2024 (UTC)

I'm proposing that a source simply stating that the military rigged the election isn't sufficient; the source should offer accompanying evidence to support the claim. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 17:54, 10 February 2024 (UTC)

Where in Wikipedia policy are editors asked to assess reliable sources for accompanying evidence of their claims? We aren’t journalists. We report what reliable sources say. We assess e.g. the BBC as reliable as a whole—not individual BBC stories as reliable. If there are reliable sources alleging military rigging, we should cite them. That is the only question to be asked. Docentation (talk) 04:27, 11 February 2024 (UTC)

Yeah if I was rigging an election the first thing I’d do is tell an international news source about rigging an election. Ramen1071 (talk) 03:49, 11 February 2024 (UTC)

Since the disputed text is already present in the article, there's no need to continue debating this matter. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 04:54, 11 February 2024 (UTC)

This was already enough. I have reported User:SheriffIsInTown. Please share your comments on the noticeboard. HistoriesUnveiler (talk) 18:41, 10 February 2024 (UTC)

Re-poll on NA-88 Khushab-II

A re-polling order has been made in regards to NA-88 Khushab-II for 15 February 2024. Should we mark the seat as “postponed” or wait until the re-polling is done to colour in the winning party/candidate. @Muzzzmuzzmuzzz, Number 57, Saad Ali Khan Pakistan, Wallu2, SheriffIsInTown, and RaiHassan1: @Wiki.0hlic, Titan2456, Alexanderkowal, VosleCap, War Wounded, Borgenland, Mmmmmhzhz, and 沁水湾:

Source: https://www.brecorder.com/news/40288217 Muzzzmuzzmuzzz (talk) 19:17, 10 February 2024 (UTC)

It should be marked as postponed because It will have re-poll along with NA-8 Saad Ali Khan Pakistan (talk) 14:07, 11 February 2024 (UTC)

Why leave out PTI independents when you clearly show a map highlighting PTI (independents). Also this doesn’t include the form 45 maps in which many of these seats added are disputed.

It just seems counterproductive. Ramen1071 (talk) 03:45, 11 February 2024 (UTC)

I agree it does seem to be favoring the Army preferred spin that Sharif won over what actually happened.Dejvid (talk) 07:49, 11 February 2024 (UTC)

Only official sources matter, not party claims. 2603:7000:8F00:1D2A:9D47:7C44:112C:AF82 (talk) 17:48, 11 February 2024 (UTC)

Trimming repetitive analysis

@Borgenland: Thanks for editing the statement/analysis and making necessary adjustments, but please ensure not to remove crucial elements. Saqib (talk) 14:06, 11 February 2024 (UTC)

I'm trying my best in copyediting. Usually if it's mentioned earlier at the top advise that there's not need to include it again. Thanks for this advice though. Borgenland (talk) 14:09, 11 February 2024 (UTC)

TOI remarks is to the point, they never won a war, never lost an election. --Saqib (talk) 14:48, 11 February 2024 (UTC)

@Borgenland: You removed some interesting elements. --Saqib (talk) 17:14, 11 February 2024 (UTC)

Same talking point as before. Some words need further clarification and have been written as if this was the encyclopedia's voice rather than the source itself. Suggest you use quotation marks. Borgenland (talk) 17:17, 11 February 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 12 February 2024

Please update the official results. The data given is not official data as per ECP. 2400:ADC1:440:E00:CC26:5DCC:37C7:1BB0 (talk) 04:44, 12 February 2024 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Shadow311 (talk) 16:57, 12 February 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 13 February 2024

These election results are based on only 10% to 20% of polling stations. These are not the final results is the only official website from Government of Pakistan to publish official results. These results are not correct Bizusa (talk) 03:37, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

References

 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 and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Jamedeus (talk) 02:08, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 13 February 2024 (2)

--Bizusa (talk) 03:54, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

Results: Unofficial early count data showed PTI-backed Independents leading in 148 constituencies, with PML-N leading in 43, and PPP leading in 47. Others led in 27 seats.[126][127]

Correction: The initial Data was only based on 10% to 15% of polling stations results. So you can't predict the final results based on the 10% to 20% of initial polling stations results The final election results show that

PTI-backed Independents leading in 93 constituencies, with PML-N leading in 79, and PPP leading in 54.

Jamal Abdul Jamal Abdul Bizusa (talk) 03:54, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

References

 Not done: Unclear what change wanted Goldsztajn (talk) 21:21, 22 March 2024 (UTC)

Final Result

Final results after 100% of the polling stations PTI-backed Independents won 93 National Assembly Seats PML-N won in 79 National Assembly Seats. PPP won 54 National Assembly Seats. MQM-P won 17 National Assembly Seats. JUIF won 5 National Assembly Seats. JUIF won 4 National Assembly Seats.

Jamal Abdul USA R Bizusa (talk) 04:03, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

Agree. Why election results are being removed and a single party PTI rhetoric of election rigging is over emphasised. Almost 90 percent of is capturing single point agenda. Election results are sourced. Gallup, IPOR, IPS surveys are sourced from official websites. If not resolved I will move to Administration notice board for partial actions of few users. LingoSouthAsia (talk) 10:17, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

Your content is being removed because you're using unreliable sources and adding original research. --Saqib (talk) 10:22, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

All is sourced very well and if you continue edit war I will ask Admin intervention against Vandalism. LingoSouthAsia (talk) 10:27, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

References

Independents should be at third place

We're prematurely assuming that independents will occupy third place, overlooking the fact that they cannot claim reserved seats. Once these seats are allotted, independents will indeed occupy third place. Pakistani election laws dictate a specific equation for allocating seats, so it would be wise to use common sense and move independents to third place to avoid misleading readers. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 18:28, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

“Parties” section

Is there a reason the “Parties” section only mentions the 2018 election instead of mentioning this election too? Blaylockjam10 (talk) 00:27, 14 February 2024 (UTC)

That's pretty standard across national election articles on Wikipedia. The table is meant to highlight the contesting political parties. This election is already put in the results section and wouldn't make sense to duplicate that information. Some random examples I've pulled: 2021 German, 2016 South Korean, 2022 Brazilian. Yeoutie (talk) 21:27, 14 February 2024 (UTC)

Possibly non-existent source

On 13 February, PTI chair Gohar Ali Khan announced the publication of a white paper on the discrepancy between the polling station Form 45's overall results and the ECP's constituency-level Form 47, supposedly based on the former. He alleged a total of 180 national assembly seats, equivalent to 68% of the directly elected ones, and over two-thirds of Punjab's Provincial Assembly were won by the PTI and, therefore liable to be recovered through the Provincial High Courts. According to the white paper, PTI-affiliated candidates won 115 national assembly seats in Punjab, 42 seats in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, 16 seats in Sindh, four seats in Balochistan, and all three seats in Islamabad. It also said that the PML-N came in second place with a total of 17 directly-elected seats in the national assembly.

I flagged this with a tag since the keywords for this statement cannot be found in the live feed from which it supposedly came from. Furthermore, the editor primarily responsible for this has taken upon themselves to pester me on my personal talk page without bothering to discuss it here. Borgenland (talk) 17:47, 14 February 2024 (UTC) Borgenland (talk) 17:47, 14 February 2024 (UTC)

Partly fixed just now. Borgenland (talk) 19:25, 14 February 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 15 February 2024

leader1 = Omar Ayub Khan leader2 = Shehbaz Sharif leader3 = Bilawal Bhutto Zardari 202.125.129.27 (talk) 09:41, 15 February 2024 (UTC)

 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 and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Sincerely, Guessitsavis (she/they) (Talk) 16:18, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

LEADE has been balanced

After changes by me it covers everything, First process, Second results, Third controversies (Allegations of rigging) and Last Govt formation . Over emphasis of one point agenda has been nuetralized. LingoSouthAsia (talk) 04:45, 16 February 2024 (UTC)

I also added the facts that how Imran's Governments was removed. It was a due legal procedure of No confidence motion. How party lost its election symbol, Due to failure in meeting election commision's requirement to hold intra party elections to bring democratic culture in PTI and follow the election Act but PTI failed despite two years continiuos orders by election commision voilationg election laws. LingoSouthAsia (talk) 05:03, 16 February 2024 (UTC)

Help me in putting togater many assembled sources to this factual state of affairs where. Many parties rejected election results however no party denied to parlimentary participation giving legitimacy to election 2024 and decided to file apeals for constituency where such parties alleged rigging. LingoSouthAsia (talk) 05:10, 16 February 2024 (UTC)

You are repeatedly deleting properly sourced content citing invalid reasons like copyvio, while adding your own commentary to the page, repeatedly. --Saqib (talk) 07:36, 16 February 2024 (UTC)

Explain to me why imran khan is being added here instead of barrister gohar when imran khan is disqualified and barred from holding office? He is not contesting elections either nor his party is contesting elections Iiiiiill345 (talk) 08:18, 16 February 2024 (UTC)

I agree with Iiiiiill345 therefore Saqib Kindly dont spoil the article with on sided cherry picking. I have included rigging allegations in third para with enough details. The para you are re adding is repeating as it has full details in all parts of article thanks to you for this still I never removed that rigging over cry and just balanced the LEADE as per purpose to give full information from all angles. You have lost your case on Admin noticeboard already so please avoid edit war otherwise I have a very strong case to topic ban you and few other PTI supporters from Wikipedia. Please dont use WP for your personal political choices. LingoSouthAsia (talk) 08:20, 16 February 2024 (UTC)

@Borgenland: Second paragraph The Election Commission of Pakistan announced the detailed schedule on 1....... seems inappropriate for inclusion in the lead.. --Saqib (talk) 10:47, 16 February 2024 (UTC)

It sounds like a WP:NOTGUIDE but I think opinions of other editors are needed. Borgenland (talk) 10:48, 16 February 2024 (UTC)

I've re-added the rigging allegation into the lead section, because the content is based on the widespread reporting of the allegations and the fact that its inclusion does not violate WP's policies. If anyone disagrees with its presence in the lead, they should provide reasoned arguments rather than simply dismissing it as one-sided cherry-picking. --Saqib (talk) 11:30, 16 February 2024 (UTC)

References

Election Commission Declaring Independents as Independents and Imran Khan's Disqualification

1. First Of All The Election Commission of Pakistan Results Show all Independents as Independents there is no such thing as PTI backed all independents whether they are " PTI BACKED " or not are subjected to join a party which already has started to happen

2. Imran Khan has been disqualified and Barred from holding office therefore the Party Chairman Barrister Gohar should be added here instead of him as this has happened to other parties too for example: Shahbaz Sharif in 2018 Iiiiiill345 (talk) 08:13, 16 February 2024 (UTC)

I believe this has been discussed at Talk:2024_Pakistani_general_election#Should_PTI_be_included_in_the_Infobox. --Saqib (talk) 08:20, 16 February 2024 (UTC)

WP Op-ed

@SheriffIsInTown: May I ask why you're deleting the reference to the editorial board piece of the Washington Post, labeling it as an opinion piece? Saqib (talk) 20:05, 16 February 2024 (UTC)

It states big bold "Opinion" in the title, when WP, itself is describing it as "Opinion", why would you consider it any thing other than an opinion piece? Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 20:34, 16 February 2024 (UTC)

Are you open to removing this source along with the corresponding text it supports? Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 15:00, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

No, unless there's policy to not use editorials. --Saqib (talk) 15:42, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

Op-ed stands for opinion-editorial which means in other words, an editorial based on opinion, not on facts. Washington Post describes this editorial of theirs as "opinion" in the title, why would they do so if it was based on facts essentially making this an op-ed, in other words an editorial based on opinion. According to my knowledge, op-eds are never considered reliable sources, we cannot use them to support facts especially grave allegations such as rigging. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 18:09, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

Unofficial early results

@SheriffIsInTown: You changed the early election results mentioning that the source states 61 independents including those backed by PTI, where did 148 number come from but I looked at the source but was unable to verify claims of 61 seats either. Where did you get this figure from? Please provide the link to that source here.

I did some search and found differing results from differing sources so we've to be caution when interpreting early election results. But most of the sources says PTI was leading in at-least 90 NA seats. Saqib (talk) 11:23, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

"As of 5:00 p.m. local time, the ECP had chalked up 43 seats for the PML-N and 61 for independents, including those backed by the PTI." Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 14:56, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

References

Why would you depend on a foreign news agency to report on early election results? Ideally, one should use a local news source instead, wouldn't it? --Saqib (talk) 15:51, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

It's irrelevant, if we can rely on foreign news agencies to substantiate allegations of rigging; we should apply the same standard for obtaining other data as well. We must avoid double standards and refrain from cherry-picking information based on personal preferences. Whether a source supports the viewpoint of a particular political party, such as PTI, should not determine its credibility. Additionally, I did not add the source; it was either included by you (as you've been primarily involved in that section) or by another editor. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 16:04, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

@Quinnnnnby: You made this edit but we couldn't verify it. --Saqib (talk) 16:57, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

As a result of this edit, a rumor circulated on social media suggesting that PTI was on track to win 150 seats, despite no credible source supporting such a claim. Only this Wikipedia article came close to mentioning the 150-seat figure, highlighting the consequences of not rigorously assessing our sources. Unfortunately, this Wikipedia article inadvertently became a vehicle for spreading misinformation. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 17:14, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

Can you share some links to those posts? --Saqib (talk) 17:34, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

I stated that based on this. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 17:38, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

Well on 8 February PTI claimed to have won over 150 seats. And second, I found several reliable sources indicating PTI's lead in over 100 seats in the initial results. --Saqib (talk) 17:44, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

@SheriffIsInTown I would disagree with that characterisation of the situation, PTI has claimed 'more than' 150 seats according to many sources, as has already been said. They are dated prior to the edit if I have done the maths correctly. Quinby (talk) 18:11, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

A party can claim as many seats as they want, it is just their claim, it does not mean that they were actually winning on that many seats. Your edits stated "Unofficial early count data showed PTI-backed Independents leading in 148 constituencies" and you supported that with a source which stated that they were winning on 61 seats. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 18:24, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

@Saqib I was working on the basis of the Asia Elects reporting on the preliminary results, which showed up to 3AM. At the time, no news source was reporting on 3AM, so I used the most up to date one I could find, in the hope that one would be published soon that could be cited alongside the 11PM one. I do apologise for any confusion caused. Quinby (talk) 17:58, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

2024 Pakistani prime ministerial election

Hi @Muzzzmuzzmuzzz, Number 57, Saad Ali Khan Pakistan, Wallu2, SheriffIsInTown, and RaiHassan1: @Wiki.0hlic, Titan2456, Alexanderkowal, VosleCap, War Wounded, Borgenland, Mmmmmhzhz, and 沁水湾: @Aréat:

We should split into new article called 2024 Pakistani prime ministerial election because for first time there are no clear majority and candidates, both Shehbaz Sharif and Omar Ayoub Khan attempt to secure a majority. Panam2014 (talk) 11:30, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

Oppose. Too little information to merit a separation. Borgenland (talk) 11:37, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

I think making a separate page on PM election is not a good idea. election of PM should be added in this article like 2018_Pakistani_general_election#Government_formation Saad Ali Khan Pakistan (talk) 12:17, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

We have lots. Panam2014 (talk) 12:29, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

Invalid WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS argument. There would have to be more significant circumstances rather than a hung parliament, where any of the major parties have a higher shot at making a government. Borgenland (talk) 12:34, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

I think it depends how large this section gets. Currently I don't think it's big enough to justify splitting, but it it ends up trebling in size, then perhaps. Cheers, Number 57 13:10, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

There are a political crisis in Pakistan. Panam2014 (talk) 13:19, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

The size of which is WP:TOOSOON for now. Borgenland (talk) 13:21, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

Oppose: I agree with Borgenland and others who oppose the idea of splitting, as it is premature to determine whether we will have sufficient material to warrant a separate article. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 14:30, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

Oppose: Too little information, the article would be too short and likely a stub, and officially these are still general elections. Titan2456 (talk) 15:45, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

Oppose: it's really not needed as stated above, and even in countries like Japan where it's the custom to have a distinct election for the Prime minister, not just a vote of confidence, we don't have separate pages on the wiki. --Aréat (talk) 16:23, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 18 February 2024

PTI seats are wrongly mentioned 94.204.35.95 (talk) 15:52, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

 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 and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Sincerely, Guessitsavis (she/they) (Talk) 16:17, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

Popular vote figures can be found here

https://elections.dunyanews.tv/election2024/election_result.php?assembly=national

PTI/IND: 31.62 (-0.20) 19,159,540 PML-N: 23.10 (-1.25) 13,995,383 PPP: 13.59 (+0.56) 8,235,692 75.99.225.59 (talk) 00:52, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 19 February 2024

PTI chairman is Gohar Ali Khan. PMLN president is Shahbaz Sharif thus it is suggested to use their images here. Talhar867 (talk) 15:23, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

 Not done, as it will be hard to reach that consensus. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 15:27, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

Why is this up for debate? In previous election’s articles, only the President/Chairman of the party who is also contesting elections him or herself is included. Check the 2002 elections. Neither Nawaz Sharif or Benazir Bhutto present despite being leaders of the party because they were barred from contesting and their parties were technically led by other people who were contesting. Same with Nawaz Sharif in 2018. Either we go back and change those articles or revise this to be consistent with that. 2603:7000:8F00:1D2A:98F1:8859:F499:71E6 (talk) 03:13, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

We're actually a bit flexible on this. What we want to display in these infoboxes is who the party is putting forward as their candidate for the job. Almost always, that's the party leader, but it is sometimes the case that a party will instead put forward someone else. This is fairly common for German elections, for example, where the Social Democratic Party of Germany often puts forward a "chancellor candidate" who is not actually a party leader, and Wikipedia's articles reflect that (Olaf Scholz was the party's candidate in the 2021 election, and lead the party's campaign, but he's not actually part of the party's leadership).

So with that in mind, that explains PML-N. Nawaz Sharif may not be the party president, but he was nevertheless who the party was putting forward as their candidate for the top job — that was the entire basis of their campaign — so it makes sense to have him in the infobox. Even though Shahbaz Sharif is the party president, and even though he seems likely to become the PM… that's not the role he took during the campaign.

What to do with PTI is a trickier. Imran Khan is currently in prison so obviously can't return to office… but despite that, if I'm reading this right, it doesn't seem like the party actually put forward a "PM candidate" until after the election (Omar Ayub Khan). So, that means we should stick to the party leader, and this seems to still be Khan — at least that's how the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf article puts it, but it's hard to determine the legal situation here, since there's a whole controversy about their leadership positions. I'm really not where what to do here, honestly. — Kawnhr (talk) 21:40, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

Despite Imran Khan's legal troubles and removal as chairman, he's still widely recognized as the leader of PTI by supporters, the general public as well the media. A quick search would confirm that he is consistently portrayed by media as the leader of the party. --Saqib (talk) 23:36, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

You know, point taken. If the idea is to represent a party with their most prominent figure, then it's not actually important whether Khan is still the legal leader or not, because he's understood to still be directing it. So I agree it makes sense to keep him in the infobox. — Kawnhr (talk) 17:00, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 19 February 2024 (2)

Change "Sikandar Sultan Raja" to "Sikandar Sultan Raja" Waonderer (talk) 16:43, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

 Already done Per MOS:DUPLICATELINK, page links are only repeated at the first occurrence in a major section. The current linking is adequate. Jamedeus (talk) 02:12, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

Allegations of rigging

This section needs major rescrutiny. An editor who has recently been blocked for being a sockpuppet left behind tons of unsubstantiated information, WP:OR, WP:SYNTH edits unsupported by refs they posted and other serious and misleading content which has also been crossposted to Electoral fraud in Pakistan. Calling all veteran editors in this article to double check keywords in the section to see if any of them match the sources cited. Borgenland (talk) 15:24, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

Moved to Talk:2024_Pakistani_general_election#Excessive_details_in_allegations_of_rigging

Excessive details in allegations of rigging

@Borgenland: You tagged excessive citations and I believe that section falls under WP:TOOMUCH. I suggest you trim down the excessive detail for better readability and conciseness and also remove excessive citations. Saqib (talk) 16:25, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

I tagged it so that others can remove the detail. I'm still cleaning out the Electoral fraud page since a lot of these details were crossposted by a sock who was also mostly responsible for the shoddy way in which the excessive citations and most probably unsubstantiated details were inserted (see above). At this moment, I am not in a position to revert here lest more content disputes come out. Borgenland (talk) 16:29, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

I hadn't seen your above thread. I agree with your assessment. @SheriffIsInTown: Can you take the plunge? --Saqib (talk) 16:55, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

@Borgenland: What do you think of this edit. --Saqib (talk) 23:38, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

Hopefully a clean start. Will personally check later if some important things got left out. Borgenland (talk) 00:01, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

Removal of PTI/Imran Khan from infobox, again

@SheriffIsInTown: Firstly, how can you claim that "almost all media call them SIC members" ? Saqib (talk) 23:40, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

Instead of making changes in haste, I suggest you discuss contentious matters first. Despite our detailed discussions above, I've noticed you're making unilateral changes without reaching consensus first. --Saqib (talk) 06:50, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Splitting

@Ainty Painty: You created a new pg called Allegations of rigging in the 2024 Pakistani general election using material from this page and then transferred a significant portion of the rigging allegations and International analysis, Disinformation, and even Formation of Punjab provincial governments (why?) from this page to that one. However, I don't believe this split is justified at the moment. Typically, a split should occur when an article becomes too large or when material is deemed inappropriate due to being out of scope. In this case, I don't see either of these issues arising. However, if you or others feel that a split is necessary, let's discuss it further here. Saqib (talk) 10:54, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

They already created it so what is to discuss, editors do not need to obtain permission from a higher authority before contributing. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 11:44, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Who said that he needed permission from a higher authority before contributing? In fact, I applaud him for taking the plunge & creating the page. However, I'm just seeking justification for the split I don't feel that a split is necessary at this point, which is why I reverted back and started this thread to gather opinions on why a split is needed. --Saqib (talk) 11:51, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

My intention was to ensure that the information is organized in a way that is easy for readers to navigate and understand. I thought that the allegations of rigging were significant enough to warrant their own page, and I moved the related sections to maintain the context. Moreover, the main article is for the election, its coverage, and results. It seems these accusations and opinions will not stop until the next election, and the text is constantly expanding (almost crossed 50,000 texts). This interrupts the flow of the main article. The best way to deal with this is to create a sub-article. If we have sub-articles for other topics, why not on this one?–Ainty Painty (talk) 13:44, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

I agree with AP's assertion that this article has all become about allegations of rigging and with the speed Saqib is going, we do not think the expansion of the allegations section is going to stop until the next election thus it is prudent to move allegations related content from this article to separate article Allegations of rigging in 2024 Pakistani general election as was rightfully done by AP earlier. When a separate article already exists then we do not need to keep allegations at both pages, we can have elections article a more balanced version with summary of rigging allegations while keeping a dedicated article for rigging allegations which we can keep expanding until eternity. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 16:11, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

What a silly argument to suggest that I would continuously add rigging allegations to this page until the next election (in 2029). Your remarks seem to imply that I'm here solely to add rigging allegations and nothing else, which is not the case. Anyways, while I agree that this or any article shouldn't be too long, I don't think this one is long enough yet to warrant a split. Per WP:HASTE, There is no need for haste in splitting an article when it starts getting large. Sometimes an article simply needs to be big to give the subject adequate coverage.

What concerned me was that User:Ainty Painty created a page with the title "Allegations of rigging in the 2024.....," but then xe moved the International Analysis section from this election page to that pg. And not only that, but also removed the same Analysis section from this election page as well. Ainty Painty, Can you explain why? I would like to hear and understand why the Analysis section is belongs to the Allegations of Rigging article (which you created). I hope its safe to say that you were going to do the same with the Allegations section as well, removing it from this page citing reasons that all information belongs to that new article and not here. well I would call it a breach of NPOV. Maybe consider shortening the allegations or analysis section if you think it's overly detailed (although I'm not sure if anything in these sections is irrelevant or out of scope) but SPLIT is clearly uncalled, as of now.--Saqib (talk) 17:17, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

I appreciate your concern and understand where you’re coming from. The reason I moved the International Analysis section to the Allegations of rigging in the 2024 Pakistani general election page is because it provides a broader context to the allegations. It’s not just about the allegations themselves, but also about how they are perceived and analyzed internationally. This context is important for readers who want to understand the full scope of the issue.

As for the Allegations section, my intention was not to remove it entirely from the main election page. Rather, I wanted to streamline it and provide a summary with a link to the detailed allegations page for those who want more in-depth information. This way, the main election page remains focused on the election itself, while still providing access to detailed information about the allegations.

I understand your concern about NPOV, and I assure you that my intention was not to breach it. My goal was to organize the information in a way that is easy for readers to navigate and understand. I’m open to discussing further adjustments.- Ainty Painty (talk) 03:08, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

One question though. It appears that there is currently NO dedicated standalone article solely focused on allegations of election rigging. This is an interesting, however, this raises the question of whether such an article will remain or can face deletion?. --Saqib (talk) 00:18, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

That’s a valid concern, Saqib. The existence of a standalone article depends on several factors, including the notability of the subject, the availability of reliable sources, and the article’s compliance with Wikipedia’s content policies and guidelines.

In the case of the “Allegations of rigging in the 2024 Pakistani general election”, it would need to meet these criteria to avoid deletion. If the allegations are notable, well-documented in reliable sources, and the article is written in a neutral point of view, it should be able to stand as its own article. Ainty Painty (talk) 02:09, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

OK I'm fine with removing WP:EXCESSDETAIL from this page. @Borgenland: Would you be willing to volunteer some time for this task? --Saqib (talk) 09:53, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

Once my laptop is fully charged. I’m already eyeing parts of the reactions. Borgenland (talk) 09:56, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

@Borgenland: Reminder. --Saqib (talk) 09:14, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

Merged Chattha paragraphs. Suggest moving MQM in government formation, removing that commentary on the role of commissioners since the refs date from 2021. And see what could be culled from the Form 45 since there is still residue from that sock and that is what made the bulk of this section nearly unreadable. Borgenland (talk) 10:15, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

@Borgenland: Feel free to move MQM in gov formation section. removing that commentary on the role of commissioners since the refs date from 2021 Please explain this. And see what could be culled from the Form 45 which paragraph exactly? --Saqib (talk) 10:39, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

Find some way to merge the Form 45 claims with the PMLN reaction into one paragraph without making it bulky. I’ve tried it with sentences. As for the division commissioner I’m no exactly sure whether it is written as wikivoice or a commentary on the part of some user. And one sentenced was reffed by a source dated 3 years before this election. Borgenland (talk) 10:43, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

I rearranged some lines, but yes, the para to be condensed. We should explain the Form 45/Form 47 saga. By the way, which sentence sounds like wikivoice, and which ref is years-old ? --Saqib (talk) 13:56, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

@SheriffIsInTown: Your latest edits have significantly reduced the amount of information in the section. and then you left the section without a single references, making it vulnerable to being marked as OR which can be deleted altogether. --Saqib (talk) 09:35, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

@SheriffIsInTown: Thought I let you know that you overlooked moving this information. IMO, you removed too much information from [Allegations of rigging] & I have some reservations about it. I'll detail them here later. @Borgenland: what you think? --Saqib (talk) 16:38, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

Sorry replying just now since my cat died yesterday. I think the major source of the retractions should at least be mentioned here. Borgenland (talk) 14:37, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

So sorry to hear about your cat's passing. Sending condolences during this difficult time.. Exactly, I appreciate if you could restore some content. I trust your judgement. --Saqib (talk) 17:30, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

by that at least mention Chattha. Borgenland (talk) 17:33, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

Done. What else? --Saqib (talk) 17:48, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

@Borgenland Why must we retain all details about Chattha in this article when the main article already covers everything comprehensively? A medium-sized paragraph summary of all allegations would suffice. The initial summary paragraph even references his admission without explicitly naming him.

Revelations of electoral fraud surfaced, including admissions from officials implicated in rigging.

I believe dedicating three additional paragraphs to Chattha in this article is unnecessary. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 18:52, 21 March 2024 (UTC)

I didn’t say give it a full blown- treatment. At least one mention and 2-3 sentences outlining what he claimed and what happened afterwards would suffice. Borgenland (talk) 18:56, 21 March 2024 (UTC)

Popular vote

Hi @Muzzzmuzzmuzzz, Number 57, Saad Ali Khan Pakistan, Wallu2, SheriffIsInTown, and RaiHassan1: @Wiki.0hlic, Titan2456, Alexanderkowal, VosleCap, War Wounded, Borgenland, Mmmmmhzhz, and 沁水湾: @Saqib and Masterpha: why we have not % and popular vote like to 2018? Panam2014 (talk) 11:52, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

Found a source recently [15]Saad Ali Khan Pakistan (talk) 21:05, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

Formation of provincial governments

I believe we should move content regarding formation of provincial governments to relevant pages for provincial assembly elections. We have separate pages for the election of each provincial assembly. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 12:56, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

Support. But I also think we should leave basic summaries which side dominated which province. Specifically support moving the PTI dispute in Punjab to the provincial election. Borgenland (talk) 13:23, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

No worries, SheriffIsInTown. I've no plans to populate this section with too much detail, just a basic summary. --Saqib (talk) 13:34, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 29 February 2024

Omar Ayub Khan should be shown because he is is the candidate for prime minister from PTI not imran khan 142.189.42.253 (talk) 19:11, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

Please see Talk:2024_Pakistani_general_election#Should_PTI_be_included_in_the_Infobox. --Saqib (talk) 19:16, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 29 February 2024 (2)

Shahbaz Sharif should be sown instead of Nawaz Sharif because he is the candidate for Prime Minister from PMLN 142.189.42.253 (talk) 19:19, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

please see Talk:2024_Pakistani_general_election#Extended-confirmed-protected_edit_request_on_19_February_2024. --Saqib (talk) 19:32, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

Multiple articles having same information

@Saqib I notice that you are duplicating identical information in both this article and the Allegations of rigging in the 2024 Pakistani general election. I believe this is not the correct approach; this article should only contain a summary of the other article. The other article should serve as the main article for coverage of rigging allegations. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 22:22, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

Sure. --Saqib (talk) 22:38, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

Add

Add popular vote of 3 major parties 93.71.250.19 (talk) 21:28, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

Article reads like a newspaper

Some folks are overdoing it, the article reads like a newspaper, not like an encyclopedia. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 14:47, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

Feel free to improve it. --Saqib (talk) 14:55, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

I think we should trim/condense the media reactions since a lot of them have basically echoed the same narratives of upset victories and electoral shenanigans and what's next for the Pakistani military. Borgenland (talk) 16:59, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

I think the hue and cry has been over covered by some enthistic political supporters. Feeling of defeat and helplessness is pushing for Newspaper like cherry picking. I have sympathy with them @Sheriff | ☎ 911. May be they can win election here on wiki. LingoSouthAsia (talk) 08:23, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

@LingoSouthAsia: Refrain from WP:NPA. --Saqib (talk) 09:03, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

108 seats won by PMLN

This is misleading as this is not the number of seats PMLN won (it is the total number of seats after reserved allocation). PMLN was not the largest party after the election. 5.151.98.36 (talk) 03:17, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

see Talk:2024_Pakistani_general_election#Independent_joining --Saqib (talk) 07:51, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

Formation of provincial governments

The content in the Formation of provincial governments section should go to the respective articles instead of being kept here. This section should be removed once that's done. | Mfarazbaig (talk) 06:08, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

see Talk:2024_Pakistani_general_election#Formation_of_provincial_governments. --Saqib (talk) 07:50, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 6 March 2024

PTI Won 92 seats 39.36.54.8 (talk) 15:17, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

See https://tribune.com.pk/elections-2024/. --Saqib (talk) 15:21, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

Provincial assemblies tables and infoboxes

Hi @Muzzzmuzzmuzzz, Number 57, Saad Ali Khan Pakistan, Wallu2, SheriffIsInTown, and RaiHassan1: @Wiki.0hlic, Titan2456, Alexanderkowal, VosleCap, War Wounded, Borgenland, Mmmmmhzhz, and 沁水湾: @Aréat, Saqib, and Masterpha:

Here, independents joining are not in table. But, they are in tables for 2024 Sindh provincial election, 2024 Balochistan provincial election, 2024 Punjab provincial election, 2024 Khyber Pakhtunkhwa provincial election. Same for infoboxes. Panam2014 (talk) 11:44, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

2024 in Pakistan

Need help incorporating election related changes to the article, particularly in the office-holders section. Borgenland (talk) 05:46, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

I have updated it. --Saqib (talk) 06:49, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

Also the provincial governments too. Sorry I'm not that skilled in tables. Borgenland (talk) 07:08, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

National Assembly election-province wise

I believe we've been following the format of the Indian election page, maybe since around 2018? but perhaps it's unnecessary. Unlike India, where elections take place in about 36 states, in Pakistan, they're only held in five regions, including Islamabad. Maybe we can consider keeping provincial assembly election pages but lets refrain from creating separate NA election pages for each region, including Islamabad. It seems redundant and disperses the information. Pinging those who created such pages @Saad Ali Khan Pakistan, Ainty Painty, and Muzzzmuzzmuzzz: Saqib (talk) 10:38, 20 March 2024 (UTC)

Shehbaz instead of Nawaz?

@Saqib @SheriffIsInTown I understand the reasoning of keeping Imran Khan instead of Omar Ayub, but why keep Nawaz sharif instead of Shehbaz? all other election pages bold the names of the winning candidate, this is the only Pakistani election page that doesn’t embolden the name of the winning Candidate, it would be better to add Shehbaz Sharif rather than Nawaz. For now I have added footnotes, but it would be better to add Shehbaz Sharif. Titan2456 (talk) 15:50, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

Because Nawaz Sharif was the candidate of PML-N for the position of PM. Are you not aware that PML-N even declared him PM in newspapers? --—Saqib (talk | contribs) 16:16, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

Yes, they declared Nawaz as a symbolic leader, still the PML-N voted Shehbaz Sharif as prime minister.

Al Jazeera report stating Shehbaz Sharif’s candidacy . Titan2456 (talk) 16:27, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

For now I think the footnotes should do the trick. Titan2456 (talk) 16:29, 24 March 2024 (UTC)