Talk:Lettergate

Asad Majeed Khan related news refs

 * https://www.firstpost.com/world/opinion-joe-biden-may-hurt-imran-khans-oversized-ego-but-wont-go-far-enough-to-hurt-pakistan-10042101.html
 * https://theprint.in/opinion/the-mystery-of-how-pakistan-gets-away-each-time/724415/
 * Pakistan to change United States envoy soon Dawn
 * https://www.theweek.in/news/world/2022/02/01/who-is-masood-khan-pakistans-controversial-nominee-as-us-ambassador.html
 * https://www.thenews.com.pk/print/930146-ambassador-designate-to-us-no-truth-in-indian-media-reports-that-process-blocked-by-washington-says-fo
 * https://washdiplomat.com/qa-pakistans-asad-majeed-khan-on-9-11-bilateral-ties-afghanistan/
 * https://www.thenews.com.pk/latest/900020-pakistan-us-may-not-enjoy-same-cordial-ties-they-once-had-ambassador-asad-majeed
 * https://tribune.com.pk/story/2351584/revolt-in-fo-over-govt-move-to-bring-diplomatic-cable-to-na
 * https://tribune.com.pk/story/2351427/geopolitics-of-imran-khans-russia-visit
 * https://www.geo.tv/latest/407267-pakistans-ambassador-to-us-asad-majeed-khan-bids-farewell
 * https://www.thenews.com.pk/print/946642-pakistan-s-ex-envoy-to-us-reports-to-fo
 * Asad’s departure not abrupt, shows embassy record, Dawn
 * Between the lines of State Dept denial, Dawn
 * https://dnd.com.pk/is-shahbaz-sharif-regime-planning-to-cover-up-threat-letter/266890
 * https://tribune.com.pk/story/2352525/govt-likely-to-appoint-new-foreign-secretary
 * https://thediplomat.com/2022/04/imran-khans-us-conspiracy-theory-a-close-examination/
 * https://foreignpolicy.com/2022/04/07/pakistan-political-crisis-imran-khan-us/
 * https://www.thestatesman.com/opinion/nation-led-political-lemmings-1503058346.html
 * Diplomatic cable is genuine, based on facts, says Qureshi Dawn
 * https://www.geo.tv/latest/402777-us-senate-confirms-donald-blome-as-next-american-ambassador-to-pakistan
 * https://www.thequint.com/voices/opinion/pakistan-crisis-why-imrans-anti-america-tirades-are-an-embarrassment-for-army
 * https://www.dawn.com/news/1686267
 * https://www.dawn.com/news/1686433
 * https://www.dawn.com/news/1686421

Ghulam Sarwar Khan Shehryar Khan Afridi controversy
&#32;Bookku, &#39;Encyclopedias &#61; expanding information &#38; knowledge&#39; (talk) 08:11, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
 * https://en.dailypakistan.com.pk/13-Mar-2022/here-s-why-pti-minister-ghulam-sarwar-wants-to-become-suicide-bomber
 * https://www.samaaenglish.tv/news/2022/03/ghulam-sarwar-wants-to-kill-enemies-with-a-suicide-bomb/
 * https://pakobserver.net/federal-minister-wants-to-become-suicide-bomber-to-obliterate-enemies/
 * https://www.memri.org/reports/pakistani-politicians-express-desire-become-suicide-bombers-i-wish-become-suicide-bomber-i-0#_ednref3
 * https://www.dawn.com/news/1685412

inquiry commission related news refs

 * https://gulfnews.com/world/asia/pakistan/pakistan-announces-inquiry-commission-to-investigate-imran-khans-foreign-conspiracy-allegations-1.87690788

&#32;Bookku, &#39;Encyclopedias &#61; expanding information &#38; knowledge&#39; (talk) 06:41, 10 May 2022 (UTC)

What is it? Much more context and explanation needed
There is nothing in the lead that actually summarizes the topic. What happened? Why is it called "Lettergate"? Who called it "Lettergate"? What happened on 7 March? What happened between 7 March and 27 March? Why did Prime Minister Imran Khan say what he said about foreign influence? This article needs a lot more context and explanation of what happened? – Jonesey95 (talk) 21:49, 5 May 2022 (UTC)


 * Pinging you to draw your attention to above expressed concerns. I hope above inputs will be helpful to you in improving the article further. &#32;Bookku, &#39;Encyclopedias &#61; expanding information &#38; knowledge&#39; (talk) 01:39, 7 May 2022 (UTC)


 * Kindly requesting again to look into inputs by User:Jonesey95. I had given more detailed timeline but has chosen to not include for unexplained reason. Present status of the article looks too pro–Imran Khan and opposition views and US official position does not seem to get any space  making the article doubtful on ground of neutrality. If you can take concerns into account it shall help DYK reaching main page.


 * Thanks and warm regards &#32;Bookku, &#39;Encyclopedias &#61; expanding information &#38; knowledge&#39; (talk) 06:55, 10 May 2022 (UTC)

Letter Vs. Diplomatic cable
Greetings ,

One of the clarification sought by you through clarification tag is when it was a matter of Diplomatic cable why it is being referred as being a 'letter'.

Following things might be happening.


 * By now the clear thing is it was an internal Diplomatic cable by then Pakistan's Ambassador Khan to Pakistan' Foreign office. (And not an official letter by US Govt to Pakistan. The kind of initial impression audience got from first speech of previous PM Imran Khan)


 * The subsequent (present) Prime Minister too seem to refer to the Diplomatic cable as Diplomat's 'khat' (The word Khat gets translated as Letter in English)


 * In part ambiguity seem to be introduced by previous P.M. Imran Khan for political gain and part of ambiguity seem to come from translation issue; carried forward almost as is by Pakistan English language media.


 * Logically 'Diplomatic cable–gate' would be less ambiguous but one more difficulty is most English language media is using word 'Lettergate'.

Again WP editors too are repeating word 'letter'. What is your opinion, how to avoid ambiguity?

&#32;Bookku, &#39;Encyclopedias &#61; expanding information &#38; knowledge&#39; (talk) 07:57, 11 May 2022 (UTC)


 * I would recommend using something more general, such as "message" or "dispatch." I would suggest that "Lettergate" stemmed from Khan's reference to the message as a "letter," while waving a physical piece of paper to the crowd; I would further suggest that if the term "Lettergate" is in common usage by now, it should be retained, even if it doesn't reflect the actual format of the message. However, referring to the message as a "letter" anywhere in the article should be reversed. Ormewood (talk) 18:01, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

I may have caused a problem...I need someone more experienced with editing to fix it
I added a sentence in the opening paragraph which added the alleged cause of the uproar, i.e. that the contents of the message detailed the wish of the United States for the prime minister to be removed over his neutral stance over the Russian invasion of Ukraine along with the consequences if this did not occur. When I attempted to reference the source, though, I ended up with two entries for the same source in the reference section, and I don't know how to fix that (my edits usually don't go much further than rewording, grammar and punctuation corrections, and reversing vandalism, and I'm inexperienced in a lot of respects when I attempt to do more complicated edits).

I think it's important for the opening paragraph to have this information, so I'm not reverting my edit, which would be the easiest solution. But it does need to be fixed. Any advise as to how to avoid this happening again would also be much appreciated. Ormewood (talk) 18:14, 2 February 2024 (UTC)


 * I'd also like to suggest that my addition addressed most of the problems brought up in the template at the head of the article. I would like to initiate a discussion on this, and if it's appropriate, a removal of the template. Ormewood (talk) 18:42, 2 February 2024 (UTC)