|This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard. If you are connected to one of the subjects of this article and need help, please see this page.|
|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
||It is requested that an image or photograph be included in this article to improve its quality. Please replace this template with a more specific media request template where possible.
The Free Image Search Tool may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites.
I have reverted several edits by IP users adding in itself damaging information referenced by YouTube clips of Urdu television news shows. I'm open to discussing this. __meco (talk) 10:52, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
Why do you think it is damaging? Don't hide behind excuse of Urdu language. And if this guy shows up in a Urdu TV show and says something, why do you think it is damaging? This is what this guy stand for. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Peterhenych (talk • contribs) 08:09, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
Who wrote this article? Too much story telling, presumptive statements, grammatical errors. It's total crap. Please have a crash course on the English language before editing it. Peterhenych (talk) 05:54, 21 March 2010 (UTC)
- Given that your own English grammar and usage is far from perfect I think you should refrain from commenting negatively on other editor's English, and especially on their rights to contribute. Instead focus on providding better sources to back up your claims and on writing in a more neutral tone.·Maunus·ƛ· 11:54, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
Syed Mumtaz Alam Gillani
Following the Marriott Hotel bombing there was some animosity and recriminations leveled between Abbasi and the later appointed minister for human rights, Syed Mumtaz Alam Gillani. I thought this was included in this article? Has it been removed? In any case, it should be presented, surely? __meco (talk) 14:36, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
Meco's Half Truths
Do you have some agenda? Quit arrogantly removing the details, which has reference to his own articles. What are you trying to hide? This is what this guy openly stand for. Peterhenych (talk) 00:25, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
Reverted edits - PPP campaign against Abbasi?
I have reverted recent edits by Peterhenych. The added text was in my view tendentious and insufficiently sourced, as well as presented in a tabloid style irreconcilable with encyclopedic material. One PPP person claiming him being a Taliban supporter does not justify the section header "Taliban sympathizer". Also, using weasel-worded claims such as "one of the journalists with known sympathies for the hardline militants..." is quite inappropriate when these allegations are leveled from a single partisan voice. It is hard not to contemplate the possibility that this is payback from friends of Syed Mumtaz Alam Gillani following the confrontation between him and Abbasi in September 2008, as documented in detail in Gillani's Wikipedia article.
Also in the now removed text was this assertion: "In September 2008, following the suicide bombing of the Marriott Hotel in Islamabad, he suggested in one of his articles that a team of US marines was the target of the Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan, in an attempt to justify the attack." This is pure slander. The last phrase, "in an attempt to justify the attack" attempts to probe the mind of Abbasi in order to attribute to him sinister motivations. Another example of blatant tabloid style is "He openly opposed the Army Operation in Swat to track down the culprits, who were involved in the brutal killings on the notorious Bloody Square in Swat." This is ripe with odious expletives more in accord with tabloid reporting than an encyclopedic article.
Reverted edits - Al-Quaeda's Political Wing?
Editwar and BLP violations
I have reverted to Meco's version and protected the page completely for two weeks. I agree with Meco that the material inserted by Peterhenych is poorly sourced and not includeable unless much better sources are found. It is also poorly written and has a clear POV. All of this needs to be taken care of before the content can be included in accordance with the biography ofliving persons policy. I suggest that discussion is undertaken here about how the article can best refer to the political and religious views of Abbasi in a balanced way supported by reliable sources. Further editwarring will not be tolerated and will lead to blocks for both parties.·Maunus·ƛ· 11:51, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
I disagree. Why is User:Mecu trying to discredit or refute the statements, and articles of Abbasi? How can the sources be unreliable when they are written by the concerned person himself and appear on the official newspaper website of the organization he works for. This sounds more like hijacking the entire article. The language may be corrected, or streamlined but the truth stays the same that "He openly sided with terrorists flogging a teenage girl", "He openly blasted the breakdown of the deal with the terrorists in Swat". The references are irrefutable. Peterhenych (talk) 00:19, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
- Look: blogspot sites are not reliable sources by any means. The articles written by him do not "openly side" with anything - he does not necessarily express his own opinions, and your description of the opinion found in the article is not objective - for example nowhere does he write that he is trying to justify the islamabad bombers - that is something you add to the article. Jang.com does not look like a reliable source. The Swat flogging article from dawn.com does not mention abbasi or show any relevance to the subject. Further more all of the most controversial statements are not sourced at all: "he forces his wife to wear a burqa", "he received threatening text messages", his "taliban sympathies" are sourced with a dead link, his distractors allegations are unsourced, his "blasting" of his colleagues for criticising the flogging is not mentioned in any of the sources given, just like how he "openly justified the flogging and called people ignorant" is also unsourced,accusations of exaggerating numbers of militants dead is unsourced as is his open opposition to the army operation in swat. All in all the section is as good as unsourced AND written in a completely biased and slanted way clearly intended to put the articles subject in the worst light possible. This is a clear violation of WP:BLP and therefore possibly damaging to wikipedia and also simply a nasty thing to do as I am sure that you are aware of the possible consequences that being described as a "taliban sympathiser" on a public internet forum might have for a pakistani journalist. The material cannot go into the article in the form yyou propose.·Maunus·ƛ· 04:49, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
Conflict with Syed Mumtaz Alam Gillani taken out
Previsouly there was a considerable section discussing the conflict with Syed Mumtaz Alam Gillani over Abbasi's journalistic coverage of the Islamabad Marriott Hotel bombing. The coverage in the present article used to equal that which can currently be read in Gillani's article (Syed Mumtaz Alam Gillani#The Islamabad Marriott Hotel bombing). It seems to me that this material is equally relevant in the present article as it is in the article about Gillani. __meco (talk) 12:45, 7 January 2011 (UTC)