Talk:2007 Pakistani presidential election

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Elections and Referendums, an ongoing effort to improve the quality of, expand upon and create new articles relating to elections, electoral reform and other aspects of democratic decision-making. For more information, visit our project page.Elections and ReferendumsWikipedia:WikiProject Elections and ReferendumsTemplate:WikiProject Elections and ReferendumsElections and Referendums articles

Pakistan High‑importance

	Pakistan portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pakistan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Pakistan on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PakistanWikipedia:WikiProject PakistanTemplate:WikiProject PakistanPakistan articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Politics High‑importance

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Clarification needed

In the section titled "Return of Nawaz Sharif to Pakistan", the sentence:"The Musharaf Government insisted that he keep his vow of staying ten years outside Pakistan and had somehow managed to get possibly (original ) undertaking and presented it to the Supreme Court." makes no sense in English. What is the "(original ) undertaking"? New evidence? The phrase makes no sense. Johnor 07:04, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that the sentence makes no sense as written. I copied the text in question from the Nawaz Sharif article. Please post your question there and see if any of the editors of that page can answer the question. --Richard 23:37, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The entire third paragraph, from "On 10th September 2007..." to "...Sharif's right to return." makes very little sense, and is close to pov and soapboxing. The paragraph after that is also very hard to read, because of all the legalese ("17th Amendment section 10 substitution of article 270-AA subsection 1-5"). This section needs a lot of cleanup and clarification. A ecis^Brievenbus 00:16, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Jamaat-e-Islami and Imran Khan

The text says "(Musharraf) has allies in the form of Jamaat-e-Islami, Imran Khan's party". However, the Imran Khan article says "Imran Khan is a member of Parliament, leader of Tehreek-e-Insaf (Movement for Justice) the political party that he founded". Can someone resolve this apparent contradiction? --Richard 06:18, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Done. It was just poorly worded. Imran Khan has nothing to do with Jamaat-e-Islami and is definitely the Tehreek-e-Insaf leader. Green Giant 22:22, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Writing a Thesis

Whats the reason for writing a whole thesis on the 2007 Presidential elections? I wonder who's bright idea it was to include Nawaz Sharif, Benazir Bhutto, and on top of that Nawaz Sharif's return to Pakistan which is in no way shape or form related to the Presidential elections.

And all of the mentioned articles had current terms used, such as "Nawaz Sharif's plane has landed" and/or "Nawaz Sharif has departed"

We should keep it simple please. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fahadzkhan (talk • contribs) 03:41, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Name of article

Shouldn't this article be named "2007 Pakistani presidential election" instead, in analogy with (most) other articles. LarRan 13:54, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nope, it shouldn't. The style for election articles is "country type election, year". —Nightstallion 16:23, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:2007 Pakistani presidential election/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

The article lacks coherence. As I don't know much about the internal politics of Pakistan, I would suggest somebody improve the article and present it in a better manner. Silly fellow 17:04, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There is a distinct lack of a NPOV in this article - needs tidying as it reads as if it supports Nawaz Sharif in places. Also some of the grammar is terrible. Old Nol 17:41, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The grammar and sentence structure is horrible - it needs to be cleaned up so readers can understand. (74.115.212.16 18:20, 6 October 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Last edited at 18:20, 6 October 2007 (UTC). Substituted at 02:10, 30 April 2016 (UTC)