Talk:Imran Khan

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Imran Khan is part of WikiProject Cricket which aims to to expand and organise information better in articles related to the sport of cricket. Please participate by editing the article Imran Khan, or visit the project page for more details.
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as mid-importance on the importance scale.

This article must adhere to the policy on biographies of living persons. Controversial material of any kind that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libelous. If such material is repeatedly inserted or there are other concerns relative to this policy, report it on the living persons biographies noticeboard.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.	Biography Portal
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the Project's quality scale. [FAQ] (If you rated the article, please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)
	This article is supported by the Politics and government work group.

	This article is part of WikiProject Pakistan which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Pakistan and Pakistan-related topics. For guidelines see WikiProject Pakistan and Wikipedia:Contributing FAQ.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.

Imran Khan is within the scope of WikiProject Afghanistan, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Afghanistan-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.

This article is part of WikiProject Muslim leaders and politicians, a WikiProject related to the List of Muslim leaders and politicians. It has been rated - on the quality scale.

Article is out-of-date—most probably written before he started his career in politics. There might be copyvio issues.--—iFaqeer | Talk to me! 22:36, Sep 29, 2004 (UTC)

Contents 1 Newsweek controversy 1.1 Newsweek controversy etc 2 Overs bowled 3 Expansion of politics section 4 PHOTO 4.1 Court Action 5 Khan is controversial 6 Spot the odd one out 7 Pronunciation of Surname 8 imran khan in politices

[edit] Newsweek controversy

I think the article should include some mention of Khan's role in the controversy; as part of that I don't think it is inappropriate to mention the criticism of Khan by some in the West, as the Weekly Standard is not exactly some tabloid. I've restored the text and tried to make the text a bit more neutral. Neilc 30 June 2005 12:57 (UTC)

[edit] Newsweek controversy etc

Neil, firstly he didn't ask for apology from Newsweek. He brought up the desecration on TV while criticizing the war in Iraq.

Secondly, the tabaloid stuff that appeared about him in the late 1970's was a part of Kerry Packer marketing. There was nothing "playboyish" about his lifestyle, if anything he had a permanent girlfriend in Emma Seargent during the mid 1980's. What is true though was that he was a prominent "socialite" in London often found in the company of Jeffery Archer, Goldie Hawn etc. But that's not a contradiction with his politics as these things date back to the 1980's well before he joined politics or got married.

Also, is there a credible link that quotes any hardline islamic views from him (a subjective matter in the first place)? If not, it should be left out of this page.

Regarding the "apology", the Weekly Standard article states:

On Friday, May 6 Khan catapulted the 300-word Newsweek story about a Koran being flushed down the toilet into headline news across the Muslim world by brandishing the article at a press conference and demanding that Pakistani president Gen. Pervez Musharraf secure an apology from George W. Bush for the incident.

f you have a reputable citation that proves this is incorrect, please provide it. As for "Kerry Packer" marketing, I don't think it is incorrect to call Khan a "playboy", even if some of his exploits may have been exagerrated. Neilc 1 July 2005 00:28 (UTC)

If it's your opinion that's fine, but what has that got to do with any objective point of view? You still have to cite a link to prove him to be one (other than magazines quoting tabaloids). Also, where is the link for his supporting a strict interpretation of Islam in Pak politics? As for "jump-starting" the frenzy, that's newsweek's allegation. Apart from Newsweek nobody has asserted that the frenzy was started following the discussion on TV.

I think the Weekly Standard is a reasonable source (and is certainly not a "tabaloid", not does it "quote tabaloids"). But there are plenty of others; take this MSNBC article, which states:

The spark was apparently lit at a press conference held on Friday, May 6, by Imran Khan, a Pakistani cricket legend and strident critic of Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf. Brandishing a copy of that week's NEWSWEEK (dated May 9), Khan read a report that U.S. interrogators at Guantánamo prison had placed the Qur'an on toilet seats and even flushed one. "This is what the U.S. is doing," exclaimed Khan, "desecrating the Qur'an." His remarks, as well as the outraged comments of Muslim clerics and Pakistani government officials, were picked up on local radio and played throughout neighboring Afghanistan. Radical Islamic foes of the U.S.-friendly regime of Hamid Karzai quickly exploited local discontent with a poor economy and the continued presence of U.S. forces, and riots began breaking out last week.

I think this fairly conclusively supports the claim that Khan played a major role in initiating the riots. The NYT articles on the riot are unfortunately no longer available online for free (AFAIK), but this post on Belgravia Dispatch quotes from a NYT article as follows:

The outcry over the Newsweek article apparently began in Pakistan, when Imran Khan, the legendary cricketer turned opposition politician, summoned reporters to a press conference on May 6 to draw attention to it. Once close to the Pakistani president, Gen. Pervez Musharraf, and a onetime crusader against corruption, Mr. Khan has been vocal in recent years against United States strikes in Afghanistan and Iraq.

"Islam is under attack in the name of the war on terror," Mr. Khan, now one of General Musharraf's most stalwart critics, told reporters. He pressed the Musharraf regime to demand an apology from Washington.

Regarding Khan being a playboy, there are various references to that, such as in this BBC story:

With the game came a playboy image with high profile girlfriends at his side. Khan admits to being a cocky 18-year-old, which he says was not helped by his star-treatment.

Or this article, which refers to Khan as a "cricketing legend and international playboy-turned-political crusader". Neilc 1 July 2005 03:51 (UTC)

Neil, once again, all these articles point out is that he read out the newsweek article on TV while criticizing the Musharraf govt's support to it. Whether the riots were triggered by it is speculative at best. It would have been different had he led a rally that went violent or something.

Regarding the playboy image, it is a tag he carried from the Kerry Packer days and your links just refer to it. They don't substantiate anything about his lifestyle that playboyish.

Finally, one of the guidelines for Wikipedia is:

Credibility, by, for example, reducing the number of phantom attributions such as "most people feel", or "some experts claim" which are frequently used to disguise rants and mere opinion.

So things like "some in the west feel that he is a hypocrite..." don't quite belong here and are mere opinions (and perhaps rants). We will still keep the part about newsweek as all said and done he has some association to it, but there is no need to add speculative and unestablished things.

Regarding Khan's role in the riots, whether or not you think it is "speculation" isn't important. Numerous reputable news organizations seem to think that the speculation is reliable enough to include in their stories, so I think we can take their word for it (particularly since you haven't provided any evidence that this "speculation" is mistaken).

Regarding him being a "playboy", I really think this is common knowledge, and I don't see what evidence there is to support your claim that it is propaganda from "Kerry Packer".

WRT "phantom assertions", that's why I've included citations in the article. Neilc 3 July 2005 06:57 (UTC)

particularly since you haven't provided any evidence that this "speculation" is mistaken

Neil, it is the job of the person who makes an allegation to prove that them, not the other way around. So if you are accusing him of being a hypocrite, a playboy, extremist etc, then it's your job to prove it, not the person refuting. Otherwise, you could vanadalize almost any person's biography on the encyclopedia because allegations and conspiracy theories can be found against almost any prominent person which can't necessarily be refuted. And as I mentioned earlier, your links do not substantiate why he is/was a playboy (does he have a harem or something? what makes a person a playboy?). And what did role did he play in the riots? All he did was read out on TV what was already published (something that I have already included in the page). People who cause riots fabricate news, lead mobs, ask people to form mobs, take out rallies that turn violent etc. You need to find a link where he is involved in such activity, otherwise you are coming across as someone who is ranting and for all practical purposes vandalizing this page!

I'm not "accusing him of being a hypocrite" -- I'm just documenting that a fair number of people in the West accused him of being one. That is part of the public record; whether or not that accusation is objectively correct is not the point.

As for the role he played in the riots, the article text merely states what has been reported by MSNBC, NYT, and numerous other publications: the Khan played a significant role in starting the controversy. I don't see how that is open to debate; if you don't think his actions had anything to do with the riots, then please reread the citations I provided above.

Regarding him being a playboy, I can't say I really care, I'll remove that from the article. Neilc 4 July 2005 02:27 (UTC)

"He was in the news after Newsweek alleged that his "reading out aloud" their article describing the Quran desecration played a part in the frenzy that followed." That's just a nonsensical statement. Newsweek would have had to have expected people to read their article. Imran can't be held responsible for the actions of people after he brought attention to a piece of writing that was already a part of the public record.

[edit] Overs bowled

Cricinfo lists the number of balls bowled by Imran Khan, rather than overs bowled. (19458 balls bowled in Test matches and 7461 bowled in ODIs). Since each over is six balls the figures for the test match convert easily enough to 3243 overs bowled. But 7461 balls converts to 1243 overs and 3 balls which should be written out as 1243.5 overs (since it's half an over) rather than 1243.3 as was previously entered in the ODI overs bowled. Hulleye 10:03, September 2, 2005 (UTC)

This is an issue that has more than one interpretation. I changed it back to 1241.1 (which was the one that was used till a couple of days ago), because though IK bowled 7461 balls that does not equal 1243.3 overs. He played one ODI match in his career that had 8 ball overs Scorecard, where he bowled 7 overs or 56 balls. It it this difference of 14 balls (56-42) that leads to the figure of 1243.3 when you do a plain division. Similarly for Tests also.

The question is whether we should have number of overs or number of balls. We have discussed it before and I can't remember what the consensus was. I have reverted the number for the time being to the original value, and we can decide it after discussing here or on the Project Cricket Pages. Please do not change the figures till you get some sort of consensus.

As an aside, 1243.5 is not correct. It is the convention in cricket to use the overs.balls form. 12.5 is read as 12 overs and 5 balls, and not 12 overs and 3 balls. Tintin

I stand corrected... had never heard of an 8-ball over. very interesting, what was the reasoning behind this, any idea? Also, in light of this, would it not be more appropriate to list the number of balls bowled rather than overs bowled? Hulleye 06:00, September 3, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Expansion of politics section

I believe that the section must be expanded as several other facets of his political life need to be covered. e.g. Difficulties in campaigning etc., repercussions on personal life, allegations abt mismanagement of funds for hospital etc. may need to be touched upon. AFIK, the first time he contested elections, he did so from five places but was not elected from any. Someone may want to include it after verifying the veracity of the same. --Gurubrahma 06:20, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

Why would you like to that?

[edit] PHOTO

Please find a better photo. Part of his Imran's face is obscured

[edit] Court Action

Didn't Imran win a court victory over Lamb and Botham over allegations of ball tampering. Should be mentioned, I feel.

[edit] Khan is controversial

Imran Khan is a very controversial figure, with a political career replete with contradictions and a personal life to match.

In the mid 90s there were hints (never confirmed) of his involvement in a death threat against one of Pakistan's greatest philanthropists, Abdul Sattar Edhi. Edhi escaped Pakistan during that time to Dubai. Khan was closely tied during that time to Hamid Gul, the former head of the ISI (Pakistan's Intelligence Service), whom the Americans claim is linked in turn to the Taliban movement in Afghanistan.

Although Khan is very popular as a former cricketer in Pakistan, he failed to translate that to popularity on the political scene, largely because of the constant shifting in positions. Under Benazir Bhutto's regime, he was supporting her main rival Nawaz Sherif. When Nawaz Sherif was ousted from government by the military coup of the current President Musharaf, he supported Musharaf and then turned against him.

As a member of the opposition and in an attempt to compensate for the absence of street support for his movement, he sides with the MMA and other religious parties.

On a personal level a lot of rumors still plague his personal life, from his involvement with a French business woman following his divorce to rumors of a liaison with Goldie Hawn. His personal life continues to be fodder for the social circles of Pakistan. --Seagull2006 07:50, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Spot the odd one out

"Imran is seen as one of the finest all-rounders the game has ever produced, along with Garfield Sobers, Ian Botham, Kapil Dev, Richard Hadlee and Wasim Akram."

To my mind one of those names just doesnt quite fit! --LiamE 18:33, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Pronunciation of Surname

Just out of interest, should his surname be pronounced "Karn" or should the "Kh" bit be like the "ch" on "loch Ness", as it would were his name written in Arabic? I have been learning Arabic and there are quite a few people with the surname "Khan" here in England, sometimes I think I might try to pronounce it as I think it should go but I could well be wrong and be made to look a complete plonker. I think even people with that name pronounce it "Karn" in England.

Furthermore, is his name written in Urdu properly in the article? The 'yaa' looks like there is only one dot underneath it, i.e. it's a 'baa' (except that would be a 'bay' in Urdu). Maybe it's supposed to be like that? Milvinder 17:23, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Oddly enough "Khan" is one of the few names where its original pronunciation has little or no bearing as to how it is pronounced in English as the word is itself part of English language with its own English pronunciation. "Khan" has been used in English as the title of central Asian rulers for many hundreds of years. The OED says in English it is pronounced "kahn", so it is a k no at ch. Of course in this case we also have the man himself who's English has always been immaculate. I have never noticed a "ch" in his own pronunciation. --LiamE 18:08, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Families who use the name "Khan" contend that they are decendents of Genghis Khan. Milvinder, it is pronounced as a letter Khat is Arabic and not Shat as in "cha". Nor is it correct that the pronounciation is Kahn, as in "can". Khan is a Muslim family name used only by Muslims in the indian sub-continent (india/pakistan/Bangladesh) and Afghanistan.

On a slightly related note I have noted that "Burqa" can sometimes be written "Burkha". When I first saw this in the Telegraph I thought it was a mistake until I checked on Wikipedia. So in Pashto and related languages, can "Khat" actually be pronounced as a 'K'? Re: the letter 'cha', by my Loch Ness example I didn't mean a "ch" sound in standard English. It's just that the sound represented by "khaa" doesn't exist in English, so the Scots "ch" on "loch" was the nearest I could get. The only English dialect I can think of where they do have "khaa" is Scouse, where they might say "I'm not going to weuurkh today" instead of "work". Anyway, this is going off the subject if Imran Khan so I think this will be my last contribution to this thread! Milvinder 19:42, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] imran khan in politices

imran khan is not controverciel poltition he is only clean man in politices of pakistan after air martiel asgher khan who neighter make under hand deal with army nor crupt polition of pakistan —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 58.65.202.4 (talk) 15:15, 4 March 2007 (UTC).