Talk:Ghulam Muhammad

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.
Start	This article has been rated as start-Class on the quality scale. (add comments)
More information about this article... Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale by the India project.

	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.
Start	This article has been rated as start-Class on the quality scale. (If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.	Biography Portal
Start	This article has been rated as start-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]
	This article is supported by the Politics and government work group.

[edit] Neutrality

I drew from this article that Ghulam Mohammad is single-handedly responsible for all of Pakistan's political problems, with no room to blame Ayub, Yahya, Zia, Benazir, General Babar, foreign intrigues, or the Islamic fundamentalists. —63.231.134.31 03:43, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

I agree that this article is not nuetral. There are no citations and little or no supporting evidence. It reads like an attack ad. Phoenix7718 08:40, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

I believe that this article requires more evidence to back up its claims. It certainly is not neutral, making it all the more necessary to prove its evidence. (O A) 16:44, 14 December 2006.

I agree with the comments above; the article was a disaster. It still is, really, but I have removed some of the most offensive unsourced statements, restructured it more logically, and toned down the POV language. Personally I do not have sufficient knowledge about Ghulam Mohamed (though, incidentally, isn't that how he spelled his name?) to judge on whether this opinion of him is fair or not, but this is Wikipedia: it's about provable facts, not someone's opinion. We desperately need to add references to this article and keep it neutral. There is also a serious lack of information on Ghulam's early life and rise to power. I have added the Wikiproject Pakistan template here; surely Ghulam is more relevant to Wikiproject Pakistan than to Wikiproject India (though, as a member of both, I don't want to take sides!) -- TinaSparkle 23:12, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] 1953

I have heard that in 1954 there was a "race to the telegraph office", with the Prime Minister trying but failing to inform Queen Elizabeth that he had dismissed the Governor General, while the Governor General successfully informed the country and world that he had dismissed the Prime Minister. I was also told that the Supreme Court did not rule between the Prime Minister and Governor General, but instead called fresh elections on its own authority. Any justification for these remarks? --Henrygb 00:50, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Well Here Is Something On Ghulam Muhammad DeClassified :

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/6/69/Ghulam23sept1955.jpg

Humayun Mirza Jr

Thanks for this, but is there any context for it? I appreciate that it would be interesting if we were writing a biography of Ghulam Muhammad, but it seems to me that it might contradict WP:NOR to have it on this page, and also the principle that Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. Unless there is a reason for having this up there, I think we will have to delete it. Anyone else have any thoughts on this? -- TinaSparkle 10:18, 17 April 2007 (UTC)