Talk:Murtaza Bhutto

The article isn't neutral, it needs to be edited in a less biased manner.

Missing Facts

How can there be no mention of the 1981 hijacking of a PIA plane in the article? The fact that it happened can not be debated, so therefore it should be in the article. I would argue that hijacking a plane is wiki worthy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.85.130.62 (talk) 19:44, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

Neutral Point of View

"He is regarded in posterity as a terrorist and an example of the flawed sons of feudal lords, suffering from a god complex."

This isn't neutral, definitely not supported by the text of the article and probably untrue.

I deleted that part, and a lot more non-neutral stuff, but the article still needs to be cleared up a lot by someone who knows something about the subject matter -- Aim Here 23:55, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Why did you delete that? Murtaza Bhutto hijacked airliners and conducted bomb blasts. I dont care if he was a Bhutto I am not someone is in awe of worthless feudals. Murtaza Bhutto was certainly a terrorist and is viewed as such by Pakistanis. You dont need to be an expert to know that.

If it is true, you need to provide facts that support your conclusion e.g. John was convicted in 1992 of conspiracy to place a really big marshmallow on flight 777 from Sidney to Canberra. Blakdogg 21:18, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

hmmm well most ppl think that Murtaza was a notorious son of a feudal but hey hav u gone thru his life???? in very early days of his youth he was exiled by zia, wen a son needs his father most at that age he lost his father was sent out of his homeland , a juvenile mind engorged wid such incidents made him quite rigid but it doesnt mean he was a bad human his ppl love him still cry for him, even he loved his homeland n ppl otherwise y in the world he cam back to pak??? u cant disregard a persons so many good traits against a few mismanagements he did.... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.130.8.4 (talk) 16:56, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

He is described, in this article, as a "...left-wing radical". That is prima-facia biased. The phrase "...disgruntled youth" needs citations in order to not be perceived as NPOV. At one point he is reffered to as "The rebel prince...". Give me a break. I have to read this crap? The last phrase in the article mentions that a policeman "...committed suicide by shooting himself in the head several times." That's obviously tongue-in-cheek, and also needs citations. Plus what's up with the grammar in this article? Leondegrance (talk) 18:48, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

It is also a problem that so much of the material on his assassination comes from one article written by his daughter. I do not mean to imply that she is lying or anything like that. I merely want to say that she is too close to the situation (as she should be as his daughter) to be entirely neutral. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.174.112.246 (talk) 23:33, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

Also, many of the other citations come from an opinion-based book review. Considering the sensitivity of the entire Bhutto issue, this article needs extensive editing based on substantiated fact alone (I realize this has already been established). I would do the research and editing if my time allowed. Why not delete all opinion-only information that only serves to inflame? Is this article, in its present state, not in violation here? It would leave very little to work from, but it would certainly be easier to edit (IMHO). This article needs attention and I just had to put my two cents in. Cowgirl in the Sand (talk) 06:32, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

I took a small shot (pun intended) at changing the POV of the article. However, I am unfamiliar with Murtaza's life and times and/or crimes, and I just don't currently have the time for the research. As a result, most of my edits were grammatical in nature. WeeWillieWiki (talk) 03:27, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Murtaza Bhutto was a true pakistani fighting an illegimate goverment, whether you disagree with Bhutto is irrelevant, Zias military take over was illegal he did not hold election in 90days and corrupted the country with terrorist —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.17.127.35 (talk) 00:14, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

Vandalism

The above statement certainly looks like the handiwork of someone on the government or agency payroll just to ‘annoy’ the family of Murtaza Bhutto. Frustrated people I must say! Murtaza Bhutto was, still is and will always remain a larger than life character in the hearts and minds of the people. Mir Murtaza Bhutto was a towering personality and very outspoken which was one of the reasons that got him killed. He tried taking revenge for his father and did whatever he did at the time for the betterment of his country, Murtaza Bhutto was no terrorist, he was a walking talking ‘resistance’ and ‘fighter’ during his lifetime and in death he became a martyr. Some ignorant fools have no idea what they’re on about. ‘Worthless feudals’? Tribalism and Feudalism exist not only in each and every part of Pakistan but all over the world, even modern day America. I guess that makes everyone worthless then, eh? You may’ve martyred Murtaza Bhutto just like you did his father Z.A. Bhutto, but you can never do away with their legacy or the thought they left behind in peoples minds, the people of Pakistan. This family has undergone tragedy after tragedy, been 10 years since the last one. The same people, the murderers who’re now on very high posts after 1996 sit and ‘bitch’ about how it was done and how they got away with it; will InshAllah one day pay for their crimes and be brought to justice because by that time we’ll have true representatives of the people at the helm of this Country, which will by that time be known as a ‘Great Country’ because right now Pakistan is anything but that, seeing the nature of things. Once more, I’d like to add, if Murtaza Bhutto was a terrorist, I really wonder what that makes ‘Hazrat’ Zia-Ul-Haq (RehmatUllah Alahi) with his drug cartel connections in Afghanistan, vendettas against Shia muzlims, bringing the Klashinknov culture to Pakistan, creating hatred between different sects of Izlam and his ‘self-made’ Hudood bill which has nothing to do with Allah, I can go on and on but I cant be bothered talking about some twat who blewup in the air and came falling to the ground roasted after which the whole country rejoiced and took a big sigh of relief. We all understand ‘conspiracy theories’ and we all know about the Old Clifton incident and the coverup after that. DO NOT demonize Murtaza Bhutto, not that it makes any difference to anyone even if you do because everyone knows what he really was but I just thought I’d sound you off a bit since I hate people like you, I can just as well imagine what kind of a person might be sitting and writing all this crap!

Shahzwar 12:40 AM, 21 September 2006

Cite reliable sources

I have removed a large amount of unreferenced information from this article following a complaint (VRTS ticket # 2006110810012762), and recreated it using a reference I found. Please cite reliable sources for all information in this and any other article in accordance with the Verifiability policy and Reliable sources guidelines. If possible, please use the footnote syntax to clearly designate which source supports a particular piece of information. —{admin} Pathoschild 06:21, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Murtaza Bhutto.jpg

Image:Murtaza Bhutto.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 21:42, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Reverted false 'rvv' change

I have reverted a change to this article which, while marked as "rvv" (revert vandalism) in the change log, deleted half the content and set the page identical to a previous revision which had been put in place by a user who had been banned for sock-puppeting. While it is clear that there is a content dispute going on, it should be discussed here at the talk page, and a consensus version reached. Making a major change falsely marked as reverting vandalism is simply not acceptable, and is a sign of WP:OWN. John Darrow (talk) 18:37, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Unsourced assertions on the article

I have removed most of the article as it is unsourced and unreferenced as per WP:BLP, since this affects or makes claims against other living persons. — Nearly Headless Nick {C} 09:30, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

Edits on 25 March 2014

I have reverted the edits made on 25 March 2014. Parts of those edits may well be the solution to the neutrality problems highlighted by the "POV" tag at the top of the article; I don't think I'm qualified to judge that. But deleting the word "terrorist" from inside a URL or the title of a cited book can't be right, nor can deleting parts of a reference leaving a "cite error". -- John of Reading (talk) 10:49, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

Children?

Shouldn't there be some mention of Fatima (his daughter, right?) ? She's a notable person on her own merit.-E.S.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Murtaza Bhutto. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100313141949/http://www.pppsb.net/ to http://pppsb.net/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:26, 6 January 2018 (UTC)