Talk:Prosecution of S. Iswaran

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by AirshipJungleman29 talk 00:03, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that S Iswaran was the first Singapore cabinet minister to be investigated by the country's Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau (CPIB) since 1986? Source: Various, including SCMP, The Diplomat
  • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Storm Poly

Created by Kingoflettuce (talk). Self-nominated at 00:33, 19 January 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Criminal investigation of S Iswaran; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.

• I know this is a nomination about a case so a similar wording might be inevitable, but the current wording does give me pause and I wonder if it might violate BLP. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 12:26, 23 January 2024 (UTC)

I don't see a BLP issue with the hook. However, I changed the hook from "minister" to "cabinet minister" per the source, so I would like a response to the change from Kingoflettuce before taking this nom further. Gatoclass (talk) 13:07, 23 January 2024 (UTC)

Gatoclass There's no real distinction as far as the Singapore government is concerned. All "ministers" are members of the Cabinet so "cabinet ministers" sounds redundant IMO, but no harm done. Cheers, KINGofLETTUCE 👑 🥬 13:26, 23 January 2024 (UTC)

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Neutral: Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Cited: Interesting:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: Gatoclass (talk) 12:16, 25 January 2024 (UTC)

Case title

Kingoflettuce (talk · contribs), the title of the main prosecution case is PP v S Iswaran, i.e. the case in which the actual criminal charges are brought against the defendant. This is how the case was titled for the trial hearing and is how criminal prosecution cases are generally titled in Singapore. It is generally the prosecuting party v the defendant.

There are a number of related cases that are titled S Iswaran v PP such as [2024] SGHC 123, [2024] SGHC 185, and [2024] SGCA 35, but these are criminal revision applications by the defendant for his charges to be heard together, for disclosure of information, etc. and are not the main case. In these related cases, the defendant is named first because the defendant is the applicant and the prosecution is the respondent. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JudiciousGoat (talk • contribs) 12:01, 28 September 2024 (UTC)

Thanks, you are Judicious indeed. I stand corrected, revert away if you haven't already. My bad! Cheers, KINGofLETTUCE 👑 🥬 15:52, 3 October 2024 (UTC)