Talk:Qazi Faez Isa

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.

If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

Biography: Politics and Government

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
	This article is supported by the politics and government work group (assessed as Low-importance).

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.

Bias

This is biased. 3catsmumu (talk) 09:54, 31 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Razia nawaz 39.49.189.85 (talk) 02:43, 9 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Why was the intra-party case ruling controversial

@SheriffIsInTown: - Please don't remove cited content that actually sheds light on why a ruling is placed under controversies. The existence of a main article does not preclude the relevant context from a controversy mentioned in WP:BLP. In fact it falls in the purview of WP:BLPCOI. You can expand on the content, but you cannot separate a judge from their judgements. A judge's biography is documented in their judgements. Wiki.0hlic ^(talk) 19:20, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I believe that a judge's biography should only cover the judgment and its immediate implications, without delving into additional details about the verdict or public opinions on it. Such specifics can be appropriately addressed in an article dedicated to the case itself. Including opinions about the verdict in a judge's biography would necessitate outlining all the points from the verdict explaining why the judges ruled as they did, thus negating the purpose of having a separate article. Additionally, since a verdict is typically delivered by a bench consisting of multiple judges, it does not solely belong to one individual. Therefore, any further elaboration should be reserved for the case article instead of biography article dedicated to the judge. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 20:06, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@SheriffIsInTown - Judges are not infallible beings who only have matter-of-fact BLPs. They can make mistakes and get embroiled in controversy like any other living person. Sanitizing their biography of observer reactions to a judge's contentious decisions is like going with a particular POV that is clearly not WP:NPOV. Furthermore, in a bench, there is a primary decision-maker and those who assent to/dissent with it. Isa was the primary decision-maker as well as the author of the verdict for the case in point. Wiki.0hlic ^(talk) 10:58, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]