The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: No clear consensus after two relists. (non-admin closure) (t · c) buidhe 23:18, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Deportation of undocumented Afghans from Pakistan → Illegal Foreigners Repatriation Plan – This is a procedural request. Editors have boldly moved to this title, which was opposed. I am starting this RM on their behalf.

In this undiscussed move, User:Ainty Painty moved to "Illegal Foreigners Repatriation Plan" saying: Per official name/plan

After that was reverted, in this undiscussed revert of the revert, User:War Wounded moved again to "Illegal Foreigners Repatriation Plan" saying: Not just Afghans. Their subsequent edit will likely also help understand their rationale: Special:Diff/1183662147 (POV limiting the scope of article, government of Pakistan established a proper plan for undocumented illegal immigrants instead of the expulsion of an particular ethnic-national group)

Prior to the title "Deportation of undocumented Afghans from Pakistan", this article, since its creation on October 7, has had these names:

• Evacuation of illegal Afghan residents in Pakistan (original name)
• Evacuation of illegal immigrants in Pakistan (undiscussed move, October 7)
• Expulsion of Afghans from Pakistan (undiscussed move, November 4)

The current title is also a result of an undiscussed move.—Alalch E. 00:34, 6 November 2023 (UTC) — Relisting. Jenks24 (talk) 10:01, 13 November 2023 (UTC) — Relisting. Reading Beans (talk) 19:01, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: WikiProject Pakistan has been notified of this discussion. —Alalch E. 23:58, 5 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: WikiProject Afghanistan has been notified of this discussion. —Alalch E. 23:58, 5 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: WikiProject International relations has been notified of this discussion. —Alalch E. 23:59, 5 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: WikiProject Human rights has been notified of this discussion. —Alalch E. 23:59, 5 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: WikiProject Law has been notified of this discussion. —Alalch E. 23:59, 5 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep current name. The government's name for the plan is a particular POV, and I don't see other RSes referring to the issue of deportation of undocumented Afghans from Pakistan discussing the issue in those terms. voorts (talk/contributions) 00:57, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Move" - per WP:NDESC Schwinnspeed (talk) 13:23, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Move – Per @Schwinnspeed: The current title seems to limit the scope to a specific ethnic-national group only, which is not accurate. The proposed title better reflects the broader scope of the government’s plan and aligns with Wikipedia’s naming convention. Ainty Painty (talk) 17:11, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Question: Is there any evidence of the proposed title being used in English-language independent reliable sources (or even in non-independent sources)? —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 02:21, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Here: APP, The News Int, UN News, PakistanStandard,ReliefWeb, FinancialExpress, Business Reocrder, Aaj English TV, Geo TV, Forbes, Aitadal, BNN Ainty Painty (talk) 08:54, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  The proposed name appears to be the accepted proper name of the plan, POV or not. It is the name of the plan and is used in that form by English-language independent reliable sources (although sometimes in quote marks), so it appears to fall under WP:POVNAME (not WP:NDESC, because the proposed name is a proper name, not a descriptive name). The next question is whether the article is about that particular initiative, or about something else. As far as I can tell, the article is about that initiative. So the proposed renaming has my reluctant support. The proposed name seems similar to Great Leap Forward, Boston Massacre, or Alexander the Great. It seems non-neutral, but well attested as the proper name for the article's subject. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 16:55, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The article almost certainly won't remain a mere explanation of the 'initiative'; I can't imagine that would survive a notability challenge. A proper Wikipedia article on the Pakistani government's mass expulsion of undocumented immigrants will require a lot more fleshing out and non-government perspectives. --Tserton (talk) 19:48, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Conclusion withdrawn after new citations and commentary by Tserton. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 21:22, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose move. Very, very few non-Pakistani sources use the proposed name, other than occasionally to mention that's what the government is calling it. A few examples from a quick survey of RS: Al-Jazeera, Financial Times, New York Times. Foreign Policy, Washington Post. --Tserton (talk) 19:41, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• The current title misleadingly claims that the deportation is limited to Afghans. Jim 2 Michael (talk) 22:48, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  The Pakistani government may be presenting it as a general deportation effort, but Wikipedia doesn't take its cues from national governments. Almost all independent reliable sources have focused on how it affects Afghans (who also comprise 95% of Pakistan's foreign citizens). Tserton (talk) 14:01, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The fact that the vast majority are Afghans is the reason that the media focuses on them. Jim 2 Michael (talk) 22:52, 12 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Move/Rename Reading the discussion here and at the ITN, most editors are seeing it as an operation aimed at the deportation of illegal immigrants from the country and not just the Afghan refugees. But still, if it's thought that the requested title is government POV, we can go for a neutral title such as Deportation of illegal immigrants from Pakistan.--Ameen Akbar (talk) 16:24, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  That title would be less problematic than simply copying the government's name for the deportations. But almost all reliable sources focus almost exclusively on how the policy affects Afghans. And those that report on the government's motivations for it agree that it is a policy aimed at Afghans, in practice if not in name. Tserton (talk) 20:41, 22 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  That title would be more problematic than copying the official name. An official name can be misleading or biased but might be used anyway simply because it's official and becomes commonly used by others. But if we're going to use a descriptive title that we choose ourselves instead, it should be a "neutral" title. If I understand correctly, many people believe that although the government is saying the program is about "illegal immigrants" in general, it is really focused on Afghans. Also, the phrase "illegal immigrant" is arguably POV itself, since it describes a person as being illegal. Many people object to the idea of a person being illegal. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 04:10, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Move: per Ainty Painty. Sutyarashi (talk) 17:46, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• The dispute here is a complicated issue and I am not confident that we have found the best title. I would be opposed to simply transcribing the official government name for the policy or at least not without more information in the first part of the lead. The most idealistic solution will be to find something that is neutral. Jorahm (talk) 19:14, 3 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]