Talk:Aangan (2018 TV series)

Special:Diff/812029617
Hi! Sorry, I may not be available on wikipedia for few days, I am messaging here after my edits (linked in heading) on Aangan (TV series) page have been reverted by an anonymous; probably the creater of page.
 * I said that I shortened the length of lead, though I got reply, "the lead should be of four paragraphs". I have checked WP:TVLEAD, there is no such a word there like "four" or "forth".
 * I had changed some categories per WP:SUBCAT.
 * I added Template:Official website in "External link" section, which I think is better to use than manual linking.
 * I don't remember much, I might have filled some Template:Cite news here too.
 * One, I could say that if  than do not write  ; it is useless repetition.
 * In, I have linked The Express Tribune, DAWN Images and The News. The News may have been piped wrongly but it worths only in Pakistani articles, as not to overlink in other references in same page.
 * I said I had removed excessive references, which means that the refs added here are either not related to the topic, or too outdated old, or too many to support one thing.
 * This might be correct as sourced that the shooting "has started" but saying this is hardly correct that it "is going on".
 * ; this is totally useless per WP:NOPIPE.
 * Also, see this for disambiguation; current TV series on ARY Digital.

When my edits were reverted, the reply I got was, "Please please I beg you don't revert it." OK, then let me explain what's in MOS:TV, and why I think my edits should be brought back. Per Template:Infobox television:
 * In  section, there should only be names of leading cast; like for here; Ahsan Khan and Mawra Hocane as said by the sources given.
 * Not to mention every name in infobox or even lead paragraph, or why is there "Cast" heading below? Better to give much details in "Production" section per MOS:TV.
 * In  section, "Do not use "SDTV" as it is ambiguous."
 * However, according to Pakistani television, adding PAL (576i) would be better, with either HDTV 720p or better HDTV 1080i.
 * I removed some infobox parameters, that may not be needed on this page.
 * and ; both are separate parameters and should be used correctly.
 * is for episode or television special. For television series, use only  and   parameters. Don't write April 2018 manually.
 * Adding other languages in prose is not good. That's why there is a parameter, so use it.

However, only the following templates that I added are brought back in the page:

"I think you should familiarize yourself with WP:MOSTV before editing such articles." Please reply, Thanks! M. Billoo 03:56, 2 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Because you begged me for that; may be you are the same one, right… why don't you sign up? Add up-to-date reference that proves "shooting is still going on". If you agree to my points above, you can change the head "Filming" into "Production". There is so much news out there, espacially Ahsan Khan's interviews with WP:RS. You yourself can see who are lead actors to include their names in infobox and lead para; and other supporting cast under "Production". Please reply, Thanks! M. Billoo 16:16, 8 December 2017 (UTC)
 * I request you to sign up first, please. Secondly, I didn't understand the context in which you replied. I said you to write the air date in Template:Start Date, as "2018|4||"; not manually April 2018 (as you said it is sourced). I also wanted to say that replace, "shooting has started and is still going on" to "the shooting took place in [city] in [whatever date or just month if sourced]." There must be some reliable source that verifies instagram post, or as I said that Ahsan Khan has given many interviews recently. Either you didn't understand me, or I don't know what are you trying to say. Since, you bagged me not to revert, I don't know if you let me edit the page. Thanks! M. Billoo 17:33, 12 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I wasn't notified of your message, because you mistakenly added the template:Ping wrongly. Thanks for asking. See MOS:TV, and other Good Articles (e.g. SpongeBob SquarePants). Usually the lead section does not need too many references, and so the "Cast" section. May be one or two paragraphs are enough in lead to explain the article in summarized form. The references are to-be shifted down under the "Production" section, alongwith the names of recurring/supporting cast. As the paragraph is "lead", it only requires the info of "lead" actors and so "leading" info. Not all to-be repeated in the lead. The repeats might be seen in WP:OVERLINK and WP:CITEKILL too. Thanks! M. Billoo 16:49, 17 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Hi! I have collected some points, and removed the overlinks and citekills, and tried to make the page look good. I think this is the way we could solve the problem, or else I have to tag the page for CE. A copy of it, I have saved in my personal backup, and wishing to apply it here shortly after. Please sign up, so anyone could also notify you easily, like you notify me on your messages. Thanks! M. Billoo 22:27, 21 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Hi! As I have seen that you recently edited the page and removed citekill from BizAsia, I accepted your that move. But, why didn't you message here? I mean, I don't know if it was the same user as you, and that's why I say you to please sign up! You can check out the page, I have made some edits. Before changing anything, first discuss here. Though, I cannot notify you due to you are not a logged-in user, you can still notify me as you know. Waiting for your comments, Thanks! M. Billoo 05:42, 23 December 2017 (UTC)
 * You didn't notified me once again, and you're wrong here, "You removed entire 2,000+ bytes without even discussing". The message is already above, and you edited the page meanwhile but didn't respond here. Now talking about Riverdale article, again you have gone wrong in this one. You are continuously giving the reference of MOS:TV wrongly in your edits! I have said that the next step of mine would be tagging this article for CE. You are comparing this non-sense article by you with a well-written article Riverdale. The reason English articles are well-written is that the number of editors contributing using WP:RS. But you don't seemed to be maintaining the page; one of the reference you have linked twice, some of them are really citekills, with one being not even related to the topic due to its outdate 2015. I told you that the phrase "shooting is started and going on" was unsourced then, which I sourced today by one of your given BizAsia ref and two of my searched RS. Also, I told that the introduction paragraph does not require references. I tried to talk nicely, even I was discussing here since your first revert. But you seemed to be angry, and once again reverted my edits. You don't want to sign in, then never ever say "without even discussing"! Flagging the article, so a senior user could check it more better way.
 * "BEWARE OF JEALOUSY! FOR VERILY IT DESTROYS GOOD DEEDS THE WAY FIRE DESTROYS WOOD" ~ Prophet Muhammad
 * May be, my next step for this article would be something else, but I am not leaving as it is on news and I also want to make it up to date. Hope I have replied, No Thanks! Because waiting for your reply is now like wasting precious time. I will keep contributing my best, and wishing to not be involved in WP:EW. M. Billoo 18:11, 23 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Praise you, are you afraid of notifying me? ¿"You are cutting 2,000+ bytes and that thing you didn't even discuss."? Have you seen the content on the page I added? Have you even checked the amount of references you have added? I am pretty sure the answer would be "No", because the thing you were watching was only and only those 2KB data. What matters in the encyclopedia is the content and its presentation. And don't be religious here, you said you were jealous and I just replied you without being religious. No Thanks! M. Billoo 20:20, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

Please review again
Hi ! I request you to please review the page once again. Please check the difference between the time you reviewed, and then the look it has right now. Which is acceptable, was I trying to destroy the article in view of MOS:TV? Also, please check User:M.Billoo2000/sandbox/Aangan (Hum TV) and let me know iff you found something unsourced or wrong, and compare it with this page. Am I trying to do it right or not? Please check this talk page also, and let me know your comments. Thanks! M. Billoo 20:20, 24 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Overall, the sourcing looks good, and I guess you're a good faith editor who tries to not "destroy the article to comply with MOS:TV guidelines." In your sandbox page, there's nothing wrong or have any unsourced claims. KGirl  (Wanna chat?) 22:58, 24 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your time! In this page, one reference has been linked twice by the user, and one reference is of 2015 which I don't think helps here. Some of them I think are un-needed, because they tell the same thing, so repeated. That's why I had to edit page, but that anonymous has reverted my edits once again. I also added some up to date content, but it got removed. So, I decided to put up my edited code in sandbox, and then I flagged this article for cleanup. Still, the user is not understanding, I thought you could help then. Thanks! M. Billoo 23:05, 24 December 2017 (UTC)
 * If you want to remove only references, I will not disallow you. But please, don't remove other things. Remove all citekill references. Reason for my angerness is you are cutting entire 3 paragraph lead, which you shouldnot do. 39.38.0.133 (talk) 07:00, 25 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Compare this page with my sandbox first, linked above. Seems like you have problem only with the removal of lead paragraphs. Don't see just number of paragraphs, and tell me if you think I am citing wrongly. Want to know your comments on my sandbox. M. Billoo 07:04, 25 December 2017 (UTC)
 * I have removed some references, which I thought were bad. Speaking about your sandbox, it's nice try. But some basic components it is missing are: "Main Cast" and "Recurring Cast", Uzma Hassan is not the part of Aangan cast and lastly I have also heard that Wikipedia is not the bulk of information or means what people really say about their roles, I mean that all experiences of cast should not be written in the article. Just 1-2 experiences because it makes it contrary to WP:Copyright Violations. I think you have understood now?! 39.38.0.133 (talk) 07:17, 25 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Aangan is not written by Mustafa Afridi, it is written by Khadija Mastoor, screenplay is done by Mustafa Afridi, mistake in your sandbox. 39.38.0.133 (talk) 07:20, 25 December 2017 (UTC)
 * It will be good if users are notified in lead that the cast has worked in Haasil and Yaqeen Ka Safar. That looks bizarre that half of the information, useful for readers, is written in Production section. Lead is the first thing which most people see. And lastly, Ahad Raza Mir should not be like Ahad Raza Mir.

For WP:C-P, see and my sandbox doesn't violate. For Uzma Hassan, her name is sourced. Please read in complete context, "Written by Mustafa Afridi, the screenplay is based on the famous novel of same name by Khadija Mastoor." Maybe I have been mistaken in "Main" and "Recurring". See Draft:Ahad Raza Mir, soon could become an article, who knows. M. Billoo 07:32, 25 December 2017 (UTC)
 * It still contains some citekill references, like "Chupan Chupai" and "Neelum Muneer" one. 39.38.0.133 (talk) 07:35, 25 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Still not agreed with the lead, I mean some references you should provide too in lead. 39.38.0.133 (talk) 07:38, 25 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Told you, the 2 Daily Times refs prove your sentence "shooting is going on", so not citekill.
 * You removed sourced Uzma Hassan and Omair Rana?
 * If Haasil and Yaqeen Ka Safar dramas name in lead para, then OK remove these names from Production.
 * Exactly which lines you think are overwritten? I know, which ref can be shared in lead? M. Billoo 07:42, 25 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Man! You've edited wrongly and caught by a senior user (notifying ) under unexplained removal. This is the problem many anonymous IPs face, and you don't want to sign in. The english drama article you mentioned, have you seen the amount of refs in its lead and lead's length? Have you sean any other drama name in lead, except for its spin off? Also, have you checked, your edits fall under C-P violation of , though it is a quotation but as you said above, "I mean that all experiences of cast should not be written in the article […] I think you have understood now". I don't know why I went to agree you on some points, still I had to disagree on many others. I will go with my edited version of sandbox, so had to undo your edit there. M. Billoo 08:24, 25 December 2017 (UTC)

You have left me spellbound. Do whatever you want to.39.38.2.24 (talk) 16:45, 25 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Are you really sure that Uzma Hassan is part of the cast? Other things are good. 39.38.3.7 (talk) 04:28, 26 December 2017 (UTC)
 * OK OK! this reference proves that Uzma Hassan is part of Aangan Cast. Sorry for all things! You can now paste your sandbox. Be sure because I also caught some grammatical mistakes in production section. Best wishes! 39.38.3.7 (talk) 04:36, 26 December 2017 (UTC)
 * And also, write Uzma Hassan instead of Uzma Hassan. 39.38.3.7 (talk) 04:39, 26 December 2017 (UTC)

✅ M. Billoo 04:47, 26 December 2017 (UTC)

I was supposed to place the "Done" before your today's message. Some red wikilinks are valid, as I told you for Ahad Raza Mir. Sometime soon, the page for Uzma Hassan could be created. Please bring forward the grammar mistakes, Thanks! M. Billoo 04:58, 26 December 2017 (UTC)


 * "Abid Ali and Zaib Rehman signed the project in the roles of parents of Ahsan's role." "Omair Rana and Uzma Hassan also signed in for supporting roles". This grammar is confusing me slightly. 39.38.3.7 (talk) 05:05, 26 December 2017 (UTC)
 * casting section.


 * But lead? see, "…based on the novel of the same name by J. K. Rowling…The film…was written by Steve Kloves…" (a good article). So do I wrote, "Written by Mustafa, screenplay is based on novel by Khadija…" This might not have created confusion. But, to me, "Written by Khadija Mastoor, the drama is based on her famous novel of the same name, while the screenplay is done by Mustafa Afridi." creates mis-understanding something like "Khadija's novel is written by herself". M. Billoo 05:21, 26 December 2017 (UTC)
 * That doesn't matter much. There are several articles like Saya-e-Dewar Bhi Nahi and Alif Allah which are also novel-based but still claimed to be written by same writer. 39.38.3.97 (talk) 05:43, 26 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Are those GA? I referenced you a sentence from the GA. You replied me in some other context, while I was saying to make the sentence similar with what's written on the GA, because here we have two writers; one who wrote novel and other who converted it into play. M. Billoo 06:16, 26 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Maybe that article's references be proving that the play is written by that writer but there are no references proving that article is written by Mustafa Afridi but instead they say that Mustafa Afridi has only done screenplay of the drama. 39.38.3.238 (talk) 09:24, 26 December 2017 (UTC)

What you say, man? I am saying to look that GA, there's written, "Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows – Part 1 is a 2010 fantasy film directed by David Yates and distributed by Warner Bros. Pictures. It is based on the novel of the same name by J. K. Rowling . The film was written by Steve Kloves and produced by David Heyman, David Barron, and Rowling.

The film stars Daniel Radcliffe as Harry Potter, with Rupert Grint and Emma Watson, respectively, reprising roles as Harry's best friends Ron Weasley and Hermione Granger."

Simply, copy the above text in the form of, "Aangan is an upcoming Pakistani pre-partition period drama, directed by Mohammed Ehteshamuddin. The drama will star XYZ (5 names)."

Re-word it to merge in continuity instead of writing separate small sentences, and paste as, "Aangan (lit. Courtyard) is an upcoming Pakistani pre-partition period drama, directed by Mohammed Ehteshamuddin It will star XYZ (5 names)."

The green text has same meaning, but use either from 'drama' or 'screenplay'. Which source says that the drama is also written by Khadija Mastoor? You must see this link one more time briefly, as you are mistaking, like you did for Uzma Hassan; it is clear there that "Khadija's novel" has been "scripted by Mustafa".

A novel is generally written in basic prose while a drama is almost exclusively written in dialogue. Hope it helps, Thanks! M. Billoo 14:47, 26 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Uff! I am saying that that doesn't matter much. Credits, which will appear after drama has aired will confirm that the drama is written by Khadija Mastoor, and the references themselves are saying that the drama is written by Khadija Mastoor and some references are not even saying that the drama's screenplay is done by Mustafa Afridi, rather they are saying it is written by Khadija Mastoor. So, just leave it. Solution for that is that I will cut the line of screenplay in the lead. 39.38.6.155 (talk) 07:13, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

With the only green part to be agreed, I disagree your last message,

You are missing the same reference as you did for Uzma Hassan as said she is not the part of cast, even this was linked first by you and not me. Ehtishamuddin has now returned with yet another unconventional tale, inspired by Khadija Mastoor's novel Aangan…… "Mustafa had been working on Aangan for more than a year. It was undoubtedly one of the best novels of its time and now it's been written by a new writer. I feel such plays are memorable and acquire a cult-classic status if produced well."

You also cited this, [https://images.dawn.com/news/1178976 …the drama is planned as a three-part series spanning a number of decades. It begins with Khatija Mastoor's original novel set in the '40s and '50s, and writer Mustafa Afridi has imagined these characters on a continued journey into the 1980s and 2000s.]

Even you linked this too, though it doesn't mention Mustafa Afridi, "It was initially thought out as a film but now we're making a play out of it,… We might turn it into a film later."

Be up to date, and please update! Khadija has written the novel about 50 years back, and she died in 1982. How and why could she be able to script it in 2016? Even maybe you edited her bio and added, "Her novel Aangan has highly been admired as a literary history in Urdu, which has also been changed into the drama." You must know the difference between a novel and a script. I am just referring you the way of writing the lead para by a GA (Good Article), even you were also "jealous" of English-topic articles, then just why?

I may have to link back Ahsan Khan's interview to Daily Times, which is quite a clear as he said, "The drama is written by Mustafa Afridi and is based on Khadija Mastoor's novel."

Though, this one may not be a GA, but see it too, "Harry Potter and the Cursed Child is a two-part stage play written by Jack Thorne based on an original new story by Thorne, J. K. Rowling and John Tiffany… The rehearsal script, which was not a novelisation of the play, was published."

You don't want to sign in, so you are just spreading up your contributions and edit histories in sevaral IPs. Even you may not remember all that which IPs you have used. You like to overlink, so you did in the lead; but you are removing a redlink for a topic which can be created shortly or sometime after, it could be kept as well. You are also not using Template:Cite news completely. And for "second appearance", it is better to use "second collaboration", and why is there any need mention it? The actors may have worked with the same director or the playwright or the production house also. This I consider as useless to explain in lead, well, I am not saying to remove it out completely.

And if I go to correct it now, you will say, "without even discussing, you are breaking MOS:TV". Well, I am not warning you for now, but my next step would be something else. I am not creating any spell over you, but as you said, Also, in production section, you have written, "The novel Aangan was originally written by late Khadija Mastoor in 1962… But as the director, Ehteshamuddin was most obsessed with partition, so he scripted the novel along with Mustafa Afridi as screenplayer… "…and I loved Mustafa Afridi's Sang-e-Mar Mar, who is now doing the screenplay for Aangan.""

Hope this helps. Thanks, or may be no thanks! M. Billoo 12:32, 27 December 2017 (UTC) [Updated: 13:12, 27 December 2017 (UTC)]
 * Complex reply 😴. Well, Mustafa Afridi has only modified what Khadija Mastoor has written and you are also accepting this but still ignoring. Original writer is considered more than it's modifier. Best Wishes! 39.38.8.16 (talk) 17:18, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

How many times should I say, try understand the difference between a novel and a drama. See below; or as you mentioned, "😴", just go to sleep:

"Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows is a fantasy novel written by British author J. K. Rowling and the seventh and final novel of the Harry Potter series. The book was released on 21 July 2007, ending the series that began in 1997…"

"Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows – Part 2 is a 2011 fantasy film directed by David Yates and distributed by Warner Bros. Pictures. It is the second of two cinematic parts based on the novel of the same name by J. K. Rowling. The film, which is the eighth and final instalment in the Harry Potter film series, was written by Steve Kloves and produced by David Heyman, David Barron, and Rowling."

"I will keep contributing my best, and wishing to not be involved in WP:EW." This is what I've said above. None of your edit I reverted, but you have reverted mine third time! You said, "I think you will probably kill me in Edit war. Respect WP:3RR (indirectly respect me)", but you yourself are not respecting WP:OVERLINK and "Template:Cite news" parameters. And even I am not saying to respect you as you've said, "You are a Muslim and that's a good thing. Yet no etiquettes and changes I have found on you which should be on Muslims."

You said, "you are also accepting this but still ignoring." Your problem is you are not read my messages completely, like it was clear you were watching the removal of 2KB previously but were not watching my edits. You said you were jealous of English-topic articles, but you are ignoring these paragraphs from Harry Potter artcles I mentioned.

You wrote, "Yet if you don't want to leave, you will yourself lose editing privileges." But here, edit disputes are being made by you, as you are removing the sourced content. Since you are not signing in, I could make a request for "page protection over edit disputes". This message too, you don't want to read completely. "Complex reply", No Thanks! M. Billoo 18:48, 27 December 2017 (UTC)
 * why being so serious? I am also Muslim and that maybe identification of me for you. Why will I involve in religious war, I am myself Muslim. You are very creative person, seriously I am very much influenced by you, but see na, like all people, you are also making some mistakes. If the novel is written by Khadija Mastoor (R.I.P well 😁). What will she think? She will think that the novel for which I got award is stolen indirectly. Be a gentle, leave this. Speaking about complex reply, you are explaining each thing like our maths teacher uses to. Explain briefly, no-one has forced you and me to explain things word by word. Hope this helps! 😅
 * And also, I am not reverting your edits because I am jealous of those, else I am reverting your edits because there is really a mistake (which I should not tell you, you should understand by yourself). Your article Teefa in Trouble is nice, but if you look carefully like this 😶, you will find mistakes there too. Should I tell you, what grammatical mistakes you have done there? I am sure answer will be "no". Ok leave it.
 * Coming to writer controversy, we can also say that Ehteshamuddin has written the novel (you may think that) because in production section you have written that it was the idea of Ehteshamuddin ace he took help of Mustafa Afridi in writing that. What person are you? Seriously yar (I am also from Pakistan that's why saying you yar 😅), it was also modified by some people maybe. Masha Allah our articles are good then why are you comparing those with Potter? Leave it yar. Oh! sorry for saying you to respect WP:3RR because I am myself not following citenews rule.
 * Lastly, Uzma Hassan controversy was completely different. Uzma Hassan didn't even took a single click to which I thought it was written wrong but news confirmed everything. 39.38.9.198 (talk) 06:33, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

Talk page is not for chatting. You said, "I am myself not following citenews rule." I don't know either if you are male user or female, but you still edited the second para of lead without "completing" citenews, and I am not saying it a rule. You wrote, "She will think that the novel for which I got award is stolen indirectly." No, they have obviously bought the copyright for it, and it is very common. I know my english is weak, and I make many mistakes; excluding typos, well, typos are also the problem sometimes; including wikipedia too. For grammar, "which I should not tell you, you should understand by yourself", you don't want to discuss, that means. Please discuss and correct the mistake instead of reverting the whole edit, "I am not reverting your edits because I am jealous of those, else I am reverting your edits because there is really a mistake". Then what is the mistake, "you are explaining each thing like our maths teacher uses to. Explain briefly, no-one has forced you and me to explain things word by word." Why are you not wishing to discuss the mistakes and preferring the reverts, "Be a gentle, leave this", why, just WHY?

Still, you are not understanding the difference between a novel and a play, and this article is about a screenplay based on the novel. Yes, play can be said as modified form of novel, like Harry Potter plays (eight films) are modified by XYZ playwright from Rowling's novels after copyright was brought. Here, Mustafa modified the Khadija's novel into a play. So, "Written by Mustafa Afrifi, the screenplay/drama is based on the novel of same name by Khadija Mastoor." Or in simple words (already above), "The drama is written by Mustafa Afridi and is based on Khadija Mastoor's novel." I don't know why you created a huge discussion on just one sentence, and still you will say, "you are editing without discussing". Your sentence is said by you, "Masha Allah our articles are good then why are you comparing those with Potter?" Or if not then prove it from some good articles; like I am proving my sentence from Harry Potter articles, from which some have been updated to WP:GA status.

Need your reply on the whole. And for Teefa, you are most welcome to discuss on its talk page and I will appreciate it. Jazak Allah! M. Billoo 09:39, 28 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Your reply made me laugh seriously 😂 when you said "why just WHY?". Seriously bored telling you same thing but, who wrote novel?, who made day the night for the novel? Of Course Khadija Mastoor. Speaking about GA,, well that doesn't matter much and should not matter for you too. The articles which don't get deleted are also GAs in my thought 😎. And also, Mustafa is himself only screenplayer. It was the 💡 idea of Ehteshamuddin, so should you say like It was his idea to make drama on partition and so he is also the writer of the play? I am still laughing on your "gentle WHY" 😆,,,,, but Khadija's writing cannot be stolen. Did you listen?! OK repeating: KHADIJA'S WRITING CANNOT BE SAID AS OF MUSTAFA AFRIDI'S WRITING. Tired 😴 but well 😪, you cannot write like Written by Mustafa Afridi, the drama is based on Khadija's... . He is screenplayer and let him be that. And yes, 'WHY, just why' I should allow it? 39.38.10.189 (talk) 12:20, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

I guess you are a female. Being a man, I should respect females and espacially fellow female citizens. This is not a GA, and I am not leaving this. You are thinking it funny. Now you see how I edit the page, and then I know you'll revert and this will create another edit dispute, making the page to be protected. So, Rescpecting females. M. Billoo 12:30, 28 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Baji, I am Male. Leave it as it is just. It fits context. 39.38.10.189 (talk) 12:43, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

So sir, once again it is clear that you don't read my messages completely, even if I am providing RS and GA text. Now you see me. M. Billoo 12:45, 28 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Uffffff! You always get stuck on this thing. Your are so so so, leave it just. I was planning to create another television article. I will not create that very soon, but maybe tomorrow, don't come there to attack. Give me time, I shall grant this article to you. Then you might do what you want, even if users don't agree it at your edits. Just just just just*10^23333 leave me. 39.38.10.189 (talk) 14:10, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

The edits rely on talk page
Hi anonymous male! Are you the same as this user was? You don't want to reply may be. You said you are creating another article and probably will not let me edit there. I didn't jumped over here by myself. The creator of this article (may be you, because IPs are 182.182... and 39.38...) has submitted a draft for review, that was created by me. So, who started? And I am not ending, because it is not a fight as you look it. You reverted my edits and not I, even the sourced content. This was just a dispute you were trying to make, instead of pointing out "grammar mistakes" to help. Yeah, you cannot be easily tracked, and do note that you are not a helpful user. I am looking forward to contribute at my best. M. Billoo 15:37, 28 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Just be happy, you will become frustrated. 39.38.11.170 (talk) 15:56, 28 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Frustrated of what? I am happy. You should just be helpful like I was doing help by providing different texts from RS and GA, or else I put on you what you said, "Leave it"! Your removal of messages from talk page, that I consider as fourth revert of my sourced content. Though this is a talk page only, many of my edit histories refer to this. So, why wishing me for being happy if you are not helping? As I said, "you are not a helpful user", once again I have been proved right! M. Billoo 16:02, 28 December 2017 (UTC)
 * You look angry, all things will go in vain if I asked from you. Don't reply!39.38.13.186 (talk) 09:51, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
 * ¿"go in vain"? Say it in simple words, you just don't want to help. And helping is not a bad thing; iff you pointed out the grammar mistakes as you said there are/were, it would be nice of you. But you yourself are kind of 'useless'. ¿"Don't reply!"? As my edit summaries in the article say, "per talk page", I am also looking forward to bring back the content here, which was your fourth revert on me. M. Billoo 05:32, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

Oh! What will people do reading a long line script? That was not a dispute, that was chatting and you also accepted this. 39.38.16.31 (talk) 06:51, 30 December 2017 (UTC)
 * ¿"Sorry for dispute" and "that was chatting and you also accepted this"? I said my edits rely on the talk page, and if it would be empty, where would be my edits rely then, on that Pagli (TV series)? No… ¿"get hell out of here" and "I will not allow you to revert it"? Per H:ES,
 * "If an edit requires more explanation than will fit in the summary box, post a comment to the article's talk page to give more information, and include "see talk" or "see discussion page" in the edit summary. […vs…] Avoid using edit summaries to carry on debates or negotiation over the content or to express opinions of the other users involved. This creates an atmosphere where the only way to carry on discussion is to revert other editors! If you notice this happening, start a section on the talk page and place your comments there. This keeps discussions and debates away from the article page itself."


 * I wish to revert your 'fourth revert', no matter "What will people do reading a long line script". This is a talk page. M. Billoo 07:41, 30 December 2017 (UTC)
 * "Angry users cannot even fit the least of it"

- 39.38.16.113 and you are one of them. The users like you are already not allowed on Wikipedia. We both are indeed making mistakes then why you, instead of explaining with love, go in angerness rule. What are you? You are #1 user, who gets stuck on one thing no matter what people say. You maybe such like angry in real life but Wikipedia doesn't allow angerness. Respect talk page guidelines. 39.38.16.113 (talk) 10:17, 30 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Thousand times I said you to stay gentle but you don't. You will yourself lose editing privileges. Please discuss word by word what do you want now? 39.38.16.113 (talk) 10:20, 30 December 2017 (UTC)
 * ¿Sir, please sir, "get hell out of here", and you are continuously saying "leave it as it is", as well not letting me undo your removal of sourced content. And saying that I love you sir, love you?
 * You know what, I don't take, even like to take angerness over me. I am not angry at all sir. You are saying me to respect the guidlines. OK, then tell me, where is it written to remove the sourced content? Even when my edits are relying/sourced on the talk page, you have removed it. Make sure that you have reverted my edits four times; on three of them you agreed you were wrong so I brought back the sourced content. The fourth one; on this talk page; is also wrong sir! "Sir, please sir! Try to understand!"
 * From where you have quoted "Angry users cannot even fit the least of it"? You are talking in rude languages, not me, sir!
 * ¿"What are you? You are #1 user, who gets stuck on one thing no matter what people say. You maybe such like angry in real life but Wikipedia doesn't allow angerness." Proof? Unsourced…! And who is menancing, "you will lose editing privileges"?
 * I am in doubt (not menancing you, just in doubt ONLY) that your username has been blocked on wikipedia, so that's why you don't want to sign up to get trapped in WP:SOCK. Even you saw that a senior user reverted your edits once on this page due to "unexplained removal of source". Just tell me, how many times I have reverted you?
 * I was wishing to say this also that by working together with RS, we can update this page upto a GA. But as I have said earlier, you can't help. As my edits rely here, I had to bring back what I had written here to complete my edit. For mistakes, I know that I make them; sometimes grammar or sometimes typos; and you should also know that my English is weak.
 * ¿"Please discuss word by word what do you want now"? The answer is, the whole talk page, but you "will not allow you to revert it". As far as my edits are on RS, I will keep supporting my point. Thanks sir! M. Billoo 11:20, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

In reply of your last edit on the article infobox, please see Harry Potter article again, | screenplay = Steve Kloves So here, it would be correct, if written as, | screenplay = Mustafa Afridi Hope this helps, Thanks! M. Billoo 12:28, 30 December 2017 (UTC)
 * based on = Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows by J. K. Rowling
 * based_on = Aangan by Khadija Mastoor
 * Ok Ok I understood what you say. Actually if drama is written by Mustafa Afridi but sources say it's written by Khadija Mastoor, then there is still confusion lying. This should be optional until it is confirmed that it is written by Mustafa. Because when some teasers will appear they will tell who has written it. Like I have given you example of Pagli, where drama was written by Shaukat Thanvi (late) but is still regarded as written by Khurram Abbas as it appears in credits. But still you are declining this edit, so bear...
 * 😑 I didn't understand what you said "sock"?¿ but 😒 when we will fight in this page, administrators will block me for sure so that's why IP 😉.
 * I am not removing unsourced content. I don't know how you said it but I don't want proof. Oh! What a good news! If you can really change it into GA, you are most welcome to to do that age who has stopped you from doing that¿? She please, don't say me sir, I am young just like you. 39.38.17.71 (talk) 14:16, 30 December 2017 (UTC)
 * What will people do reading a long line script and you are reverting it because I have reverted your edit?? (here you were arrogant). That was combination of your and my edit and that issue was resolved as you did what you wanted. If someome ask you this, you simply reply that you had seen this thing in Harry Potter's article. But what's the purpose is reverting messages. You simply want to insult me and I don't want that so I cannot allow you for this! Simply forget this just. 39.38.17.144 (talk) 16:19, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

See message by a senior user below, who suggested for GA, if we both work together on it. OK, I agree with your first part for now, 'sir', where you have said, "Because when some teasers will appear they will tell who has written it." But, as "Written by Mustafa, the drama is based on Khadija's novel", better if we say him a playwright, so "screenplay by" parameter should be used in infobox; well OK, wait. Leave the sock one, actually you are insulting me by saying "she" sir! I may have considered it as WP:BEHAVE violation, or may be not? From where you get this, ¿"when we will fight in this page, administrators will block me for sure"?

And again, for this, ¿"What will people do reading a long line script"? I don't mind if the "chat part" of this talk page, as you've said, would not be back. But please "sir", as you are asking me to ¿"talk with love"?, let me bring my part of it just to verify my edits on the page, on which my edit summary relies. I just want to make my edits clear. If someone, 'SOMEONE' go throught the article and/or visit history to check the edits, which say "see talk page", and he comes here to see nothing, so then instead of visiting the talk page's history too, it would be better to see the "edit story/long 'summary'" right over the talk page. Also, if you yourself were not reading and/or haven't read the full "conversation", it doen't mean ¿"what people will do"? reading or verifying edits. ¿"You simply want to insult me and I don't want that so I cannot allow you for this"? There would be no insult for you, sir, there is no matter if the whole content would be back. ¿"because I have reverted your edit"? sir, you have reverted my sourced content, my edits which relate to the edits on the article, those which I pointed out in my article edits, those on which my edit summaries in the article rely, understood?

As you said that I ¿"try to fight"?, I want you to please check my "fights" on these talk pages, furthermore, you can check article history by those dates if you want to:
 * User talk:M.Billoo2000 (some of the "fights" I have removed because those do not worth for me to archive anyway, you can go throught the history too; my talk page)
 * Talk:Mahira Khan and Talk:Raees (film) (also with his "socks" in Talk:Ae Dil Hai Mushkil, you might understand now; those users are blocked)
 * User talk:Hcns and File talk:Dear Zindagi poster.jpg
 * User talk:TheGreatWikiLord and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Pakistan Super League

Pleasse tell me of which guidlines you were talking about, Thanks ¿"young"? sir! M. Billoo 18:26, 30 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Firstly, 😑 once again you are over-respecting me by saying "young sir" now. After that, I didn't check it correctly that I had written "she please"¿ I really didn't want to write that, it was just a mistake, because you know, I don't write correctly, instead I move my fingers across keyboard to write messages (that is the function of my mobile keyboard), so whenever mistakes come I don't see them correctly and that's not contrary to WP:Behaviour Violation because you had atleast asked me what I had written. OK, coming to the topic, you can revert them but, but, that shouldn't be insulting for both of us, you have said me that's why I'm believing you. The language I have used there would not be appropriate that's why I was prohibiting you but if you have taken this responsibility, so I cannot refuse it. Do ittt... 39.38.18.148 (talk) 07:40, 31 December 2017 (UTC)

¿"over-respecting"! "Just just just just*10^23333"? leave the whole respect. Once again you agreed that you have/had gone wrong by ¿"mistake"?! Ignoring the "revert" part here, you tried to attack me sevaral times, and now saying ¿"that's not contrary to WP:Behaviour Violation […] The language I have used there would not be appropriate that's why I was prohibiting you"? First you attacked on my race/religion, saying ¿"Yet no etiquettes and changes I have found on you which should be on Muslims." And/or "Why will I involve in religious war? Then, you attacked me personally, saying ¿"Baji, I am Male."? Then even tried to attack my personal life, saying ¿"You maybe such like angry in real life but Wikipedia doesn't allow angerness."? Who are you to allow/disallow someone? Your behaviour is even much more rude than you are thinking of mine, I don't know why you put the insult on your device, ¿"I didn't check it correctly that I had written "she please"¿ I really didn't want to write that, it was just a mistake, because you know, […] (that is the function of my mobile keyboard)"? Forget the context in which you said that all, because you too don't understand the context of the same "Written by Mustafa……" You wanted to give it international look so I provided you the text from GA and RS to rely on them, instead you started comparing it with Pagli. I don't know where is better place to talk to you, but this is the only place I consider, for now. In last, if talking about insult or whatever, I should now report your behaviour (182.182.… and 39.38.…) and ¿"get hell out of here"?! M. Billoo 04:48, 2 January 2018 (UTC)
 * What can you say about your own behavior? Your behavior is even more rude with me from first day. Behavior Violation was started by you actually. When I messaged you, you called me female to which I angrily said you "Baji". Report me I don't care. They will block you because you started angerness not I. 😝 39.38.29.199 (talk) 15:19, 5 January 2018 (UTC)
 * You are talking about which ¿"first day"?!? Special:Diff/808654330 or Special:Diff/812029617 or Special:Diff/813159398 or Special:Diff/816753402 or Special:Diff/816787600 or Special:Diff/816877493 or Special:Diff/817431286 or Special:Diff/817448200 or Special:Diff/817448446 or Special:Diff/817456298 or what? In my opinion, it is "Special:Diff/812204923". And you too should always clarify what you say, but "sadly" you don't like to do so, that's what I have noted in these few days, because you don't even read the complete text, and think that what people will do reading ¿"long line script"? Everyone is not like you, or better I mean you are not like everyone. M. Billoo 21:47, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

Since I can't notify you, please go and comment on Dispute resolution noticeboard. M. Billoo 14:14, 6 January 2018 (UTC)
 * You are liar, you said I have prohibited you from reverting old messages in this talk page. I haven't prohibited you, I said you can do it. I said this article belongs to you, so whatever you want to do you can, but unfortunately, you failed it. I will not discuss about this dispute, because it's not dispute at all, this was resolved. No further masaala should be added in this dispute. 39.38.61.215 (talk) 06:49, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

Well, I don't WP:OWN the page. But as you have again said without checking what were you saying, so then don't come back here. I don't care if you think you will be insulted by those content, so I am bringing back from Special:Diff/817456407. Anything between the two is resolved when they mutually agree. Since, you said, ¿"it's not dispute at all, this was resolved"? I will also say "RESOLVED". Still, if you remove your messages only, I will not say anything. No thanks! M. Billoo 14:42, 7 January 2018 (UTC)
 * You have restored what you wanted. But what's now the purpose of this section "Removal of messages??"? Just saying it would confuse people. But what will you say?! 39.38.50.184 (talk) 15:33, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

CE
Hi ! Thanks for your helpful contributions on the page! You said, "Still needs copyediting for style and cohesion." You are most welcome to bring forward them. FYI, please see WP:HD, where I have asked for help on this page. Also, if you want to, you can check out the history of this talk page. Thanks! M. Billoo 06:15, 30 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I was really just fixing up the worst of the poor English. I'm afraid I don't know enough about the subject to be a lot more help. I did glance at the talk page history, and really the only thing I took away from that is that if the time, effort and words spent arguing back and forth had been, instead, devoted to article improvement, you'd probably have a damn good article by now... -- Begoon 06:41, 30 December 2017 (UTC)
 * To clarify my point above, there have been over 10,000 words added to this talk page. The article contains just 445 words of readable prose. Just something to think about, maybe... -- Begoon 00:03, 31 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Hi! There had been a huge dispute talks between me and that anonymous "male". If you read the above section of messages, there I said that I have given edit summaries on article like, "see talk page". But that anonymous has removed that totally, including on what my article edits rely. I wish to support my edits by bringing back the content on talk page. Though, if it has gone too long, I may have no problem when other things will be removed. The link you shared also says,
 * Reverted edits: 0
 * Max. text deleted: 39.38.10.189
 * This deletion, I consider as fourth revert of my sourced content, after "his" 3 reverts on article. Thanks! M. Billoo 03:45, 31 December 2017 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion: You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. Community Tech bot (talk) 20:21, 28 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Sajal Aly.jpg