User talk:Justice007/Archive 2

Would you please do not disturb while an article is being written? Thank you!
Would you please do not disturb while an article is being written? Thank you! C. Jeremy Wong (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 12:13, 1 October 2011 (UTC).

There is already a tag telling you I've been worrking on the article! Please stop disturbing! C. Jeremy Wong (talk)

Dear Mr Sehgal, Thank you very much for your enthusiasm for adding your ideas. Yet, I'm afraid the telecommunications field is not the area you have participated in. I will explain (I promise) to you point by point around a week later on why your changes on my writing are mostly unsuitable. Yet, I hope I do not need to, from today, finding my words and moving them back here & there amongst the paragraphs/sentences. You do not know what I'm going to write, therefore you cannot understand why my words have to be put here or there, but not at the other places ... .... Thank you! C. Jeremy Wong (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 06:43, 5 October 2011 (UTC).

Non-English sources
Note that you are allowed to add non-English sources to articles (see WP:NOENG). I have searched for sources regarding Ahmad and Pir-e-Kamil using google, google books and google scholar and can't find anything, but her name has a variety of spellings and I'm guessing most of the work is in Urdu. If you are aware of Urdu or other non-English sources (either on-line or in paper) they can be used to improve the referencing and expand both pages. The best thing you can do to help avoid the issues I am bringing up on these pages is to find sources and integrate them neutrally. I don't want to delete a genuinely notable page, but I am unwilling to simply accept an author or book is notable without evidence. WLU (t) (c) Wikipedia's rules: simple/complex 20:01, 21 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your kind constructive step,I appreciate it.I know Urdu and four other languages of that subject of area,as I am very familair to that.I will try to find reliable sources.One thing I will again repeat here that writer shoud be called Umaira Ahmad with full name or Umaira.Because as WP:SURNAME states that famous name should be written.Beyond policies,for I exemplify,in that part of world,things are very different than western counties,most of public does not use that surname with their name,they use name second name or third name, small groups use mostly surname/family name. And Ahmad is Umaira's second name,I think so.When I realy call her name Ahmad the people  will not understand,about whom I am talking,and they will consider me knowing nothing.And it will be my more obivous stupidity even if I pretend to show my mastery of WP:policies and guidelines.She is famous and known in Pakistan and India as Umaira Ahmad,but absolute not Ahmad.And it will be not suitable for the standards of Wikipedia.I assume good faith I hope we both are doing best for wikipedia.Cheers.Ehsan Sehgal (talk) 21:30, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
 * All of my edits and talk page comments are constructive, you just don't like some of them. However, to edit wikipedia, you must learn and accept the policies and guidelines - one of which is that you have to demonstrate that something is notable, you can't just say it is.
 * Referring to people by full name is common in North America as well; Tom Cruise is called "Tom Cruise" nearly everywhere, but in news articles only the second name is used after the introduction. So either Umaira or Ahmad should be used throughout, but not both.  The style used elsewhere doesn't matter, on wikipedia we use a single name as that is the policy.  If you look at the pages for Qamar Zaman Kaira, Yousaf Raza Gillani, or probably any other individual, it's a single name.  It doesn't matter how she is known in Pakistan, her article is bound by our policies.  So we need to figure out what her surname is and stick with that.  I would suggest Ahmad.  WLU (t) (c) Wikipedia's rules: simple/complex 12:09, 22 October 2011 (UTC)


 * - Well,I don,t think your edits are here constructive. Though you are mentioning policies and guidelines of wikipedia,but I consider it that they are in wrong direction,which are misunderstood to the topic.What you have mentioned examples of the names,Qamar Zaman Kaira and Yousaf Raza Gillani,here it is clear to me that Kaira and Gillani are the family names,and famous and known to the public according to Pakistani customs.

I am giving you examples too,as exact WP:SURNAME policy,take a look at,

There are hundreds of article which support the exact wiki policy.These are my concerns that your suggestions look like imposing personal ideas and choices.Now I in this regard,don't want to waste my time to discuss with you further.I will ask WP:Consensus rather than removing,adding content.The editors who assist me,I trust their fairness, neutrality and experience.Cheers.Ehsan Sehgal (talk) 16:13, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
 * 1) Ahmad Faraz,here has been used full name rather than Ahmad or Faraz,though Faraz is also right.
 * 2) Genernal Mohammad Zia-ul-Haq,has been used Zia,not Haq,nor genernal,because he was famous Zia era.
 * 3) Ishtiaq Ahmad is also same used,not Ahmad.
 * Thank you for pointing out some page that needed correcting, I have corrected all three, , , to comply with WP:SURNAME. In the future, please feel free to correct them yourself.  Because this is a wiki, individual pages can rarely be used as examples of what is acceptable as anyone could have edited them.  The exception would be featured articles, and even then must be used judiciously.  If an article is not in compliance with the policy, please change the article accordingly.  None of this is my opinion, I make a point of continuously citing policy to justify my edits.  WLU (t) (c) Wikipedia's rules: simple/complex 17:36, 22 October 2011 (UTC)


 * First, please read WP:CANVAS. Continually going to different editors hoping for a different opinion that agrees with yours is inappropriate.  If you genuinely have an issue, use dispute resolution, or one of the appropriate ways of soliciting outside input such as a third opinion or request for comment.
 * Second, please do not dump the collection of postings from other talk pages on the regular page. It's an unnecessary duplication of content and serves to purpose I can see. I have removed them. WLU (t) (c) Wikipedia's rules: simple/complex 10:31, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

But I wait couple of days more to see reaction on my comment from other editors on the talk page of Pir-e-Kamil,if no any reaction there,then I will go to dispute resolution,or any other.Cheers.Ehsan Sehgal (talk) 11:25, 25 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I did not try any forum,I just asked to be sure about the policies.due to unfamiliar of most policies and guidelines yet,and others like use of templates and tools etc.
 * I wouldn't bother going to dispute resolution until after you've either added sources that demonstrate notability, or it's survived a deletion debate. I planned on nominating it by Friday or so.  If I may suggest, your first priority should be finding sources to indicate notability.  WLU (t) (c) Wikipedia's rules: simple/complex 12:29, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification
Hi. In Abdul Qavi Desnavi, you recently added a link to the disambiguation page Desna (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:20, 19 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Thanks.Noted.Ehsan Sehgal (talk) 11:37, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

Ehsan Mehmood Khan and Babar Malik
Sehgal, avoid disturbing these articles. Ehsan Sehgal is not the only person important in the world. OK.--182.177.77.7 (talk) 15:39, 26 December 2011 (UTC)
 * 182, would you mind either sticking to one IP or creating an account? Furthermore, Ehsan has as much a right as you to edit those articles.  Nolelover   Talk · Contribs  15:46, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

3RR
Ehsan, if you don't want to be blocked, please don't edit any of the articles again. At this point, any admin would be perfectly justified to block us all, and I obviously don't want that to happen. Stay away, and I'll see what else we can do.  Nolelover   Talk · Contribs  20:50, 26 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Ok.Thanks.Ehsan Sehgal (talk) 20:54, 26 December 2011 (UTC)


 * It has been done what should be done.Ehsan Sehgal (talk) 00:49, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes...Malik's article was deleted because it was too similar to the article that was deleted at AfD (which you commented on). Khan's would probably be deleted at AfD as well, but I'm going to wait at least a day or two before nominating it.  Nolelover   Talk · Contribs  00:59, 27 December 2011 (UTC)


 * I realy did not want to be deleted the article,but I previously suggested for deletion same article too,after searching several hours for at least one reliable source, but failed,now I was also busy to save the article,but I spent hours,no any positive result.The conduct of the editor was WP:Harassment,and blackmailing which wikipedian community can not afford.Anyhow,he succeeded to get removal of the cited contents with reliable sourcesA b from my article,and that you did,while it was not my editing.I do not know how long I will bear and wear for that kind of punish because of the name of WP:self-promotion of WP:Conflict of interest. I think I must change my name because every editor will use it as a weapon against me,as it happend now.I wanted to improve the articles,but the situation became bitter,therefore,done nothing.Now it is here in Netherlands 2.53 AM.I must go to bed,I am tired.Thanks for things making better.God bless you every way in the life.Ehsan Sehgal (talk) 01:57, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes...I understand. Try not to let it get to you to much though. I've seen much worse, and you just have to let it go. Anyway, I think its a good idea to change your name...it would prevent a lot of bad arguments from coming up. Good night -  Nolelover   Talk · Contribs  02:27, 27 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Watching,day is also good.Thanks.Ehsan Sehgal (talk) 20:46, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

Justice007
Well, looks like you are now set. :) Any problems? Everything good? What do we call you now?  Nolelover   Talk · Contribs  15:46, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

Your account is active on 1 project site. Unconfirmed accounts with your name remain on 2 projects).Can you figure out please?.
 * Yes it is now OK,but there is a little confusion that my old account is also active,where my ( Global account status:All in order! / Your account is active on 18 project sites).While it should be in user's rename,but it's not there,and is that:(Global account status:In migration

What can I say how you must call me,it is always nice to me when anyone call me with my given name,but here now I am "Justice",actually not familair to you or any other editors who call me with my given name.As a routine,might happen to write down my given name,and it's possible. Thank for everything you doing to help.So here is Justice.Cheers.Justice007 (talk) 16:54, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion
Are you sure you want to do that? I understand where you're coming from, but I'm not sure that deleting your article (or even trying to) will help...it's only bowing to pressure from less-then-helpful editors; sort of like letting them "win", for lack of a better word. Either way, I'll respect your decision.  Nolelover   Talk · Contribs  21:31, 5 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Yes,and I have dropped my request at WP:AfD


 * Can you help me that have I dropped my request on proper page?.Justice007 (talk) 21:54, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
 * I have created the AfD, although I wish it hadn't come to that. :'(  Nolelover   Talk · Contribs  22:35, 5 January 2012 (UTC)


 * I do realy not regret it, I am what I am,and I am man of the principles,I don't "Casting pearls before swine."They are very low and mean in my eyes who do not care ethical boundaries in their manner and life.I am sure that I will remain notable in the eyes of the people of the Urdu world without article on the wikipedia page.But they don't.I have no any doubt about it that you are a treasure and worth of the wikipedia.Fair,bold,civil,and good faith teen-ager having wisdom of approaching the destination.God bless you.Justice007 (talk) 23:15, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks Ehsan, God bless you too :)  Nolelover   Talk · Contribs  01:11, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of Ehsan Sehgal for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Ehsan Sehgal is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Ehsan Sehgal (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article.  Nolelover   Talk · Contribs  22:32, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification
Hi. When you recently edited Muhammad Iqbal, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Islamic civilization (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:11, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

Muhammad Iqbal
I'm terribly sorry Justice, but I've talked to some other editors and I don't think we're doing this right. The material you've written so far, while excellent, is too close to what the article looked like before it was deleted. We'll have to really start from scratch. What I'm going to do is remove everything but the first paragraph and then add add of the online references so we have lots of material. Again, I'm sorry I have to remove your work, but there could be even more problems if we don't do this right.  Nolelover   Talk · Contribs  19:25, 7 January 2012 (UTC)


 * It's Ok.Justice007 (talk) 20:00, 7 January 2012 (UTC)


 * I think too close should not be a matter of deletion again,you can change it in your own words, exact contents can be copyright but not in own words,many things you change in own words,will be too close to the contents,anyhow.You know better,do it what is good and proper.Thanks.Justice007 (talk) 20:09, 7 January 2012 (UTC)
 * I understand what you're saying, but to be on the safe side lets not use the content from the article before it was deleted at all. It will take much longer, but we need to make sure that nothing comes from that version.  Nolelover   Talk · Contribs  20:59, 7 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Right.Justice007 (talk) 21:12, 7 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Hi Nolelover,please take a look at Mohammad Iqbal,I have added new and different contents,can you clean-up if not good?.Justice007 (talk) 23:22, 7 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Much better. There are lots of great sources, so we shouldn't need the old content to create a good article anyway.  Nolelover   Talk · Contribs  00:21, 8 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Noted and I appreciate your kind assistance in this regard,further expanding tomorrow,time to sleep,good night.Justice007 (talk) 00:27, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

Birthday of Ahmed Faraz!
Hi there, I was notify by few people that Birthday of Ahmed Faraz is written wrong at wikipedia. I have fixed it. but you have changed it again ? Ahmed Faraz was born on 12th Jan, 1931. Also I have noticed that at wikipedia page, his website is written as http://www.ahmadfaraz.com/ and there they have made a mistake. anYway I would liek to fix it. as well. His official website is : http://www.ahmadfaraztrust.org/ its a trust setup by his son Shibli Faraz. Facebook Page for trust: http://www.facebook.com/pages/Faraz-Foundation/127926029131?ref=search&sid=100000741721962.156280333..1

I am sure you have understand the issue now. and can you please fix this now ? since I am not very good in writting things on wikipedia.

thanks.

best regards

Amjad Sheikh — Preceding unsigned comment added by Urdulife (talk • contribs) 19:01, 12 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Done.Justice007 (talk) 19:33, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

Birbal Jha
I've deleted the page (again) for copyright infringement of an article I found online. You commented on the article's talk page, so I'm letting you know.  Eagles   24/7  (C)  19:06, 12 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Thanks for letting me know.Justice007 (talk) 19:18, 12 January 2012 (UTC)
 * As you know, the article was recreated again (with the copyvio intact), but your rewrite cleaned them all up. Good work.  Eagles   24/7  (C)  19:45, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks
It was my first message, i didn't know it was not private! I have edited it by removing my personal email and link to the picture of his passport. Thanks alot for your help. I have asked few friends to provide more reference about his birthday, newspaper article, books etc. I will for sure add more reference about his date of birth. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Urdulife (talk • contribs) 19:54, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification
Hi. When you recently edited Muhammad Iqbal, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Javid Iqbal (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:52, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

Please.

 * Hi,can you make external links shorter and proper so that I can use it in references to,relating article Tahir Naqvi.Those are all in Urdu,one is well reliable source from daily online newspaper,USA,London based.Thanks.Justice007 (talk) 14:02, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Hi,Drmies,what a kind and lovely encouragement,it's your greatness.I appreciate your words.God bless you.Cheers.Justice007 (talk) 16:16, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Some baklava for you!

 * ASA,Umer,I like it,thanks for hospitality. Justice007 (talk) 21:49, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Re: Birbal Jha
Hello Justice007, and thank you for your message. I believe what this article needs most, is text-labels on the links to help address the bare URLs. It would also help if some of the links from the lists below, were moved up into the text area as in-line references, wherever they may apply. At present, readers are just seeing a big ugly links-list, with no indication of what they are or what they reference. Hope this helps address some of your questions. :) -- WikHead (talk) 19:25, 19 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Excellent! You're doing really well with that. I don't want to keep fussing over the cleanup-link rot tag, but I would like to see it remain on the article until simple "word" text-labels are applied to that long list of external links at the bottom. I'll check back later and possibly add some link-labels myself, if you haven't already. It's looking good! :) -- WikHead (talk) 22:41, 19 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Thanks for encouraging.Justice007 (talk) 22:50, 19 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Hey Justice, I just tried working one link in the other article as an example. I'm not sure that I should keep going with it because I'm unable to read the non-English text. Perhaps if you followed my lead on that article, you could address the other three links. An English translation would probably be best. Hope this helps. -- WikHead (talk) 23:55, 19 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Well I certainly hope you are having a good sleep. I have returned to the two articles in question, and have added text-labels and/or dead link templates as described above. This fully addresses my original concerns. If you have any further questions, feel free to give a shout on my talk-page. Stay well Justice, and happy editing! :) -- WikHead (talk) 02:00, 20 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Hello again! I see that another user has removed (much of my work) the long external links section while I was off line. Although that user was acting perfectly within the EL guidelines, it removed what we've been discussing and what I wanted you to see. At this point, you can still view my contributions as I left them for you, by clicking here (older revision 472171891). Links can still be retrieved from the older version by clicking the edit tab and copying anything you wish to restore. I don't recommend restoring the entire external links section as it was, but it may contain good items that can still be used as additional inline citations. I recommend the use of more citations if possible, as long as they contain good (WP:V) information from reliable sources. Some links, particularly the ones to the news services, may still be very valuable to the quality of the article. -- WikHead (talk) 16:25, 20 January 2012 (UTC)
 * My apologies Justice, for maybe not fully understanding everything you had written in your morning post, but do believe that most of it was (and still is) very clear to me, despite the overlap or over-description in my reply above. With the distraction of noticing changes by other users, and slight confusion by the fact that we had in part been discussing a second article, I chose to write a bit long and wide for clarity... so all bases were covered. Just my way of making certain that we were both on the 'same page' in our discussion. -- WikHead (talk) 20:04, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

I have no problem with edits done by the other users behind me. I endorse them in fact, as they follow the guidelines and closely resemble edits I would eventually have made to the article myself. In this particular case however, where the article is new and still in its creation process, my plan was to leave the list visible long enough for you to see the examples discussed and salvage any useful citations from it... before eventually trimming it back or tagging the section for being over populated. The other editors did right, and of course had no idea that they were removing something that was in the process of being discussed. As long as I know that you are indeed finished working with those links, I'm happy to see that they've been removed. :) -- WikHead (talk) 22:52, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

Allama Iqbal
Dear User:Justice007, I left a message for you [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Muhammad_Iqbal#Hi.2CJustice. here], Please read and specify. :)-Regards, --Omer123hussain (talk) 19:18, 22 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Replied on Mohammad Iqbal talk page.Justice007 (talk) 20:25, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

Re:Please enjoy.
Salaam! Bahut bahut shukria, mai n aap ke videos zaroor dekhoonga! I hope you're doing well! Khuda hafiz, AnupamTalk 02:09, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

Jha
Please don't edit war! I don't want you to get blocked. :) Even if you're right, just let others take care of it.  Nolelover   Talk · Contribs  20:17, 29 January 2012 (UTC)
 * It's okay. Just let it go. I'll try to fix it. I really don't want there to be any reason for you to get blocked.  Nolelover   Talk · Contribs  20:23, 29 January 2012 (UTC)


 * No problem,OK.Justice007 (talk) 20:26, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification
Hi. When you recently edited Mahira Khan, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bol (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:46, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

Muhammed Al-Ahari article
The article has footnotes listed under references. How can I fix it so that it will not be listed as having no footnotes?MoorishAm1965a 18:49, 19 February 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by MoorishAm1965a (talk • contribs)
 * I have fixed the footnotes issue. Hope that helped :)  Nolelover   Talk · Contribs  21:06, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

Please Help
Attention Justice007 I did not add any link to YouTube knowing that it results in automatic revert. My three edits of yesterday had nothing to do with any external links. I actually liked your edits, the way you rearranged the materials. Since you are more experienced, can you help in reverting to where you left off. Thanks. Sdeol (talk) 13:29, 21 February 2012 (UTC)


 * No problem,done, and replied on your talk page.Thanks.Justice007 (talk) 13:45, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Changes made to Shah Jahan Page
Dear Colleague,

I observe and appreciate that you are a generous contributor to Wiki. I have been reading about Mughal empire and always read that Shah Jahan had several wifes in fact in the existing page as well we have a statement where we mention about his love for Mumtaz Mahal in comparison with other wives. I wonder what "Vandalism" I have done by editing the spouse section and added names of his wives.

Requesting you to educate me on this...

Regards Jitink (talk) 14:26, 22 February 2012 (UTC)Jitin

Changes made to Shah Jahan Page
Dear Colleague,

Thank you for educating me. I quoted a site as I saw many people have quoted some websites. Anyways, I will learn bit more before I do that next time.

However, what drew my attention in the existing site was

"According to the official court chronicler Qazwini, the relationship with his other wives "had nothing more than the status of marriage. The intimacy, deep affection, attention and favor which His Majesty had for the Cradle of Excellence [Mumtaz Mahal] exceeded by a thousand times what he felt for any other."[9][10][11]"

This made me research a bit on who were his other wives, as we agree that we don't have proper references for names of the wives can we at least say his spouse status was "Mumtaz mahal and OTHERS" as the above statement says he loved Mumtaz more than other wives that means he must have had other wives right?

Another thing, as per the page "The intervening years had seen Khurrum take two other wives known as Akbarabadi Mahal (d.1677 CE, 1088 AH), and Kandahari Mahal (b. c1594 CE, c1002 AH), (m.1609 CE, 1018 AH)." Can we at least have these two names in the "spouse" section? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jitink (talk • contribs) 18:16, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

May I also request you to change the word "Vandal" to something more decent as I did not plan to spoil anything?

Regards Jitink (talk) 18:01, 22 February 2012 (UTC)Jitin

Heya Justice
I don't quite understand this edit. Where was that copied from? I can't find that anywhere.  Nolelover   Talk · Contribs  20:20, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks :)
Many thanks for your congratulations. It means a lot to a novice like me :) After all, Doon School is my first template. Getting a hang of this wonderful place!! &#91;&#91;User:Merlaysamuel&#124;Merlaysamuel&#93;&#93; (&#91;&#91;User talk:Merlaysamuel#top&#124;talk&#93;&#93;) (talk) 17:42, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Inserting Images
Hello, Appreciate your willingness to help. I would like to insert an image in the info box for Satyapal Anand, a colored thumbnail of the size 240x320 27 KB jpeg. Could you provide simple step by step instructions how to do. Image is in public domain because I downloaded from internet. Thanks Sdeol (talk) 20:42, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

thanx
thank you for your suggestions!

DoscoinDoon (talk) 13:44, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 5
Hi. When you recently edited Mahira Khan, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page VJ (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:58, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Fatima Bhutto, policies and assuming good faith
I honestly don't see what the harm adding Columbia University does to the article. And telling me I must know Bernard College is part of it, is not a given as I already said I did not. We have a reliable source for both so I don't think it is redundant. The notability and verifiability policies are also both met. Why should one detail be given preference over the other? Both citations are stated. I find it is difficult to edit this article as there appear to be almost WP:OWN ownership like activity going on considering you revert me shortly after I make an edit - every single time. You don't pursue a discussion beforehand, which you should, as it work both ways. This is a collaborative process, surely? You initially assumed me to be a vandal when in fact my edit summary explained my edit and nothing vandal about it. Yet, you assume extraordinary good faith when an anonymous editor removes words, without explanation, from the article, when you assert that his "edit is right" because it is kind of redundant. That makes no sense at all. One important policy is WP:AGF. I think you may want to take these concerns into account in future. You can reply here and I will check here. Nimom0 (talk) 10:19, 5 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Hi,I am not contributor as you say WP:OWN,you are editor as I am with same rights.We have to follow Manual of Style/Linking,WP:OVERLINK and WP:REPEATLINK. In the source,there is not mentioned Barnard College at all.You can change it into Columbia University instead.I have not much time to check thoroughly all the references,if you can,please do it which is relevant to content and not. I hope this helps.Cheers.Justice007 (talk) 11:18, 5 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi, thanks for your prompt reply. I don't disagree at all, but 1-2 sources is not overlinking. I always do my best to use sources which support a the content. Will have a look in more detail later and see if there is room for improvement. No worries. Nimom0 (talk) 11:26, 5 March 2012 (UTC)


 * No problem.Justice007 (talk) 11:30, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Celebrate Your Life
--Errant (chat!) 10:33, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Hounding and disruptive conduct
Hi, will you care to explain how you arrived at Sarah Kazemi page just shortly after I started editing it? It is no coincidence and is grossly disruptive. I feel you should know WP has a policy prohibiting such behaviour which is called hounding/stalking. Read WP:HOUND. I have clashed with you twice first on the Fatima Bhutto article where you revert me constantly without discussion. Again against WP policy. Then you magically turn up in an article, I just started editing 1 day ago. You also need to understand that when you disagree with something, you will need to discuss your concerns and gain consensus. Reverting until you get your way is not productive. You just revert until the other party gives up. This conduct is no longer acceptable, as you are inhibiting my editing: Kindly note that hounding and the disruption are reportable. If I report you it can cost you block. Consider this a warning. Nimom0 (talk) 14:20, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Edit warring
Do you not understand the purpose of discussion. First you stalk me there and now you edit war. Refrain from further reverts immediately. I just started editing and your previous edits were problematic. You have made a right mess of the article. I really don't appreciate this. If you have any concerns, then you need to address them in a proper WP:DISCUSS (edit summaries is not for discussion). Or do you really want to get blocked from editing on WP? I am happy to look at the article and work with it as I wan intending to until you stalked me there. Stop this inappropriate behaviour. WP policy says: Discuss first, Second gain consensus only after that can a revert be considered. This is something you will need to accept if you wish to edit seriously on WP. Reverting is not a discussion. I really appreciate the atmosphere you create for me as an editor. And I am sure you will not appeciate it, if I stalk you to articles and start undoing your work. I have shown willingness to discuss with you in the past but my patience is wearing thin especially after todays events. Nimom0 (talk) 14:27, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Continuous stalking of my edits and contributions
Your last message at the talkpage of Nolelove proves you are hounding me and you are now going through all my edits trying. It is really inappropriate of your to do what you did there. I stand by my complaint. You are hounding me and you have proved it twice now. I guess you did not bother to read or pay notice to WP:HOUND. Your presence at Sarah Kazemy is still unexplained and you are trying to stay beneath the 3RR but clearly intend to continue your edit warring and WP:OWN. I will not accept your disruptive behaviour or stalking. And I have asked you 3 times to stop. Disengage yourself from that article. You only came there because of me. And considering our past clash you should have avoided such behaviour. This is bad faith on your part. Nimom0 (talk) 11:39, 8 March 2012 (UTC)


 * We have to learn much things.You should read first that WP:Bold and WP:Civility.You cannot stop me to contribute the way which allow me the rules of wikipedia.Please be in WP:Common sense.Justice007 (talk) 13:48, 8 March 2012 (UTC)


 * I am not stopping you from contributing but you stalked/hounded me to the Sarah Kazemy article. I can stop you from that because we both know, exactly how you got there and you continued your disruptive behaviour there. You need to read and learn WP:HOUND (a wikipedia rule you are in breach of), because you seem to think editing on WP also allows you to harrass editors like me. Don't deny it. Secondly by bringing up an older unrelated discussion to our discussion, you have effectively proven you ARE stalking and going through my edits. Your edit warring behaviour is why I left Fatima Bhutto. WP:Common sense yourself. It is clear you will not disengage and I am not going to accept your behaviour so we have a problem. Nimom0 (talk) 17:01, 8 March 2012 (UTC)


 * You are creating problems for your self not for me,and listlen and remember you accusing me continuously WP:Hounding even you do not understand that policy,you are also accusing that I am following you from Fatima Bhutto.I warn you please stop WP:Gaming the system and keep WP:Honesty.Take a look at Fatima Bhutto "view history" and decide who came to disruptive editings?.There was my first edit this before that you are nowhere,you came after me,look here but I did not declear you WP:Hounding nor asked how you came at that article,because it is your right to edit everywhere as the policies  of wikipedia.Justice007 (talk) 17:48, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
 * No actually you created this problem by stalking me into a new article stub I started editing. No coincidence. I will repeat: you are hounding me. I didn't know you before Fatima Bhutto and all I entered was an iterview which you immediately reverted (no discussion). Wikipedia policy: discuss. You ignore that and edit war. Stop denying or evading. I asked you very clearly how you arrived right after me at Sarah Kazemi. You are stalking my edits which is how you found an old edit and misused it to divert focus from the issue you have created and which I am addressing. STOP WP:HARRASS. It is not your right to edit anywhere on Wikipedia when your aim is to cause disruption and harrass under the WP:HOUND. WP policies say: disengagement in such circumstances. Topic bans can also be imposed. You followed me there which is hounding, disruption and unacceptable. Are you going to desist and disengage from Kazemy or not? Nimom0 (talk) 18:26, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

Last warning


 * You should and must understand the WP:Policies and guidelines,do not mention here if you do not know the exact concept of the meaning.Your attitude falls under WikiBullying,Which I cannot ignore,you cannot give me orders to stop editing anywhere even to Sarah Kazemy,you don't Own it.Justice007 (talk) 23:59, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

Final warning against your persistent wikihounding and harassment

Clearly your constant evasion and failure to address the issue instead throwing acronyms my way, show you are incapable of desisting or disengaging from further conflict escalation. Your behaviour is WP:BULLY and WP:HARRASS. You STALKED me into the Kazemy article. This is not about WP:OWN but you stalking me to an article and causing the same disruptive havoc there. This is also covered in WP policies and guidelines. I can not edit like this. You won't back down and obviously I will not accept your harassment. READ WP:HARASS and understand it. Even your friend, Nolelover, asked you to disengage from this article like I did from Bhutto - to avoid conflict. But you are seeking conflict and have made editing so unpleasent for me. Nimom0 (talk) 17:27, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Nimom0, please drop it. This charge of hounding is completely overblown. You two are fighting and edit-warring over minor issues--and despite Nolelover's suggestion, the article talk page is still empty. What do you think Sarah would say if she knew that you two are fighting over 'firsthand' this or that while leaving her backside uncovered, so to speak? I'd like for both of you to drop the language of "final warnings". You need to disengage from each other, not necessarily from the article. If you like, of course, I can start blocking: Nimom0, you'll be blocked first, for harassing Justice. Justice, I may have a block in storage for edit warring. Or you (I mean this in the plural) can choose to disengage and/or cooperate. Happy editing! Drmies (talk) 18:40, 9 March 2012 (UTC)


 * That's OK.Thanks.Justice007 (talk) 18:49, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Talkback
 Nolelover   Talk · Contribs  02:31, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

British Lingua
Respected Justice007, can you please read the reference provided for editing British Lingua before undoing. Darrenmong — Preceding unsigned comment added by Darrenmong (talk • contribs) 18:51, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

British Lingua
Respected Justice007, is it ok to request you to do more research on the work of British Lingua in respect with Sopken English Skills training for the Bihar government school teachers; and Delhi Homeguards during commonwealth games.Darrenmong  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Darrenmong (talk • contribs) 18:58, 9 March 2012 (UTC)



Lionelt has given you a McDonald's Filet-O-Fish sandwich! Filet-O-Fish sandwiches are very popular during Lent and promote WikiLove. Hopefully, this one has added flavor to your day! Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a Filet-O-Fish sandwich, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

Spread the goodness of Filet-O-Fish sandwiches by adding {{subst:Filet-O-Fish}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message!

Haider Qureshi
Hello Justice007, I am glad to see you in my Inbox, I saw the image you sent me and actually I am not so much familiar with the copyrights. But I'll upload it soon, so thanks for contact.-- Assassin'S Creed T -  E  -  C  -  G  - 12:33, 15 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Hi,thanks for your quick reaction,let see what happens after uploading the image.It is my pleasure to contact you, be in touch.Cheers.Justice007 (talk) 14:49, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

April 2012
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war&#32; according to the reverts you have made on Atheism. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement. Please be particularly aware, Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states: If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. IRWolfie- (talk) 20:24, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
 * 1) Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made; that is to say, editors are not automatically "entitled" to three reverts.
 * 2) Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.