User talk:Mansoor Ijaz

Please add constructive comments here --

User Talk 01 MAY 2014
Birth date I just realized we're going to need a source for your birth date... is it somewhere in the current citations? Otherwise it should be removed. § FreeRangeFrog croak 19:44, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
 * the Curtis reference (the Book titled "Encyclopedia of Muslim-American History") mentions it at the top of its section on me. I replaced the image that was deleted by a user at Wikimedia Commons. I will get that one reinstated later this week when I get the permission lodged the same way we did for my father's image. But in the meantime, I loaded up another one which also serves the required purpose. --Mansoor Ijaz (talk) 19:49, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Hi buddy, I wanted to let you know that I am going to request an undeletion of the image at this page that was deleted: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Mansoor-IJAZ.jpg. Would you kindly have a look and see whether the same basic procedure that I followed before would be allowed in this case as well? Just so I know what to do when the photographer gets in touch with me tomorrow. Also, I am now about 70% done on adding in all the references in the article on my father. Have a look when you have time to gauge progress. Best --Mansoor Ijaz (talk) 22:51, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
 * It should be the same. A release is a release, doesn't matter where it comes from. But to expedite things you might want to just state "CC-by-SA" without Wikipedia or anything like that... and make sure the photog knows what the image will be used for. Then just forward it to the permissions queue so that another editor can look at it. The undelete request can be made in Commons in the same place I did the last ones once the ticket is in OTRS. § FreeRangeFrog croak 22:55, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
 * many thanks --Mansoor Ijaz (talk) 22:58, 1 May 2014 (UTC)

User Talk 02 MAY 2014
Mujaddid Ahmed Ijaz

Good afternoon Sir. I'm a day late, but now I'm ready to give you a crack at the Sandbox. It's fully referenced except for the Atoms for Peace paragraph -- that one I felt was already properly sourced by the WP:LINKS but feel free to add some in if you find good ones. Maybe the Eisenhower Library link or something. I look forward to seeing the piece moved over to mainspace with your help.

Separately, I spoke to the photographer for the image that was deleted from my article yesterday. He agreed to provide the license we need -- should get that over the weekend and then we can get that problem sorted as well. Let me know if you need my inputs anywhere. I think it came out pretty good and I was really able to reference almost everything important that needed it. --Mansoor Ijaz (talk) 18:46, 2 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Will take a look later today, and will look for that release as well. § FreeRangeFrog croak 20:41, 2 May 2014 (UTC)
 * The image issue is now sorted out in Commons, by the way. § FreeRangeFrog croak 22:08, 2 May 2014 (UTC)
 * can I go in and now replace with the old image again then? Thank you for your help. We make quite the tag team! --Mansoor Ijaz (talk) 22:09, 2 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Yep, I see you already did, so you're all set. § FreeRangeFrog croak 22:14, 2 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Many thanks, I also need to go in and fix up the Personal life section for the corrective edits that were made in my father's biography. Experimental physicist vs. what's there now (Theoretical physicist) -- there really was a lot of almost entirely wrong information in my father's Wikipedia biography. I'm glad we did that project to correct it. Anyway, with permission, I will go in and fix it up and you can review/edit as needed. Thanks, and I look forward to your commentary on my father's article at my Sandbox later. --Mansoor Ijaz (talk) 22:18, 2 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Absolutely, if there's something wrong then by all means. I have it in my watchlist so I can diff. § FreeRangeFrog croak 22:20, 2 May 2014 (UTC)

User Talk 03 MAY 2014
Good early morning to you. Just a short note to say that the Sandbox is now complete from my input standpoint. Hopefully you can find time to review and then let me have one last look before we move the re-developed article to mainspace -- thanks. --Mansoor Ijaz (talk) 07:13, 3 May 2014 (UTC)

Recruitment Centre
Hi Mansoor Ijaz,

I would just like to inform you that the WikiProject Good Article Recruitment Centre project has been but on hold until further notice. The decision comes after it was noticed that there was a lack of commitment from some of our recruiters as well as the recruitees. We will be working on revising to the program in order to make it more efficient and productive so we can teach user interested in reviewing Good Article nominations better.

I am telling you this because I see that you have added your name to the waiting list. If you are still interested in being recruited at some point in the future, please leave your name on the list, however, if you are no longer interested, I ask you to remove it or contact me on my talk page. Thank-you.-- Dom497 ( talk ) 20:15, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

GA review ping
Hi Mansoor Ijaz, I am going to review your article Timothy M. Carney for GA if you are still around - or if you have an actively editing friend on-wiki who can help. I almost always ask for a few fixes and changes, so, as I see you haven't edited since May, can you or somone else who watches your talk page let me know if this article has any active editors? Thanks Montanabw (talk) 20:40, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for letting me know. I am indeed still around and will be happy to answer questions or conduct as I can fixes etc. I hope it fits the criteria. Thank you for taking the time to review it. Best, --Mansoor Ijaz (talk) 20:47, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Timothy M. Carney
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Timothy M. Carney you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Montanabw -- Montanabw (talk) 20:41, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Timothy M. Carney
The article Timothy M. Carney you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Timothy M. Carney for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Montanabw -- Montanabw (talk) 04:21, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Robin Raphel
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Robin Raphel you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Sasuke Sarutobi -- Sasuke Sarutobi (talk) 00:21, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Robin Raphel
The article Robin Raphel you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Robin Raphel for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Sasuke Sarutobi -- Sasuke Sarutobi (talk) 17:43, 8 November 2014 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry to have had to fail this, but given the attention that the reported investigation into Amb. Raphel has brought and the resulting activity to the page, the article could no longer hold up as stable or NPOV. In the meantime, I've also placed a request for the page to be semi-protected while the media activity passes. I hope that you consider my recommendations in the GA review and renominate the article after addressing these. Please feel free to contact me if I can help. — Sasuke Sarutobi (talk) 17:51, 8 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Apologies for the flip-flop, but given that recent activity isn't as bad as I'd first perceived it to be, I'm looking to re-open the review, at the suggestion of another reviewer. Would you be able to drop me a line either here or on my talk page if you wish for the review to proceed? Thank you — Sasuke Sarutobi (talk) 00:55, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Robin Raphel
The article Robin Raphel you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Robin Raphel for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Sasuke Sarutobi -- Sasuke Sarutobi (talk) 09:41, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Timothy M. Carney
The article Timothy M. Carney you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Timothy M. Carney for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Montanabw -- Montanabw (talk) 17:43, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:06, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Hussain Haqqani article Memogate section
The content under Hussain Haqqani and memogate scanda is being debated in the talk page for the lack of credibility. You contribution and suggestion to the content is highly recommended as you are one of the prime witness in the whole episode. Kindly come on the talk page of Hussain Haqqani for review — Preceding unsigned comment added by VisionHawk (talk • contribs) 08:41, 20 December 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for your request. Unfortunately, as the legal case in this matter of the Memorandum is still technically open and ongoing, it is not possible for me to directly comment on the changes being made to the Husain Haqqani article. I have noted this conflict of interest problem on the article's Talk page before, as you will see. I can only recommend that the main Memogate article and the version that was passed in an intense editing of my own Wikipedia article are accepted as factual and accurate, and should therefore essentially appear in the same manner in the Haqqani article as well for consistency of content and objectivity. Hopefully this helps. I'm sorry I cannot directly contribute more than that. Mansoor Ijaz (talk) 10:11, 20 December 2015 (UTC)


 * The content relating to Hussain Haqqani has again been reverted to its old form despite serious concerns being raised by a number of commenters regarding its biased nature, likewise content relating to Ayesha Jalal has again been inserted despite protest which I believe are in a direct violation of Wiki BLP rules when it comes to your very own integrity like wise the inserted content also go against Wikipedia OR rules. I in my capacity have tried to revert the content to restore it to its original agreed upon form but such attempts have been thwarted by Kautilya3. I humbly request you to take notice. Thankyou --GreenBeret65 (talk) 20:23, 3 January 2016 (UTC)


 * This is what I have been told, with warnings of a block, I fail to understand why all the sources given to highlight the true neutral picture are ignored and a specific point of view suiting a few individuals is being pushed, kindly take note of what I was told:
 * @GreenBeret65: I heard you fine the first time. Wikipedia is written using reliable sources, as per WP:RS, and the editors' opinions are irrelevant. Mr. Ijaz, being part of the subject of the article, has conflict of interest in the subject and his views will be completely ignored. He can only raise objections based on WP:BLP violations concerning him and, if we can't resolve such issues on the talk page, they will be referred to WP:BLP/N. Any reverts you make to the article edits have to be justified on the grounds of Wikipedia policies. Cheers, Kautilya3 (talk) 20:27, 3 January 2016 (UTC) GreenBeret65 (talk) 20:42, 3 January 2016 (UTC)


 * I have raised my objections with administrators at the living persons/Noticeboard (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons/Noticeboard#Husain_Haqqani_.28segments_of_article_dealing_with_Mansoor_Ijaz.29). Feel free to comment there as required -- there is no question that as written presently, the section defames me and in my view, violates BLP criteria as the burden of evidence rests with the editor. Mansoor Ijaz (talk) 23:33, 3 January 2016 (UTC)

Recent changes
Thanks for your note. I can't remove the party affiliation, because Ebyabe already removed it. Secondly, I don't understand your concern about "Pakistani-American", because our Pakistani Americans article says Pakistani Americans are Americans whose ancestry originates from Pakistan or Pakistanis who migrated to and reside in the United States. I don't see how there's a difference between "Americans whose ancestry originates from Pakistan" and "an American of Pakistani ancestry". Nyttend (talk) 12:24, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
 * You're welcome. I thought perhaps there was some difference between Pakistani-Americans and Italian-Americans, Polish-Americans, etc. that I was missing, so it helps to hear back from you.  Nyttend (talk) 14:31, 17 July 2016 (UTC)

Re: Updates required
Thank you for thinking of updating the article: I understand that you're still in acute grief, and if our places were switched, I'd never think of contacting you about updating my Wikipedia article. I've added your mother's dates to the infobox, although not to the main body because the text merely mentions her quickly; the dates aren't cited in-article, but I provided a link to the obituary page on the Roanoke Times website in my edit summary. I didn't see anything in your father's article that needs an update, although of course if you can show me something that does need an update, I'll get it.

Prominent physicists, like prominent scholars in other disciplines, will pass the WP:ACADEMIC standards; the comments on her VT scholarship's page might be enough by themselves, and I strongly doubt that such statements would appear on the university website if additional sourcing didn't exist. Your familiarity with sources will especially be helpful in the immediate aftermath of her passing, since most of what I'm seeing online is obituary related, and as you may be aware, there appears to be a Lubna Ijaz in the neurosurgery department of the the Children's Hospital and the Institute of Child Health in Lahore. If you draft an article in your sandbox, adding the sources before asking me to create the article, things will go easier. A cautionary note first — please be careful to demonstrate your mother's notability, because anything written by a relative of a recently deceased person is likely to attract objections on WP:NOTMEMORIAL grounds. For a somewhat comparable situation, consider the article about Kevin Granata (a victim of the VT massacre) whose article was created just after his death and quickly nominated for deletion; it was easily kept because he easily qualified for WP:ACADEMIC, but everyone had a harder time because the solid sources were added only after the deletion debate started.

Obituaries aren't a good source for most purposes, but nobody's going to object if we use it to cite her death date. The online obituary page says that it was posted on 11 January, but could you tell me what days the print edition of the Times included her obituary? I'm uncomfortable relying on the newspaper's website (just because obituary pages tend to get taken down before long), but as I now live in Lynchburg (an hour's drive east of Roanoke), I can likely find a printed copy of the days you specify and thus cite the print edition. Nyttend (talk) 01:08, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 4
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Mujeeb Ijaz, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Montgomery County and Radford. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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) 06:07, 4 December 2020 (UTC)