User talk:Mar4d/Archive 13

Your contributed article, Pashtun American


Hello, I noticed that you recently created a new page, Pashtun American. First, thank you for your contribution; Wikipedia relies solely on the efforts of volunteers such as you. Unfortunately, the page you created covers a topic on which we already have a page – Afghan American. Because of the duplication, your article has been tagged for speedy deletion. Please note that this is not a comment on you personally and we hope you will continue helping to improve Wikipedia. If the topic of the article you created is one that interests you, then perhaps you would like to help out at Afghan American – you might like to discuss new information at the article's talk page.

If you think the article you created should remain separate, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Additionally if you would like to have someone review articles you create before they go live so they are not nominated for deletion shortly after you post them, allow me to suggest the article creation process and using our search feature to find related information we already have in the encyclopedia. Try not to be discouraged. Wikipedia looks forward to your future contributions. Krzyhorse22 (talk) 17:10, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Pashtun American


A tag has been placed on Pashtun American requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about something invented/coined/discovered by the article's creator or someone they know personally, and it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Krzyhorse22 (talk) 17:10, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

Warning
You're further warned here not to "remove th[e] notice from pages that you have created yourself". Instead, you're supposed to click on the blue box which reads "Contest this speedy deletion".--Krzyhorse22 (talk) 08:55, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

WikiCup 2015 September newsletter
The finals for the 2015 Wikicup has now begun! Congrats to the 8 contestants who have survived to the finals, and well done and thanks to everyone who took part in rounds 3 and 4.

In round 3, we had a three-way tie for qualification among the wildcard contestants, so we had 34 competitors. The leader was by far in Group B, who earned 1496 points. Although 913 of these points were bonus points, he submitted 15 articles in the DYK category. Second place overall was at 864 points, who although submitted just 2 FAs for 400 points, earned double that amount for those articles in bonus points. Everyone who moved forward to Round 4 earned at least 100 points.

The scores required to move onto the semifinals were impressive; the lowest scorer to move onto the finals was 407, making this year's Wikicup as competitive as it's always been. Our finalists, ordered by round 4 score, are:


 * , who is competing in his sixth consecutive Wikicup final, again finished the round in first place, with an impressive 1666 points in Pool B. Casliber writes about the natural sciences, including ornithology, botany and astronomy.  A large bulk of his points this round were bonus points.
 * , second place both in Pool B and overall, earned the bulk of his points with FPs, mostly depicting currency.
 * , first in Pool A, came in third. His specialty is natural science articles; in Round 4, he mostly submitted articles about insects and botany.  Five out of the six of the GAs he submitted were level-4 vital articles.
 * , second in Pool A, took fourth overall. He tends to focus on articles about cricket and military history, specifically the 1640s First English Civil War.
 * , from Pool A, was our highest-scoring wildcard. West Virginia tends to focus on articles about the history of (what for it!) the U.S. state of West Virginia.
 * , from Pool A, likes to work on articles about British geography and places. Most of his points this round were earned from two impressive accomplishments: a GT about Scheduled monuments in Somerset and a FT about English Heritage properties in Somerset.
 * , from Pool B, came in seventh overall. RO earned the majority of her points from GARs and PRs, many of which were earned in the final hours of the round.
 * , also from Pool B, who was competing with RO for the final two spots in the final hours, takes the race for most GARs and PRs—48.

The intense competition between RO and Calvin999 will continue into the finals. They're both eligible for the Newcomers Trophy, given for the first time in the Wikicup; whoever makes the most points will win it.

Good luck to the finalists; the judges are sure that the competition will be fierce!

, and  11:48, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

Seeking your input
Greetings sir,

I'm seeking your input regarding the starter class article on G.A.Parwez, within the wiki-Pakistan project domain. It is a controversial topic so I've collected twenty 3rd party mainstream sources, on which the discussion is on-going currently at:. I would like to build a consensus on the sources/content before I edit the main page. Your contribution of an opinion, as a very experienced editor within the project-scope, will be greatly appreciated. I hope you can spare some time for this. Thank you. Code 16  ... Logic Bomb !  14:35, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Thanks Jaaron95.  Mar4d  ( talk ) 12:04, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Ali Zafar
Template:Ali Zafar has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 05:47, 8 September 2015 (UTC)

Potential admin
Hi, I notice you're on List of administrator hopefuls. Wikipedia would benefit from more admins. If you have been editing for more than 12 months (preferably 24+ months), and have been editing fairly consistently for the past 6 months (preferably 12+ months) with at least 100 edits a month (this tool will help) - or an explanation for any gaps, and haven't been blocked in the past three years - or a good explanation for a recent block, don't have a recent history of edit warring or arguing with other editors, feel you can explain why you wish to be an admin, can demonstrate some understanding of Wikipedia's procedures and processes, or know where to go for guidance, and are confident enough to go through a RfA, please get in touch with me. We can talk about it some more, and if all looks OK, I'll nominate you.  SilkTork  ✔Tea time  12:14, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Hi Mar4d, if you run for an admin, I guess everybody is going to look at the British Pakistanis dispute with a microscope. I will let you take the lead in resolving it! Cheers, Kautilya3 (talk) 15:59, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
 * I am thankful for your offer and appreciate it. Having admin tools is something I would certainly like to think about down the road, if it can enable me to better contribute to the encyclopedia, which I strive for in my current capacity. However, it is also true that whatever little or more I presently contribute to my areas of interest here are voluntary and because I enjoy it. As such, I like to enjoy this as a privilege rather than a burden, and I am sure going for adminship would require adding some responsibility which I can't commit to at the moment. I feel that I am satisfied with my current role, and would like to consider something like this after some more time, when I feel I can commit more time and resources on top of my voluntary editing. Regards,  Mar4d  ( talk ) 04:28, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
 * I think Mar4d should have accepted this offer. He has vast experience as a Wikipedian and his experience would have been more utilized during his role as admin. But anyway, everybody has its own priorities.-- Human 3015   Send WikiLove   15:27, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the support. As I have indicated, it would be a privilege and something to think about further down the road. For the present, I am largely satisfied with my current capacity, and would like to continue contributing in the same capacity to my focus topic areas. Indeed, we already have many admins who handle the topic area in which I edit, and I think they really do a decent job.  Mar4d  ( talk ) 02:17, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

Hi. Sorry for long delay in responding, I've been tied up. No worries about not feeling ready right now, and I understand the notion of it being an extra burden (though in fact it's not, it's simply extra tools which may make your job of contributing to the project easier and quicker). I'll mark you down on my list as not interested at the moment, but if you do change your mind, please do get in touch on my talkpage or by email. No promises as I've not yet looked into your contribution history, but I do like that you are willing to put yourself forward as an admin, so I'm happy to give you support, honest opinion, and advice when you're ready. Regards  SilkTork  ✔Tea time  10:58, 10 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your help. Will ping you for sure when I think I'm down for it.  Mar4d  ( talk ) 11:05, 10 September 2015 (UTC)

Categories needed

 * Please, categories if you have time, you may also copy edit if needed. Thanks.Justice007 (talk) 08:29, 18 September 2015 (UTC)
 * I have added some categories. Faizan (talk) 14:53, 18 September 2015 (UTC)

Archive tepmplate

 * Would you please add the automatically archive template to my talk page, I tried, but the old one making that difficult. Thanks.Justice007 (talk) 09:56, 21 September 2015 (UTC)
 * I use automatic archiving via MiszaBot. To set that up, you will need to paste the bot code at the top of your user talk page. See these instructions (and the examples above it) to set that up. You can set it according to your personal preferences. Cheers,  Mar4d  ( talk ) 10:04, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

Plz Help me how to upload images on wiki by without violation of copyright or rules — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rahib222 (talk • contribs) 10:01, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Mani and Hira


The article Mani and Hira has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this biography of a living person will be deleted unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the prod blp tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can when you are ready to add one. Saqib (talk) 11:19, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

Category:Ali Zafar
Category:Ali Zafar, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 04:09, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

this is for you

 * Thanks! I appreciate it :)  Mar4d  ( talk ) 19:05, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

October 2015
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=685509739 your edit] to Nusrat Fateh Ali Khan may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just [ edit the page] again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/BBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/BBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=BracketBot%20–%20&section=new my operator's talk page].
 * List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 07:20, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
 * *Nusrat! Live at Meany (1998). Produced by the University of Washington. 87-minute recording of a 23 January 1993 concert at Meany Hall, University of Washington in

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Karachi articles missing geocoordinate data


A tag has been placed on Category:Karachi articles missing geocoordinate data requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for four days or more and it is not presently under discussion at Categories for discussion, or at disambiguation categories.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Red rose64 (talk) 09:16, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

Please categories

 * Please add the proper categories if you have the time, and may you copy edit and expand too. Thanks.Justice007 (talk) 13:50, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

Award for You :)

 * Thanks I appreciate it :)  Mar4d  ( talk ) 19:49, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Creating categories
Hello, I hope you are well. It is usual to do things in a different order: create the category, and then add the names. Still, I can see it's now done. Thanks and best regards, George Custer&#39;s Sabre (talk) 09:00, 27 October 2015 (UTC)
 * No worries, thanks.  Mar4d  ( talk ) 09:01, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

Category

 * Here, I am again for your help to Ibrahim Jalees, proper categories, and you may copy edit and expand. Thanks.Justice007 (talk) 10:33, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Shuja Khanzada
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:01, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

DYK for 2015 Attock bombing
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

Barnstar
Thank you so much :D WhisperToMe (talk) 05:46, 5 November 2015 (UTC)
 * My pleasure :)  Mar4d  ( talk ) 07:26, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

WikiCup 2015: The results
WikiCup 2015 is now in the books! Congrats to our finalists and winners, and to everyone who took part in this year's competition.

This year's results were an exact replica of last year's competition. For the second year in a row, the 2015 WikiCup champion is. All of his points were earned for an impressive 253 featured pictures and their associated bonus points (5060 and 1695, respectively). His entries constituted scans of currency from all over the world and scans of medallions awarded to participants of the U.S. Space program. came in second place; she earned by far the most bonus points (4082), for 4 featured articles, 15 good articles, and 147 DYKs, mostly about in her field of expertise, natural science. , a finalist every year since 2010, came in third, with 2379 points.

Our newcomer award, presented to the best-performing new competitor in the WikiCup, goes to. Everyone should be very proud of the work they accomplished. We will announce our other award winners soon.

A full list of our award winners are:


 * wins the prize for first place and the FP prize for 330 featured pictures in the final round.
 * wins the prize for second place and the DYK prize for 160 did you knows in the final round (310 in all rounds).
 * wins the prize for third place and the FA prize for 26 featured articles in all rounds.
 * wins the prize for fourth place
 * wins a final 8 prize.
 * wins a final 8 prize.
 * wins a final 8 prize and the FL prize for 11 featured lists.
 * wins the most prizes: a final 8 prize, the GA prize for 41 good articles, and the topic prize for a 13-article good topic and an 8-article featured topic, both in round 3.
 * wins the news prize for the most news articles in round 3.

We warmly invite all of you to sign up for next year's competition. Discussions and polls concerning potential rules changes are also open, and all are welcome to participate. The WikiCup judges will be back in touch over the coming months, and we hope to see you all in the 2016 competition. Until then, it only remains to once again congratulate our worthy winners, and thank all participants for their involvement! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send.

, and  18:39, 8 November 2015 (UTC)

Do you know
Do you know there is an SPI against you? Sockpuppet investigations/TopGun. HIAS (talk) 21:09, 8 November 2015 (UTC)

Help Regarding Template:WikiProject Sindh
Hi, Aoa,I have created a template (Template:WikiProject Sindh) as well as its doc template kindly help me how it can be included into relevant WikiProject Sindh, Its intended that all attributes of Sindh can be summed up into one and separate WikiProject Sindh and could be used by Wikipedians utilizing it into creating new articles or already existing articles.... Kindly include it .....Thanks..Jogi 007 (talk) 04:08, 11 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Hmm, interesting idea. Actually most of the parameters contained in this template can be found in Template:WP PAK so it might be redundant to have a separate template. That is why we have just one template for WikiProject Pakistan that includes all provinces and cities, so that we don't need seperate templates (see Template:WikiProject India or Template:WikiProject Australia as an example, they too have one template for all India/Australia articles rather than individual state/city templates). The benefit of having a combined template is that all articles can be categorised under both Category:WikiProject Pakistan articles and Category:WikiProject Sindh articles using one template, rather than having to tag with two templates. It's more easy for assessments and navigation that way. I think the template can stay for now, but I'll try and come up with a better model for Template:WikiProject Pakistan where each sub-project can have its own assessment paramaters (currently, the parameter only exists for WikiProject Pakistan, not the sub-projects). That way, we can combine the two templates in the future. Let me know your thoughts if you have any :)  Mar4d  ( talk ) 08:16, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

Fawad afzal khan
Salam Bro, i just wanted to add that now a edit war will start on the page of fawad khan due to punjabi pathan thing. He is punjabi speaking pathan but the thing is its better to remove the ethnicity part and in early life and just keep the categories after all he is pakistani and thats what matters to the world. I guess if we go further like this it will add this article to protection like many other articles. Whatever suits you is good. But after all he is pakistani and categories are enough to mention him As what he is ethnically
 * W. Salam. I understand your concern, however I do not think it will affect the article or provoke an 'edit war'. As long as everything is sourced, it meets WP:BLP and is an essential piece of information in the article. In the case where there are unsourced edits, vandalism of BLP violations, they can always be reverted. Regards,  Mar4d  ( talk ) 04:11, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

Notice
There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. The Avengers (talk) 05:14, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

November 2015

 * Something's gone haywire here. Going to clear this up over the next few days.  Mar4d  ( talk ) 17:04, 22 November 2015 (UTC)
 * ,,  ,

Nomination of Pashtun Americans for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Pashtun Americans 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/Pashtun Americans 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 high-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 notice from the top of the article. Krzyhorse22 (talk) 17:51, 3 December 2015 (UTC)

Block evasion
was blocked in 2008 for using multiple accounts. Later he created many accounts including Mar4d in April 2010. This account of Mar4d is actually a block evasion, all of edits of Mar4d in past 5 years are block evasion. I think talk page access and email should be disabled for this account. But in good faith he should be allowed to make unblock request from grand sockmaster account just for his satisfaction. -- Human 3015   TALK   19:16, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
 * I really doubt that but even if it was true, an admin will tell you that the only grounds of revoking talkpage access are abuse of talkpage instead of making unblock requests or other legitimate edits / requests on talkpage. A legitimate request in this case would also include denial of such accusation which makes removing talkpage access disruptive. I can't understand why you would request such given that Mar4d has not been editing his talkpage for anything but to discuss within purview of his block. Plus, Mar4d may choose to take WP:Standard Offer on this account after six months if his unblock request is rejected (that is, if he makes one), or simply after waiting. I'm not sure how any of this is worth admin time anyway. -- lTopGunl (talk) 17:31, 16 December 2015 (UTC)

Enough
This is complete bogus!. Can I ask on what basis this frivolous SPI was merged!? How am I supposed to take this all seriously by taking the baggage of another sockmaster? On what basis was the connection with no evidence? How on earth was this judgement formed? I need you to take a look a detailed look at this because I'm losing a good part of my sanity.  Mar4d  ( talk ) 17:55, 16 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Can we at least get admins involved in this case who dealt with Siddiqui? That's the minimum I'm asking.  Mar4d  ( talk ) 18:02, 16 December 2015 (UTC)


 * I am not going to take someone else's dirt. I already have enough to deal with on my own plate. I have nothing to do with User:Siddiqui. There needs to be a complete inquiry into this. Wrongly being tagged as another user's account is a serious issue.  Mar4d  ( talk ) 18:13, 16 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Sockpuppet investigations/Siddiqui/Archive, Requests for checkuser/Case/Siddiqui - Siddiqui and his accounts edit from Canada, how was this overlooked? Let's forget CU for a while, how on earth am I being connected to a user who's style of editing, POV, history is completely different? The mentioned user's account was created in 2005 (ten years ago) and blocked in 2007. This is before I even edited!  Mar4d  ( talk ) 18:22, 16 December 2015 (UTC)
 * You were editing back in 2007. This is about the same time when Siddiqui was editing. You know most editors in the topic area and I am sure you must have interacted with Siddiqui before. Do you think any of this makes any sense?  Mar4d  ( talk ) 18:57, 16 December 2015 (UTC)
 * By the way, I myself have been editing Wikipedia for years and I know each and every editor in my topic area on my fingertips. Siddiqui's accounts have a huge copyrights problem. See Contributor copyright investigations/Paknur and Contributor copyright investigations/AlphaGamma1991. This is noted in Siddiqui's own SPI. As per my judgement, this user was most likely one of Siddiqui's recent accounts. This needs to be noted especially as I've been connected on so-called 'behavioural' evidence.  Mar4d  ( talk ) 19:09, 16 December 2015 (UTC)


 * I don't know why you are keep on pinging here. He is really very neutral editor, don't defame him. Do you think that your one of sock  created article named Regents Park State School so editor named  will support you? Or is there any connection? -- Human 3015   TALK    19:16, 16 December 2015 (UTC)
 * I'm not a fan of making accusations, but for a user who was just saying above my "talk page access and email should be disabled" and keeping in mind your past association with CosmicEmperor, it is clear where you're trying to get at. Since you're keen to violate WP:3RR here on my talk page to add in your comments, I'm going to ask you again Human3015: this is not about you, so please desist.  Mar4d  ( talk ) 19:39, 16 December 2015 (UTC)
 * This is not about you and me, this is about community. You can't simply revert my comments on your talk page unless it is clear vandalism. You are a blocked editor who used many accounts, I have been interacting with you since I joined Wikipedia, I know you and your edits very well. I can give comment regarding you. You are suppose to reply it. "This is not about me"? Really? Then is this about RegentsPark, TopGun and other editors who blocked you or commented here? This is never about me. This is about our community. -- Human 3015   TALK   19:50, 16 December 2015 (UTC)
 * No, this is about me. This is my talk page and I reserve the right to appeal or defend myself against accusations that are false and unproven. Quite frankly, your comments here are not helpful, relevant or addressing the issue. So I am asking you to please not add further fuel to the fire where it's not necessary. You have your fair share of issues on editing and perhaps interests on this issue, but this is outside your domain. So I'm going to ask you again to please stay out of a matter which is serious and requires administrative attention. Don't make this your ego problem.  Mar4d  ( talk ) 19:58, 16 December 2015 (UTC)

The Avengers
Can I also ask how this user, who's account is less than three months old yet one of his first actions on Wikipedia was filing an SPI on my account, and who now is apparently very clearly operated by CosmicEmperor (blocked), was not taken into account when this was started at Sockpuppet investigations/Siddiqui? Is the mala fide intent behind this not obvious?  Mar4d  ( talk ) 18:47, 16 December 2015 (UTC)
 * I don't know how does legitimacy of The Avengers is questionable here, SPI about him is going on, if he is cosmicemperor or not is really not question here, it is all about your socks. -- Human 3015   TALK   19:05, 16 December 2015 (UTC)


 * I've been retagged under an unrelated master account based on a fabricated SPI filed by CosmicEmperor's account, (account registered 18 September 2015). This needs to be investigated, in addition to the SPI running on CE above. The admin who made the call does not appear to have prior experience in dealing with Siddiqui, so I can understand if there is an error in judgement.  Mar4d  ( talk ) 09:29, 17 December 2015 (UTC)

Evidence
So since I've been tagged as, I decided to do some digging and narrow my search down to a time when Siddiqui's account/s and I were active. It took me less than 10 minutes to go back to July 2010 (compare: Siddiqui's edits and compare my edits). On 24 July, at 3:18, I made this edit. At 3:23, Siddiqui makes an edit. At 3:28, I make an edit, followed by Siddiqui's edits at 3:31 and 3:33. At 3:36, both Siddiqui and I make an edit! Then I create this category at 3:37. Siddiqui edits at 3:43, 3:50 and 3:55 and meanwhile I'm editing a category at 3:57. At 4:27, I edited a category and at 4:28, Siddiqui made his edit. I demand an explanation how it is humanly possible to be editing completely different articles/categories/topics at the same time, and sitting in two different countries!? For the record, Both AlphaGamma and Marduking were checkuser-confirmed accounts of Siddiqui.  Mar4d  ( talk ) 21:35, 16 December 2015 (UTC)
 * More common timings: Siddiqui at 14:32, me at 14:34, Siddiqui at 14:35 and me 14:37, Siddiqui at 14:42, 14:45, me at 14:44, 14:48 (I continue editing). On 25 July, at 12:34, Siddiqui and I editing completely different articles at the same time. Then on 27 July, AlphaGamma CU'd and blocked as Siddiqui. The diffs above and timings of the edits on the same day (matched by minutes), in addition to stark differences in topics edited shows how the accusation being made is logistically and technically impossible.  Mar4d  ( talk ) 05:57, 17 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Don't know why you removed my comment, it was in your support. Your wish. --AmritasyaPutra T 06:32, 17 December 2015 (UTC) Thanks, but I'd prefer to use this section to present evidence. Uninvolved users can comment above.  Mar4d  ( talk ) 06:36, 17 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Here's another one: on 24 July 2010, at 5:15, Siddiqui's account Mardu King edited Mustafa Pasha Mosque. At 5:16, I was editing another article and adding a category. On 24 July, at 5:39, me editing Blasphemy law in the United Arab Emirates. At 5:40, Mardu king edited Ghazi Saiyyad Salar Masud (edits were deleted by Moonriddengirl due to Mardu king's copyright violations on the same article from March 2010, hence diff is not available).  Mar4d  ( talk ) 07:33, 17 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Additionally, Siddiqui's accounts had a massive, massive copyrights problem. I know this myself since I recreated a few of his deleted articles. The problems were apparent from his accounts in 2010 (same timeframe when I was also editing) as well as before that period. In addition to Contributor copyright investigations/AlphaGamma1991, his pattern of editing can be seen at Contributor copyright investigations/Paknur (subpages: page 2, Page 3, Page 4, Page 5, Page 6, Page 7, Page 8, Page 9, Page 10.)  Mar4d  ( talk ) 07:45, 17 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Siddiqui was among a group of editors involved in ARBIP disputes in 2007 (based on which WP:ARBIPA sanctions came into existence), that is long, long before I ever edited. More on Siddique: Requests for comment/Siddiqui.  Mar4d  ( talk ) 07:49, 17 December 2015 (UTC)
 * This one is perhaps the biggest give away, an old Siddiqui SPI with CheckUser confirmation Mar4d is unrelated. It is baffling indeed to see how this was ignored by the admin in the recent SPI despite being pointed out by Smsarmad.  Mar4d  ( talk ) 07:57, 17 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Hi mar4d. I agree that the evidence re Siddique is very weak. But, imo, not much is going to happen here unless you can get the admin to reverse their findings Your best bet is to present your evidence to the admin who tagged you as a sock of siddiqui and, failing that, take your evidence to BASC. Mostly, people are fair so all this is worth a shot.  --regentspark (comment) 16:46, 17 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Noted, thanks. Pinging .  Mar4d  ( talk ) 16:59, 17 December 2015 (UTC)
 * After reviewing the case again carefully, I see that the evidence connecting Acejet socks to Siddiqui is not strong enough. I reverting the merging of two cases, and reverted tagging Acejet and his accounts as socks of Siddiqui. Sorry for any inconvenience I caused.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  22:03, 17 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks I appreciate the prompt action.  Mar4d  ( talk ) 04:39, 18 December 2015 (UTC)

Siddiqui
I got a pinged notification for this thread. As per the following thread on ANI, there seems to be an attempt to link me to another editor (contributions) which is false and baseless. There may or may not be an SPI. If the former is the case, at the least, it would be preferable if an editor could post or at least link my comment since the accusation involves me. In my defence, I'd like to point out:
 * The filer is the same newly-registered account that was involved in my SPI.
 * Siddiqui is an old user who edited far back in 2005. As per my knowledge, he was among a group of early editors that were involved in arbitration based on which WP:ARBIPA was formed. Most of his accounts that were blocked had copyrights violations issues. Moreover, Siddiqui geo-locates to a different continent as implied in Requests for checkuser/Case/Siddiqui and Sockpuppet investigations/Siddiqui/Archive.
 * Any user who was involved with Siddiqui or his accounts knows and would be able to recongise the style of editing, differences in POV, articles of interest and editing history etc. I have no link with the mentioned editor. John Vandenberg dealt with CU cases involving Siddiqui while he was editing and he would have technical and behavioural information regarding this. It may help to consult him and/or other users who were involved with Siddiqui.
 * Linking users to me based on contributions is ludicrous since I have a large footprint covering hundreds of articles in the same topic area and there are overlaps with most editors. Being listed on SPIs of other users is not something new for me. Since I currently do not have editing privileges in order to defend myself, being retagged as a sock of another editor doesn't rank too highly on the bucket list. I'd like to stay away from Wikipedia for the forseeable future. Pinging as he's familiar with most editors in the same topic area. Thanks,  Mar4d  ( talk ) 08:05, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Hi Mar4d. Must admit I'm surprised to see you blocked for sock puppetry. With you gone, TopGun banned from Indo-Pak topics, and smsarmad and Faizan barely editing seems like Pakistan related pages will not get the attention they deserve. I agree that the Siddiqui connection does seem circumstantial but that's a side issue because the checkuser that lead to your block seemed fairly definite. The best solution for you right now is to stay away for a while and then come back under the standard offer. I'll, of course, support your return. If the checkuser was wrong and you're not Acejet (in all honesty, the odds on that are fairly low) then you do have a problem because if Acejet goes on socking then the SO won't apply. In that case your best bet is to make a case at WP:BASC. Only they can review the check user results, examine other evidence, and decide whether or not to overturn that result. I hope you find a way to come back and I hope all is well with you in RL.--regentspark (comment) 14:00, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
 * : Thanks for your reply and encouragement, I appreciate it. Yes, I've thought things through and I understand where it goes from here. For the time being, the most I can say is that I've chosen to stay away from Wikipedia. I believe that is best for both myself and the community. Cheers,  Mar4d  ( talk ) 14:48, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
 * : Very sad to read that you got a block. What's hapening actually! now has no time so am I very busy with my small business. Who's going to take care of Pak interested articles?   Mehra j Mir  (talk) 16:37, 10 December 2015 (UTC)
 * I think Sidique's confirmed sock seems very similar to Mar4d in name and interests. But anyway, we are here to take care of Pakistan related topics, even I am fighting AfD of Pashtun Americans which deserves article and created by Mar4d. I will also create Tourism related articles of Pakistan. Pakistan is like my motherland. I love Pakistan. Dil Dil Pakistan, Jaan Jaan Pakistan (My heart is Pakistan, My life is Pakistan) is most played song in my mobile, superb music. There is no issue who will take care of Pakistan related topics, population of Pakistan and internet users in Pakistan are very high. There are many highly experienced users who have been blocked for some reasons and Mar4d not the first one. Many admins have been indeffed in past for some reasons. Still I wish best luck to Mar4d in real life, I personally think that Mar4d is far more useful to Pakistan in his real life and can do great things for Pakistan. I will adopt some Pakistani users and will guide and inspire them, I have already started helping some Pakistani editors. I will help them to create and improve articles related to Pakistani music, tourism, politics, diaspora, culture and history. I myself will also work on it. (I hope Mar4d will not revert my this comment). -- Human 3015   TALK    19:48, 10 December 2015 (UTC)