User talk:Mar4d/Archive 14

Wikipedia 15 event in Hyderabad Sindh Pakistan.
Hi dear Mar4d,Aoa,I have created a Wikipedia meetup event to celebrate Wikipedia 15, and discuss about Wikipedia and Wikimedia foundation at Hyderabad Sindh, Pakistan.You are requested to coordinate me in organizing this event, all possible help and guidance is requested, Expecting positive and dignified role from you.You are invited to join physically for this event. https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_15/Events/Hyderabad,_Sindh_Pakistan

Jogi 007 (talk) 06:11, 17 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Hi Jogi! Great initiative. We haven't had much Wikimeetups in Pakistan (I believe Karachi is the only one so far). Unfortunately, I won't be able to physically attend but I do wish you all the best in organising the event. I'm sure there are many active Wikipedians in Sindh and editors on the Urdu Wikipedia and Sindhi Wikipedia who can be contacted to make this meetup a reality. If you contact the users running Wikimedia Pakistan (one of them is Saqib), I'm sure they'd have useful tools at their disposal and other help to promote this meetup and get as many attendees on board as possible. Good luck,  Mar4d  ( talk ) 06:51, 17 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Hi Mar4d, sorry for my comments regarding Siddiqui about you because you proved innocent in that case. But anyway, as RegentsPark said I also welcome your comeback after 6 months if you go for standard offer of 6 months. I think you are useful for Pakistan overall. I just request you to become more neutral while editing India-Pakistan related topics. I am not much active on Wikipedia as I used to be. So I don't want to take curse of anyone for any reason, I think there should be peace. Thanks. -- Human 3015   TALK   19:26, 20 December 2015 (UTC)

WikiCup 2016 is just around the corner...
Hello everyone, and we would like to wish you all a happy holiday season. As you will probably already know, the 2016 WikiCup begins in the new year; there is still time to sign up. There are some changes we'd like to announce before the competition begins.

After two years of serving as WikiCup judge, User:Miyagawa has stepped down as judge. He deserves great thanks and recognition for his dedication and hard work, and for providing necessary transition for a new group of judges in last year's Cup. Joining Christine (User:Figureskatingfan) and Jason (User:Sturmvogel 66) is Andrew (User:Godot13), a very successful WikiCup competitor and expert in Featured Pictures; he won the two previous competitions. This is a strong judging team, and we anticipate lots of enjoyment and good work coming from our 2016 competitors.

We would also like to announce one change in how this year's WikiCup will be run. In the spirit of sportsmanship, Godot13 and Cwmhiraeth have chosen to limit their participation. See here for the announcement and a complete explanation of why. They and the judges feel that it will make for a more exciting, enjoyable, and productive competition.

The discussions/polls concerning the next competition's rules will be closed soon, and rules changes will be made clear on WikiCup/Scoring and talk pages. The judges are committed to not repeating the confusion that occurred last year and to ensuring that the new rules are both fair and in the best interests of the competition, which is, first and foremost, about improving Wikipedia.

If you have any questions or concerns, the judges can be reached on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, on their talk pages, or by email. We hope you will all join us in trying to make the 2015 WikiCup the most productive and enjoyable yet. You are receiving this message because you are listed on WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Sturmvogel 66 (talk), Figureskatingfan (talk), and Godot13 (talk).--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:46, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

WikiCup 2016: Game On!
We are about to enter the second week of the 2016 WikiCup. The most recent player to sign up brings the current total to 101 contestants. Signups close on 5 February. If you’re interested, you can join this year's WikiCup here.

We are aware that in some areas the scoring bot’s numbers are a little bit off (i.e., overly generous) and are working to have that corrected as soon as possible.--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:04, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

WikiCup 2016: Game On!
We are about to enter the second week of the 2016 WikiCup. The most recent player to sign up brings the current total to 101 contestants. Signups close on 5 February. If you’re interested, you can join this year's WikiCup here.

We are aware that in some areas the scoring bot’s numbers are a little bit off (i.e., overly generous) and are working to have that corrected as soon as possible.--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:08, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

Nomination of Australians in Lebanon for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Australians in Lebanon 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/Australians in Lebanon 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.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  23:28, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

Categorie

 * I always remember you, may you add the proper categories to The Shadow of the Crescent Moon and copy edit and expand. Thanks. Justice007 (talk) 18:00, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

WikiCup 2015 March newsletter


That's it, the first round is done, sign-ups are closed and we're into round 2. Forty-seven competitors move into this round (a bit shy of the expected 64), and we are roughly broken into eight groups of six. The top two of each group will go through to round 3, and then the top scoring 16 "wildcards" across all groups.

Twenty-two Good Articles were submitted, including three by, and two each by , , , and. Twenty-one Featured Pictures were claimed, including 17 by (the Round 1 high scorer). Thirty-one contestants saw their DYKs appear on the main page, with a commanding lead (28) by. Twenty-nine participants conducted GA reviews with completing nine.

If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on WikiCup/Reviews. Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Thanks to everyone for participating, and good luck to those moving into round 2. ,, and --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:39, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

WikiCup 2016 March newsletter (update)
Along with getting the year wrong in the newsletter that went out earlier this week, we did not mention (as the bot did not report) that claimed the first Featured Article Persoonia terminalis of the 2016 Wikicup. ,, and .--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:06, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

WikiCup 2016 May newsletter


Round 2 is over and 35 competitors have moved on to Round 3.

Round 2 saw three FAs (two by and one by ), four Featured Lists (with three by ), and 53 Good Articles (six by  and five each by, , and ). Eleven Featured Pictures were promoted (six by and five by ). One Featured Portal, Featured Topic and Good Topic were also promoted. The DYK base point total was 1,135. scored 265 base points, while and  each scored 150 base points. Eleven ITN were promoted and 131 Good Article Reviews were conducted with completing a staggering 61 reviews. Two contestants, and, broke the 700 point mark for Round 2.

If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on WikiCup/Reviews. Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Thanks to everyone for participating, and good luck to those moving into round 2. ,, and -- MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:00, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

about your revert on my edit
Salam aleikum

Afghanistan and Australia are counted as 'white countries' Afghans are conisdered as Middle Eastern American. they are not considered as asian by the US census but white because they all belong to the Iranian race (pashtuns, persians, tajiks, balochs, kurds all of them are from Iranian race) that's why the US census considerers Afghans as 'white americans' and not asian americans like paki's and indians. the person who made that map was wrong

is a Pakistani editor. He mostly edits Movie articles. You and must convince him to edit Pakistan related articles more and more. This will benefit the project. When he joined Wiki, he was a teen, but now he can develop Pakistan related articles following the five pillars of Wikipedia.

Eid Mubarak!
 Sh eri ff  |  ☎ 911  | 04:23, 6 July 2016 (UTC)
 * --  Mar4d  ( talk ) 13:31, 6 July 2016 (UTC)

July 2016

 * User:Mar4d, what's your connection with User:Aaasmani Pharista who posted this addendum here on this talk page, which you quickly reverted, and who started this ANI section in support of your unblock request - in their first two edits immediately after creating an account? Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 12:21, 8 July 2016 (UTC)
 * As I implicitly stated at WP:AN, Aaasmani Pharista is a sock but ❌ to Mar4d.--Bbb23 (talk) 12:57, 8 July 2016 (UTC)
 * No connection. But my user and talk pages are a point of interest for quite a few people/impersonators as the page history indicates, savoury or unsavoury. So I'd go with the latter camp. The modus operandi is to revert or ignore. Since we are on this, I also want to draw attention to the following IDs which were activated when I was away (and are mis-tagged): . I'm sure an admin may perform a simple check and obtain info.  Mar4d  ( talk ) 13:05, 8 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Mar4d, before we even think about removing tags from accounts, please disclose all accounts you've used since being at Wikipedia. Please also state whether you've edited under any other account or IP (you don't have to disclose the IP itself) in the last six months. I would not even consider an unblock until you've done that to my satisfaction.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:27, 8 July 2016 (UTC)
 * To answer your query, any alt./public connection accounts in use were identified in the last check. The only other old one I know of is this . My primary ID (registered early 2010) ever since is of course the current one. My sincerity to WP:SO stems from coming out clean to WP:UTRS two days after the block. So editing/evading and jeopardizing my commitment was out of the question. You are by all means free to check. I'm making this appeal only after holding up my end and want a legitimate return in good faith. Kind regards,  Mar4d  ( talk ) 19:21, 8 July 2016 (UTC)
 * So there's no misunderstanding, please name all the accounts.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:05, 8 July 2016 (UTC)
 * No worries. The account names are Drspaz, Lyk4, Sardr8, Emirati Icon and the older ones are Acejet and Eccentrist. Any others are unrelated. Just to confirm, the primary account (which I want to retain) is this. Of these, I believe Drspaz and Lyk4 were declared, the others weren't. Regards,  Mar4d  ( talk ) 15:04, 10 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks, both. I don't think an unrelated sock should detract from this unblock request, and on first reading of the case I'd be minded to unblock. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 13:06, 8 July 2016 (UTC)


 * I support an unblock as well. Mar4d, you should be aware that any socking in the future will likely make it impossible for you to return and any past undisclosed socks that are discovered will make things difficult for you. Hopefully you've come clean on everything. --regentspark (comment) 15:03, 8 July 2016 (UTC)
 * I would glad to welcome back Mar4d. We badly need leadership of the WP:INDOPAK Cooperation Board. However, I share 's concern. All the accounts that Mar4d might have used in the past must be disclosed. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 18:31, 8 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Understood. Thanks both for your input.  Mar4d  ( talk ) 19:26, 8 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Aasmani Pharista and mistagged accounts are related to those accounts which have been attacking me, TopGun, FreeatlastChitchat and TripWire recently. I cannot believe a seasoned editor like Mar4d will create such a telling account such as Humdar4d to sock. He must be on crack pot to do that. You can see taunts towards Mar4d from a sock here, similar taunts were posted on FreeatlastChitchat TP recently. There are people who would be very happy to get and keep as many contributors of WP:Pakistan blocked as they can.  Sh eri ff  |  ☎ 911  | 23:48, 8 July 2016 (UTC)


 * Mar4d, I'd like to continue our conversation down here. Thank you for naming the accounts. At this point, I'm willing to AGF that, , and are not your accounts. There's no doubt the three accounts belong to the same person, but that person may not be you. I'd like to address some other issues now. In your lengthy unblock request, you never acknowledge you were socking with multiple accounts. Instead, you seem to prefer the more muted characterization of alternative accounts, both declared and undeclared. You also state that you "see the block as a long-term culmination of these bottled-up issues." That statement also appear to mitigate your responsibility for what happened. Finally, your first comment on this Talk page after I blocked you was, "Something's gone haywire here. Going to clear this up over the next few days.". What did you mean by that? AFAIK, you never returned in the next few days - or even much longer - to clear things up. Please address the socking v. alternative accounts, the bottled-up issues, and my last question. Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:29, 10 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I'm not denying the account abuse, in fact took responsibility regarding the disruption caused by it in my appeal above. I also acknowledged the consequences and what it will take to get back on track. The reason this block was enforced is due to three instances of account misuse between 2010 and 2012. What I meant by bottled-up issues is that I accept why this block is in place, and know what I need to do in order to move forward learning from those past mistakes/experiences. There are legitimate and illegitimate uses of accounts i.e. socking, and the actions causing this block constituted the latter. Hence the conditions I agree to abide to, listed prior to the unblock request above. As a user, I think I have matured since 2012/13 which for me was a fairly contentious period of editing. Others have the right to their own judgement of course. Regarding the comment after the block, the state of mind I was in back then was to get to the bottom of this problem and clean this mess I found myself in. As an experienced user, I know there is no other way out. That comment was made on 22 November. On 24 November, I contacted WP:UTRS where I did clear things up in detail, the circumstances when other accounts were used, and communicated my intention to return legitimately. This appeal here is pursuant to acting upon their response and WP:SO. Things became slightly complicated when I was mistakenly re-tagged under another sockmaster following an SPI in December, but I'm glad it was resolved - and that, I also did clear :) Cheers,  Mar4d  ( talk ) 17:14, 10 July 2016 (UTC)
 * One last question. If you're unblocked, do you agree that you will never use an alternative account again, even if you believe it is legitimate, i.e., you will edit only under this single account?--Bbb23 (talk) 17:31, 10 July 2016 (UTC)
 * I agree, positively. I have listed this right at the top.  Mar4d  ( talk ) 17:34, 10 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the dialog. I've unblocked you. Please remember that regardless of socking you edit in a contentious part of the project. That requires extra care and deliberation before acting. Hopefully, some of your increased maturity will spill over into your editing generally. Good luck to you.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:24, 10 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks, and for the advice. I appreciate it.  Mar4d  ( talk ) 18:33, 10 July 2016 (UTC)

Welcome Back...

 * Thanks a lot !  Mar4d  ( talk ) 10:34, 12 July 2016 (UTC)

Category:Shah Rukh Khan
Why do you keep adding this red link to articles? Create the category first. BollyJeff &#124;  talk  16:26, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Done.  Mar4d  ( talk ) 16:30, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Some were not coming up where I expected, so I change the sorting.  I hope that's okay.  BollyJeff  &#124;  talk  17:03, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
 * All good.  Mar4d  ( talk ) 17:10, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

Category:Nadeem F. Paracha has been nominated for discussion
Category:Nadeem F. Paracha, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. 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. Tim! (talk) 13:51, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

Welcome back!
Welcome back Mar4d! --regentspark (comment) 22:08, 10 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the support, RegentsPark .  Mar4d  ( talk ) 04:54, 11 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes, welcome back, Mar4d. I didn't follow what happened leading to you being blocked, but you often crop up on my watchlist and I look forward to seeing you making constructive edits again. Cordless Larry (talk) 07:13, 11 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Likewise. Thank you!  Mar4d  ( talk ) 08:13, 11 July 2016 (UTC)


 * Great, well done Mar4d. Welcome back! -- Kautilya3 (talk) 11:18, 11 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks Kautilya3. Looking forward to it :)  Mar4d  ( talk ) 11:25, 11 July 2016 (UTC)


 * Now that's a good surprise. It was a shocker to see you gone on something totally silly. Great news for WP:PAK to have its most active contributor back. Happy Editing. -- lTopGunl (talk) 18:34, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks . Good to hear from you! Looking forward to some productive collaboration, it's unfortunate to see some articles left in a bad shape.  Mar4d  ( talk ) 18:40, 12 July 2016 (UTC)

WP:PERM
Your permissions requests were approved and processed. — xaosflux  Talk 11:43, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I appreciate it.  Mar4d  ( talk ) 13:28, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

Hey
Thanks for the message can you check my edits on Azad kashmir rights abuses I have read the source on women on another site but it did not state that they are being abused by the government of pakistan or any such group you can revert if you find some date on it. Asim Sahi (talk) 16:27, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

Welcome back, Mar4d
Hey, welcome back Mar4d! You were always a good editor. Never knew why you got banned, but yeah, welcome back. --113.203.189.76 (talk) 14:42, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your kind message :)  Mar4d  ( talk ) 15:01, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Just wondering, but why were you banned? --39.57.3.178 (talk) 11:12, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
 * There were issues concerning misuse of accounts. If I may ask, are you a registered user? You should consider creating an account if you have not done so, as the benefits are many and we definitely need more active editors at WikiProject Pakistan. Cheers,  Mar4d  ( talk ) 11:17, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
 * I have made registered accounts before, but I abandoned them. I prefer to edit anonymously. --113.203.174.48 (talk) 15:33, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

Spartacus
Hello

I have seen User Spartacus disruptive editing pattern you had been facing. Now he and his IP sock  are removing my comments with allegation of being LanguageExpert sock. They have not even filed any SPI still removing my comments. May be your comments on Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement TripWire will be very use full. Xenoverse9 (talk) 11:01, 27 July 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 39.32.140.22 (talk)

About Your Edit to the Page Humayun Khan (soldier)
Why are you removing Category:American people of Pakistani descent from the page, even though it applies? I am going to revert your edit. Please don't remove it again. --113.203.186.168 (talk) 11:20, 2 August 2016 (UTC)

If you're going to remove it, then remove Category:Pakistani emigrants to the United States also as that makes just as much sense. --113.203.186.168 (talk) 11:22, 2 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Category:Pakistani emigrants to the United States is a subcategory of Category:American people of Pakistani descent so we don't need both, only the first one. Category:American people of Pakistani descent is for American-born citizens who have Pakistani ancestry, while Category:Pakistani emigrants to the United States contains articles of US citizens who migrated from Pakistan. Since Humayun Khan migrated to the US, he qualifies for the emigrant category, not the descent category. Hope this clarifies.  Mar4d  ( talk ) 12:08, 2 August 2016 (UTC)
 * There are plenty of other pages in both categories. Why don't you remove them also? Also it doesn't say the person has to be specifically US born to qualify for that category. Just a US citizen of Pakistani descent. --113.203.186.168 (talk) 13:44, 2 August 2016 (UTC)
 * I reverted your edit. Just leave it. --113.203.186.168 (talk) 13:45, 2 August 2016 (UTC)
 * It doesn't matter if other pages are in the wrong category. Wikipedia's a work in progress, anyone can voluntarily fix something they see. And you are incorrect, Category:American people of Pakistani descent is the parent category and should ideally have only those people who are U.S.-born. The others go into emigrants or expatriates, there's a reason why we have those separate categories. I create and categorise thousands of articles/categories so I do know what I'm doing. Feel free to check other American descent categories and the majority of articles they contain.  Mar4d  ( talk ) 13:53, 2 August 2016 (UTC)
 * For further reference regarding how to correctly apply these categories, please check this query and the detailed response here. Thanks,  Mar4d  ( talk ) 14:03, 2 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Fine, whatever. --113.203.188.141 (talk) 15:41, 2 August 2016 (UTC)

August 2016
Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit you made to Jammu and Kashmir, did not appear constructive and have been undone. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use the sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. ''Removal of NPOV map and replaced with non-standard map. Gain consensus before such changes.'' Filpro (talk) 19:22, 3 August 2016 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Xulfi
Hello Mar4d,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Xulfi for deletion, because the article doesn't clearly say why the subject is important enough to be included in an encyclopedia.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Jamesbushell.au (talk) 23:38, 3 August 2016 (UTC)

request to create wikipedia page or add reliable sources
assalum u alikum, i am Osama from hyderabad i have bit experience on wikipedia, i create a articles for media personality, i create article for Rauf Chandio by direct view but it was deleted by the admin. so i create draft it was decielined so i resubmit it so itt  is currently submit as a draft for review but i thing it has not reliable sources etc. i have not much experience in wikipedia

the link of draft which is currently submit for review is

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Rauf_Chandio

this draft is about media personality39.38.58.83 (talk) 07:58, 8 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Hello Osama. Please note that as per WP:GNG, a journalist can only be notable enough to have an article if there are enough reliable sources about him/her. In the absence of many sources, it will be difficult to create a separate article. If there are only a few sources discussing the journalist, it may be better to list them at List of Pakistani journalists (with the sources cited) rather than creating an article. Hope this helps,  Mar4d  ( talk ) 10:43, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

CSD on Government of Azad Kashmir
This is nearly identical to the text here Azad_Kashmir. It was tagged as duplicate content, no one was questioning its existence.--Savonneux (talk) 10:52, 10 August 2016 (UTC)
 * In that case, I'll do a rewrite of it to meet the concerns raised in the speedy. But I do think it needs an article.  Mar4d  ( talk ) 10:55, 10 August 2016 (UTC)
 * As you argued, Azad Jammu and Kashmir Council is also worthy of an article. It's a shame that so many of these titles are being tainted by biassed contributions. If you can contribute balanced versions of Shaan's articles I for one would be grateful. for (talk)  11:02, 10 August 2016 (UTC)
 * I do know many of the user's edits are not constructive. They need to be singled out and deleted/dealt with. However, there are other not-so bad contribs like the Azad Kashmir government article and the Azad Kashmir Council. I had long been planning to write them. I'll take my time to go through the user's edits and see what can be repaired and what should be undone. Meanwhile, if the WP:OR articles don't stop, I do think an immediate remedy like a short block may help (they have a number of notices on their talk page already).  Mar4d  ( talk ) 11:07, 10 August 2016 (UTC)
 * I posted them to ANI Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents it seems there is an issue with copyvios.--Savonneux (talk) 11:15, 10 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks. The copyvios are a concern and should be deleted of course, the same way Azad Kashmir Council got deleted.  Mar4d  ( talk ) 11:18, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

Brahui nationalism listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Brahui nationalism. Since you had some involvement with the Brahui nationalism redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. for (talk)  12:17, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

Help regarding a Wikiconference / or meetup in Pakistan
Hey, Dear, recently a Wiki conference is organized in India WikiconferenceIndia2016, We want to start such a conference in Pakistan. We have discussed this issue on Village Pump (Deewan e Aam) on ویکی کانفرنس انڈیا 2016ء میں پاکستان کی نمائندگی Urdu Wikipedia. We have decided to arrange such events, meet-ups, conferences in Pakistan, so we could collect and gather all Wikipedias of Pakistan including Urdu Wikipedia, Punjabi Wikipedia, Sindhi Wikipedia, Kashmiri Wikipedia, Balochi Wikipedia, Pashto Wikipedia , Khuwar Wikipedia at one place and discuss eachother problems, scope, progress and collaboration. Plz help us finding and making such a dream come true. Thanks..--Jogi 007 (talk) 11:58, 1 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Hi Jogi! Sorry to hear about your experience. The idea of Wikimeetups or other larger-scale events in Pakistan is nice. I do think it has been discussed several times before. I believe it would be best to continue discussion on conceptualising such events at the Urdu Wikipedia village pump to maximise input. The number of users within Pakistan itself is quite sizable if we count the various Wikipedia language editions. In addition, you may want to contact the people at Wikimedia's chapter of Pakistan on this as they will undoubtedly need to be involved to make something of that sort possible. They have held several successful projects since the last couple of years. Cheers,  Mar4d  ( talk ) 14:35, 1 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks, but are not you participating in these discussion, we will be waiting for your feedback whenever there is such discussion, or you kindly give your comments on Urdu Wikipedia Village pump page. Thanks..Jogi 007 (talk) 05:26, 2 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Kindly let me know your, Facebook id, & location if you are available in Karachi, then we can have a meetup and discuss things in details, already there is Arif Soomro], and Me in Karachi.Jogi 007 (talk) 07:07, 2 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Waiting for your favorable response.--Arif80s (talk) 07:38, 2 August 2016 (UTC)
 * @Jogi don: Please email me, we can discuss this matter further. Cheers,  Mar4d  ( talk ) 08:27, 2 August 2016 (UTC)
 * It is nice to see Mr. Jogi trying to arrange a meet up for Pakistani Wikimedians. This is a wonderful idea where we can solve our problems easily. I am also interested to participate in this event. Kindly keep me informed about the further developments. Regards.--مھتاب احمد (talk) 09:25, 2 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Please count me in. I would love to be a part of such events, as an Urdu Wikipedian.--ابنِ ضیا (talk) 06:12, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

I'm back
yes, Real life kept me busy. But wikipedia is same as before. -- '''yousaf465'  15:21, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

A cup of coffee for you!

 * Cheers. As is rightly said, Wikipedia is a work in progress and a product of our voluntary contributions. It's always great to see veteran editors like you return. Brings back some semblance and nostalgia of the good old editing days :) Hope to see you around more!  Mar4d  ( talk ) 15:44, 11 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Can you please further edit this article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Yousaf465/sandbox

List of members of the 14th Parliament of Pakistan
Hi Mar4d, I have nominated this list for featured list candidate. Today, it was reviewed and there're some work to be done. I am working on it but I need your help as well. Could you try to work on lead section please and ce it? --Saqib (talk) 09:02, 12 August 2016 (UTC)

About Category:Pakistan-American businesspeople that you created
While its not obligatory, I think you should rename it to "Category:American businesspeople of Pakistani descent" to match the style of the other sub-categories of Category:American people of Pakistani descent by occupation. --113.203.200.166 (talk) 15:13, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
 * I checked the naming convention before creating it, and apparently that is how the others are named. See Category:American businesspeople by ethnicity. It's usually best to conform to how other subcategories are named.  Mar4d  ( talk ) 16:00, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
 * At the same time, I don't really mind though if it's renamed.  Mar4d  ( talk ) 16:03, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
 * OK. --113.203.219.70 (talk) 17:48, 13 August 2016 (UTC)

ARBPIA
Hi Mar4d. A suggestion. Use the neutral sanctions template ( rather than the one you gave AKS. Less strife. --regentspark (comment) 11:51, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the suggestion. Will consider that in the future. Cheers,  Mar4d  ( talk ) 11:56, 14 August 2016 (UTC)

Pending changes reviewer granted
Hello. Your account has been granted the "pending changes reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on is located at Special:StablePages.

Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.

See also:
 * Reviewing, the guideline on reviewing
 * Pending changes, the summary of the use of pending changes
 * Protection policy, the policy determining which pages can be given pending changes protection by administrators. Widr (talk) 16:05, 20 August 2016 (UTC)

Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto page
I really do not want to argue but there are some problems with naming him "قائد عوام". The source you used is his grand daughter Fatima Bhutto who is not any historian or an "academic" in the true sense of the word. She writes novels which is fiction. The source you quoted also "assumes" that the entire nation calls him by this name, which of course is not true logically as he is reviled by lots of people who call him a variety of names etc. I think you can write that his "supporters" call him by this name. TouristerMan (talk) 04:34, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Sounds fair. How about changing the text to "He is revered by his followers as "Quaid-i-Awam". As far as the source is concerned, I still don't see what is wrong with it. She being from the family makes her a good source, even if he assume her views are slanted in favour of her grandfather.  Mar4d  ( talk ) 04:38, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Sure. your recent edit is quite fair. Ty TouristerMan (talk) 04:46, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Technically, you need a better source than a granddaughter. Not necessarily academic, but definitely independent. Just a thought. --regentspark (comment) 12:05, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Sure. I'll see what I can do about that; there are plenty.  Mar4d  ( talk ) 13:12, 22 August 2016 (UTC)

Pakistani Film Task Force
Salam and thank you for asking. Sorry for late reply was bit busy. I am up for project, you already have Umais vote so start it, i will be assisting you in this process. Happy editing! Nauriya (Rendezvous) 10:43, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Great, I will update you all once I get that started.  Mar4d  ( talk ) 07:36, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

IP you warned yesterday at Israel–Pakistan relations
See this lovely edit. He's an IP hopper with some bizarre, almost delusional ideas. Told me he'd have Anonymous get me. Blocked before and I'm blocking him now for this latest threat to someone else. Doug Weller talk 08:31, 30 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Heh. Something tells me those 'delusional ideas' stem from this popular mythological theory among Afghan nationalists. I am not sure the IP understands the purpose of WP:RS. Anyway, thanks for looking over. I'll watchlist those articles, let's see if Anonymous can stop me from Twinkling all over the place :p  Mar4d  ( talk ) 10:48, 30 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Lol. Thanks. Doug Weller  talk 13:13, 30 August 2016 (UTC)

Re: Balochistan
You make great points and I agree. However, the DuestcheWelle is a non-Pakistani publisher, so in that sense it is international. I will move the paragraph to the China-Pakistan economic corridor in that case.--NadirAli نادر علی (talk) 20:23, 1 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Okay, thanks.  Mar4d  ( talk ) 05:54, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

Nargis Fakhri
This page belongs in Category:American models of Pakistani descent. Since it requires editors to be auto-confirmed, would you mind adding it? --113.203.221.99 (talk) 17:58, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

Notability of villages in union councils?
I seem to have wandered into Pakistan articles as a result of chasing a sock, but I'm trying to see what I find and what I can improve or what should be gotten rid of because it doesn't meet policy. I noticed you commented on a related geographical discussion, so I figured you might have an idea on the following: an undiscovered sock that created Shadore, a village in a union council. I can't G5 it because the sock wasn't blocked at the time it created the article. I have proof the place exists per a map, but that's not sufficient per WP:GEOLAND. What I don't know is whether this is a "subdivision" that shouldn't have an article or a "legally recognized entity" that should, because there's not enough information in the article. In either case, the article is terrible, but Wikipedia supposedly has a "gazetteer function" (not my words) that allows for geographical articles with very little justification or content. MSJapan (talk) 18:08, 4 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Hi. Actually, union councils are the lowest tier of subdivisions. What that means is normally, villages are union councils in their own right. Or more broadly, a union council consists of a village and its surrounding areas. This list indeed shows Shamdarra as a union council of Mansehra District, but not Shadore. So I assume Shadore is part of the Shamdarra union council vicinity, as the article claims. I think it'd be best to refer to the notability guidelines concerning small villages, as you pointed out. In case those are not satisfied, there is always the option of redirecting it to Shamdarra. Regards,  Mar4d  ( talk ) 18:39, 4 September 2016 (UTC)


 * So if I'm reading that right, if a union council has/is a village, then it wouldn't have another village at the same level under it, right? So in this case, I'd guess that Shadore would be part of the larger village, and more akin to a section or neighborhood?  It also seems that maybe it isn't separately legally recognized? MSJapan (talk) 18:50, 4 September 2016 (UTC)
 * For the first question, yes. A village can't have a village inside it. The union council itself is a village. So my assessment is that it's most likely a non-notable neighborhood. I did a brief search now, and the lack of sources confirms that. I would suggest redirecting it.  Mar4d  ( talk ) 18:58, 4 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Union Council is a bigger entity than a village. Most UCs contain many villages in them.  Sh eri ff  |  ☎ 911  | 19:25, 4 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Perhaps; it's a bit of a grey area, as most articles on union councils on Wikipedia are on villages, and rarely have I seen a union council having many components. Union councils of Pakistan (although unsourced) says "A village council usually comprises a large village and surrounding areas, often including nearby small villages". So my assessment of a UC is that it is based on a central village and its surrounding locales (the central village in this case being Shamdarra). I guess we'd have to subscribe to notability guidelines as far as the "surrounding" areas are concerned, because many of them may just be neighborhoods or tiny settlements. The Punjab Local Government Act goes a little into "Delimitation of Union Councils" into "wards", though that is pretty micro-level and more for election purposes; it defines a ward as "a village, one or more adjoining villages" or "census blocks" (in urban areas). That probably blurs the line between a notable or non-notable entity, which is where the notability guidelines come into play, IMO.  Mar4d  ( talk ) 19:37, 4 September 2016 (UTC)
 * OK, it's iffy enough for me to take a shot at it. MSJapan (talk) 19:07, 5 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Village Council is a different entity than the Union Council. The above definition given by Mar4d fits the VC. VC usually comprises one village and maybe some small surrounding areas but UC is a quite bigger entity and the surrounding villages are not usually that smaller in comparison to the village after which the UC is named or headquartered in. Big cities can contain many UCs in them but when it comes to village areas, a UC can contain many villages.  Sh eri ff  |  ☎ 911  | 20:18, 5 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes, technically, village councils are smaller than UCs. But in the current administrative setup, we only have districts, tehsils, and union councils, and it is unlikely to be devolved further beyond UCs anytime soon. AFAIK, only Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province has so far replaced UCs with VCs, but the financial viability and administrative costs of it remain questionable. As far as Wikipedia's concerned, we're still dealing with the union council units.  Mar4d  ( talk ) 05:34, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

Aman ki Asha edits
Hi Mar4d. I noticed that you removed the "criticism" section of the Aman ki Asha article. I placed the criticism section there because, without it, the article gives "undue weight" to Aman ki Asha's self-stated intentions of "faciliating dialogue". I say this because, in your edit where you removed the two quotations from Tarek Fatah, a notable Pakistani-Canadian, you justified the revision on the basis that such criticisms have "undue weight". I'll edit the article to improve what I now see as "not the most neutral" edit that I originally made. Thanks. Svabhiman (talk) 19:29, 8 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for editing that article to introduce alternative views. Criticism of the concept should be added as it is covered by different sources, however it is important that WP:WEIGHT is also considered. Generally, that section still needs some work. For example, in the MOS:OPED cited, Fatah's quote is one of many criticisms so it is not clear why that quote in particular is emphasised on. Furthermore, Tarek Fatah is known for his hawkish views and sometimes presents opinions which appear to be drivel. His views can be presented as long as they're attributed, but he's not the most reliable source we have on Pakistan topics. In the quote "ISI aunties coming to India and running circles", it is not clear who he is referring to (if it's just about the Tarar-Tharoor issue, which is what I understand, then again we have the issue of WP:UNDUE). It also accuses a journalist of being an ISI agent, which as you know is an allegation requiring reliable sources (check out WP:BLP). If you want to improve that section, I would consider incorporating views of prominent politicians, academics, media, or public opinion within India concerning Aman ki Asha. The same can be done for Pakistan. Thanks,  Mar4d  ( talk ) 04:07, 9 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the feedback! After reading my initial revision, I realized how grossly non-neutral I had made the wording based on some of my own preconceptions, so I really appreciate you're calling me out on it so that I can improve as an editor/contributor. I share your observation that Tarek Fatah is absolutely non-neutral with respect to India-Pakistan relations. That said, the nature of criticism of Aman ki Asha from the "Indian" or "Pakistani" perspective is necessarily non-neutral. Perhaps the next step in editing the "Criticism" section should be to draw from academic literature on the track II aspect of Aman ki Asha. Thanks again! Svabhiman (talk) 10:56, 9 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Glad to see the convergence of views, concerning better coverage of the criticism. Good luck with the editing. Cheers,  Mar4d  ( talk ) 11:19, 9 September 2016 (UTC)
 * (tps) There is plenty of academic coverage on the subject . -- Kautilya3 (talk) 12:08, 9 September 2016 (UTC)