User talk:Mar4d/Archive 4

MfD nomination of WikiProject Tehran
WikiProject Tehran, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject Tehran and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ). You are free to edit the content of WikiProject Tehran during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Logan Talk Contributions 18:51, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

2011 NATO attacks in Pakistan
There are some issues with the fast editing going on here. Some editor adds massive WP:OR or POV (probably in the name of POV removal) and then a third editor comes and does some massive good edits before those changes can be removed. Reverting becomes nasty... --lTopGunl (talk) 05:14, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Also check out this section. --lTopGunl (talk) 05:14, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Hey, there was some news in which US says, Pakistan permitted it for this assault saying that there were no troops in the area. You might want to review its reliability with all the contradictions. --lTopGunl (talk) 15:16, 3 December 2011 (UTC)
 * We have to be careful even when adding this detail and make sure that it is not treated as "fact", but rather as a "claim". This story comes from the Wall Street Journal (WSJ), a western source, and is presently an American claim (I do not see any updates from the Pakistani military alluding to this story yet). Besides, this article mentions that "A Pakistani military official categorically denied the WSJ’s account, saying the aircraft had already engaged when Pakistan was contacted". I think this recent story would be appropriate in the US claims section. Mar4d (talk) 15:29, 3 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Exactly my point, that's why I used your talk page instead of the article's to prevent trolls picking up on its lead. Even if put in the US claims section, I think we should let this be published on other more reliable sources first. Even then when it's added, the categorical denial should be inline with it as well. --lTopGunl (talk) 15:34, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

You might want to take a look at this:. The line at the top removed with source and this content added. --lTopGunl (talk) 13:57, 4 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I noticed that too. I'm not sure why the user removed it, but it's not a very contentious edit in my opinion because the following sentence mentions "Military officials in Kabul claimed insurgents in Pakistan have also used empty Pakistan border bases to stage attacks, which may have been the working assumption of the coalition forces who called in the airstrike." The user probably removed it because he saw it as redundant and repetitive. Mar4d (talk) 14:01, 4 December 2011 (UTC)
 * As for the content added, that seems to resemble the Wall Street Journal story (refer to our above discussion). Mar4d (talk) 14:06, 4 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Yes, that's why I referred it to you since you were arranging part and would have noticed if it was a redundancy removal. For the added content, I expected that sooner or later. What about adding the categorical denial you mentioned? --lTopGunl (talk) 14:27, 4 December 2011 (UTC)
 * The categorical denial should be mentioned along with it, so as to present views of both sides. Mar4d (talk) 14:51, 4 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Just did. Check out. --lTopGunl (talk) 14:53, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

Azad Kashmir
After that discussion on redirect deletion, I gave the two articles some thought and did some back ground checks on the talk page discussions. Comparing the facts on ground Pakistan actually only separated Gilgit-Baltistan as a political entity and that is the only difference in Pakistan-administered Kashmir and Azad Kashmir. The current split seems to be a WP:POVFORK delibrately created for this purpose under the pretext of separating administrative information about the state and the conflict so as to remove the title Azad from it (which has still remained in the Pakistan-administered Kashmir title as a residue of discussion). I think we should make a move for merger of these two articles clarifying in body that Gilgit-Baltistan was separated while the rest of the Azad Kashmir is still representing the same. After all there's no separate Indian-administered Kashmir article for Jammu and Kashmir rather a redirect. Seems POV emphasis based. What do you think? --lTopGunl (talk) 06:37, 5 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I think there has been a long discussion on this issue before, and people objected to a merge because they said that unlike Indian administered Kashmir (which only consists of one territory), Pakistan-administered Kashmir consists of two territories and that an article is thus needed to collectively refer to both regions. Having this article removes the emphasis on having to mention the disputed status of Azad Kashmir and Gilgit Baltistan over and over again on their articles, and it allows readers to read what exactly is "Pakistan-administered Kashmir" in one article, as opposed to having a repetitive content fork on two different articles (Azad Kashmir and Gilgit Baltistan). You can try and go ahead for the merge but I am pretty sure people may object to it due to these reasons. Mar4d (talk) 06:56, 5 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, the issues are there but there's no separate entity inside Pakistan by that name. So it seems to be creating a non existent one for the ease of description. I'll start a merger proposal. Let's see. Incase a merger is done the redirect discussion will have to do with one less point from my side. Although that redirect is useless anyway. --lTopGunl (talk) 09:47, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Request for Editing Help
Dear Mar4d, I created an Infobox User:Hindustanilanguage/dlt/sandbox for the article posted on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dalitstan.org. I've created a sandbox text because I am unable to edit the article on my own. I faced a peculiar problem since last one week - the page isn't taking the "save page" button. I wonder if it is the result of some censorship or a technical snag. Can you please help me? Hindustanilanguage (talk) 08:52, 7 December 2011 (UTC).

Veena Malik
Please do not add unreferenced or poorly referenced information, especially if controversial, to articles or any other page on Wikipedia about living persons, as you did to Veena Malik. Thank you.

Please note WP:BLP states, "Editors must take particular care when adding information about living persons to any Wikipedia page. Such material requires a high degree of sensitivity, and must adhere strictly to all applicable laws in the United States, to this policy, and to Wikipedia's three core content policies"

Please join the discussion on the article talk page. Thanks. --Ronz (talk) 07:02, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Well, I added a citation sourced to Newsweek Pakistan to what I added in the article. Can you clarify what you mean by adding "unreferenced or poorly referenced" information? Mar4d (talk) 07:06, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
 * The information you added wasn't verifiable by the source (or just a misleading, cherry-picked bit of information from the source, depending on your perspective) and was most definitely controversial. Best stay away from BLP articles if you can't take more care to follow WP:BLP. --Ronz (talk) 16:46, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Please stop adding unreferenced or poorly referenced biographical content, especially if controversial to articles or any other Wikipedia page. Content of this nature could be regarded as defamatory and is in violation of Wikipedia policy. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. --Ronz (talk) 16:27, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

Tip off and ISI
Thanks for the tip off... the report was a bad faith even without informing me of it, the article is protected now. The Urdu name you just added to ISI, are you sure they use the translation? I've seen them using transliteration ie. ... --lTopGunl (talk) 06:48, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
 * All good. Actually, I didn't add the Urdu translation manually; I copy-pasted it over from the Urdu Wikipedia version of the article which apparently has that title. Mar4d (talk) 06:55, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
 * That might slightly border on circular referencing but since it actually translates to that as well, let's keep it till some other Urdu speaker objects with some reference on whether the organization itself uses translation or transliteration for the Urdu name. On a side note, try CRULP's Urdu keyboard set up which can be switched from taskbar when needed (typing is transliteration based, so fast). --lTopGunl (talk) 07:12, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the advice. I often use Google Urdu Transliteration, which is also quite good. Have you tried it before? Mar4d (talk) 07:30, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, I used that before but that has to be opened, languages chosen, transliterated and then cut-pasted. The keyboard setup is as easy one time setting (downloading keyboard setup from the CRULP site and a Nastaliq font) and allows to type in Nastaliq by switching to it with a keyboard shortcut while typing in a textbox and switching back to English when done. A bit handy. --lTopGunl (talk) 07:35, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
 * True. Will give it a try. Mar4d (talk) 07:43, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

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

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:57, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

Watchlist
You might like to use this script for the over growing watchlist. Works with Enhanced recent changes enabled from preferences. Here is a description and an example on the use. --lTopGunl (talk) 13:39, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Sure, I'll take a look. Is this what you use for reverting vandalism? Mar4d (talk) 03:21, 17 December 2011 (UTC)
 * No, this will just give you options to add colours to selected pages in your watchlist for ease. Since your account is in good standing you can ask for rollback rights here, that is used to revert vandalism. --lTopGunl (talk) 03:25, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

Humsafar
Please check Talk:Humsafar. Shariq r82 (talk) 13:25, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

Pakistan
A peer review on Pakistan has been put up for a drive to promote it back to "Featured Article" status. You might want to join in your spare editing time. --lTopGunl (talk) 23:33, 17 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the invitation. I'll give my two cents if there's anything I find in the article that needs improvement. Mar4d (talk) 11:25, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

Participation needed at Talk:Pakistan studies
Hello Mar4d. Since I saw your name on the above talk page, here is a link to a note which I left to JCAla on the matter: User talk:JCAla. Depending on your degree of interest in the article, this advice may also apply to you. TopGun has complained at WP:AN about the lack of response by people who disagree with him. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 16:33, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

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

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:56, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

GA review of 2011 NATO attack in Pakistan
2011 NATO attack in Pakistan is getting a Good Article review. Might need some quick fixes if the reviewer asks. I'm waiting for reviewer comments though. --lTopGunl (talk) 12:33, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Sure, I'll be there to help around. Mar4d (talk) 12:40, 22 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Ok, check out the review page then. It is on hold till the stated issues are fixed. --lTopGunl (talk) 13:45, 22 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Lol. Cleared overnight. Now you've to get it to FA :p --lTopGunl (talk) 01:58, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Whoa, that was quick! I was a bit busy so wasn't able to give it enough time, though I was with the impression that it'd definitely take a week or so to clear up the issues. Good job :) Mar4d (talk) 02:38, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I thought so too. The reviewer actually put it to hold for a week, but our preemptive usage of templates helped out. Got it fixed overnight and passed. Thanks. :] --lTopGunl (talk) 02:41, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

Notice of discussion at the Administrators' Noticeboard
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding because you are named as part of User:Kiftaan's mass-sockpuppet conspiracy theory. The thread is The user who cried sock. Thank you. Ian.thomson (talk) 15:34, 24 December 2011 (UTC)

Filing an SPI
Here's a partially filled form. All you need is to put in Kiftaan's name, and diffs from both editors showing similar edits. Ian.thomson (talk) 17:19, 24 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the link Ian. Will do shortly. Mar4d (talk) 17:32, 24 December 2011 (UTC)
 * No need. . He's blocked now. Keep a look out for sleepers while the case is fresh. --lTopGunl (talk) 18:44, 24 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Good decision. What a nuisance that turned out to be. Hopefully, we can now concentrate back on the interrupted work. The only positive that probably comes out of this is that if he starts this again (he's already done it three times on me), we now have irrefutable evidence which will boomerang back on him. Mar4d (talk) 04:06, 25 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Oh, yeah... I forgot what I was doing because of him, lol. Not to mention I'm handling another IP sock at the moment. --lTopGunl (talk) 10:46, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

Copy of deleted article
I see that you deleted the article Journal of Pakistan Medical Students. Is it possible if I can have access to the deleted content of the article for personal use? Mar4d (talk) 02:00, 20 December 2011 (UTC)
 * (Copying the above from my talk page) I've pasted a copy to http://pastebin.com/MpPZebYX. It will expire in a day, because of copyright/attribution issues.  Sandstein   08:04, 25 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Okay, thanks. Mar4d (talk) 08:08, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

Investigation reports
Ok, this was seen coming. An IP has added this section to the NATO attack article - not in very good formatting either. It was recent content without discussion but I'm not sure if I can remove it under WP:NOTNEWSPAPER, since we were already expecting that update. Maybe we should combine the reports you gave here and improve it to match the rest of the article's quality. --lTopGunl (talk) 22:46, 23 December 2011 (UTC)


 * I've removed it for now since there are many reports from all sides and it is something more of a recentism without processing the prose. --lTopGunl (talk) 13:02, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

Pakistan studies RFC
Can you list the RFC at some neutral WP:MOS related active noticeboard? I've not been much active on project notice boards until recently myself, so don't have much idea. --lTopGunl (talk) 12:58, 26 December 2011 (UTC)
 * To be honest, I don't go much on noticeboards or RfC's so I don't quite have an idea as to where it could be listed. I'll try my best to look for a place though. However, isn't it just better to be bold and carry out the move? I've already given my reasons, so have you, and we've also got an admin who shares a similiar opinion. The opposing users have not made any effort to clarify their points further even after so many days, apart from pretty much repeating the same points. This is a failure and lack of willingness on their part. It is also clear that some of them have a WP:Conflict of interest there. Mar4d (talk) 13:05, 26 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes I know, that is exactly the case and that's why I involved an admin and called an RFC, there was no point from the start otherwise except WP:IDONTLIKEIT. Anyway, JCAla (who was not even related to the discussion) reported me for removing the content on the pretext of editwarring and I said (which got the page protected only), I'll make an edit now after a consensus. They'll just WP:NINJA revert if I move that (actually remove, since it's already there in that article). This needs to be closed with a template for them to stay off. Ok, I'll do some searches then. --lTopGunl (talk) 13:11, 26 December 2011 (UTC)
 * On a side note, if you really want a valuable third-party opinion, one person who I would really recommend for you to contact is User:Fowler&fowler. He's one of the most knowledgeable editors on South Asia-related topics who's contributed to heaps of Indian and Pakistani history/academic-related articles; I've often asked him to give his viewpoints in disputed content. I'm sure that (if he is willing to participate) he will provide a very neutral, balanced and logical judgement on the issue, either for or against and steer this otherwise dead discussion to some direction. Mar4d (talk) 13:17, 26 December 2011 (UTC)
 * That might be really helpful but inviting single users previously not involved who will (obviously) give a reasonable answer to the supporting side will be misrepresented by the opposing editors (since you know their ways) as canvassing. I'll find a noticeboard or wait for RFC comments. --lTopGunl (talk) 13:25, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

Don't worry about the tb templates, I'm watching your page and get an SMS (lol, yes a bit wikiholic) for the watchlist changes (RSS feed of watchlist to facebook (via RSS-to-email) to SMS (via fb msgs)), haha. --lTopGunl (talk) 13:30, 26 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Fowler&fowler is a trusted editor who's significantly contributed to making India an FA article. He's got a background in South Asian articles due to his intellectual knowledge and expertise of the area. It wouldn't make sense if anyone calls asking for his opinion as "canvassing". Just a subtle suggestion on my part :) Mar4d (talk) 13:36, 26 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, I believe that, but if you follow Talk:Taliban and Talk:Indophobia in detail, you'll know they don't listen. It can be waited out I guess. All they need is a few sensible editors opposing them and a closure. Let's see, Thanks. --lTopGunl (talk) 13:45, 26 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Btw, there's been some fun at Kiftaan's talkpage and I've requested protection. --lTopGunl (talk) 13:47, 26 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Don't waste too much time there unless you want to hear stories like racist admins / day of jugement and I have over 1,000 g/fs on MySpace and on Facebook. Mar4d (talk) 14:03, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

Lol. That's why I said 'fun'. --lTopGunl (talk) 16:00, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

Nuclear weapons
I think the statement is now a bit ambiguous as compared to the previous one since Turkey shares NATO small scale weaponry. So, first Muslim-majority to posses nuclear weapons and first nuclear weapon state in Muslim world would be more descriptive. I could be wrong. --lTopGunl (talk) 16:09, 26 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Okay, this was the previous statement:

"Pakistan has the eighth largest standing armed force and is the only Muslim-majority nation to possess nuclear weapons also being the first nuclear power country in the Muslim world"


 * New version:

"Pakistan has the eighth largest standing army internationally and is a recognised nuclear weapons state, being the first and only nation to have that status in the Muslim world"

Which part sounds different? Mar4d (talk) 16:15, 26 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Possession of nuclear weapons has been removed, which brings in Turkey as a NATO member to atleast posses some small scale. Since you've mentioned them together, I saw another problem, it's not the 8th largest standing army, it's the 8th largest standing armed force (including Navy and Airforce). Would be a good idea to move this section to Talk:Pakistan? --lTopGunl (talk) 16:24, 26 December 2011 (UTC)
 * See the talk page. Mar4d (talk) 16:27, 26 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Ok, replying there. --lTopGunl (talk) 16:42, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

Categories and templates
--lTopGunl (talk) 12:31, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
 * There seems to be a naked template at Pakistan "Template:Navbox", or is that normal?
 * The category "Muhajir people" for Muhammad Ali Jinnah might be confusing as he lived in Karachi long before partition.
 * I've removed the category. As for the template, I noticed that long ago. Apparently, the last few templates related to "languages" are not being displayed for some odd reason. I'm a bit puzzled and don't quite understand why the templates aren't being shown. Mar4d (talk) 12:34, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Ok. I tried to fix the template once, but ended up self reverting in the end. You are more into templates and categories than I am, so messaged you... it might be objected in FAC... the source seems to be correct, still this displays. --lTopGunl (talk) 12:37, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Aah, I think I figured out the problem. Just give me a few minutes to try and fix it. Will tell you later. Mar4d (talk) 12:42, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Ok. --lTopGunl (talk) 12:46, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
 * It seems that the article cannot tolerate too many templates at the bottom as it overloads, and some templates don't end up displaying, thus resulting in the naked link you were talking about. I've sort of trimmed it down by removing two unnecessary templates: Template:Major non-NATO ally and Template:World Trade Organization since both these don't wikilink to the Pakistan article anyway but rather Military of Pakistan and Economy of Pakistan. All the rest templates are being displayed correctly now. Mar4d (talk) 14:00, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Great. --lTopGunl (talk) 14:05, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

December 2011
Please do not add or change content without verifying it by citing reliable sources, as you did to Pakistan's role in the War on Terror. Please review the guidelines at Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Darkness Shines (talk) 16:14, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

Interesting
Articles for deletion/Human per flagrant sock-puppetary, self-published and conflict of interest. --lTopGunl (talk) 00:29, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Lol. It's an April Fool's Day joke :p Mar4d (talk) 02:00, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Yeah, lol - was going through the "humor" category. The ones I mentioned here were the best oppose points. --lTopGunl (talk) 02:07, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

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

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:45, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

ANI
While you added your comments on your own probably via your watchlist, an administrator has hinted you to be a meat puppet... although that is technically not possible since you are an established user and not called by me to join Wikipedia for any purpose - the other possible assumption of canvassing has no evidence too. Thought of notifying you if you lost track of that IP discussion at ANI. -- lTopGunl (ping) 23:21, 30 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the notice. I gave my view of things at the expense of my own time and just wanted to raise the recent content removal on Pakistan's role in the War on Terror as well as the article Anti-Pakistan sentiment, where the correction action should have been to reword the disputed sentence or at least take it to the talk page to reach an agreement (as Bbb23 did). Darkness Shines didn't do any of that but instead chose to go down the path of removing the sentence completely along with the source, and didn't give any clear rationale either - thus my judgement of it being as a contentious edit. In any case, the issue seems to have been closed so there's no point of replying there. Mar4d (talk) 02:06, 31 December 2011 (UTC)


 * No problem. Yeah, it's closed now. What the immediatists don't understand is vandalism is something like "ljflsjdfljsdlj" entered into the article which was not the case on these articles. I'll continue to keep those on my watch list too.. since every time a page blanker comes by, some one more experienced chooses to be an immidiatist and encourage the blanking vandal, who wouldn't even give a reason, to editwar. -- lTopGunl (ping) 02:13, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

Your contributed article, Cephas Zhuwao


Hello, I notice that you recently created a new page, Cephas Zhuwao. First, thank you for your contribution; Wikipedia relies solely on the efforts of volunteers such as yourself. Unfortunately, the page you created covers a topic on which we already have a page - Cephas Zhuwawo. 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 Cephas Zhuwawo - you might like to discuss new information at the article's talk page.

If you think that the article you created should remain separate, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. 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. Jevansen (talk) 05:09, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Javeria Abbasi


The article Javeria Abbasi has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Does not appear notable? Only one self published ref

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Darkness Shines (talk) 05:46, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Malware
One of the references you added to Javeria Abbasi just tried to install malware on my rig. It was the Mag4U one, please remove it. Darkness Shines (talk) 06:15, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Huh.... malware? Are you sure? That website has a lot of interviews with notable personalities as Google shows and complies with WP:RS. I doubt it has malware but I'll check it again and remove it if something's fishy. Mar4d (talk) 06:18, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Running a scan, will let you know, may be a false positive. Darkness Shines (talk) 06:29, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of Indians in Afghanistan for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Indians in Afghanistan 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/Indians in Afghanistan until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Darkness Shines (talk) 18:01, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

Re:Transliteration
Salaam! I've added the reqested scripts at Bullah Ki Jaana. Let me know if you need help in any other articles. I hope you have a good day! Khuda hafiz, AnupamTalk 17:03, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

Image for Rawalpindi (Template:Largest cities of Pakistan)
Hello! If you have visited Islamabad you may also have visited Daman-e-Koh. This picture is actually taken from Daman-e-Koh of 7th Avenue of Islamabad and this road is in no way in Rawalpindi or leads to Rawalpindi. Neither is it named Islamabad-Rawalpindi freeway. A simple google image search of 7th Avenue Islamabad will result in scores of image similar to this. And if you see this on google maps, this road is just beneath Daman-e-Koh and is in between sector F-7 & F-6 and G-7 & G-6. And if you see Map of Islamabad you will identify this road yourself and also its vicinity to Rawalpindi. I hope this is enough to convince you about my stand on that image. -- S M S  Talk 20:26, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Indians in Afghanistan
See Articles for deletion/Indians in Afghanistan. Informing you as you created the page. Inform any other editors who you know are major contributors to the page (or it's previous deleted versions) I don't find any though... seems like this page was deleted and restored at your request. -- lTopGunl (talk) 23:53, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

TTP
Are you ready now with adding content to the lead? Or is there more to come? Regards, JCAla (talk) 14:09, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Replying on talk page. Mar4d (talk) 14:41, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Country Forecasting
Hi Mar4d,

I noticed that you posted an external link to the Pakistan page for Development Forecasts from International Futures. Just recently, I've posted a few of the same external links to other country pages. I think that it's a tool that has a great deal of utility, and the forecasts add something new and interesting to country discussions. I believe it's a valuable addition, and I'd like to see these forecasts on more country pages. Do you have any thoughts on this? Or are you interested in joining me in adding more forecasts to country pages? I look forward to hearing from you. (Shredder2012 (talk) 16:38, 7 January 2012 (UTC))
 * Hi there! From what I gather, this external link that you're mentioning (International Futures) had already been in the article long before; I never added it. To be honest, I never even noticed it until you posted about it here, so I might not be the relevant person to ask an opinion from :) I think an appropriate place to discuss the inclusion of this link on country articles (and get third opinions) might be at External links/Noticeboard. Happy editing! Mar4d (talk) 16:45, 7 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the advice. Cheers! (Shredder2012 (talk) 20:04, 8 January 2012 (UTC))

Switches
I've added the switches. Take a look at the article and the talk page section. -- lTopGunl (talk) 01:17, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Will reply soon. Mar4d (talk) 02:34, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Ok, whenever you get to, also take a look at the discussion about images in the same discussion section... I'm on widescreen now and almost all the images are displacing headings and edit buttons. September88 has suggested to use percentages instead of pixels to size the images. -- <b style="color:#060">lTopGunl</b> (<b style="color:#000">talk</b>) 02:22, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification
Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * 2012 Khyber Agency bombing (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Lashkar


 * Manzoor Wassan (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Khairpur

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:58, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

Youm-e-Takbir‎
Created an article for Youm-e-Takbir‎... a little help with relevant templates/categories/your usual drive through business ;) -- <b style="color:#060">lTopGunl</b> (<b style="color:#000">talk</b>) 02:45, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Sure, I'll take a look. Mar4d (talk) 05:54, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Added the article to the template as well. Is it possible to modify the fair use rationale of the Chagai-I infobox image so that can be added here too? After all the image is irreplaceable and directly related to this article too. -- <b style="color:#060">lTopGunl</b> (<b style="color:#000">talk</b>) 01:24, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Don't think there should be any problem, just edit the template at the image page though and add the name of this article, if you're keen to add it. As for the categories, note that I've done a minor cleanup, since some of the categories were redundant as the article was already indirectly part of them (Category:Nuclear history of Pakistan for example is itself a sub-category of the science and technology history and military history categories, which themselves are further a sub-category of Category:History of Pakistan). :) Mar4d (talk) 03:12, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Yeah, though more preferable will be an image of the actual celebrations. Usurped my username on commons, will upload when I get a hand on one. Fine with categories copied some from Chagi I to start the article - better now. -- <b style="color:#060">lTopGunl</b> (<b style="color:#000">talk</b>) 03:20, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

Neighbourhoods of Faisalabad
Slam, I hope you are good, I've created separately Template:Neighbourhoods of Faisalabad for the geographical areas of Faisalabad, and removed the geographic articles from Template:Faisalabad. I hope that is well for it, thanks for your contributions.--  Assassin'S creed   T -  E  -  C  -  G  - 18:48, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Fair enough. I didn't see that template before so that's why I had re-added it. Mar4d (talk) 18:49, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Hmm, no problem I created it later.--  Assassin'S creed   T -  E  -  C  -  G  - 08:41, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

Arbitration
You are involved in a recently filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at Arbitration/Requests and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. Additionally, the following resources may be of use—
 * Arbitration/Requests;
 * Arbitration guide.

Thanks, JCAla (talk) 18:15, 17 January 2012 (UTC)


 * I guess you've to post in your own section on the case instead of threaded form. -- <b style="color:#060">lTopGunl</b> (<b style="color:#000">talk</b>) 14:31, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification
Hi. When you recently edited Terrorist incidents in Pakistan in 2012, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Sui (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:28, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

Pakistan copy-edit
Hi, TopGun has suggested to proceed the article to FAC in the coming days and I am of the opinion to get it copy-edited before to make it perfect, preferably by fresh eyes. What do you think? And can you suggest any specific user for the task? September88 (talk) 15:35, 20 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Let's make some final touches and put it up in the next two days or so, I reckon. I still think we should do something about the images because some of them are overused and redudant (for example, we're using three pictures of Mount K2 when really one is enough, and there could be so many different places instead. Same goes for the Swat and Balochistan pics - there's two when we only really need one each. Just my opinion. Mar4d (talk) 16:43, 20 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Ok, I'll see what improvements I can make. And you're not wrong about the pics. I just opened up a discussion on Pakistan talk page on final touches. How about you list all the improvements you want there and see if any objections arise and it can be modified then? September88 (talk) 17:59, 20 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Sure, I'll take a final look and give my input. Mar4d (talk) 18:02, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

Edit warring
Regarding, please stop the edit warring. The fact that the other editor did it is not OK. You never brought the issue to the talk page, as he was requesting. It is your responsibility to do so if someone challenges your edit; it is not your responsibility to just put the tags back. It's WP:BRD, not WP:BRBRBRBRBRBRGOTOANI. Magog the Ogre (talk) 23:44, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

Talkback
 Assassin'S creed   T -  E  -  C  -  G  - 13:52, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Kashmir-Pak userbox
Did that Kashmir-Pak unification userbox get deleted? Showing blank on my userpage. -- <b style="color:#060">lTopGunl</b> (<b style="color:#000">talk</b>) 20:42, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
 * An anonymous IP user who seems to be making some POV edits blanked it here on the pretext of the userbox being moved to mainspace. I can't see whereabouts in the mainspace he's talking about. User:Saimdusan/Userboxes/Kashmir2 and User:Saimdusan/Userboxes/Kashmir3 are still there uninterrupted, so this particular blanking seemed to be obvious vandalism. Mar4d (talk) 01:24, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Ok, watchlisting now. -- <b style="color:#060">lTopGunl</b> (<b style="color:#000">talk</b>) 08:58, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

Foodistan
Hello there,

I have started creating an article at Foodistan. I would appreciate if you and other editors could help increase the content of the article.

Many Thanks.

--Rvd4life (talk) 14:52, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Sure, will take a look. Mar4d (talk) 16:06, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of Aimal Qazi for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Aimal Qazi 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/Aimal Qazi until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. LuciferWildCat (talk) 20:42, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification
Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * Afghans in Pakistan (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Kalashnikov


 * Gerrard Street (Toronto) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Rickshaw

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:49, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

India article
There has been many discussions about Afghanistan border in talk page and consensus has been achieved. First go through the archives before saying that consensus is required. If you want to bring up a point, start a new section on the talk page. Please do not edit a featured article in a disruptive fashion. -- Anbu121 ( talk me ) 07:30, 29 January 2012 (UTC)
 * I was not aware of any such discussion. If possible, could you provide me the archived link to the consensus? Mar4d (talk) 07:53, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

The first discussion was here in 2006 and there has been many discussions after that. -- Anbu121 ( talk me ) 08:30, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

INCOTM Feb 2012
As you are a WikiProject India member, dont forget to vote here & participate with a few edits in this months COTM too. AshLin (talk) 05:58, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

Indians in Afghanistan discussion

 * You might want to list your objections (if any not already covered) on the article's current state, me and JCAla have listed ours, I'm about to take it to WP:DRN. -- <b style="color:#060">lTopGunl</b> (<b style="color:#000">talk</b>) 13:58, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi. I think I don't have anything specific to say as of yet (the issue is also a bit WP:TLDR to be honest), so I encourage you to use whatever platforms necessary to ensure the article remains balanced, neutral and does not stray on the route to WP:COATRACK again. If that's what is happening, then great. I am always willing to visit the article later some time whenever I'm free and offer helpful advice. Otherwise, please go ahead with the DRN process. Cheers, Mar4d (talk) 14:09, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Ok, will be taking it there as currently the discussion is gridlocked. Will obviously inform all involved editors. -- <b style="color:#060">lTopGunl</b> (<b style="color:#000">talk</b>) 14:14, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification
Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * Bacha Khan International Airport (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Pashtun


 * Terrorist incidents in Pakistan in 2012 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Ansar-ul-Islam

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:53, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

Indo Pak war of 1971 (POWs)
Hello! we currently are discussing an issue related to POWs of Pakistan-India war of 1971 here. I would like you to participate in the discussion and give your thoughts specially related to this edit. Thanks! -- S M S  Talk 09:51, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

Talkback
 Lynch 7  15:20, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

Indians in Afghanistan
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is "Indians in Afghanistan". Thank you. -- <b style="color:#060">lTopGunl</b> (<b style="color:#000">talk</b>) 15:00, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

Mediation Cabal: Request for participation
Dear Mar4d: Hello. This is just to let you know that you've been mentioned in the following request at the Mediation Cabal, which is a Wikipedia dispute resolution initiative that resolves disputes by informal mediation.

The request can be found at Mediation Cabal/Cases/08 February 2012/Indians in Afghanistan.

Just so you know, it is entirely your choice whether or not you participate. If you wish to do so, and we'll see what we can do about getting this sorted out. At MedCab we aim to help all involved parties reach a solution and hope you will join in this effort.

If you have any questions relating to this or any other issue needing mediation, you can ask on the case talk page, the MedCab talk page, or you can ask the mediator, Whenaxis, at their talk page. MedcabBot (talk) 00:26, 8 February 2012 (UTC)


 * FYI: This mediation was closed because Darkness Shines did not agree to participate, the mediator has now listed a structured RFC so that this issue can be over come: Requests for comment/Indians in Afghanistan. -- <b style="color:#060">lTopGunl</b> (<b style="color:#000">talk</b>) 10:58, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Okay. I notice that this is based on a selective option voting system. I like that concept. I'll be around to add my perspective on the issue. Thanks for notifying. Mar4d (talk) 11:53, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes, the issues were too complex to be handled by a normal RFC. I've informed all involved users (except JCAla who already knows). -- <b style="color:#060">lTopGunl</b> (<b style="color:#000">talk</b>) 12:05, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

Re: Af-Pak cricket
Hello. Strictly speaking the match isn't a home match for either, although you could consider Afghanistan to be the "home team" as Sharjah is their unofficial home ground. AssociateAffiliate (talk) 18:28, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Talkback
 Assassin'S creed   T -  E  -  C  -  G  - 07:41, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

Afghan cricket team vs Pakistan in the UAE in 2011–12
Hello Mar4d. How would you feel about a joint effort between us in getting the Afghan cricket team vs Pakistan in the UAE in 2011–12 article to good article status. I did initially think it wouldn't be possible, but then came upon this article by the excellent User:Harrias, who managed to get it to good article status. AssociateAffiliate (talk) 10:55, 11 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I think that's a good initiative. I would be willing to work and help in promoting the article to that status. This game was a significant milestone in many different ways, not just in Afghanistan's sporting history, but also for cricket. There is also good coverage of this event in multiple mainstream reliable sources, so with some dedicated work, I do not see how there would be anything hindering in getting this article to GA. Cheers, Mar4d (talk) 12:15, 11 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Excellent! Once I've finished creating William Pickett I'll crack on with it. AssociateAffiliate (talk) 12:33, 11 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I've added an incomplete match report for the Afghan innings, what do you think so far? AssociateAffiliate (talk) 14:42, 11 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Hello mates, I am appreciating you for this struggle but I also want to participate in this effort. Actually I want to get knowledge of this, are you ready to allow me to participate? -- <span class="texhtml" style="text-shadow:#666666 0.2em 0.2em 0.5em; font-family:Trajan Pro; color:#000000;">Assassin'S Creed T -  E  -  C  -  G  - 18:31, 11 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I've expanded the match report and included a full scorecard to compliment the summary scorecard. I have a tendancy to rabble on, so the match report section can do with some rewording and probably shortening somewhat.  I'll leave that part in your capable hands. AssociateAffiliate (talk) 22:21, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Wow, that was really quick! The article is in a good shape. I'll see what I can do, but good work on the expansion. @Assassin: Wikipedia is an open editing and collaborating environment, so you would are welcome to edit the article. Mar4d (talk) 00:07, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
 * What do you think can be done to the lead? I'm not sure about the home ground info being in the lead, but if removed from it the lead would be way too small. AssociateAffiliate (talk) 19:09, 16 February 2012 (UTC)