User talk:PAKHIGHWAY/Archive 17

September 2017: warning
Hello, PAKHIGHWAY. Reading through this talkpage, I see a lot of snark from you whenever anybody criticizes you. "Your majesty, what does one have to prove to your highness that Dhillon's are in fact a Punjabi surname?", "Apparently claiming our surnames is a crime against humanity." Civility is policy on Wikipedia. Please apply it in your exchanges with other editors. Also, nationalist editing is not acceptable here. And it's none of your business where other editors come from or other personal details, though you seem to have made it your business here in July. Please discuss edits and articles, not editors or where they live or their nationality.

You seem to have stopped interacting much with other editors on talkpages recently, which is just as well in a way, I suppose, considering the rudeness I see from you in posts from July and August above. However, nationalist insults in edit summaries are actually worse than a regular personal attack on a talkpage, as they are more difficult to remove. This edit summary, and this are outrageous. One more attack like that anywhere, in text or edit summary, and you will be blocked indefinitely. Bishonen &#124; talk 17:10, 20 September 2017 (UTC).


 * Keep your empty threats to yourself and kindly don't message me again. When people write BS, they will be responded too in the manner they have chosen for themselves. Period. --PAKHIGHWAY (talk) 18:34, 20 September 2017 (UTC)


 * Erm, Bishonen is an admin, PAKHIGHWAY. As such, the "threat" certainly isn't "empty" - they can enforce it, if they see fit. - Sitush (talk) 18:36, 20 September 2017 (UTC)


 * So what if Bishonen an admin? I have never interacted with that person in my life and don't need threats hurled at me. Furthermore, I was reverting ridiculous edits made to Point 5353 and Gilgit Airport, where your fellow country folk seem to have trouble acting in a civilized manner. Like I said, I don't need empty threats. And let this be the last time I see your message on my talk page. I have already told you once that I don't want to interact with you. Kindly stop stalking me. Thank you. --PAKHIGHWAY (talk) 18:40, 20 September 2017 (UTC)


 * That is the entire point of admins - they only act where they are uninvolved (or, at least, should do). I'm not sure what you mean by "your fellow country folk" as I have no idea (nor care) whether any British people have edited those articles or not. And now I will go away and consider reporting this issue to WP:ANI: you have had enough warnings. - Sitush (talk) 18:42, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

ANI
There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. - Sitush (talk) 19:13, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

Blocked
You have been blocked temporarily from editing for contravening Wikipedia's harassment policy. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page:. --John (talk) 19:37, 20 September 2017 (UTC)


 * Hello . Please have a look at my complete edit history. The majority of my work and editing has been non-confrontational and mainly restricted to History of Pakistan, Pakistan Railways and Automobile industry in Pakistan among several other areas. I'm very random when it comes to my editing articles. My intention is not to create trouble here and neither do I go around looking for trouble. Rather, it seems like trouble seems to keep finding me. I have asked as well as his group of Indian wiki members to stop harassing me and stop interacting with me. Rather then avoid me, they continuously provoke me by threatening to have me blocked or have IP hoppers vandalize articles which I have either created or edited. The latest and most recent example would be Point 5353 and Gilgit Airport. When blatant ridiculous edits like this are made, what does one expect? The real problem here stems from the fact that there seems to be a group of Indian Wikipedia members who are absolutely incapable of having a level-minded, civilized discussion when it comes to anything related to Pakistan. The Gandhara article is a perfect example - when they cannot get there way, they either get the article locked or try and have the person editing the article (which they claim is "anti indian") blocked. This is totally unacceptable. Luckily, Wikipedia has many non-Indian members who clearly see the bias and because of that, my edits on the Gandhara article were eventually approved. The problem they have with me is that I'm Pakistani, I'm knowledgeable about my country and history, and have good intentions for Wikipedia and try my best to follow the rules and regulations of Wikipedia. To them, this is blasphemy because it directly conflicts with the agenda they have of spreading pseudohistory and attempting to usurp Pakistani history and culture under the Indian banner. A perfect example of this would be South Asian Iron Age, which was wrongfully redirected to Iron Age of India. When I attempted to question this and requested a change back, they (as usual) ganged up and prevented this from happening, even though South Asian Stone Age is present and South Asian Bronze Age as well. What they keep doing is poking the bear, and when the bear growls, they go crying to the administrators. This is not fair. I urge the administrators to look at my case rationally and to look into my edit history...yes I admit I have said some very nasty and mean things, but that was not done because I have some personal agenda or vendetta. It was simply a reaction, which I think holds some merit. If the Indian wiki members spent more time reporting the IP hoppers and Indian trolls, which constantly vandalize Pakistani articles, it would be better then trying to get rid of a Pakistani wiki member who is trying to contribute to the wealth of knowledge of Wikipedia. In closing, I would like to say, actions speak louder than words. My edit history is for the most part non-confrontational and focused on information, not conflict. I will accept any decision made by the administrators. Thank you for your time. --PAKHIGHWAY (talk) 19:43, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

Unblock Request

 * The real problem here stems from the fact that there seems to be a group of Indian Wikipedia members who are absolutely incapable of having a level-minded, civilized discussion when it comes to anything related to Pakistan. PAKHIGHWAY, this statement of yours clearly indicates why you should not be on Wikipedia. Bishonen has already warned you about trying to associate nationalities with editors yet you do just that in an unblock request. Frankly, if it wasn't that mar4d seems to like your edits, you'd probably have been indef blocked a long time ago. The rope, it seems to me, has finally run out on you. --regentspark (comment) 00:15, 21 September 2017 (UTC)


 * Why shouldn't I associate nationalities with editors, when editors are making nationalistic edits in the first place? According to your logic, it's okay for Indians to be nationalistic, but when somebody responds, it's a crime against humanity? That's laughable to say the least. --PAKHIGHWAY (talk) 02:07, 21 September 2017 (UTC)


 * Why indeed. I have extended your block to indefinite as it is obvious to me that you are not suited to editing here. --John (talk) 10:18, 21 September 2017 (UTC)


 * Could you kindly reconsider, because I'm not the one provoking this. This is not fair. Go through my entire edit history, I'm not causing problems at all. --PAKHIGHWAY (talk) 11:31, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

Previous ANI
PAKHIGHWAY was brought to ANI back in March by for trying to remove any mention of India in articles about Indus Valley civilizations.

Frankly, the only reason he avoided a block is because he disappeared for a few weeks. This current block only shows his extreme battleground mentality, and his replies above show that he has no willingness to back down from his ultra-nationalism. He needs to either stay blocked or be topic-banned from anything having to do with the history of Pakistan or India. 74.70.146.1 (talk) 04:00, 22 September 2017 (UTC)


 * Please explain in what I have stated above is "ultra-nationalist". Furthermore, your vandalism of Point 5353 is clearly visible for everyone to see. --PAKHIGHWAY (talk) 04:07, 22 September 2017 (UTC)


 * Furthermore, one shouldn't complain about others, especially when you yourself are guilty. As seen here https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Indians_in_Pakistan&oldid=772996262 and here https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Zakir_Rashid_Bhat&diff=800690746&oldid=800537562 and here https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Zakir_Rashid_Bhat&diff=800690887&oldid=800690746


 * Yeah, I surely did not agree with the edits I saw back in the day. Heck no one found them acceptable, but for some reason the whole report just slipped into the shadows, as is common for ANI. However, ever since that report, Pakhighway has quite drastically bettered his editorial pattern, at least based on what I have seen. I'm purely talking in terms of encyclopediec content. He made alot of proper edits on numerous history-related articles pertaining to Pakistan. Furthermore, he has created alot of articles that I believe are deemed really valuable to the WP:PAKISTAN scope (i.e. infrastructure). This definitely can't be neglected.


 * Though his continuous violations of WP:CIVIL and WP:BATTLEGROUND are absolutely indefensible, and for that itself a block had to be warranted, I'm sure he'll tread much more carefully from now on, given that he experienced first-hand what such editorial behaviour results in. No more CIVIL/BATTLEGROUND violations. Indeed, as others suggested, try to focus on one scope at least for some time. Also, take notion of RickinBaltinmore's comment; I believe this particular advice could be really helpful for you. All the best, - LouisAragon (talk) 17:55, 23 September 2017 (UTC)


 * Thank you for your comments and suggestion. I will indeed. --PAKHIGHWAY (talk) 21:31, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

2nd Unblock Request
My original request is at the bottom of my talk page.


 * Comment: I'm a little stunned that PAKHIGHWAY would suggest my warning (or "threat") above should count in their favour in an unblock request, and was designed to "provoke" them. Having noticed their recent outrageous edit summaries, I was attempting to warn them emphatically of how unacceptable those were. I was hoping it would have a good effect, since the user is indeed a content contributor and I was reluctant to block them out of hand. But I guess it didn't work. I can only endorse John's block. Bishonen &#124; talk 15:02, 21 September 2017 (UTC).


 * One summary is outrageous, and the world comes crashing down? I've read much worse on Wikipedia in the past. Grow up. I have had several issues with people here, but you're are behaving as if this is a chronic problem which is done daily. A couple of summaries were outrageous because the original edit (vandalism) done to the article was outrageous. Every action has an equal and opposite reaction. For months I have put up with IP hoppers who have vandalized every article that I have edited. Point 5353, Pakistani name, Gandhara are just a few examples. I oppose this indefinite block vehemently and implore a non-biased admin to please look into my edits and my history. An indefinite ban is extremely harsh and unwarranted. --PAKHIGHWAY (talk) 15:12, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
 * I'm going to be honest. You've made a lot of good edits here, especially with roadways and transit in Pakistan. However, I too have a concern with edit summaries such as "Everywhere you go on Wikipedia, you have these moron Bhuttos and Amritsari Nawaz whores vandalising every article with there BS." and "Never ceases to amaze me how moronic most Indians are". That, flat out is behavior that is unacceptable here. I honestly would consider a shorter block for you from indefinite because of your content you contribute, but those summaries really do bother me. RickinBaltimore (talk) 15:21, 21 September 2017 (UTC)


 * Thank you for comment. Firstly, yes those summaries are harsh and I fully admit to it and I admit I should be temporarily banned for them. But the background from which I wrote that is not out of the blue. This image that some are trying to portray is that I am a trouble maker couldn't be farther from the truth. I get frustrated at times and just lash out and for that I understand a temporary ban. But a flat out indefinite ban? Really? I can name several established Wiki users who have said far worse things than me. Anyhow, you quoted the "Bhuttos and Nawaz" summary I made to Pakistan Boxing Federation. Just want to clear this up...these are the names of two leading political families in Pakistan led formally by Benazir Bhutto (PPP) and Nawaz Sharif, not Wiki members. Both these corrupt political parties just recently discovered the internet and have been running amok on Wiki using there social media cells to promote there own political agenda. For example, see Calibri where the social media cell of one of these political families began tinkering with the article, during which a legal proceeding was occurring (full discourse is present on the talk page of Calibri here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Calibri). Wiki actually had to lock the article, since it made world media headlines. The second summary you quoted was "Never ceases to amaze me how moronic most Indians are" which I think was from Point 5353 or Gilgit Airport. Point 5353 is a mountain peak in Kashmir...it was captured by Pakistan in 1999 and remains in our control...in fact, I even made it a point to use only Indian sources to further hammer home the point. What happened? Of course, my edits were vandalized and without any sources or evidence, the location of Point 5353 was changed from Pakistan to India. This isn't the first time things like this have happened...it's a chronic problem and is being done using IP hoppers. The same happened with Gilgit Airport...this airport is clearly in Pakistan, unless I missed a major event. It was also vandalized and changed from Pakistan to India. How would you like it if the Grand Canyon for example was edited and said it was in Mexico or if Baltimore Airport was in Canada? It's just ridiculous edits...and overtime eventually you get pissed off. I'm only human, and there's a limit to how much nonsense one can take. --PAKHIGHWAY (talk) 15:38, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
 * It is good to see that you take responsibility for your actions, and understand the problem. Everyone acknowledges your content contributions, and it is what makes you stand out as an editor. However, the name-calling and personal comments have to stop, period, sans-justification, even if hell freezes over. If you won't learn now, it will only cause you more future trouble. I hope you will take something out of this. As far as WP:VANDALISM goes, you should not lose your sleep or composure over it, what was WP:TWINKLE invented for? Being a Pakistan editor, you obviously know what you signed up for as this is a contentious topic area. Take a hike :p  Mar4d  ( talk ) 17:30, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
 * I wasn't aware of this gadget Twinkle. Thanks for bringing it to my attention. And thanks for your comments. --PAKHIGHWAY (talk) 19:37, 21 September 2017 (UTC)


 * I think RickinBaltimore, being an admin, already knows an indefinite block is neither long nor short. PAKHIGHWAY, you can look it up here. Discussion where you undertake to stop the disruption is now supposed to follow, but don't bother to address me, because I won't be back; I've had enough of the way you speak to me. Try the reviewing admin, when one comes by, or Rick. Bishonen &#124; talk 17:40, 21 September 2017 (UTC).
 * To add to this, I honestly think your editing in your areas of interest is of a great benefit to the project as a whole. I know who the Bhutto's and who Nawaz are, however the "whores vandalizing every article" line you used in that edit summary is very poor. There wasn't a reason to use that language. If you're frustrated to the point you have to resort to that type of name calling and slurs, walk away. Don't resort to that level of attack, because as you can see it leads to this type of result. Trust me, I get it. Vandal edits are a pain, and I deal with some people that try to deliberately get under my skin. I I'm willing to convert the block from indefinite back to the original length, but you have got to assure me, and the community, you'll put a stop to this behavior. RickinBaltimore (talk) 18:59, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
 * I don't intend on using that language again or resorting to name calling. I've pretty much learned my lesson over the past two days. And I assume if I get unblocked, this is my last chance. So I intend on making sure I don't get banned again and so I assure you, you won't be hearing any complaints about me from now on. --PAKHIGHWAY (talk) 19:35, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
 * I am willing to stick my neck out and take you at your word on this. (and sorry to bring you back to this),  would you be willing to accept this to lower the block and allow a return to editing? RickinBaltimore (talk) 19:37, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
 * To be clear, are you undertaking not to call out editors by nationality any more? --John (talk) 19:42, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
 * I will not call out editors based on nationality from now on. --PAKHIGHWAY (talk) 19:47, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Hello. Just wondering, what final verdict has been reached for my case. Regards. --PAKHIGHWAY (talk) 21:35, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

Not so fast, gentlemen.

PakHighway, in accordance with your undertaking, you need to either withdraw or considerably revise this Request for move and other similar Requests you have placed on various pages. I gave you an ARBIPA reminder on that day, together with a pointer to an ARBIPA edit restriction that you are required to follow. But you have completely ignored the warning. You could have been indef'ed for that a month ago. Now that you claim to have learned from all this, are you willing to withdraw these nationalistic requests for move? -- Kautilya3 (talk) 20:03, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Sorry, but that request to move is not an invalid claim of mine. Those articles should follow the same concept as South Asian Stone Age and be re-directed to South Asian Iron Age and South Asian Bronze Age for the sake of neutrality. I'll happily reword it to make it sound less antagonizing, but the request to move will stay put until a consensus is reached. --PAKHIGHWAY (talk) 21:39, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
 * How exactly would you reword it? Can show us a sample wording you might use? (By the way, there is nothing called a "valid" or "invalid" request for move. It all depends on whether you can produce policy-based reasons that convince other editors.) -- Kautilya3 (talk) 15:04, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
 * A normal person who reads that article will wrongfully assume that the Indus Valley Civilization and its precursors (Mehrgarh and Nowshera) were in what is today the REPUBLIC of India. The historic India (Indus Valley) and the modern-day Republic of India are not the same. A clear distinction needs to be made here. I would compare it to the Macedonia naming dispute. So my re-worded request to move would sound like '"Iron Age in India → Iron Age in South Asia. South Asia today refers to the regions of India, Pakistan, Bangladesh while India today refers to the Republic of India. We're talking about the entire Iron Age of South Asia, not India. Hence forth for the sake of neutrality, this should be changed to South Asian Iron Age, just like South Asian Stone Age. Several authors have already used the terms "South Asian Iron Age" or "Iron Age of South Asia" such as Bronze and Iron Ages in South Asia, The Early Iron Age of South Asia, The age of iron in South Asia: legacy and tradition, Iron Age Material Culture in South Asia – Analysis and Context of Recently Discovered Slag Sites in Northwest Kashmir (Baramulla District) in India'' --PAKHIGHWAY (talk) 01:15, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Ok, that is much better. I am satisfied., over to you.
 * (By the way, I used to tease my Greek friends saying Alexander wasn't a Greek; he was a Macedonian. That used to rile them up. Your editing here has much the same effect.) -- Kautilya3 (talk) 23:29, 23 September 2017 (UTC)


 * Based on what I've seen, made the right move by making the block indefinite. In addition to the repeated personal attacks, PAKHIGHWAY also seems to have a big problem of making pov-agenda edits. If one looks at PAKHIGHWAY's edits, they can see a WP:BATTLEGROUND mentality -- divisive edits that do anything and everything to separate articles pertaining to Pakistan from India. One example is this one, where PAKHIGHWAY removed any mention of Pakistan from an article about Hindi and Urdu wedding songs, a pluricentric language that is spoken in both India and Pakistan; he then created the WP:CFORK, Pakistani wedding songs, to remove any mention of India. In the article Desi, PAKHIGHWAY removed any mention of Pakistan with an edit summary of "Pakistanis are not desis. They don't even share the same genetics", then attempting to excuse his POV pushing against reliable sources with pseudoscientific OR genetic maps and racist comments on the talk page (despite the fact that there is an obvious overlap in India and Pakistani ethnic groups after the united country was partitioned less than 70 years ago). See also this comment: e.g. "It's somewhat ironic how Indians love creating trouble on Wikipedia by purposely skewing information and deleting information from articles to paint a false image of the very country they seem to want to get as far as possible away from. Odd...yet comical." In an article about Indian South Africans, PAKHIGHWAY removes the internal link about Pakistanis in South Africa, despite the fact that they both hail from the same region, the Indian subcontinent/South Asia. Based on what I've seen, PAKHIGHWAY is not here to build an encyclopedia -- he is here to push Pakistiani nationalism. It seems best that PAKHIGHWAY be given an indefinite topic ban on India-Pakistan related articles. Otherwise, a total indefinite site-ban would be appropriate. --1990&#39;sguy (talk) 02:58, 22 September 2017 (UTC)


 * A completely false picture you're trying to paint here...you also don't seem very knowledgeable about the country or the region. Before reading my response to you, please read the Languages of Pakistan and Demographics of Pakistan. After reading both articles, it should be clear to you that Pakistan is defined as a political union...this is a union of several ethnic groups that live together and speak many languages. Hence forth, Pakistani wedding songs should reflect weddings songs that are sung by the various ethnic groups in the various languages. The ethnic groups that make up Pakistan are not the same as in India, with the exception of Punjabis. However, they make up less than 2% of India's population, and around 48% of Pakistan's population. Also, Indian Muslim migrants to Pakistan make up around 5% of Pakistan's population. The other ethnic groups of Pakistan such as Sindhis, Baloch, Pashton, Seraikis, Hindkowans, Gilgitis etc. are not found in India, just as how Bengalis, Tamils, Goans, Kannadigas, Gujaratis are not found in Pakistan. Furthermore, Urdu is not spoken by 100% of the population in Pakistan. In fact, it is barely spoken by 10% of the population as a first language, even though it is the lingua franca. This would be like re-directing South Korean wedding songs to Japanese language wedding songs. I don't see how the two are related. The same goes with Pakistani wedding songs and Hindi and Urdu wedding songs...they are not explaining the same thing. So it makes zero sense to link the two together. If you look at my edits on Pakistani wedding songs, you'll notice that most of the songs are not even Urdu. So I fail to understand your first complaint. Moving on to your second complaint about he term "desi". The term "desi" is controversial to say the least and its even been mentioned on the article...secondly, the word "desi" is barely used in our lexicon and is mostly restricted to northeastern Punjabis to describe something "local". Desi is indeed used by expatriate South Asians living in the United States, which is something I agreed with and is a reality. In Pakistan however, the word is about as foreign to us as favela. Also you wrote '"despite the fact that there is an obvious overlap in India and Pakistani ethnic groups after the united country was partitioned less than 70 years ago".'. According to demographics of Pakistan, this is a wrong. Furthermore, may I ask which "country" you are talking about? European occupation and colonization is not a "country" to me...neither my parents, grandparents and great-grandparents. That is highly insulting and offensive. The British Raj was no country of ours, it was an occupation that was established in 1842 with the fall of Sindh in the Battle of Miani and ended in 1947 with the Independence of Pakistan. This is a highly offensive statement you have written. This would be akin to saying that Italy and Britain share the same ethnic groups, because the Roman Empire ruled over both territories. That doesn't make much sense. Moving on to your third complaint, yes I removed Pakistanis in South Africa from Indian South Africans, because (once again) they are not the same. The ethnic groups that make up the Indian South African community are no the same as the Pakistanis in South Africa. With all due respect, you need to differentiate nationality, from ethnicity and language because you seem to be under the impression that Pakistanis and Indians are the "same". They are not...if they are, then Koreans and Japanese are the same as well. Do Pakistanis and Indians share similarities...sure, just like Koreans and Japanese share similarities. But that doesn't mean they're the same. Hope my response as been eye-opening. --PAKHIGHWAY (talk) 03:36, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
 * I do not support a topic ban at this stage as it appears too punitive. Let's not escalate what appears to be a behavioural block into something else, and create further undesirable drama. However, PAKHIGHWAY, I think it would be wise if you for the time being focus only on Pakistan articles and perhaps self-restrain yourself from articles that have to do with Pakistan-India ethnic issues etc. (particularly anything contentious). I think that would be the best way to go forward. Focus on the good content creation.  Mar4d  ( talk ) 06:36, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your input. I already indeed began self-restraining myself from articles that have to do with Pakistan-India ethnic issues. I stopped editing History of Pakistan for that reason and said to myself I would begin editing again in a few months time. Also, the Desi article someone mentioned here has not been touched by me in months. I have already accepted the edits made to the new article as it clearly mentions this term is stereotypical and doesn't reflect ground realities. However, the Pakistani Wedding Songs complaint I did not understand at all. My main focus will be on Pakistan Railways and transport and maybe I'll come back to History of Pakistan towards my New Years break. But I'm going to avoid Pakistan-India articles for the conceivable future. --PAKHIGHWAY (talk) 13:38, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

PSL
Hi! Messaging you after you recent edits on Pakistan Super League.

The edits you made are mostly unsourced, as there is no official statement for the amounts in PKR. All the amounts that were revealed or shared were in US$. I don't know what is the current rate of PKR-US$ and US$-PKR, and what was back in December 2015. So do many people too.

Also, Multan Sultans was bought on per year agreement as per official statement. But some news sources, I don't know why, say it as eight-year contract. This is the first time I saw you edited it as ten-year agreement.

Also, the intro? May be you were right that it had needed some better typo, but now it appears to be in no-continuity. You have added mixed-up info in just a single paragraph.

May be revert it good faith, Thanks! M. Billoo 12:45, 25 September 2017 (UTC)


 * I just wrote as per my knowledge...unsourced...so if it needs to be reverted, no problem. --PAKHIGHWAY (talk) 15:16, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 2
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that 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.


 * Garden Town (Pakistan) ([//toolserver.org/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Garden_Town_%28Pakistan%29 check to confirm] | [//toolserver.org/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Garden_Town_%28Pakistan%29?client=notify fix with Dab solver])
 * added a link pointing to Union Council


 * Gulshan-e-Ravi ([//toolserver.org/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Gulshan-e-Ravi check to confirm] | [//toolserver.org/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Gulshan-e-Ravi?client=notify fix with Dab solver])
 * added a link pointing to Union Council

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:43, 2 October 2017 (UTC)

October 2017
Please do not move a page to a title that is harder to follow, or move it unilaterally against naming conventions or consensus, as you did to Defence Housing Authority, Lahore. This includes making page moves while a discussion remains under way. We have some guidelines to help with deciding what title is best for a subject. If you would like to experiment with page titles and moving, please use the testWikipedia. ''Apologies for template. But without any doubt, you are familiar with enwiki policies in general, and also about page moving. It was you, who had initiated the move discussion/request on article's talkpage. And yet you moved the page while discussion wasn't closed, and there was one vote opposing move; with no supporting votes.'' — usernamekiran (talk)  22:35, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 9
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that 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.


 * List of radio channels in Pakistan ([//toolserver.org/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/List_of_radio_channels_in_Pakistan check to confirm] | [//toolserver.org/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/List_of_radio_channels_in_Pakistan?client=notify fix with Dab solver])
 * added links pointing to Shina, Balti and Wakhi


 * Pakistani name ([//toolserver.org/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Pakistani_name check to confirm] | [//toolserver.org/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Pakistani_name?client=notify fix with Dab solver])
 * added links pointing to Gulshan and Gulnaz


 * Township, Lahore ([//toolserver.org/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Township%2C_Lahore check to confirm] | [//toolserver.org/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Township%2C_Lahore?client=notify fix with Dab solver])
 * added links pointing to Ayub Khan and Iqbal Town


 * Abdalian Cooperative Housing Society ([//toolserver.org/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Abdalian_Cooperative_Housing_Society check to confirm] | [//toolserver.org/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Abdalian_Cooperative_Housing_Society?client=notify fix with Dab solver])
 * added a link pointing to Iqbal Town


 * Awan Town ([//toolserver.org/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Awan_Town check to confirm] | [//toolserver.org/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Awan_Town?client=notify fix with Dab solver])
 * added a link pointing to Iqbal Town


 * Education Town ([//toolserver.org/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Education_Town check to confirm] | [//toolserver.org/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Education_Town?client=notify fix with Dab solver])
 * added a link pointing to Iqbal Town


 * Hassan Town ([//toolserver.org/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Hassan_Town check to confirm] | [//toolserver.org/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Hassan_Town?client=notify fix with Dab solver])
 * added a link pointing to Iqbal Town


 * Jati Umra (Lahore) ([//toolserver.org/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Jati_Umra_%28Lahore%29 check to confirm] | [//toolserver.org/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Jati_Umra_%28Lahore%29?client=notify fix with Dab solver])
 * added a link pointing to Iqbal Town


 * Johar Town ([//toolserver.org/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Johar_Town check to confirm] | [//toolserver.org/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Johar_Town?client=notify fix with Dab solver])
 * added a link pointing to Iqbal Town


 * Mansoorah, Lahore ([//toolserver.org/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Mansoorah%2C_Lahore check to confirm] | [//toolserver.org/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Mansoorah%2C_Lahore?client=notify fix with Dab solver])
 * added a link pointing to Iqbal Town


 * Sabzazar ([//toolserver.org/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Sabzazar check to confirm] | [//toolserver.org/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Sabzazar?client=notify fix with Dab solver])
 * added a link pointing to Iqbal Town


 * Sukh Chayn Gardens ([//toolserver.org/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Sukh_Chayn_Gardens check to confirm] | [//toolserver.org/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Sukh_Chayn_Gardens?client=notify fix with Dab solver])
 * added a link pointing to Iqbal Town


 * WAPDA Town ([//toolserver.org/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/WAPDA_Town check to confirm] | [//toolserver.org/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/WAPDA_Town?client=notify fix with Dab solver])
 * added a link pointing to Iqbal Town

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:07, 9 October 2017 (UTC)

Pak Business Express
Hi ! I really impress from your work. I want to bring your attention towards article Pak Business Express. This article contain wrong information. Pak Business Express train is still running under Pakistan Railways control and management. PR just ended joint venture with private company. Please check my cites which i recently added to this article. You can also check Pakistan Railways web site for its current timmings. Please correct it. In past i corrected it but someone undid. To avoid undid again i am requesting you that please correct this article. Thanks (Adnanrail (talk) 11:31, 4 November 2017 (UTC))


 * That's fine. I was under the impression that the train had been halted. --PAKHIGHWAY (talk) 14:05, 4 November 2017 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of List of bus routes in Multan


The article List of bus routes in Multan has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "Wikipedia is not a travel guide"

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages 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 page 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. Ajf773 (talk) 04:16, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Volvo Pakistan Limited Logo.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Volvo Pakistan Limited Logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:48, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Atlas Honda logo.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Atlas Honda logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:07, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

January 2018
Hello, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. I noticed that you recently added commentary to an article, Point 5353. While Wikipedia welcomes editors' opinions on an article and how it could be changed, these comments are more appropriate for the article's accompanying talk page. If you post your comments there, other editors working on the same article will notice and respond to them, and your comments will not disrupt the flow of the article. However, keep in mind that even on the talk page of an article, you should limit your discussion to improving the article. Article talk pages are not the place to discuss opinions of the subject of articles, nor are such pages a forum. ''Please raise points of disagreement or discussion on the talk pages, not in citation needed tags. A Wikipedia article should not address anybody.'' Kautilya3 (talk) 21:01, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be repeatedly reverting or undoing other editors' contributions at Point 5353. Although this may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Wikipedia this is known as "edit warring" and is usually seen as obstructing the normal editing process, as it often creates animosity between editors. Instead of reverting, please discuss the situation with the editor(s) involved and try to reach a consensus on the talk page.

If editors continue to revert to their preferred version they are likely to be blocked from editing Wikipedia. This isn't done to punish an editor, but to prevent the disruption caused by edit warring. In particular, editors should be aware of the three-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, and violating the three-revert rule is very likely to lead to a block.

''Also, are you aware that there are additional restrictions in place on any article related to the Kashmir conflict? &mdash;  MBL  Talk 05:12, 20 January 2018 (UTC)''

It appears that you have been canvassing—leaving messages on a biased choice of users' talk pages to notify them of an ongoing community decision, debate, or vote—in order to influence Talk:Point 5353. While friendly notices are allowed, they should be limited and nonpartisan in distribution and should reflect a neutral point of view. Please do not post notices which are indiscriminately cross-posted, which espouse a certain point of view or side of a debate, or which are selectively sent only to those who are believed to hold the same opinion as you. Remember to respect Wikipedia's principle of consensus-building by allowing decisions to reflect the prevailing opinion among the community at large. Thank you. Do it again and I'll get you blocked. &mdash;  MBL  Talk 08:32, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

Pakistan Army article 1965 section contains Indian claims however the Indian army page contains only Indian claims
Hi user Pakhighway I have noticed the 1965 subsection of the Pakistan army page has Indian claims of 471 tanks while the Indian army page has ZERO pakistani claims of 500 tanks nor does it contain neutral sources which state Pakistan lost 200 or 300 tanks. Please I would like someone to tell this to user Adamberger80 who seems to think the Indian Army page should only contain Indian sources but the Pakistani army page should cater for Indian claims also this double standard should not be allowed. Hranday8 (talk) 09:53, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

Special:Diff/822108342 – you're still edit-warring
PAKHIGHWAY, you haven't got consensus to add that quote and you've been warned already. Please stop and engage in discussion at talk or you are likely to get blocked again. &mdash;  MBL  Talk 14:06, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

Hookah
I saw on the Hookah page someone started adding in biased information to distort the article, which you changed back to the more neutral version. Mystrobiller (talk) 22:19, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

More nationalist POV
You have in the last few hours created a bunch of nationalist redirects, eg:
 * Punjabi wedding songs and Kashmiri wedding songs redirected to Pakistani wedding songs
 * Kashmiri wedding and Punjabi wedding redirected to Marriage in Pakistan

You know that the Kashmir and Punjab regions fall under both Pakistan and Indian administrations, cultures etc. Add to this your recent comments at Talk:Bhat and I think we've reached the end of the road as far as your contribution to anything related to Pakistan and Indian ethnic matters, and probably a broader scope still. It seems as if you just can't stop needling when it comes to these topics and it is disruptive. If you go back to contributing to roads in Pakistan etc, avoiding all mention of India and all regions that are disputed etc, then you're probably a positive to the Wikipedia project but these divergences, which you have been warned about in the past, are plain old nationalist POV and not helpful.

You have had a fair few admins involved on this page so I will leave it 24 hours to see if any of them want to comment and/or act. If nothing happens, I am going to take it to WP:ANI, sorry. - Sitush (talk) 17:43, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

ANI
There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. - Sitush (talk) 15:43, 26 January 2018 (UTC)


 * This is bordering harassment. I will be making a complaint against you. This has gone far enough. --PAKHIGHWAY (talk) 16:05, 26 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Now would be a good time for you to complain, in the ANI thread. However, I have had little to do with you in months and only got involved after you started editing an article that has long been on my watchlist. You may want to read WP:BOOMERANG first. - Sitush (talk) 16:34, 26 January 2018 (UTC)

January 2018
To enforce an arbitration decision you have been blocked from editing for a period of 31 hours. You are welcome to edit once the block expires; however, please note that the repetition of similar behavior may result in a longer block or other sanctions. If you believe this block is unjustified, please read the guide to appealing blocks (specifically this section) before appealing. Place the following on your talk page:. If you intend to appeal on the arbitration enforcement noticeboard I suggest you use the arbitration enforcement appeals template on your talk page so it can be copied over easily. You may also appeal directly to me (by email), before or instead of appealing on your talk page. Guy (Help!) 00:39, 29 January 2018 (UTC)  Reminder to administrators: In May 2014, ArbCom adopted the following procedure instructing administrators regarding Arbitration Enforcement blocks: "No administrator may modify a sanction placed by another administrator without: (1) the explicit prior affirmative consent of the enforcing administrator; or (2) prior affirmative agreement for the modification at (a) AE or (b) AN or (c) ARCA (see "Important notes" [in the procedure]). Administrators modifying sanctions out of process may at the discretion of the committee be desysopped."