User talk:SaadUmer74

Welcome!
Hello, SaadUmer74, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, your edit to General Dynamics F-16 Fighting Falcon does not conform to Wikipedia's Neutral Point of View policy (NPOV). Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations that have been stated in print or on reputable websites or other forms of media.

There's a page about the NPOV policy that has tips on how to effectively write about disparate points of view without compromising the NPOV status of the article as a whole. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the Questions page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, to ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Below are a few other good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! --Goldsztajn (talk) 12:32, 11 June 2019 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Contributing to Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Simplified Manual of Style

Edits at General Dynamics F-16 Fighting Falcon
Please refrain from reverting to the text you introduced at the F-16 article. Some comments: 1. You removed sourced text about a PAF F-16 being lost in friendly fire in 1987 - but provided no alternative reference indicating this information was incorrect or an explanation why the information should be removed. 2. The text added about the incidents in February 2019: a) Using the phrases "covered up there loss" (spelling should be "their") or "hide their loss" is not a neutral point of view. b) Using a phrase "fake radar images" requires references from reliable sources, neither reference you attached to that sentence provides any information or evidence that the images were fake. The overall effect of your contribution was heavily slanted towards an official Pakistani version, this is why the text has been reverted.

Your intention to add information to the article about the February 2019 incident is good and I completely agree that the article should include information about the role of PAF F-16s in that incident. The problem is that the way you have included information does not conform to Wikipedia policy. If you need further help - put a request on the talk page of the article and editors can help you there. --Goldsztajn (talk) 11:10, 13 June 2019 (UTC)

Reply: Edits at General Dynamics F-16 Fighting Falcon
Reply: Thank you Sir for considering my views about the airstrike in February 2019. Sir i want to state here that i have a lot of references, proofs, and judgments about my version. What I am saying is that their are two many pages on wikipedia that are on the behalf of indians. The indians say that F-16 was shot down they don't have proofs but there editing are committed. I have reliable sources if you want any proof i am here to give you all the proofs. The next thing is about the Neutral Point of View Ok I agree with that i would be highly satisfied if you give me chance to edit again i will change some of my Statements but the role of this aircraft in air to air combat is very essential to understand, people take wikipedia as a reliable source & I also have a reliable Source. Thank you Looking Forward. Please check this What Indians are Writing Sir: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abhinandan_Varthaman