User talk:Sarmad Sardar Bhutta

Welcome!
Hello, Sarmad Sardar Bhutta, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of your recent edits did not conform to Wikipedia's verifiability policy, and may have been removed. Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations verified in reliable, reputable print or online sources or in other reliable media. Always provide a reliable source for quotations and for any material that is likely to be challenged, or it may be removed. Wikipedia also has a related policy against including original research in articles.

If you are stuck and looking for help, please see the guide for citing sources or come to  The Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Here are a few other good links for newcomers:
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Introduction tutorial
 * Contributing to Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Introduction to referencing
 * Help pages
 * Simplified Manual of Style
 * Task Center – need some ideas of what kind of things need doing? Go here.

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 need personal help ask me on my talk page, or. Again, welcome. – Uanfala (talk) 13:05, 4 December 2022 (UTC)

December 2022
Hello, I'm Uanfala. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. – Uanfala (talk) 22:05, 8 December 2022 (UTC)


 * @Uanfala
 * where to provide reliable source.
 * how to provide it.
 * I mean where I write that information then. Sarmad Sardar Bhutta (talk) 22:27, 8 December 2022 (UTC)
 * I recommend taking a short break from direct editing and spending a day or two to acquaint yourself with the fundamental principles of Wikipedia. The Wikpedia policies about sourcing are at WP:Verifiability and WP:Reliable sources. A beginner's technical guide for inserting and formatting sources is at Help:Referencing for beginners. When you eventually do start editing again, you'll notice that the text you would like to edit will usually already cite its sources. You'd need to read those and take them into account when making any changes to that text. Another very important Wikipedia policy is WP:NPOV. With regard to the Saraiki question in particular, this means that we don't write articles from the point of view of one or another ethnic group. Many Punjabis view Saraiki as a dialect that's rebelled and that needs to be brought back in to the fold. Likewise, many Saraikis believe that their language is very old or very great. Wikipedia may report those views, but it doesn't follow them itself. Instead, it goes with the most reliable, academic, neutral sources available. If you're interested in this topic, there are excellent works written by Christopher Shackle and by Tariq Rahman. – Uanfala (talk) 22:41, 8 December 2022 (UTC)
 * @Uanfala yeah for that purpose I have material but the existing articles about that topic I found here are very biased.
 * The basic thing I am trying to find is how to mention it or show it to Wikipedia. Sarmad Sardar Bhutta (talk) 22:49, 8 December 2022 (UTC)
 * So you perceive a bias on Wikipedia, and the way you decide to solve it is by going around a bunch of articles that have passing mentions of Hindko and making sure those passing mentions were accompanied by the declaration that Hindko is in fact a dialect of Punjabi? To most observers it will not appear like you're improving the neutrality of the encyclopedia, quite on the contrary. Wikipedia ideally tries to present its topics in accordance with the best available sources out there, not cater to the points of view of one or another group of editors. I appreciate it that you've made some progress since last time (you're beginning to make some use of sources, and that's great). However, if your main goal is to keep proclaiming that such and such varieties are dialects of this or of that language, then you're probably going to continue seeing your edits getting reverted. Working towards that sort of goal would be acceptable on many other media, but not on Wikipedia. – Uanfala (talk) 22:59, 11 December 2022 (UTC)
 * @Uanfala
 * But I have mentioned you the official page of the government of that Province in which it was clearly written that HINDKO and Saraiki both are PANJABI dialects.
 * I think you don't have read my mentioned articles properly.
 * Already written articles are quoting some one's personal views from his book like Christopher Shackel.
 * And on other side there is an official document of Provincial government but you decided to go with the views of writer who actually don't belong to this region and belong UK and don't even know the language of this region properly.
 * I don't know but if some one can write anything there by quoting him.
 * And I can't do that even If I am showing official governmental documents.
 * What I say? Sarmad Sardar Bhutta (talk) 23:19, 11 December 2022 (UTC)
 * @Uanfala
 * https://kp.gov.pk/page/languages
 * This link will take you directly to that page of the government website to whom you can read by giving some of your time if you have not read previously. Sarmad Sardar Bhutta (talk) 23:24, 11 December 2022 (UTC)
 * I don't think the government of Pakistan has taken any official actions on this language vs. dialect question (the fact that they count the two as separate languages in the censuses seems to point in some direction, though that's not the one you'd agree with). The document you're referring to is this: a brief information page on the website of the provincial government. There's nothing "official" about its content. Regardless, Wikipedia's coverage of language should be primarily based on academic linguistic works, not the publications of governments.  But you don't have to agree with me: if you'd like to, you can always get feedback  from other editors on the acceptability of specific sources: the place for that is WP:RSN. – Uanfala (talk) 23:34, 11 December 2022 (UTC)
 * @Uanfala
 * You said that Wikipedia's coverage of language should be primarily based in academic linguistic works.
 * So are Research Papers on language are acceptable in this regard? Sarmad Sardar Bhutta (talk) 23:46, 11 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Yes! Ideally, you'd be looking at a number of research papers and then weighting them based on their reliability. I suspect you probably have in mind Maldonado Garcia's paper on Saraiki? At first sight, it looks like exactly what we need: an apparently in-depth study trying to decide if Saraiki is a language or a dialect. However, a closer look reveals that this paper is of a low standard, and the conceptions of language and dialect there significantly diverge from the those of the linguistics literature. Again, you don't have to take my word for it: you can ask for experts' opinion at WT:LANG. So, no: I don't think the paper is acceptable. – Uanfala (talk) 02:02, 12 December 2022 (UTC)
 * @Uanfala
 * Well you deny what a provincial government is saying.
 * You are not accepting any research paper too.
 * Many people quote your Wikipedia to say that although we completely understand each other but look on Wikipedia it is written that Saraiki is language.
 * My Family shifted from Multan to RAWALPINDI.
 * And my ancestors told me that they used to speak PANJABI.
 * Even Non Muslims migrated from Multan to India still say that they were from Multan and were Punjabies and speak Multani Punjabi.
 * I don't know where are you from but it is your duty to make it right because people quote you usually to say look here it is written like that. Sarmad Sardar Bhutta (talk) 22:18, 13 December 2022 (UTC)
 * If we changed the article to say that it's a dialect, then most of the Saraikis will be complaining about it. For such a topic where groups of people have mutually incompatible views, I don't think there's a way to please everyone with the way Wikipedia covers that topic. But it's also not Wikipedia's purpose to satisfy everyone's pre-existing opinions, its purpose is to reflect the best available literature on the topic. – Uanfala (talk) 13:00, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
 * @Uanfala
 * Best available literature OK
 * Go on Governmental website of KPK Province it's telling that Saraiki, Hindko are PANJABI dialects.
 * Go on Governmental website of Punjab Province of Pakistan and check language people speak in that Province it will tell you only PANJABI.
 * You can go and check your self.
 * Pakistan is Federation where it's Provinces have their own Assemblies or Parliment and run themself independent from Center.
 * I know you say what Central Government is saying.
 * For god sake Central government control only few sq km of Capital ISLAMABAD.
 * Rest of the country is run by Provinces.
 * If in Hindko article it's written that it is one of LHANDA dialects then on Brittanica it's clearly written that Lahnda is same name of WESTERN PANJABI.
 * And I changed Lahnda word into Western PANJABI but you removed it.
 * People speaking same language calling the same language with different names.
 * Thanks to Wikipedia which present best available literature but can't see what official Provincial governments data is saying about this matter. Sarmad Sardar Bhutta (talk) 10:06, 21 December 2022 (UTC)