User talk:Tariq hilal

January 2011
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to the encyclopedia, one or more of the external links you added do not comply with our guidelines for external links and have been removed. Wikipedia is not a collection of links; nor should it be used as a platform for advertising or promotion, and doing so is contrary to the goals of this project. Because Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, external links do not alter search engine rankings. If you feel the link should be added to the article, please discuss it on the article's talk page before reinserting it. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. MrOllie (talk) 19:09, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not a collection of links, nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Inappropriate links include (but are not limited to) links to personal web sites, links to web sites with which you are affiliated, and links that attract visitors to a web site or promote a product. See the external links guideline and spam guideline for further explanations. Because Wikipedia uses the nofollow attribute value, its external links are disregarded by most search engines. If you feel the link should be added to the article, please discuss it on the article's talk page rather than re-adding it. Thank you. MrOllie (talk) 19:24, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

Advice
Please look at WP:SPAM about advertising, WP:GNG about notability, WP:RS about reliable references (and WP:COI about conflict of interest. I'm not deleting it, just saying I don't think it fits the rules here. An admin will decide. If you want to comment, please use the hangon tag as you will find on the big pink tag. Thanks. Peridon (talk) 19:48, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Sorry, the tag stays. Peridon (talk) 20:08, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Your recent edits
Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126; ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 20:27, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute to the encyclopedia, but when you add or change content, as you did to the article Pakistan, please cite a reliable source for the content of your edit. This helps maintain our policy of verifiability. See Citing sources for how to cite sources, and the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. OhNo itsJamie Talk 20:06, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

March 2011
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by adding commentary and your personal analysis into articles, as you did at Pakistan, you may be blocked from editing. Please don't remove content sourced to something like the Economist just because it doesn't fit your POV. -- Eraserhead1 &lt;talk&gt; 00:15, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

Reply
Begin in the name of Allah the beneficent the merciful. May Allah's blessings be on you, your family and all of us.

Pls avoid harsh tones while communicating with others. Using unnecessary threats even on User page is also against the policies of Wikipedia. You could have said the same thing in a polite manner.

Any how, reason for your not understanding why Economist related content was removed:

1. Due to fake media-propaganda mainly by International media, specifically US, UK, India & certain European countries even you are digesting the wrong image of a country having population of 200 million normal-family-oriented-humans. Your tone clearly says that. If you were a Pakistani you might have still objected it but wouldn't have used such harsh and threatening tone. Question your own-self: "What does Eraserhead1 known about Pakistan except that it is a country fill with terrorists?" This way you will understand better that what am i trying to say.

2. It is pretty old (2008) and still influencing general readers helping them to make a wrong POV of MY, by the grace of AlMighty Allah, beloved country.

3. The image of a grenade used in the article starts developing a "dangerous" POV even before reading the article of MY, by the grace of AlMighty Allah, beloved country. See it for yourself.

4. The heading "Pakistan The world's most dangerous place" used in the article again starts developing a "dangerous" POV even before reading the article of MY, by the grace of AlMighty Allah, beloved country. This heading is wrong. Will repeat again that by blessings of Allah 200 million normal-family-oriented-humans live in Pakistan. Believe me that they are leading much better and comfortable life in comparison to almost any country of the world. In fact, number of British people have left UK for good to settle in Pakistan. Contacts of certain people can be provided to you if you say so for your direct verification.

5. Your action leads to a question: "Does Economist says anything positive or constructive about Pakistan?" Answer: "NO". Try search box on economist by your ownself if you do not agree. Isn't this itself a good enough proof that nothing Economist is trying to create a POV only. Is it simply possible. Please learn about good things on Pakistan including its people.

Your response awaited. Till mean while will not undo your changes.

Suggestion: If you do not agree, undo your action, as your action is creating a wrong image of Pakistan and discuss it on discussion page of Pakistan.

Thank you for your input and giving your time to Pakistan.

P.S. FYI, launching complain of your tone and threat.
 * I have replied in detail at Help desk. -- Eraserhead1 &lt;talk&gt; 20:54, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
 * You were directed here mistakenly. Still learning Wikipedia. Reply is at Help desk where you replied. Apologies. Tariq hilal (talk) 06:52, 15 March 2011 (UTC)Tariq hilal

This is your last warning; the next time you violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by inserting commentary or your personal analysis into an article, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. OhNo itsJamie Talk 23:48, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Jamie will you be kind enough to be more precise with the reason why you have issued this warning? Tariq hilal (talk) 07:02, 15 March 2011 (UTC)Tariq hilal

Proposed deletion of Dreamworld Resort


The article Dreamworld Resort has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * WP:ADVERT. Unremarkable company or organisation, fails criteria at  WP:ORG -  tagged since February.

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. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 13:49, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Dreamworld Resort


The article Dreamworld Resort has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Advert. Unremarkable company or organisation, fails to provide sources for WP:ORG

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. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 13:52, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of Dreamworld Resort for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Dreamworld Resort 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/Dreamworld Resort 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. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 15:58, 7 June 2011 (UTC)