This is an archive of past discussions with User:Faizanalivarya. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
I highly appreciated your concern for deleting pictures, I am agreed with File:Walter Freeman performing a lobotomy.jpg its correct you may request it for deleting, however other file which is logo of an organization the article on Wikipedia is not being uploaded yet I am quite busy in some other Wikipedia projects therefore I request you to keep this File:Youth Club International.jpg file. --Faizanalivarya (talk) 07:22, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
File:Youth Club International.jpg listed for deletion
I highly appreciated your concern for deleting pictures, I am agreed with File:Walter Freeman performing a lobotomy.jpg its correct you may request it for deleting, however other file which is logo of an organization the article on Wikipedia is not being uploaded yet I am quite busy in some other Wikipedia projects therefore I request you to keep this File:Youth Club International.jpg file. --Faizanalivarya (talk) 07:22, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
Improvment
I do not doubt the articles could be improved, but it would be a major help if you could add a comment on the talk pages about what you consider especially outdated, incomplete or in need of changes. Right now I wouldn't even know where to begin to address the issues you saw. "This article could be better" is true for most articles, but it's not really helpful. Huon (talk) 01:42, 1 January 2012 (UTC)
You are right I consider that as well and start following the new way which you told me as my and your goal is same to make Wikipedia wonderful place for everyone however ways are bit different I will certainly try to do what you told me, that's honestly appreciated, thanks a lot for helping brother.--Faizanalivarya (talk) 19:52, 4 January 2012 (UTC)
You really deserve them thanks however I need your personal attention and help for being a admin as well, therefore Its a long journey which I have to complete, Thanks a lot for being with me helping me. --Faizanalivarya (talk) 20:26, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
I'm not sure what your reason was for reverting Abdirahman bin Isma'il al-Jabarti, but the way you did it specified that I had vandalized the article (see [1]). You might not agree with my edit, but note – for future reference – that this does not constitute vandalism. Thanks, -- Gyrofrog (talk)19:12, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Before saving your changes to an article, please provide an edit summary, which you forgot to do before saving your recent edit to Aeroflot. Doing so helps everyone understand the intention of your edit (and prevents legitimate edits from being mistaken for vandalism). It is also helpful to users reading the edit history of the page. Thank you. --Jetstreamer (talk) 00:53, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
Thank you for your interest in helping other users to create accounts. Unfortunately, your application was unsuccessful on this occasion. This is because there is no particular backlog or shortage of users on the ACC team. Also as you mention more than once "I am quite busy in some other Wikipedia projects". Please feel free to ask for a review of this request by replying to this email in a few months. Cheers, Mlpearcpowwow03:20, 7 January 2012 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification
Hi. When you recently edited Mahmood Parekh, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Service (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.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
I just saw you added comments such as this one to multiple articles. I doubt they are useful. Firstly, real vandals will hardly be impressed by a "please don't vandalize this" note. Secondly, you do not own articles you started; you can expect them to be heavily edited by others. Claiming that it's impossible for those articles to violate any policy of Wikipedia does not make them perfect. For example, I believe you're not a native speaker, and your English may profit from proofreading. More significantly, many of those articles are very, very short on reliable secondary sources, and significant coverage in such sources is necessary to establish notability. Huon (talk) 22:05, 7 January 2012 (UTC)
I was busy in reviewing few articles therefore I was not able to reply you rapidly, now let me clear the wrong image which you have in your mind, now first of all, I honestly respect you and your comments so no offense, I honestly respect senior Editors therefore I honestly respect you as well but let me tell you bit about me I am editing Wikipedia since 2006 without any user name or ID now in 2010, I register my ID I never say that I own my article what ever we write here its for people who visit Wikipedia, I honestly love and respect Wikipedia, I hope so do you therefore I want to make Wikipedia the marvelous place for everyone who visit here, If someone appreciate Wikipedia or its article its my and i hope your appreciation as well.
Now, Answer for Vandals, here in Wikipedia we believe in GOOD Faith Policy which means we should have a faith on other that the second person wont think negative about Wikipedia, Whenever I write any article I believe in honest work what every I write should be VALID therefore I belive that other Wikipedia user avoid vandalizing any page on our beloved Wikipedia however anyone can contribute in it and go a head type anything which is important, supportive and fruitful for any article on Wikipedia therefore in my work I strictly take care about PG.
3rd Answer, you asked me why my articles are less well there are only few articles who are written less mostly I don't focus on articles i focus on reviewing like you however my working style is bit different I search for citation and fill it by my self mostly I avoid being angry mastodons with anyone as we believe in WP:NAM with all your due respect but you were bit offensive in your messages as I remove the proposal tag because I was working on other article and searching for new citations for my articles.
Your this sentece hurt me a lot ""For example, I believe you're not a native speaker, and your English may profit from proofreading" I always support and appreciate Proofreading its very good for us and for our beloved Wikipedia however your pitch was not good don't forget our policy of WP:NAM AND for kind your information I am NATIVE ENGLISH SPEAKER, I am speaking English since I was born.
Proposal for deleting any article or declaring it for deleting is your right I do respect it however in bulk reviewing you didn't check it properly in Moni Bhattacharjee article citations are satisfying the secondary sources, look you are agreed on the point that his one movie is very notable, its not only one movie he has more than 6 biggest movies as he is director of nineties therefore its hard to find information on net however I am working on it as soon as I find I will upload it,
Regarding Mahmood Parekh article, I have uploaded the Secondary Sources and tertiary sources as well his interview on TV channels and Newspapers which satisfy Secondary and tertiary sources and he is very known personality in Pakistan and the world he is one of the 20 board of directors of AI must say a legend because he is the only person in Pakistan who started Healthcare Advertisement in Pakistan however as you know Pakistan had poor IT sources at his time when he was struggling, he is Entrepreneur in Pakistan as he is one of the Vice President and Coordinator of International Advertising Association for Pakistan.
I hope that This was very good discussion with you I hope you will reply me in posative manner and reply conclude the article deleting request. --Faizanalivarya (talk) 03:57, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
First of all, I'm sorry about my native language mistake; I went by your own userboxes which classify your level of English as "advanced", not "near-native" or "native" (and per WP:BABEL, "advanced" is supposed to mean "advanced for a non-native speaker, but not as good as a native speaker", which may be counterintuitive). I meant no disrespect. Still we agree that proofreading cannot hurt; typos may always occur. (And of course this is just as true for my own edits as for yours or anybody else's.)
Regarding the specific articles:
Moni Bhattacharjee has no significant coverage in reliable sources at all. The Hindu articles are reliable sources, but they mention him in all of a half-sentence each, and the Cannes websites provide even less information on him. The film Mujhe Jeene Do may be notable, maybe some others are too (though the others he directed do not have articles, and the articles on the films where he served as assistant director do not mention him), but notability is not inherited. Directing notable films does not automatically make the director notable.
Mahmood Parekh similarly has no significant coverage in reliable sources. The only reliable secondary sources are the Dawn article and the Daily Times articles; all three mention Parekh only in passing. All other sources, including the YouTube videos, are primary sources or just directory entries.
Per the general notability guideline: "Significant coverage" means that sources address the subject directly in detail, so no original research is needed to extract the content. Significant coverage is more than a trivial mention but it need not be the main topic of the source material. Please also have a look at the example for a "trivial mention" given there; that's exactly the level of coverage we have for Parekh and Bhattacharjee.
I believe you have presented your opinion on the deletion discussion pages for Bhattacharjee and Parekh; the discussions will remain open for at least a week, and during that time the articles can of course be improved to address the issues I raised. Other community members will probably join the deletion discussions as well, and in the end an admin will judge whether consensus has been established for keeping or deleting the articles (and a lack of consensus defaults to keeping them). Huon (talk) 15:49, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
January 2012
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Guinea-Bissauan passport, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. AKS (talk) 10:28, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
I honestly appreciated your work however all these articles which you mentioned are created by my self to serve our beloved Wikipedia and why would I vandalize article which is created by me? my friend kindly read the Vandalism I am reviewer my self I can not do vandalism I am against vandalism you should assume good faith on your fellow Wikipedian therefore don't be offensive, It must be something wrong and If still you think I did any vandalism my honest apologies I will improve it okay, I hope you appreciated cheers bye. --Faizanalivarya (talk) 21:44, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Faizan 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. AKS (talk)
11:06, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions with User:Faizanalivarya. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
