This is an archive of past discussions with User:Saqib. 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.
A long, long time ago, on Mian Tahir Pervaz, you added this citation {{cite news|title=List of winners of Punjab Assembly seats|url=https://www.thenews.com.pk/archive/print/429935|accessdate=18 January 2018|work=The News|date=13 May 2013|language=en}}[1] It links to an article titled Dhoni’s cricket brain crucial for India at World Cup. I don't see any mention of Pervaz or politics. Did thenews.com change their numbering scheme? No hits from Googling "List of winners of Punjab Assembly seats" for thenews.com.pk. The URL has not been archived on the Wayback Machine. Should the citation simply be deleted.
Citation [3]: PML-N MPA, sons named in FIR over sexually abusing minor domestic help appears to have Pervaz' photo, but does not mention him by name. Should that citation be removed?
@Adakiko: It's indeed strange that The News story seems to have been deleted, especially considering it wasn't controversial in any way. Perhaps they changed the URLs, as I've noticed similar occurrences recently. It's also concerning that the Wayback Machine didn't archive the page. Anyways, I've replaced the reference for verification for now. Regarding the third reference, it did mention the subject in the second paragraph. --—Saqib (talk | contribs) 18:58, 28 March 2024 (UTC)
Thank you for taking care of that! News sites often remove articles after a limited time. Some have their own archives, others do not. One has to make a request for the Wayback Machine to archive. Also, litigation has forced the Wayback Machine not to archive some websites.
@Adakiko: It's not a logo or a teapot, but rather a "LOOTA" which is used in toilets in South Asia. Its depiction in this context could be seen as vandalism or even libelous. In Pakistan, "loota" refer to lawmakers who frequently change political parties. --—Saqib (talk | contribs) 11:42, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
It seems as though you created the articles in a hurry this time around and did not take great care in finding the existing articles for MPs. I have so far found duplicate articles for three Sindh Assembly members among the articles which you created recently. Did you use some kind of automated method to create articles in bulk as there are multiple articles created in a single minute? Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 04:29, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
@SheriffIsInTown: I wish there were an automated tool for this, but unfortunately, I had to search manually for each lawmaker to see if they already had a WP BLP. If no results came up, I created one. Mistakes can happen, especially with spelling variations in lawmakers' names. I saved most of the pages in one go, which might give the impression of using an automated tool. Out of the over 250 BLPs I created recently, you've only found a couple that already existed, demonstrating that I did conduct thorough Google searches. The main issue isn't creating single-line BLPs, stubs will grow over time, as they did back in 2018. --—Saqib (talk | contribs) 07:35, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
BTW, which assembly had the most duplicate BLPs that you found? I'd like to review them and see where things went wrong. --—Saqib (talk | contribs) 07:41, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
Notice for Invalid Deletion Request & Conflict Resolution
Dear Saqib,
I hope you doing well,
It has been observed that you have been nominating my articles for invalid deletion, brother I would like to clarify whats the matter as you have nominated invalid article delectation, I told you earlier as well, lets work together to improve WP:Pakistan as team as others are working why you dont understand? lets talk and solve our matters as you are not reading articles and nominating for deleting and instead of adding citations or improvement request you are just adding invalid deleting invalid templates, lets work together and improve for betterment of Wikipedia and those article which you feel require improvement we can improve them as I always take my all articles as responsibility and its our responsibility to improve articles.
I will also help to improve your articles by adding citations which I already did in past, but you always act negatively which count under WP:NPA policy.
Let me know, if we can be friends, and wish you Happy HOLY MONTH OF RAMADAN & LAIL UL QADIR
@Faizanalivarya: This is quite amusing. On one hand, you're falsely accusing me of personal attacks and requesting a ban on me, while on the other hand, you're seeking friendship with me. --—Saqib (talk | contribs) 21:38, 30 March 2024 (UTC)
@Saqib I am not falsely accusing you for anything, did you read my articles? instead of improving it you just ask for deletion and you also went to my created articles and kept doing the same, so it does cover under WP:NPA policy which you did break, you need to work on your behavior, I did visit your contribution history, you didnt make any significant change in improving wikipedia you just projected negativity instead of contributing on main pages you like to write on peoples talk pages, and try to increase your edit count which is again a breaking of Wikipedia editing policy WP:EP.
I report you because your action is totally biased, false and invalid and ask for friendship because we are here to improve Wikipedia as I said I can improve your articles not issues, if I want I can also nominate your article for deleting but I am not like that, I love to help and assist people as much as I can.
And As its Ramadan going on we can respect each other and learn from each other, if still you will keep breaking polices so unfortunately I need to keep the reporting against you if you think you can change and truly want to improve wikipedia so we can work together and improve Wp:pakistan and other projects.
I am working on many sideline projects with Wikimedia foundation in UK so I can add you in those as well but you need to change your attitude towards people and be nice with them.
It does not mean anything @saqib you are ignoring the positive gesture of helping and contribution for Wikipedia together as team. I do not appreciate any violations if there is any issue you are welcome to highlight but reporting something which is invalid that would be not appreciated. Cheers man Faizan Munawar Varya chat contributions16:36, 31 March 2024 (UTC)
2nd Notice for Invalid deletion request
Hi Dear Saqib,
You have nominated Rana Muhammad Akram Khan for deletion for the reason that there is no reference that is directly about him but it was pointed out there. Apparently, you seem to nominate articles for deletions not on basis of any solid ground but rather out of your confusion, Please remember that successive deletion nominations go against wikipedia's policy as it can discourage potential editors. kind regards. DavidSchop (talk) 17:55, 31 March 2024 (UTC)
If it is not of interest to you, why do I think about the deletion. If you didn't like the article or us in general, you didn't have to do it. Well, thank you, it made everything worse.--Acartonadooopo (talk) 20:52, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
Hey, I perceive that you might have an unfair advantage on ANI and other noticeboards because of your photo with Jimmy Wales, possibly due to editors' respect for the Wikipedia founder. You're entitled to manage your user page as you see fit, but I want to express my observation that simply meeting Jimmy at a conference and taking a photo with him doesn't necessarily mean you're close friends with him. Likewise, it doesn't diminish the contributions of editors who haven't had the opportunity to meet him. I've noticed that during conflicts or controversial editing situations (15:30, 19 March 2024), you sometimes restore his picture (22:10, 19 March 2024), perhaps as a symbolic gesture to gain support. It's worth mentioning that others are aware of this as well. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 16:18, 14 April 2024 (UTC)
Your message caught me off guard. I never implied that I was a friend of Jimmy, did I? I simply met him at a Wikimania conference and thought it would be nice to have a photo with him on my user page. I'm surprised or rather disappointed by your suggestion that having a photo with Jimmy could confer some sort of influence or unfair advantage to me here. I must say that your focus on me rather than on the articles is concerning. I encourage you to redirect your energy towards constructive collaboration and improvement of WP articles. --—Saqib (talk | contribs) 16:33, 14 April 2024 (UTC)
Hell Saqib. I worked on Draft:Adil Raja. You said it should "meet any of the eight academic-specific criteria" or "cite multiple reliable, secondary sources independent of the subject, which cover the subject in some depth". Firstly, why does it need to meet an academic specific criteria? I never mentioned that he was linked with education. He's a journalist. Additionally, I cited 66 different news about him. I worked really hard on the article and kept it as neutral as possible. Please tell me what I can do to get it accepted. Thank you so much bro!
How is it not neutral and how is it promotional? I tried to make it the best to my ability. I still don't know why you're saying fails to meet WP:N. How's it not notable? There's more news on Adil Raja as of today. Please help me so I can actually get this published. Quote any biased sentences from my draft. You should accept the draft so others can assist me in making it better. Thank you WarriorYt43 (talk) 17:53, 14 April 2024 (UTC)
@WarriorYt43: Not yet. Thus far, I've only removed unacceptable sources. However, the content previously cited by those unacceptable sources remains and needs to be addressed as well. It's not advisable to resubmit it in its current state. I'm also occupied with other tasks, so it will take some time. If you're able, please review each line and remove any material that could be considered WP:OR. --—Saqib (talk | contribs) 09:53, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Imaan Zainab Mazari until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-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 notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited ISI activities in Pakistan, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Muttahida Qaumi Movement. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)
No one really 'owns' WP pages. Anyone, even you, can edit them. But if something's backed up by WP:RS, it's gotta stay put. —Saqib (talk | contribs) 21:13, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
Okay i understand WP:RS what if i just simply put info on my web and then reference it in any article. Person is being maligned on wiki platform. You need to consider my request or else what options i have? Stardust512 (talk) 21:15, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
Please remove Family background. I will provide authentic information about him or i will edit it my self. I need protection for this article to protect it from vandalism. Stardust512 (talk) 21:23, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
WP operates on the basis of well-sourced information, so you can't just dismiss it as vandalism when it's properly cited. —Saqib (talk | contribs) 21:30, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
Hi Saqib. I think this edit was against consensus. If we want to add prime ministerial candidates then we should replace Nawaz Sharif with Shehbaz Sharif who actually became the prime minister. Also, can you remove Indian web editor's gossip coverage about Shehbaz_Sharif#Family marriages? Inclusion of Nilofar Khosa and Syeda Kulsume Hai violates WP:BLPPRIVACY. 103.170.139.225 (talk) 23:55, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
Haji Muhammad Bashir's Draft Page
Dear Mr. Saqib,
I hope this message finds you well. I am writing to express my disagreement with the recent decline of my Wikipedia article submission Draft:Haji_Muhammad_Bashir, citing insufficient reference coverage.
I respectfully submit that the references provided, particularly the articles from reputable sources such as Cricket World and Express Tribune, offer comprehensive coverage of the subject's life. For instance, the article from Cricket World, available at "https://www.cricketworld.com/heart-and-soil-of-pakistan-cricket/67304.htm", is a complete biography of Mr. Bashir and provides a thorough overview of their contributions. Additionally, the piece from Express Tribune, accessible via "https://tribune.com.pk/story/890296/the-gaddafi-and-the-man-behind-it", offers further insight into their significance, published by a prominent newspaper in Pakistan.
Furthermore, I have ensured that the other references included in my submission contain substantial information relevant to the subject matter. It is notable that I have observed several Wikipedia articles lacking references altogether, exemplified by the page "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agha_Zahid". In comparison, my article is meticulously referenced and offers a more comprehensive overview.
Given these considerations, I kindly request your assistance in reconsidering the publication of my article or providing guidance on how to meet the necessary criteria for acceptance.
Thank you for your attention to this matter. I look forward to your response and guidance.
I don't see enough solid coverage in WP:RS to meet WP:GNG. This news story is fine but that alone isn't sufficient. Also, there're unreliable sources cited in the bio that need to be removed. Without some revisions, I can't approve it. I'm here to help though. —Saqib (talk | contribs) 21:09, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
It has further news stories from other reputable channels that offer similar coverage to the mentioned news story. Additionally, I firmly believe that the article from Express Tribune and the pieces from CricketWorld provide substantive coverage of the subject's biography.
I would appreciate if you can make the necessary revisions to ensure compliance with Wikipedia's standards by removing any unreliable sources you identify to enhance the article's credibility and reliability. M.Mahmood256 (talk) 21:26, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
First off, please remove the WP:OR from the bio. I've noticed that some content cited references that aren't actually in those sources. Once you've cleaned up the WP:OR, I'll take another look. Also, I've already taken out some unreliable references. —Saqib (talk | contribs) 22:48, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
M.Mahmood256, The bio still contains WP:OR. For example, I'm unable to find citation for He was married and had two sons, three daughters, and nineteen grandchildren. Like I said before, please remove original research. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 12:33, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
All this information is written in the CricketWorld story, including details about his date of birth, his children and family. The writer has mentioned that the information he mentioned in his story is provided by his sons and Pakistan Cricket board officials.
I believe this story is a reliable citation. But if you still think that it is not enough, then you can also remove this lines related to his family and there would not be any impact on the subject's bio. M.Mahmood256 (talk) 21:48, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
Assalamualaikum wa rahmatullahi wa barakat, brother I've seen that you've added more citations and original research tags to these two articles I created (I also created 1974 one but I haven't fixed it yet), so I invite you to check them again, I am a bit busy on other articles so although I've more citations I haven't added them all. I think this many citations are enough. If not you can just ping me to inform. I'll add more. I've therefore removed the tags on those articles because I think the problems are resolved. May Allah bless you with a happy day . Waleed (talk) 00:56, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
@M Waleed: Thanks for adding more citations. It looks okay to me, but I was hoping for a bit more. I hope you continue to improve the page. It was quite interesting, BTW. Thanks for your contributions! —Saqib (talk | contribs) 07:18, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
I've added some sources from newspapers, but currently I'm researching about the particular battles of Siachen conflict. I would add more sources in coup articles. Waleed (talk) 08:00, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
I was just going over some of the pages you made & I noticed they could use some more sources. Plus, there's a bit of WP:OR going on in there which you want to avoid. Another editor raised similar concerns too. When we're talking about historical stuff, it's important to make sure we've got solid sources backing up every bit of info we put in there. —Saqib (talk | contribs) 09:12, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
I might give it a look later on. Meanwhile please ensure that relevant WikiProject templates such as Template:WikiProject Pakistan are added to the article's talk page. Additionally, please keep in mind that not every event merits a WP page, only those that meet WP:NEVENTS should be considered. Happy editing! —Saqib (talk | contribs) 14:20, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
It was a whole conflict and I make articles only for those events which are notable (have more than 50 deaths and have had a significant effect. Like all the 3 Baloch conflicts are highly notable, similar is the case with the coup attempts, accidental Soviet infiltrations and conflicts in dir. There are some low level mutinies and conflicts like that but aren't notable so I didn't create articles for them. The conflicts which I thought needed articles for Pakistan, I've made all of em (I may find some more in the future). And moreover the Second Baloch conflict I've removed the tag after giving 7 more book sources. Waleed (talk) 14:33, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
@Saqib assalamualaikum brother and good morning, I've added like 7 sources each for both second and third Balochistan conflict and then removed the tags, I've added 2 sources for 1976 dir rebellion but I know it needs more so I didn't remove the tag there Waleed (talk) 01:30, 8 May 2024 (UTC)
Response to Feedback: Al Islah Center's Notability and Article Revision Proposal
Dear Saqib,
Thank you for reviewing our submission for the Al Islah Center. We appreciate your feedback and understand the importance of ensuring that Wikipedia articles meet the necessary criteria for verifiability and neutrality.
We believe that the Al Islah Center is indeed a notable organization, and we are committed to providing the required references to demonstrate its significance. We will ensure that these references are in-depth, reliable, secondary, and independent of the subject, as per Wikipedia's guidelines.
Additionally, we acknowledge your concern regarding the tone of the submission and its resemblance to an advertisement. We will take this into account and strive to rewrite the article from a neutral point of view, referring to a range of independent, reliable, published sources.
If you are open to collaboration, we would welcome the opportunity to work with you to revise and improve the article together. Please let us know if you are willing to provide guidance and support in this process.
Thank you for your time and consideration. Mehdiaic (talk) 07:08, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
I might not be able to contribute to this page since I'm busy with other priorities, like patrolling new pages, which is quite demanding. However, I'm happy to provide guidance on how to improve the article. Firstly, you've to remove any content that sounds like advertisement. Next, you should replace references linked with the organization with ones that meet the criteria outlined in WP:RS. Once those steps are done, I'll take another look. As it stands, the current version of the article won't get my approval. —Saqib (talk | contribs) 07:14, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
Thank you, Saqib, for your guidance on improving the article. I completely understand that you're occupied with patrolling new pages and appreciate you taking the time to provide feedback. I'll work on removing any promotional content and replacing references with more reliable sources as per the WP:RS criteria. Once these adjustments are made, I'll be sure to let you know for further review. Your input is invaluable in maintaining the quality and integrity of Wikipedia articles. Mehdiaic (talk) 08:47, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
Request on 07:44:39, 7 May 2024 for assistance on AfC submission by 41.78.193.38
Hello Saqib. The nature of your edits, such as the one you made to Waqar Zaka, gives the impression you have an undisclosed financial stake in promoting a topic, but you have not complied with Wikipedia's mandatory paid editing disclosure requirements. Paid advocacy is a category of conflict of interest (COI) editing that involves being compensated by a person, group, company or organization to use Wikipedia to promote their interests. Undisclosed paid advocacy is prohibited by our policies on neutral point of view and what Wikipedia is not, and is an especially serious type of COI; the Wikimedia Foundation regards it as a "black hat" practice akin to black-hat search-engine optimization.
Paid advocates are strongly discouraged from direct article editing, and should instead propose changes on the talk page of the article in question if an article exists. If the article does not exist, paid advocates are strongly discouraged from attempting to write an article at all. At best, any proposed article creation should be submitted through the articles for creation process, rather than directly.
Regardless, if you are receiving or expect to receive compensation for your edits, broadly construed, you are required by the Wikimedia Terms of Use to disclose your employer, client and affiliation. You can post such a mandatory disclosure to your user page at User:Saqib. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Saqib|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}. If I am mistaken – you are not being directly or indirectly compensated for your edits – please state that in response to this message. Otherwise, please provide the required disclosure. In either case, do not edit further until you answer this message. Lkomdis (talk) 04:13, 9 May 2024 (UTC)
Notice of Conflict of interest noticeboard discussion
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding Dear Saqib,
You are constantly removing the articles that I have created without citing any reliable reasons. Just now, you have moved my article in the draft space Draft:Kashan Admani - Wikipedia. If I have COI, he should prove it. If there is some information that is not reliable, there is Citation needed template available. Perhaps, you are having some agenda to remove the pages that I create. I have humbly sought an admin support and guidance in this matter. You are more than welcome to comment on the issue. Thanks!. The thread is unknown. Thank you. Aanuarif (talk) 12:12, 9 May 2024 (UTC)
Notice of Harassment
Dear Saqib,
Please feel free to explain your actions on the Admin Noticeboard. Thanks!
@Aanuarif: Okay, got it, another notice. How many do I have to defend BTW? And please make sure to place notices properly. It keeps things neat and my tp won't look this messy. --—Saqib (talk I contribs) 12:21, 9 May 2024 (UTC)
I cannot comment on how many you need to contest or defend. No one likes contesting notices and I feel for you for being in this position. I only have this one going on with you and rightfully so. Aanuarif (talk) 12:25, 9 May 2024 (UTC)
Hey!!
If you are getting stressed out, you should take a break. You don't have to respond to everything. You can wait for an admin or uninvolved editors to ask you something and answer only that. I just started looking a bit, to try and see if I can find anything actionable, and the first diff of note so far was yours, sorry to say. Just don't do this. It undermines your point and shifts focus toward your conduct rather than others'. If you find yourself about to publish something like that again, stop, take a break, come back and publish when you can bring yourself to write something inocuous like "signing unsigned".
Thanks for the suggestion, but I don't need a break. I'm not as down as those UPEs who are flooding in to attack me. As a human, it's normal to get annoyed when you're repeatedly attacked in just one week by different UPEs. But I'm learning how to deal with these folks, so I'll be more careful with my words from now on. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 08:23, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
AfD some articles
One thing that might be good for you to do is to nominate some of the sock created (or heavily edited) articles for deletion and check the accounts involved for socking. That might draw out the sockfarm and help thin its herd and help us identify the scope and methods of this sock. I've already found two possible socks just by looking around. Allan Nonymous (talk) 14:55, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
I'd open an SPI on a lot of the keep voters here. This seems to be the farm in question. Already opened one on the person in question (who seems to be one of their article creators). Allan Nonymous (talk) 15:02, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
Allan Nonymous, I know AfD isn't a vote, but I've seen some closed the AfDs when there are many "keep" comments, even without proper rationales. But I don't blame the admins. They just err on the side of caution and close based on non-consensus. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 15:12, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
I'd advise you put a comment at the bottom "for closing admins" notifying them of the Nauman335 UPE farm efforts that may have influenced AfD on these articles and additionally, tag certain accounts as SPAs. That can help inform them and give them cause to ignore the socking. Allan Nonymous (talk) 15:15, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
I was suggesting you mention the sock concerns (i.e. "aggressive UPE farms have played a major in this article"). If you mention a specific editor who hasn't been conclusively identified as a sock, that's a pretty clear case WP:ASPERSIONS (even if they may still be a possible sock). Sorry that wasn't clear. Allan Nonymous (talk) 14:02, 15 May 2024 (UTC)
Editing logged out
Hello, I noticed that you may have recently made edits to 103.151.0.166 while logged out. Please be mindful not to perform controversial edits while logged out, or your account risks being blocked from editing. Please consider reading up on Wikipedia's policy on multiple accounts before editing further. Additionally, making edits while logged out reveals your IP address, which may allow others to determine your location and identity. If this was not your intention, please remember to log in when editing. Thank you. LizRead!Talk!23:22, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
Hello, Saqib,
I realize that you have been provoked by some IP editors recently but this editor appeared to support several of your AFD nominations and I want to make sure you are not editing logged out. Thank you for your response. LizRead!Talk!23:25, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
Liz, Come on, Liz, seriously? This needs a thorough investigation. I assure you, it wasn't me. I'm not foolish enough to edit or even support my own AfDs using IPs. Please feel free to struck them down. I don't care about those votes! So now, if any IP votes "keep" on my AfD nomination, you'll automatically think it's me? I guess I'm done then. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 23:27, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
Check out my remarks when an IP voted "keep" on my AfD nomination. Feel free to strike it down, too. I already have a STRONG opinion that IPs shouldn't be even allowed to participate in AfDs, in the first place. However, I seriously suggest you getting a CU done on me and/or remove this warning from my tp because it wasn't me. And Thank god, IPs didn't vote "keep" on a AfD where I almost lost the case. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 23:48, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
Hey Saqib, I get where you are coming from but in this particular scenario where the suspected editor has already been part of other SPIs along the current one yet they have not been confirmed with one CU explicitly stating there is no evidence they are using multiple accounts, I think it's best not to bring it up and UPE has not been confirmed either. Going around and spreading they are suspected might be a legitimate cause for WP:HARASSMENT or WP:NPA. Haven't you had enough AN/ANI/COIN/Admin talk page complaints lol? WP:LOUT is confirmed so that's fair to point out. I guess treat it like you would a Wikipedia article...no source means no mention.
On other note, what you do think about putting to together a Pakistan source guide in your User space? At some point I think getting some them in font of WP:RSN is needed so they get added to the citation highlighters used by NPP and others (ex. User:Novem Linguae/Scripts/CiteHighlighter which should install if you haven't already). Lastly, thanks your note about my COIN comment as it's never my desire fuel the flames. S0091 (talk) 18:32, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
S0091, Got it, I'll try my best to avoid calling them socks, but I did mention they are suspected, and one of them very much suspected UPE, at least - though of course, we don't have evidence of that either. Thanks for the heads-up though. And sure, I'll definitely create a guide at some point to outline wihch Pakistani sources can be considered RS and which cannot. It's definitely needed moving forward. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 18:58, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
Playing wack-a-mole with socks is probably loosing strategy or at the very least a time consuming one. A the of the day the main issue, as I understand it, is they are creating non-notable drafts/articles based on non-WP:RS. The best way to combat it is to ensure the community knows a source is not WP:RS so no matter who uses it, UPE/sock or an AGF editor, those sources will not be considered when trying to assess notability (or WP:V for that matter) by NPP or AfC. As you know, sources like Galaxy Lollywood which is a blog should not be used at all but it's not documented. S0091 (talk) 19:23, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
You seem to have opened multiple fronts at one go and one of the front seem to be stubs relating to Tribes of Pakistan articles. I broadly do share your concern but have suggested different treatment at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Abro (tribe).
Though I am not hard and fast about my suggestion but suppose you can give it a consideration. Happy editing. Bookku (talk) 06:02, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
Bookku, You're right. It definitely needs a discussion, but I'm afraid I won't be able to initiate it since I'm occupied elsewhere. BTW, what do you mean by "I opened multiple fronts at once"? —Saqib (talk I contribs) 11:45, 15 May 2024 (UTC)
'Brief: I intend no negative sense in 'multiple fronts'.
Well deletion sorting pages are on my watch list and usually once in a while summary comes to my notice that's how I reached Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Abro (tribe) and took a look into it. By the time I typed my comment another user commented that you have listed few more in the same series and responding at every place was not suitable so came to your talk page then realized you are working on multiple more deletions in some other topic areas too. At personal level I was afraid you will be able to spare time for my message or not. To have your reasonable attention I used term 'multiple fronts' since at personal level generally I would find it difficult for myself to attend to discussions at many pages at the same time.
Hi. I'm trying to use Wikipedia for the first time and it's hella overwhelming. I'm trying to figure it out and fix things as per the rules. Meanwhile, can you please cut me the slack for a day so l can atleast figure it out before l see the content vanished. Thanks! The0bvioustruth (talk) 17:25, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
Hi Saqib i don't understand why you would delete the information about cover song sahibo and information about the artist's kathak dance training that has proper news citation. Can you explain the logic behind it? Also the information about kathak dance training received by the artist was cited with proper news reference. As you have taken so much trouble in editing and fixing this page can you add those details back if you are as fair as you claim to be? Also the section I added about controversy was neutral and not even praising but rather shedding a balanced detached view of social media reaction. there are 100s of articles and news details supporting my findings. Also please kindly clarify your how your edits and revisions are more neutral now that you have removed something that is all over the internet and supported by several news publications online and social media findings. you can google the artist and there are several articles about the controversy that are clearly not paid. As for notability no pakistani artist can pay gulf times or times of india or any indian news publication to write about them as paid promotion. This artist was viral in india in 2013 when Times of India wrote about her. India today wrote about her "Maha Ali Kazmi, a 25-year-old Pakistani of Kashmiri descent is making waves with her pop-rock single, across the border in Karachi". Kashmire Life: "Maha Ali Kazmi, a young girl hailing from Kashmir presently living in Karachi, Pakistan, has released her first pop-rock single in Karachi. Her first single Nazar has become an instant hit. The music video received rave reviews over the internet and is being liked by people from both sides of the border. The singer has become an overnight celebrity." and The economic times inida "the song went viral and she became an overnight sensation". All the news online shows this artist is notable contrary to your claims.
I would also like to bring to your knowledge that although wikipedia is a very reputable platform however from scholarly standards information on wikipedia added by contributors like yourself are not even eligible as reliable sources. Universities particularly discourage students from citing any wikipedia references. I think you give yourself too much undue importance as the role you play as a contributor. Atleast the topics have some form of achievement supported by news publications unlike yourself. However i commend you for you time and effort on wasting so much energy on topics you deem to be not notable and unworthy of being on wikipedia. even if you delete these so called unworthy articles it would it would be on no consequence to these topics. Thank you. P.S it seems all other contributors, save yourself, are paid promoters with hidden agendas and close relations to topics they have contributed to. Aditiroykapoor (talk) 21:11, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
Hey Saqib, I'm reaching out because of your draftification of Draft:Gorsi (I processed the R2 request for the redirect left behind). The move summary states Not ready for mainspace, incubate in draftspace. Reason/s: no sources. It looks like you made a mistake considering there are 14 sources on the article. Hey man im josh (talk) 11:45, 15 May 2024 (UTC)
Hey man im josh, The issue isn't that it lacks references; the issue is that I don't think it meets WP:N. I made a mistake—the reason should have been WP:N, not a lack of sources. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 11:48, 15 May 2024 (UTC)
It looks like you also made this mistake twice on May 7 as well at Draft:Breaking News (Pakistani TV series) and Draft:Jinnah Municipal Stadium. It's important that you provide an accurate rationale when draftifying an article, as all 3 of these (3 out of 18 in your draftify log) used the same move summary of no sources and had all had a number of them at the time. I also noticed that you aren't notifying users every time when a page is draftified. Please make sure to do so, per WP:DRAFTNOTIFY. Hey man im josh (talk) 11:52, 15 May 2024 (UTC)
Hey man im josh, Okay, it looks like I selected NN when draftifying or declining drafts, but somehow V got chosen. I'll be more careful next time. If the references are there, why would I deliberately choose V? —Saqib (talk I contribs) 12:01, 15 May 2024 (UTC)
Appreciate it, we all make mistakes. If the references are there, why would I deliberately choose V? – That's why I've been calling it a mistake instead of some deliberate malicious action :) Hey man im josh (talk) 12:12, 15 May 2024 (UTC)
I've figured out the issue. The default setting is "It has no sources," which is why the incorrect reason is being added, repeatedly. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 14:32, 16 May 2024 (UTC)
Sameeerrr
I think it is fair to assume any 'new' editor and IPs are likely socks given the history around the Pakistan entertainment industry articles. Sameerrr in particular was very clearly a sock. Did you see their last note on their talk page? I mean, really?? The reason I engaged with Sameerrr and a couple IPs is because if they can present any good sources, I'm open to entertaining them until socking/UPE is confirmed. The same for BeauSuzanne. I get where you coming from but I strongly suggest stop making disparaging remarks about them. AfDs should focus on the sources and notability criteria. Anything else is a distraction from what the core discussion should be about unless there is confirmation and even then if an article meets N, it may be kept. S0091 (talk) 18:54, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
You keep bringing up a "dubious editing history" (ex. WP:Articles for deletion/Hiba Ali Khan, link does not take you to the discussion which is at WP:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive361#BeauSuzanne). The only thing that has been confirmed is WP:LOUT (per Drmies The OR issues aside, I can confirm that there is no technical connection that I see that links the editor to a sock master. What I will say, BeauSuzanne, is that you should really stop editing while logged out, esp. if it involves collusion.) but neither the OR or LOUT has anything to do with whether their articles meet N. However, if an IP pops in an AfD then that's cause to mention it. S0091 (talk) 19:13, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
Oh, ok. Apologies, I didn't realize you had already stopped because quite a few AfDs are still open so was going by what I saw. For Sameerrr, this comment after their unblock request was declined. S0091 (talk) 19:30, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
S0091, So, yes, Sameeerrr was confident they wouldn't get caught. The same goes for other suspected socks—they're technically avoiding detection. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 19:35, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
Well, most of them are doing a poor job of it. If your going to sock, don't dive into the same areas and go on about about the history of other socks or editors. S0091 (talk) 19:41, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
S0091, Right and I'm not bothered by folks having multiple accounts here. But when they start trying to manipulate things by getting involved in AfDs and consistently voting with illogical arguments, all in the hope of closing down AfDs with no consensus, that really gets on my nerves and that's when I feel like I need to report them to SPI. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 19:45, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
Poppay Ki Wedding
A page with full referenced and reliable sources with the IMDb link, why you move the the Article from Main Space to Draft. I didn't think that you did it right. As I'm a auto confirmed user, i have right to move draft to the main Space. One thing more i noticed that you are on a mission on deleting or nominating for deleting the Pages related to Pakistani Entertainment. What you want to do ? Zoramid (talk) 20:22, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
Zoramid, Hang on a sec! You’ve only been on WP for just 03 days, right? How come you know that I'm on a mission on deleting or nominating for deleting the Pages related to Pakistani Entertainment.? Just curious! —Saqib (talk I contribs) 20:26, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
Zoramid, You can't just move a draft to main namespace like that; it might be seen as disruptive editing. The article doesn't seem to meet WP:GNG. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 20:31, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
I have a request to make: Please slow down with posting AFD nominations. I notice you recently posting dozens of nominations on the same day. This is just not fair to the limited number of discussion participants we have evaluating articles and sources right now at AFD. You might know the subject area of these articles very well but this is not true for other editors on the project. Looking for sources can take hours for one article and multiply that by two dozen additional articles and our very capable AFD participants just can't keep up with the number of AFDs you are posting over a short period of time.
What will likely happen is that there will be low or no participation on the majority of these AFD discussions and so they will just be relisted several times until they are closed as Soft Deletions. Most of these articles are just poorly sourced and so there is no urgency for them to be all proposed for deletion on the same day so maybe limit yourself to nominating 5 articles at AFD/day.
I realize that it just takes a few minutes for you to tag an article and create a discussion page but please consider the workload on our ever decreasing number of experienced AFD discussion participants and don't overload them with dozens of nominations. If these article are truly subpar, they will end up being deleted tomorrow, next week, next month or next year. But they don't all need to be considered for deletion at the same time unless there is problematic content like copyright or BLP-violating content or other types of articles that violate Wikipedia policies and guidelines. I appreciate your work ethic, just consider how much time and effort goes into considering one AFD and pace yourself. Thank you for considering my suggestion. LizRead!Talk!21:55, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
Liz, Alright Liz, I'll hold off on any more nominations for deletion for now, at least until the current ones are sorted out. BTW, there's this one AfD that's getting bombarded with delete votes, and some of them seem to be coming from sleeper accounts. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 09:58, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
Respected admin Liz, please notice Saqib's behaviour [1], at first he nominated all of the BLP's i created and now when the article was kept then he goes on to tell admin to change the decision [2]. He is continuously asking me to provide reliable sources and when i provide sources from The Express Tribune and other authentic sources then claim them dubious. Please check my history, i am unable to convince him despite many editors have acknowledge my work [[3], [4], [5], [6][7], and he is contineously labelling me UPE on multiple platforms. Today, he accused me of WP:OR however i just moved film section from bottom to top. Please see my talkpage regarding WP:OR. Libraa2019 (talk) 19:03, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
I am discussing you because you initiated AFD's and even goes on to contest article which was kept in AFD. And you are already stalking me from day one thats why all of the articles which i created are under AFD or tagged with notability despite meeting criteria of wikipidea. I was feeling helpless therefore its the right place to tell admin. Libraa2019 (talk) 19:13, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
But you never requested admin to change the decision after AFD then why you are so much against me that you want to wash off my legit articles from wikipidea even after being kept at AFD? It feels harrased dont you feel? And today you accused me of adding WP:OR for just moving section. You want me to leave wikipidea i think? Libraa2019 (talk) 19:21, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
But I'm just trying to help clean up. If you think what I'm doing isn't justified, feel free to report me to ANI. But just please stop accusing me of attacking you. I'm focused on the articles, not the editors. Also, I didn't ask Doczilla to reverse the decision. I just let them know that the the closing wasn't fair, IMO. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 19:33, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
Your statement was "considering taking this to WP:DRV" which clearly means you were opposing consensus and closure admin decision. I will surely report you at ANI after proper research and evidences. Libraa2019 (talk) 19:38, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
No, what Saqib was saying is he thought Doczilla's assessment of WP:consensus was incorrect which is his right to raise. I mean, have you bothered to look at WP:DRV? Editors contest closes regularly so not a big deal. Above that, he has not taken it DRV so your argument is moot. Even if he did, doing so does make an an ANI complaint so you need wipe that from your line thinking. S0091 (talk) 20:16, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
S0091 were these actions of Saqib justified? [8], [9], by saying this, he connected me with unknown UPE's whom he knows better but dont you think these comments are too harsh? Libraa2019 (talk) 20:27, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
The first one he does not directly implicate you as UPE, only that he has nom'd UPE articles which is true. There's plenty of blocked UPE socks to support his statement. The second he does not mention UPE but retaliation and you have not done yourself any favors by mentioning that AfD at WP:Articles for deletion/Danial Afzal Khan. If you think you have a case, like I said, take to ANI. S0091 (talk) 21:01, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
You are just defending him in his wrong deeds otherwise he mentiond UPE's because he think i am connected to them. He expect others to respect his decisions everytime, like if he is voting keep then no one has right to vote delete and vice versa. Anyways i dont have grudges as it was an instant reaction and today a new day with new hopes. Libraa2019 (talk) 03:05, 22 May 2024 (UTC)
And i noticed one thing Saqib, you clarified your stance that you are are trying to clean up, but when some one with good faith just wanted to share opinion on non notable creator then you called it retaliation. You should assume others are here to build too and in good faith not only you. I have never voted Keep in television serials which i created because earlier i was unaware of wikipidea policies and created those projects and i am not even UPE who will be affected after deletion of those. Libraa2019 (talk) 19:51, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
@Libraa2019 Liz generally does not pay attention to pings because she gets so many. Saqib, I suggest laying off Libraa outside of nominating articles for AfD and doing as them as a slower pace, which it sounds like you are going to do anyway. A suggestion is to mix them up by who created them so no single non-blocked editor gets overwhelmed. Libraa, if you want to pursue a complaint, take it to ANI. You can also request Saqib not post on you talk page outside of mandatory notifications. If you choose that route, post on note here and on your talk page to cover the bases. S0091 (talk) 19:16, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
S0091, I am not connected to anyone and don't know how to prove it. Just one thing i did is voted Keep in one article which was created by BeauSuzane but its a coincidence, otherwise i would have voted Keep in most of the AFD's by BeauSuzane or other editors. I even dont have anything to do with Green Entertainment but accused of being connected with someone who has interest in this channel. Libraa2019 (talk) 19:33, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
I did not say or indicate you are a sock/UPE so no need to convince me and the SPI clears you of being a Nauman sock (I am paying attention to that SPI given the disruption). S0091 (talk) 19:39, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
Every time I put Memon KutianaWala's pages up for deletion, their reaction remained exactly the same. Nostalgic times! —Saqib (talk I contribs) 21:47, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
Now indirectly connecting me with someone else. Anyways, Saqib, the way you defended Waqar Zaka and insulted me was also shocking for me and that reaction was too much childish if you agree or not :) Libraa2019 (talk) 02:57, 22 May 2024 (UTC)
Thanks for your contributions to Afshan Hassan. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it needs more sources to establish notability.
I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.
I've just read over the AfD for Waqar Zaka. Please be cautious about accusing other editors of acting in bad faith. If you believe other editors are on a vendetta, you'd better have some strong evidence to back that up, and in this case you clearly did not. Your edits created an uncivil atmosphere, and that's bad for the project. In the future, be circumspect about what you say and bear in mind that having a battleground mentality can lead you down the path to ANI. —Ganesha811 (talk) 18:34, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
Ganesha811, I'd like to clarify that I wasn't accusing everyone who voted to delete the BLP, just a few against whom I filed the SPI. I didn't targeted @JoelleJay and @Oblivy, who both voted to delete. I was mainly trying to counter some arguments, especially that one editor who labeled every Pakistani source (including Dawn and the Express Tribune) as unreliable and paid. One can definitely check their editing history, they weren't regulars in AfDs. Even the nominator turned out to be a sleeper account. Anyway, I did my best to save a BLP I felt shouldn't be deleted because Zaka was a WP:N figure. But unfortunately, not enough people from the wider community participated, and the page got deleted based on those deletion votes. But I'm cool with whatever call the closing admin made. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 18:52, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
Someone doesn't have to be a regular at AfD to participate at AfD. As long as they're not an WP:SPA or clearly malicious, they're good. I didn't mention the SPI reports - falsely accusing someone of bias is uncivil in and of itself. —Ganesha811 (talk) 19:01, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
Ganesha811, It's just that the nominator of this AfD filed a unfounded report against me on ANI, so I started taking this AfD emotionally. But now I realise I should've avoided that. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 19:24, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
Hi. I appreciate you being self-reflective about taking that AfD too personally, and thanks to @Ganesha811 for bringing this up at an appropriate time. I have three things to say which I hope you will take to heart:
origins aren't destiny - nominators sometimes get blocked in the middle of AfD's and those AfD's sometimes roll along. Also, just because a blocked/UPI/COI/tainted editor created an article doesn't mean the article gets to be deleted; sometimes those people had the best knowledge even if it was applied in a way we disapprove of
even if you weren't calling me and @JoelleJay bad faith editors or sockpuppets, that doesn't mean it was pleasant for us to participate in the AfD discussion
less is more. Use your energy to make policy-based arguments and don't repeat the same point over and over. I'm sure it was extremely hard to close such a long AfD. The closing admins are good at contextualizing low-experience and low-content votes, and if you need to call someone out for their conduct go to their talk page.
Oblivy, Your suggestions are well noted. However, the AfD process seems like a LOTTERY. For instance, we have BLPs on some ROTM actors, but not on controversial yet popular figures like Waqar Zaka. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 07:36, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
hi, do you mind pointing out where you think the references are unreliable? they are all third party references, mostly from news sources. i have edited and worked on muliple wikipedia articles before in the past year and never had this issue, so it would be kind of you to point out where the issue is exactly so that i can fix it. Thank you for your help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bitsadinnit (talk • contribs)
@Bitsadinnit: Sources like Parhlo, Medium, Cutacut, Islamabad Scene, ProPakistani etc aren't considered RS and shouldn't be used on BLPs. Additionally, the BLP in question seems overly PROMO. If you have any COI, I suggest you declare them. If not, you should explain why the BLP is PROMO. --—Saqib (talk I contribs) 12:44, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
Thank you for letting me know about the reference issues, however, they are still news sources, only difference is that they are local, but are not prohibited. Also, I used the wikipedia page for Michael Moore as a sample for this article, it utiised a similar tone and language, which has not been characterized as promo, due to which reason I am confused about the issue here. Bitsadinnit (talk) 13:01, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
What about the promotional issues? All of the information about this person is available online on multiple webpages. I have mentioned I used Michael Moore as a sample and it is not considered to be in violation of any policies. Can you point out what exactly is the problem here? Thank you for your time. Bitsadinnit (talk) 13:23, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
Bitsadinnit, Well IMO the subject of this BLP seems to be excessively promoted, with citations from unreliable sources and non-independent ones like ShaFilms. Some paragraphs cite RS but the source doesn't even mention the subject, such as The Diplomat. To be frank, the BLP is overly detailed and reads like a job resume to me and also it's unclear if the subject even meets WP:N. Therefore, I suggest trimming it significantly, removing unreliable and non-independent sources, and addressing the raised issues before resubmitting it for review. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 14:43, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
I will work on the references as you have said. However, I still do not think it's fair to go about it in this manner since so many more articles like this exist already (e.g. Jawad Sharif). The purpose of BLPs is to provide an objective narration of a person's life, which will obviously include their life and career, as well as their achievements. How is a person noteworthy if we were to not discuss any of this? Please, reconsider your stance, since it makes no sense to remove his works and life from an article which is precisely about that. Thank you. Bitsadinnit (talk) 04:17, 27 May 2024 (UTC)
Bitsadinnit, Feel free to resubmit it for review if you think my assessment was unfair. I've no problem with someone else approving it, but I won't approve it in its current form. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 08:07, 27 May 2024 (UTC)
TheTechie, Well it seems SPI is on life support, despite clear evidence of vote manipulation leading to the BLP's deletion. But no offense to admins—I understand the backlog! —Saqib (talk I contribs) 06:15, 29 May 2024 (UTC)
Bludgeoning
Saqib, you really do need to stop WP:Bludgeoning. The more back and forth between editors, the less attractive a discussion becomes to uninvolved editors. It is one of the reasons I have not participated in some of the AfDs and almost didn't at RSN. If it is putting me off, it very likely is putting off other editors as well. Make your case, then walk away at least for a couple days or so unless someone specifically asks you something. There was no need for you respond to either me or JMF at RSN or most of Thowawaways comments. All it did was fuel the flames. For AfDs, if the article has several sources you are much better off being more specific in your nom as to why those sources do not GNG or BASIC. You might consider doing a Template:Source assess table off the bat, at least for the sources that have non-trivial coverage. S0091 (talk) 17:39, 29 May 2024 (UTC)
S0091, Odd that you perceive me as the one "bludgeoning" in that discussion, and not them because you've posted this note on my tp, only. I didn't even bother replying to most of their comments, even when they tried to WP:PA me, or poke fun at what I said or just to get a reaction out of me. Anyways - if that's your perspective, I step back from this thread. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 18:07, 29 May 2024 (UTC)
For you, it is across several discussions not only the RSN one. Ganesha811 also advised you about bludgeoning above. I haven't gotten to Throwaway yet but my next stop. I have a life outside of Wikipedia. S0091 (talk) 18:24, 29 May 2024 (UTC)
I mean is there any point of that discussion? We still didn't reach to a conclusion and he deliberately started mass removing again, ignoring my last responses and accusing me of being affiliated with that website.
What do you mean by We still didn't reach to a conclusion? From what I've observed, everyone's just labelled this dubious website as a unreliable source,. Secondly, if I've accused you of being affiliated with this dubious website, could you offer a diff - at the minimum? If not, let's just pause and move on politely. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 19:29, 29 May 2024 (UTC)
Hello, my dear friend. Please add a different source once you've removed one. Some advice.
You have recently edited a page related to India and Bangladesh, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.
A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have special powers in order to reduce disruption to the project.
Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:
adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
follow editorial and behavioural best practice;
comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
refrain from gaming the system.
Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template. FNH004 (talk) 14:39, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
You recently removed sources from Kazi Salahuddin you could have atleast added a new one while in the case of Victoria SC you did not even remove the source properly. These are Bangladeshi football articles so I would hope you edited with a bit more care. Also none of these are personal attacks. If you have any issues regarding the article I created - Wahiduzzaman Khan Pintu please have it checked by a reviewer and lets see if it gets deleted. FNH004 (talk) 15:16, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
FNH004, Wait - do you own Bangladeshi football articles? I'm simply cleaning up spam links, including ones that you and others added. Will you let me handle it, please? And regarding Wahiduzzaman Khan Pintu, No, I've no interest in asking others to review it or even tag this BLP, even though tags might be warranted. Just wanted to give you a heads-up that instead of lecturing me about contentious topics, you should better watch your edits because you're citing spammy and dubious links as references and also adding WP:OR, like personal details (e.g., dates of birth) to BLPs. Meanwhile, I request you to please leave my tp. If you've an issue with my edits, please raise it on the relevant talk page, not here. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 15:29, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
No, I do not own Bangladeshi football articles. It was just simple advice or even a request, since I'm the one who takes care of those pages most of the time. But as usual, you got aggressive, and I hope you stop threatening everyone on this site. Anyways, goodbye. Hopefully, I don't have to come back to this talk page ever again. FNH004 (talk) 16:01, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
(talk page watcher) It is even disappointing to see an experienced editor, with 20K+ edits to their name, is using name calling like a 4-year-old, which is potentially uncivil. FNH004, please civilly, come to a conclusion with Saqib here. If you cannot, I will have to move this to DRN. — thetechie@enwiki: ~/talk/$22:45, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
SheriffIsInTown, After a thorough review of weeklycuttingedge.com, here's my assessment. While it claims to be a popular magazine, it doesn't quite even fit the typical magazine model, especially since it's circulated in all Foreign Embassies, Libraries, Hospitals, 5 star Hotels and Government/ Private Departments. It's run by a business tycoon (who also happens to serve as the editor) Dr Niloufer Mahdi with no journalistic experience. And despite being in publication since 2016, it's worth noting that Pakistani sources such as DAWN and Express Tribune don't even acknowledge this publication, leading me to conclude it's more of a WP:QS. In fact, they're engaging in blatantplagiarism. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 15:25, 31 May 2024 (UTC)
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tenderd until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-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 notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.
Hi Saqib, I noticed that you tagged Tabii with a notability tag and then marked it as reviewed. This seems contradictory to me and I've unreviewed the article so that another reviewer can take a look at it. Happy reviewing! -MPGuy2824 (talk) 10:15, 11 June 2024 (UTC)
MPGuy2824, Hello - are you sure I reviewed it manually? If so, I may have done so to remove it from the backlog. I actually proposed it for deletion, but a SPA objected to the proposed deletion, so I added notability tags. — Saqib (talk) 10:19, 11 June 2024 (UTC)
But now that the BLP is up for deletion, let's leave it to the community to decide. I threw it into AfD because I didn't think he's notable enough. Saqib (talk) 11:06, 13 June 2024 (UTC)
Dear @Saqib
Its very unfortunate that you have deleted my Wikipedia article draft Inayat Khan (actor) on 11th may 2024
Before your mention about Inayat Khan that he is not a notable actor in pk you should have watched my dramas as a leading hero like ( Muqaddar Ka sitara, GT road , Ishq Zaat , Resham gali ki husna, Love Impossible, ishq Achanak, & many more.. & as a 2nd hero Tere anay se for Geo Entertainment)
Hi Saqib, I have seen a couple times-ish you have draftified articles but another draft already exists and perhaps already reviewed. In those circumstances, you can redirect one of the drafts so there's not duplicates. If one has already been reviewed, redirect to that one. If not, which ever one was created first. This will hopefully prevent multiple versions being submitted for review or one being moved to mainspace and another submitted, etc. S0091 (talk) 18:35, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
S0091, But the problem arises when different accounts create different drafts, and any attempt to redirect them results in the edit being reverted. — Saqib (talk I contribs) 19:02, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
It being created by another account doesn't matter. If the "master version" of the draft is accepted, the redirect will still exist so the history is maintained. This has been discussed at AfC a few times (please don't ask me to dig out the discussions lol). Are experienced editors reverting the redirect? S0091 (talk) 19:09, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
S0091, I don't really recall the drafts right now. On a related note, if an article has already been flagged and draftified, but another user attempts to recreate the article on the same topic in main NS. What do you think of such behaviour? — Saqib (talk I contribs) 19:23, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
I think this is an example. An editor creates an article which an editor moves to draft (Draft:XXXX). Another editor creates the same article which you move to draft under a different title because the draft already exists (Draft:XXXX (2)) After you move it to Draft:XXXX (2), you should redirect it to Draft:XXXX. At the end of the day, only one draft about a topic should exist. Whoever created the 2nd draft/article is welcome to improve the draft that already exists, though often in these circumstances they are UPE/sock/COI which makes it even more important only one draft exists. S0091 (talk) 19:38, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
@Allan Nonymous If the only reason you draftified the article is because a draft exists (whether submitted to AfC or not), that is not a sufficient reason. It is fine for a draft to exist on topic that is in mainspace. However, if you had other concerns such as UPE/sockin/COI, WP:TOOSOON or some other appropriate reason, use that instead. S0091 (talk) 19:46, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
I mean all of those factored into the decision, I wouldn't have moved the article to draft if neither of those was a concern of mine. Allan Nonymous (talk) 19:51, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
Hello, Saqib. Your account has been granted the "extendedmover" user right, either following a request for it or demonstrating familiarity with working with article names and moving pages. You are now able to rename pages without leaving behind a redirect, move subpages when moving the parent page(s), and move category pages.
Please take a moment to review Wikipedia:Page mover for more information on this user right, especially the criteria for moving pages without leaving a redirect. Please remember to follow post-move cleanup procedures and make link corrections where necessary, including broken double-redirects when suppressredirect is used. This can be done using Special:WhatLinksHere. It is also very important that no one else be allowed to access your account, so you should consider taking a few moments to secure your password. As with all user rights, be aware that if abused, or used in controversial ways without consensus, your page mover status can be revoked.
If you do not want the page mover right anymore, just let me know, and I'll remove it. Thank you, and happy editing! Primefac (talk) 14:48, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
I finally replied... I kept forgetting. Is posting at RSN slow for you? It is a pain a for me, even typing there is a delay. I had thought it was because of that monster ADL RfC but that's been archived. S0091 (talk) 17:19, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
Ultimately it works for me. I mean i can post but there's a delay when typing and posting. If you are not experiencing an issue then it's something on my end...but not sure what it could be. S0091 (talk) 17:54, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
Review for Sonia Shamroz
@Saqib see the sonia shamroz draft she looks an award winning and bbc, arab news published a strong stories on it. Aig is notable references looks more strong. Kaladrmpio (talk) 06:03, 30 June 2024 (UTC)
@Saqibjust see you decline again. Just have a qucik quick why bcc, arab news strong Stories doesn't meet the gng? Including pak top news papers published an articles on it. Kaladrmpio (talk) 07:10, 30 June 2024 (UTC)
Hey,i will not remove that was a mistake i apologies second you asked me about the connection i have no connection with the user you mentioned above sonia shamroz is already famous in Pakistan and majority people knows her. I just suggested and add some more things if a person is notable why the draft is declined? You mentioned that sources are not reliable is bbc and arab news are not strong sources for the gng? And pakistani, the news, bol news tv, geo news? Kaladrmpio (talk) 07:22, 30 June 2024 (UTC)
@CNMall41: I don't usually entertain requests from LOUTSOCKS, but sometimes they provide interesting leads. Chaudhry Aurangzeb do not pass NPOL because they aren't a member of parliament. However, they have received coverage that strongly suggests it may be paid. Would you mind reviewing the references and provide your 2¢ as well? — Saqib (talk I contribs) 09:37, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Muhammad Ishaq Madni until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-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 notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.
It is exhausting to continue a discussion on it. I would recommend going to RSN with it so it saves time in the future. Otherwise, you will end up with the same arguments. CNMall41 (talk) 07:07, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
CNMall41, Certainly, I'm willing to initiate a thread on Youlin at WP:RSN. However, the issue is there seems to be a lack of participation. In fact, last time you recommended that I bring ProPakistani to WP:RSN, but then you did not participate in the discussion yourself and the discussion was archived without any substantial outcome. — Saqib (talk I contribs) 09:41, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
Sounds like you are putting it on me for not participating. I do not participate in every discussion. If you do not get participation, then you can ask that it be unarchived and even to a RfC. But, do as you wish. It was just some friendly advice. --CNMall41 (talk) 05:35, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
I hope you understand my removal of content from Sher Afzal Marwat article. I have confirmed the inaccuracy from him personally and have made changes in which the reason is already explained in the edit summary following the changes. If you have any further questions or concerns, Please let me know. Hammadalishah01 (talk) 15:36, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
Hey Saqib, you should view this fake self-promoted film Operation Swift Retort (short film) by DJ Kamal Mustafa. If you check the article references in which two to three are self-published articles by DJ Kamal Mustafa, who is a journalist.
He created number of other films just for their Wikipedia approval and he did it. He did the very low quality film in low budget or by himself. He published music before for his Instagram verification and Google Knowledge Panel. If you check out his work he did totally self-promoted things everywhere. I see you are active in these topic please submit it for deletion. ChasmanOPT6 (talk) 16:17, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
The operation Swift retort is mentioned by gulf news, geo news, the news, pak observer and many other news outlets but you've deleted it based on anti pak stance. As per Wikipedia admins the 2019 jammu kashmir airstrike was rightly added as it has passed the wp notability but you have removed it. The op is not new and was banned by you and other admins last year when he made fake Wikipedia on his name which we Nominated it for deletion. The op is jealous and sent message on Instagram after laughing on it. We will purse it legally and holding Wikipedia accountable for removing ISPR movie. 182.190.222.78 (talk) 05:24, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
Hello, Saqib. Please check your email; you've got mail! It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
I know you Saqib and Captain Assassin!. You both are friends and feeling so jealous to DJ Kamal Mustafa.
Saqib you are so against army and ISPR because you are a pti / imran khan fan , please stop making disturbance on wikipedia. I am here to fix and write good for wikipedia.
Captain Assassin! aka Rafhan, i know you okay. You and your younger brother are better in film making but it does not means you hate other movies and make it wrong.
DJ Kamal produce official ISPR films like Ehd-e-Wafa drama. Operation swift report (short film) has more authentic references like The news , samaa , dawn and many more as i mentioned long time ago here.
But no problem if you both deleted it by collaboration with Daniel from English wikipedia , but it is still on other languages and wikidata also. And on fandom wikis too. Donot worry about anything.
I saw your request at the Devoter SPI and you might find User:SD0001/deleted-metadata-link helpful which will allow you to see the creator and contributors of a deleted page (sorted newest to oldest so scroll to bottom). You might also have to look at the page log to put the pieces together if the page was recreated. Pinging @CNMall41 too. S0091 (talk) 16:00, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
Hmmm...well for the creator yes but it does not give you the various contributors which often are also socks (ex. Dj1kamal). Thanks for sharing that one. How do you run it for a different page? S0091 (talk) 16:22, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
There's step-by-step instructions for how to log into Quarry and fork a query here; I haven't verified them for a long time now, but they should still be accurate. That'll let you edit and rerun the query yourself. Then change the list of articles in both places (the duplication is admittedly not ideal); use underscores instead of spaces in the titles. The query would have to be rewritten to handle mixed namespaces, like if you wanted the creators of titles in both mainspace and Draft:. —Cryptic16:36, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
But I don't wanna learn SQL @Cryptic lol. Nah, I thought it would need to be forked but haven't delved into Quarry yet. Thanks for the info. S0091 (talk) 17:04, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
1. First of all, I am wondering how an article about a television show or a film can be made by getting paid, especially a Pakistani one.
2. Secondly, a show like Barzakh (TV series) with a cast of A-class actors like Fawad Khan and Sanam Saeed and which is also a Pakistani and Indian co-produced series, which you don't see every day, I think. And if you are blaming me for creating it by getting paid, please provide an explanation with proof; otherwise, apologize to me. I will not tolerate my insults and paid-editing blame from you publicly.
3. Now about the GUNREL sources that you think I have used. First of all, I didn't know that "Bol News" was found to be unreliable; otherwise, I wouldn't have used it. So you could have just asked me about that decently or been a gentleman and told me about it. But instead, you just started attacking, like I have just seen your old discussions with every editor you have been involved with.
5. Please see someone if something is wrong with you. Let me tell you that I was planning to create an article on Umro Ayyar - A New Beginning but wasn't finding a time to do that. So someone created it right when I was thinking, and I contributed as everyone else did. Tell me, am I the only one who contributed to this article? I contributed to it because it was lacking a lot of content and sources, since I personally watched the movie. If this is a crime here, then I have been doing it since October 2010; otherwise, please apologize. There are other editors on Wikipedia like you who are trying to make it a better platform, so why are you being so egoistic and aggressive with everyone?
6. You are also accusing me of starting a draft for an upcoming animated film Draft:The Chronicles of Umro Ayyar...lol. I am really wondering if either you don't want to think or your ego is not letting you. No doubt, the film's article, which I contributed to, and this draft have something in common: their character, [[Umro Ayyar]]. Please show me anything else that you find common in them, and please clear up the blame you are putting on me. Or apologize here again; I have just heard a lot from you within a few days. It's really insulting someone openly on a public platform. And on the other hand, you might have read on my user page that I am pursuing animation, and I can now think about you: you don't check positive things for others; instead, you just look for negative things to blame someone. I have been editing animation-related articles since 2011, I think. Please blame me for everything I have done since the day I started contributing to this platform. We learn; we always learn, sometimes from our mistakes and sometimes from others help. I don't see you helping anyone here on Wikipedia; instead, you have been found taunting and blaming everyone.
7. Yes, I have been previously warned for paid editing, and yes, I was involved in that for a few weeks. I cleared everything that time, and honestly, I didn't even remember anything from those events until today, when I again read all those discussions. When I found out that paid editing was not allowed, I was really ashamed and afraid to lose my account, so I left Wikipedia because I got really busy in my real life pursuing my animation and film producer career. Now, I am again afraid of your thinking here. Why did you bring that up now, and why are you blaming me now without any proof? I need an explanation here.
8. I just saw that you have started a sock investigation against me. Very nice again. Please tell me how you think I am any one of them. I have clearly mentioned my other two accounts on my user page. I don't know or have any link to any of them. And by the way, from the look of the contributions done by users User:Jio Lohar Jio and User:Avace Khan, it might be one or either two of my brothers. All three of my younger brothers started taking an interest in Wikipedia when they used to see me working on it, so I can presume they might be editing using those accounts. But I clearly didn't know until today that these accounts even existed because I was away from Wikipedia, and I didn't even hear from them if they were editing on Wikipedia or not. Now, I need an explanation here too: why would I create other accounts and contribute to the articles (they did), which I can also do from my own account? If you don't have a clear answer for this one, please apologize here again, I am facing a great deal of insult here. I am not a new editor wandering around here uselessly. I have contributed to this platform more than you and I am still willing to do my best, only if we cooperate here with each other, which you clearly don't.
9. I also want a clarification that this User:JanAminK is not you. I received an email from User:JanAminK thinking I was Awais, and that's my younger brother, by the way. And looking from that perspective, probably one (User:Avace Khan) of the accounts you are linking me to might be his by reading the user name. I am going to ask him tomorrow if it's really him. And by the way, you can see his editing style if you can still clearly see things; it's a lot different than mine. And you can also notice that he has also been editing animation-related articles; that might be because he is also going to be an animator soon (2D illustrator yet), so that clarifies his interest. And I am a 3D animator, just for your information. But I have clearly seen your interest by now, which is just to see the negativity and mistakes of others and then taunt and blame them.
10. I don't think I am going to take revenge or taunt back, but I have seen your experience too. Your edit here has disrupted the "Featured films" section's table's layout. It's just a recent and minor mistake, I understand. But I just wanted to show you that we all make mistakes; that doesn't mean you go around blaming and harassing other editors like you are a boss here.
Please treat others as you would want to be treated if you were in their place. If you still need any explanation, please feel free to ask. Or if you still don't believe a person, then you yourself are a liar, and I can only say that. Let's swear by putting hands on the Quran if you want to go that way, for the blames you have against me right now. Give 100% proof of what you have just blamed me for, or simply apologize to me. Thank you. --Captain Assassin!«T ♦ C ♦ G»00:25, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
Look at your behavior everywhere you go. Why this attitude? I know you are more senior than me, and I will never say that I am a senior editor than you, but just re-read all of your messages once. Here, again here, and at many other places. Don't you have to face Allah someday? --Captain Assassin!«T ♦ C ♦ G»00:59, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
And listen, don't message me again and again on my talk page; if I am not available to reply, then obviously I am not available to reply. So just message me once, and I will get back to you when I am back on Wikipedia. --Captain Assassin!«T ♦ C ♦ G»01:05, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
Thanks for the novella-length message! Unfortunately, I'm short on time and energy, so I'll keep my reply brief. First off, I don't even recall interacting with you before, so there's nothing personal here. Contrary to your suggestion, I'm neither jealous nor attacking you. Actually your account recently flagged to me while I was investigating Nauman335 socks and I noticed you were also editing the same articles. And this led to discovery of some evidence confirming your continued engagement in UPE, despite warnings dating back to 2019. As @Bilby:said back then, it's fine to engage in paid editing as long as you disclose it. While I don't feel the need to apologize, but if you find my behavior unacceptable, feel free to file a report at ANI. Regarding JanAminK, just to clarify, it's a sock of Devoter (DJ Kamal Mustafa), not mine. Could you please share the contents of the email? — Saqib (talk I contribs) 06:10, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
Hi. Look, first of all, I have just checked Nauman335's edits and there is not a single similarity between us. I never edited war pages, and I like sports but don't usually edit them too, while Nauman335 has mostly done. I don't think our editing style will match even 1%, anyone can tell that. It looks clear to me that you are jealous of me, the way you said "With over 80K edits and thousands articles created, we expect better from you.", and tried to affiliate me with that user. You just want me gone and clear your way up in the Pakistanis list, please go ahead, I created that page to encourage editors, not to make them jealous. I am not trying to self-praise myself here, but meet me once please and you will see how humble I am and a kind person in real life, at least I try to be, and I don't even get jealous or get angry. I am also hardly finding any time to give to Wikipedia, but I have just started it again to satisfy my hunger for editing Wikipedia (only if people like you will let me, instead of pulling my legs). Secondly, I already told you that UPE engagement was around five years ago and I didn't know anything about it at that time, and I was ashamed of it. I can see the nature of your personality now, you are the person who will chase another one their whole life for one mistake they have already apologized for. And about ANI, I have seen you telling people around to take you to ANI on even really little matters, see, that's called pride/ego. And yes, I will share the email's contents with you. --Captain Assassin!«T ♦ C ♦ G»17:02, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
Hello
Recently you have reviewed the page Draft:Kabhi Main Kabhi Tum and declined the Draft but You do not provide the decline reason. I am really disappointed that the fully Referenced and Depth Coverage with Reliable Sources draft has been declined. The draft is provided with Reliable sources like Dawn News, The Express Tribune, Dawn (newspaper), BOL Network, Daily Jang, ARY News, 24 Digital and many more that has also their own article in Wikipedia English. Please provide me the reason for declining, so I will improve the Draft Article.
Thank you... MMJX788 (talk) 20:56, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
I've provided the reasoning. I don't think the topic meets WP:GNG as the article relies on numerous unreliable sources. --— Saqib (talk I contribs) 07:47, 31 July 2024 (UTC)
I don't think that the Draft has unreliable Sources. Dawan, ARY News , Express Tribune and more are all Reliable Sources. MMJX788 (talk) 08:10, 31 July 2024 (UTC)
July 24
Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war; read about how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.
Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Slatersteven (talk) 14:32, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
You are repeatedly removing information from members of National Assembly from a specific political party. You should stop doing so because of conflict of interest. You are changing the spelling of name to wrong. Removing his current position. Setting wrong vote counts as per source. Removing his current nomination from infobox as Federal Parliamentary secretar. Also removing his business details. Also you are removing Dubai Leaks 2024 information paragraph.
@Shirt58: Thanks for the kind words Peter! I appreciate the thought, but I have to pass on the admin role for now. I enjoy patrolling new pages and keeping an eye out for UPE and COI editors. It's a bit controversial and I think I'd like to stick to that for the time being. --— Saqib (talk I contribs) 18:08, 6 August 2024 (UTC)
Throwing random opinion & accusing others on their talkpage
I've already requested you not to use my talkpage occasionaly to express your random opinions on regular basis. If you have so much issues then file an ANI but its a humble request dont fill my talkpage with unnecessary junk & false accusations as you are doing with other Pakistani editors. Libraa2019 (talk) 16:03, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
Libraa2019, This isn’t the first time you’ve pointed out how other editors, including @SheriffIsInTown interact with me on-wiki. Look, SheriffIsInTown and I do have our disagreements, which is pretty normal, but it’s not something you need to worry about. I’m not interested in posting unnecessary comments on your tp or taking you to to ANI, as you suggested. However, when someone mentions there’s an issue with your editing, I feel it’s important to share my perspective, which is perfectly allowed. Let’s keep things friendly and not get too worked up about it! — Saqib (talk I contribs) 16:17, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
Let’s keep things friendly, i am ready from day one, will you let it be? because your history tells opposite. I feel it’s important to share my perspective, which is perfectly allowed I am doing the same and i feels it's necessary to point out & it looks like every Pakistani editor has an issue with you not just Sheriff or me. Libraa2019 (talk) 17:30, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
Libraa2019, I’m not sure what you’re trying to accomplish by repeating the same point on my tp. I repeat, it shouldn't be your concern what others say about me. Feel free to share your opinions or perspective on my tp. Unlike you, I won’t tell you not to comment here. However, please avoid repeating the same useless points over and over. — Saqib (talk I contribs) 17:36, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
Since I was mentioned, I stand by the opinion I expressed here. Saqib's behavior often goes beyond simple disagreements; when an editor disagrees with them, it seems there is no safe place on Wikipedia, and both the editor and their contributions are targeted for removal. This conduct has had a severely negative impact on WP Pakistan, an area already neglected, largely due to such behavior that discourages newcomers. I have personally experienced this type of targeting multiple times, with the most recent example being the creation of this AFD just six hours after my edit—their second edit of the day after that move—along with other previous instances. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 18:06, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
Saqib, as imagined by some
SheriffIsInTown, ...when an editor disagrees with them, it seems there is no safe place on Wikipedia... Wow, what a silly remark! I must be running around with a knife- like a Good Guy doll - chasing people off WP. Honestly, your comment seems quite off to me, but I'm not surprised. I've always looked up to you as one of the Pakistani editors I hold in high regard, but remarks like this make me reconsider that. Do I also need to highlight that you AFD'd one of my creation in retaliation? Or are you upset because this consensus was against you? Just to clarify, I’m not trying to push away editors. In fact, I’ve done a lot off-wiki, including but not limited to WikiGap, to bring in new contributors, though I don’t need to flaunt that to prove myself. So your accusation holds no real value. But if you’re upset about why I’m focusing on UPEs, I’d argue that WP is better off without them. Anyways, I don't feel like arguing with someone I consider an important part of the community. If you think my behavior is an issue, this isn't the right place to express your frustrations grievances. Just because we have several content disputes doesn’t mean you should join the bandwagon of UPEs to target me. — Saqib (talk I contribs) 18:18, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
What you’re trying to accomplish by repeating the same point on my tp Neither am i, what you're trying to accomplish by repeating the same point without evidence that i am UPE. it shouldn't be your concern what others say about me Neither it should be yours what others say about me. Saqib, You are participating in every forum in which i've involved, constantly targeting, harrasing, threatening me and what not. Just few minutes ago you were telling me to let things friendly and now called me UPE in above comment. Libraa2019 (talk) 18:40, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
Libraa2019, Your issue is that you take everything personally. I haven’t accused you of UPE recently, either directly or indirectly, and there's no need to dig up old diffs. I don’t have anything more to say on this, so let’s drop it. But if you want to push it further, that’s your call. — Saqib (talk I contribs) 18:53, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
Saqib, Will you please clarify why you wrote to Sheriff that he is joining bandwagon of UPE's. Did'nt you called me UPE here? And what about this why are you constantly relating me with block user? Do i need to mention how much times you took things personally? It started few months ago when i voted Keep in AFD initiated by you and since then you are following, threatening, harassing me and nominating my articles for deletion[10]. Don't accuse others of taking things personally when you too doing the same from day one. Libraa2019 (talk) 19:21, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
You can interpret anything differently when it's taken out of context. The quote you mentioned is followed by and both the editor and their contributions are targeted for removal. There's nothing silly about that. I’ve already expressed my opinion on your editing behavior, which I believe goes beyond mere disagreements. "It's like judging a book by a single page; context matters." Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 20:20, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
SheriffIsInTown, OK but If you're sure I’ve been targeting all these editors, why don’t you take it up at ANI instead of just whining on my tp? I'm also stand by my actions, as I believe I'm addressing UPE editors in a manner that's appropriate and justified. If the community determines that my actions are inappropriate and that I should stop, I will respect that decision. However, I will not stop based solely on your complaint. — Saqib (talk I contribs) 20:30, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
I don’t rush to ANI like you do, and I don’t believe this situation warrants one. I also don’t see any issue with addressing my concerns about your behavior directly with you. What’s wrong with that? I prefer to mend the fence before tearing it down. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 22:08, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
I must be running around with a knife- like a Good Guy doll - chasing people off WP. I would like to admit, many times i feel safe that you don't have access to reach me off-wiki otherwise God knows what would have happen. If the 3 editors (out of which SheriffIsInTown & Captain Assassin seniors) are pointing your behavior then definitely there is some issue and its up to you whether you accept it or not. Libraa2019 (talk) 05:59, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
I know I should avoid this discussion but I would only ask and suggest Saqib calm down and show good behaviour to all editors trying to contribute to Wikipedia. Based on his behavior, he thinks he is the only one better here, accusing everyone of UPEs and all. I don't think this is leading to a good end, we should work as a team and guide each other here instead of just attacking and showing bad behavior. It looks like what I have heard from my elders is true, that we Pakistanis don't like to see others (Pakistanis) going forward and achieving success in life. --Captain Assassin!«T ♦ C ♦ G»11:09, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
@SheriffIsInTownI prefer to mend the fence before tearing it down We can certainly resolve our differences, but that requires you to stop attacking me and joining the ranks of UPE editors. I’d like to reiterate that I still hold you in high regard among Pakistani Wikipedia editors, despite our several content disputes. This respect isn’t based on your high edit count but because your contributions are truly admirable. In fact, I stopped editing the 2024 Pakistani general election page because of our content disputes, as I didn’t want to escalate the matter further.
@Captain Assassin! There is good evidence that you're still involved in UPE and this evidence is with paid-en-wp. I have no interest in falsely accusing one of the most active editors from Pakistan, especially given the potential consequences. I’m well aware of the gravity of making such claims. I definitely wouldn’t want to face a Boomerang myself, especially considering someone with over 81,000 edits, unless there were substantial evidence to back it. — Saqib (talk I contribs) 12:12, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
Actually, it's the opposite; you are the one escalating the situation. When you point a finger, three are pointing back at you. You need to stop turning one content dispute into another, as I previously pointed out. This behavior, which I consider to be wikihounding, is like adding fuel to the fire, where you take a content dispute from one area and then initiate another dispute with the same editor elsewhere on Wikipedia. Libra has also complained that after opposing you in an AFD, you've been targeting their contributions. Regarding your claim that I support UPEs, I have never supported a UPE. Even if an editor is a UPE, Wikipedia’s content policies still apply. Firstly, you cannot accuse someone of being a UPE without evidence; innocent until proven guilty. Secondly, you cannot remove content solely because it was contributed by a UPE. If the content is sourced from reliable sources and relevant to the article, it should not be removed merely because of its contributor. This was the case with the 2019 Jammu and Kashmir airstrikes. It seems that some editors who always oppose pro-Pakistan edits have teamed up with you to create a consensus for its removal. It’s a numbers game, with over a billion against 240 million, and that ratio extends to WP as well. A chain is only as strong as its weakest link, and we must ensure we aren't weakening the community by undermining each other's efforts without just cause. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 14:42, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
SheriffIsInTown, This behavior, which I consider to be wikihounding Actually, it's quite the reverse - you’re the one WP:WIKIHOUNDING me for quite some time. It seems that some editors who always oppose pro-Pakistan edits have teamed up with you to create a consensus for its removal. Impressive! And now you’re actually casting WP:ASPERSIONS on @Ravensfire and Slatersteven: and others who opposed you here, implying they’re Anti-Pakistan. Anyway, your accusations against me and other editors are unwelcome here so please cease posting on my tp and address your concerns elsewhere. PS. I don’t want to come across as harsh, so feel free to make comments on my tp if they relate to content issues. Thank you! — Saqib (talk I contribs) 18:15, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
I dont know much about this topic & i should avoid this but just saw this notice which according to me was a bit partial because this topic is related to both countries and he only posted this notice in noticeboard of India & not Pakistan. Libraa2019 (talk) 14:06, 11 August 2024 (UTC)
@Saqib This was an attempt to create a partisan audience by inviting one WikiProject and not the other. Selecting an audience in this way is a form of canvassing. Because of this type of editing behavior, I don’t hold you in high regard. You can choose to either hold me in high regard or remove me from your pedestal by striking your comments; I really don’t care. If pointing out these behaviors causes you to lower your opinion of me, that’s fine. I don’t need to earn the high regard of an editor like you. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 15:15, 11 August 2024 (UTC)
┌───────────────────────────┘ SheriffIsInTown, You’re clearly ignoring my explicit request to stop posting on this thread because the discussion is heading in the wrong direction. But since you asked, let me clarify, whether one like it or not, but since Jammu and Kashmir is officially recognized as part of India, so I notified the appropriate notice board about this discussion. If I missed notifying the Pakistan Noticeboard, you had the opportunity to do so, but you didn’t either. And I don't expect you or anyone else to hold me in high regard. Let's keep our discussion civil and respectful, as it seems there’s some frustration or aggression coming through. — Saqib (talk I contribs) 15:52, 11 August 2024 (UTC)
Regardless of the status of Jammu and Kashmir, that article belongs to both the India and Pakistan projects. WP:CANVASS explicitly prohibits partisan invitations, and because this is a conflict page, if an editor is inviting one project, it is their moral responsibility to invite the other project to ensure a balanced discussion. I was not even aware that you had invited one project without including the other. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 17:18, 11 August 2024 (UTC)
Hello, Saqib. Please check your email; you've got mail! Message added 17:37, 9 August 2024 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
Jdcomix, I understand my comment may have been upsetting. I’ve since struck it off, as my intention was to highlight a general concern about behavior, not to target any specific editor. On a different note, did you use the Emergency user slap button on my tp above to Whack me? It seems there might be an issue with that direct link. — Saqib (talk I contribs) 06:14, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
Replaceable non-free use File:Shaza Fatima Khawaja.jpeg
Thanks for uploading File:Shaza Fatima Khawaja.jpeg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of non-free use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of non-free use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:
If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification, per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. -- Marchjuly (talk) 21:36, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
Marchjuly, I thoroughly checked for an image of this person under a free license but was unable to find one. That’s why I decided to upload this non-free image. If you still believe it should be removed, please let me know. — Saqib (talk I contribs) 07:56, 16 August 2024 (UTC)
Non-free images of living people are pretty much never allowed because it's almost always possible for a freely licensed image to either be found or created to serve the same encyclopedic as any non-free one. Even if such an image doesn't exist today, someone could take one tomorrow and upload it under a free license. If you feel that an exception should be made in this case for this particular person, you can use the template {{di-replaceable non-free use disputed}} template to explain why. The administrator who reviews the file will assess your argument and decide whether it's something worth further discussion. -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:33, 16 August 2024 (UTC)
Marchjuly, You’re right. However, the issue is that this person has been a lawmaker since 2013, and despite over 10 years having passed, we still don’t have a free-licensed image, so I uploaded a non-free one because she is now in the cabinet. I don’t have any other strong reasons or exception to keep this image, so if it is deleted, I'm OK with that. — Saqib (talk I contribs) 08:37, 16 August 2024 (UTC)
