Jump to content

User talk:Intothefire: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
3swordz (talk | contribs)
723 edits
contribs
No edit summary
Line 1: Line 1:
you are a biased, a-hole person who needs to stop editing pages that have nothing to do with your people or lineage. I think you are psychotic and have nothing better to do with your life than to ruin other peoples' history. Kill yourself.

==Welcome==
==Welcome==
Hello, '''{{PAGENAME}}''', and [[Wikipedia:Welcome, newcomers|welcome]] to Wikipedia. Thank you for [[Special:Contributions/{{PAGENAME}}|your contributions]]. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the '''[[Wikipedia:New contributors' help page|New contributors' help page]]''', where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type '''<code>{&#123;helpme}}</code>''' and your question on your user talk page, and someone will show up shortly to answer. Here are a few good links for newcomers:
Hello, '''{{PAGENAME}}''', and [[Wikipedia:Welcome, newcomers|welcome]] to Wikipedia. Thank you for [[Special:Contributions/{{PAGENAME}}|your contributions]]. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the '''[[Wikipedia:New contributors' help page|New contributors' help page]]''', where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type '''<code>{&#123;helpme}}</code>''' and your question on your user talk page, and someone will show up shortly to answer. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

Revision as of 19:25, 20 October 2008

you are a biased, a-hole person who needs to stop editing pages that have nothing to do with your people or lineage. I think you are psychotic and have nothing better to do with your life than to ruin other peoples' history. Kill yourself.

Welcome

Hello, Intothefire, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} and your question on your user talk page, and someone will show up shortly to answer. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and vote pages using four tildes, like this: ~~~~. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome!--Xsamix 09:27, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Why are you always writing India & Hinduism in anything pertaining to Pakistan

I have noticed that you routinely insert the word india and hinduism into many issues that have nothing to do with them particularly in reference to articles related to Pakistan. Stop falsifying history and please stick to the facts. Aimless distortion of history and the false promotion of incorrect facts and information using vague resources does not help either. Please stop doing so as this constitutes a violation of Wikipedia rules and you will be reported. Thank you.

Hinduism

Welcome to WikiProject Hinduism

WikiProject Hinduism — a collaborative effort to improve articles about Hinduism

Discussion board — a page for centralised Hinduism-related discussion

Notice board — contains the latest Hinduism-related announcements

Hindu Wikipedians — Wikipedians who have identified themselves as Hindus

Portal — a portal linking to key Hinduism-related articles, images, and categories

Workgroups — projects with a more specific scopes

For more links, go to the project's navigation template.

--D-Boy 11:08, 23 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your edit to Hindu and Buddhist archetectural heritage of Pakistan

Your recent edit to Hindu and Buddhist archetectural heritage of Pakistan (diff) was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to recognize and repair vandalism to Wikipedia articles. If the bot reverted a legitimate edit, please accept my humble creator's apologies – if you bring it to the attention of the bot's owner, we may be able to improve its behavior. Click here for frequently asked questions about the bot and this warning. // AntiVandalBot 19:52, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Kashmiri Muslim tribes from Hindu Lineage

A tag has been placed on Kashmiri Muslim tribes from Hindu Lineage, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. If you plan to add more material to the article, I advise you to do so immediately. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources which verify their content. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait a while for you to add contextual material, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. – ipso 12:37, 1 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

I will soon discuss with you all the points you raised. Siddiqui 07:22, 5 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Thanks

Hi, thanks to youe comments. I could not understand which of writing made you smile. I respect all relegions and beleive that no relegion supports evil practices and these bad people exist every where belonging to all relegions and their deeds must not be taken that their trait is commanded by relegion.

I appologise if my commnets about khatris in section pre partion people of sheikhan have digusted you. But it is a tarit found every where in business class. Hope you will guide me at wikipedia. With regards —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Abulfazl (talk • contribs) 07:41, 19 January 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Hi

Read your comments. You are absolutely right this stereotyping is so much common that people don't think of going into depth and watch if such things really exist or not, and I have observed it my own case as being a Shia Muslim from childhood I used to here from even my closest freinds the things that had no root had I got astonished when I heard these kind of things about ourselves like shia cut the childern and make haleem from their flesh or shia Quran had 40 parts etc. I happened to view gita, Sri granth sahib and I think that these holy books also represnt the muslim beleif of tawheed and also being chadhar from chander bansi rajputs I can never be claiming any kinda arabian ancestry and beibg descended from a holy lineage can not make myself respectable unless my deeds are good enough. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Abulfazl (talk • contribs) 06:37, 24 January 2007 (UTC).[reply]

wikistalking and harassment

Please do not leave messages such as the ones you did on the userpage and talkpage of user:Szhaider. It construes stalking and harassment, which will not be tolerated. You will be blocked without further warning. Rama's arrow 15:00, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, I'm afraid your desire to post that comment is not justifiable - we do not attack other users on Wikipedia or brand them one way or another. Please have a look at WP:CIVIL, WP:NPA. I suggest you not add that post anywhere - the context will be clear to anyone viewing the page history. Rama's arrow 17:51, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The above warning was received by me in response to the following message I posted on user Szhaider s talk page . [[1]]

My refferences to his post were factual , yet he found them offensive enough to make a complaint about me . Made me wonder why he was so eager to have my comment removed from his talk page specially since I had not made any offensive or factually incorrect comment .... a bit ironic yes . [[2]]Intothefire 06:36, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Its Abulfazl

Read your comments about article Dulla Bhatti by the way I just created it with minimum information and other wikipedia community member aded worthful information to it. Another thing about the name abulfazl, Abulfazl was not only the writer of Ain-e-Akbari in history and not my name because of him but Abulfazl is the Kuniat (a type of name in arabic) of Hazrat Abbas Alamdar (A.S) the Son of Syedushuhda Imam Hussain (A.S). I just updated you because I felt as if you were mingling this name with the name of one of member of mughal darbar and taunting about an article being written about a rebellion of mughal darbar, by a person having such name. And If I took it wrong please ignore these lines.


Feel Sory

I feel sorry, it may have hurt you but I did not intended it. I hope you will ignore my act. Abulfazl 08:14, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Wikiproject or Wikiportal Punjab?

I contacted User:DaGizza about creating a project for Punjab or possibly even a portal. He approved so I am asking more people now. The project is to be a collaborative effort between Indian Punjabi and Pakistani Punjabi and other non-Punjabi people, this should hopefully also generate good feeling between Indian and Pakistani sides. — Nobleeagle [TALK] [C] 09:38, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, see Portal:Punjab :) — Nobleeagle [TALK] [C] 21:40, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Rohtas Fort

Hi, I had deleted the WP:India tag previously added by my bot as the article seemingly has nothing to do with India. You have undone the deletion and reinstated the tag without giving any reason. Can you please let me know how the fort is connected with India? — Lost(talk) 10:53, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Request please explain what would constitute " related to India " in terms of the logic prevailing on wekipedia with regard to the shared heritage of India and Pakistan .The tag was not originally instated by me ,however I was surprised to see it removed . Intothefire 11:44, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The tag was instated by my bot. It picked up all articles within relevant categories and tagged the talk pages with the India project tag. Today while assessing, I saw that the fort has no connection to India except for perhaps its name. Hence I removed the tag. The tag simply means that the project team takes care of the maintenance of the article and hopefully helps it reach featured status. — Lost(talk) 12:12, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Your response does explain to me the technical aspect with regard to the tag ....however you do not seem to have responded to the larger question you raised viz "Can you please let me know how the fort is connected with India?" and my request thereof to you to please explain "what would constitute " related to India " in terms of the logic prevailing on wikipedia with regard to the shared heritage of India and Pakistan " , await your response Intothefire 12:33, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I always maintain that we should not get too caught up in the nitty-gritties of a situation. Very simply put, as a member of the India project, would you be willing to devote time on this article to make it better so that information about the article and about India is better transmitted to the wikipedia readers? If yes, go ahead and add the tag and assess it for the future editors. If not, do not add the tag. Spend your energy making another article better. Hope that explains my point of view. Do let me know if you have further questions — Lost(talk) 14:17, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Adding to my response, if an article is about a place/person who was related to India pre independence but shifted to Pakistan later on, the India tag can be added and there is a pre=yes parameter to address such situations — Lost(talk) 15:04, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

I had heard this word hussaini but really did not know whats the background thanks for informing me, and such informative knowledge information from you is always welcomed. Abulfazl 07:55, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Again

Again Thanks for your support but I dont how revret the table of household goods which has been corrupted by Tuncrypt. Abulfazl 08:50, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Quotes

LOL. If I knew about the topic I would have helped. As a reader I am saying is that there are too many quotes in section, I hope you agree to that. Wont do any harm if we move the quotes to wikiquote or possibly a new article. or the section can be turned into a narrative with few quotes and ref. At the moment the section is a quote farm by definition. --Webkami 19:31, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ibn Battuta

Can you cite any evidence of him being a slave? I did a search of the page and found the word slavery only twice (the two slavery categories).Bakaman 15:00, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In relation to this edit.Bakaman 18:29, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Here let me be more straightforward. I looked at the slave categories while viewing the page, I found no evidence or even mention of the word "slave" before I saw those categories. Since you quickly undid my edit, I was wondering what evidence you had to suggest Ibn Battuta was ever a slave.Bakaman 14:55, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
No problem, but if there is an article on his writings, then that would probably be a relevant category.Bakaman 19:17, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dhimmi

You can find the attribution to dhimmi here and here at the site. It appears the target site has been upgraded and the links now redirect elsewhere. I can't recall which article the quote is now in, I would happily go back and fix/improve the quality of the quotations if you can remind me where you found them.

As far as dhimmis go historically society has been bigoted and stratified. The indians had their caste systems, Persia had the Aryans and non-aryans, Byzantine had greek and non-greeks, the colonials had the Europeans and the natives, similarly the Umayyads had Arab and non-arabs the list goes on. Take a society, take a history and even further take a period within that history and you will find a "superior social strata" always, especially between conquerors and subject peoples. Among Umayyads the non-arabs were further politically segregated as dhimmis on the basis of religion. What that meant differed according to the differing imperial monetary and political milieu, the definition of what constituted a "loyal citizen"; so it is a mixed bag that we can take up in a more detailed discussion if you prefer. Coming around to the last part of the argument, I would definitely prefer being a dhimmi compared to a colonial era slave and if i was an Iraqi and my nation had to have been conquered by someone I would be happier that the conquerors were the Americans and not someone else. It's all relative to the historical period. I do however agree that "granted" is an inappropriate term in this case and tender my apologies.

P.S: Assume good faith.--Tigeroo 20:15, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"It may indicate" is his take on the interpretation of what a singular piece of evidence, the usage of "burxan", could imply and only a precursor to two more paragraphs where he offers further supporting evidence of why he beleives that this was indeed behind the concept of "burxan". Also note that this period is the Ghaznavid Period, a couple of centuries after Qasim. From the time of Qasim through the two semi-independent arab states later this status had been institutionalized and this status which I think your query was about can be verified easily from many other sources if that is your concern. Evan as late the Mughals, Dar a shikoh is documented as considering the "upanishads" as one of the books. Reading the source and my sentence again though I see a second issue and a need to restate the sentence vis-a-vis Burxan, my earlier interpretation and understanding seems to have been a bit flawed on it's relevant import.
Just a pointer however, dhimmi started as a means of defining rights of the inhabitants of the state. The criteria applied for regulating citizenship was alleigance to the Islamic ideals and character of the state. i.e. "subjects who live within and are therefore protected by the state (rule of law, force of arms etc.)" but not a part of it. This itself grew from an intial tribal Arab-centric definition. The various forms of interpretation it took is a story of "social evolution" in itself defined by political, social, economic and ideological circumstances. I see no reason to defend any concepts of "social superiorities" wether based on religion, race, creed, language, ideology or sex; those we are better off growing out of in the course of social evlolution. However, it is also a natural tendency of people to "differentiate" and label among themselves wether in some manner. I am afraid looking at "social stratification" in simplistic terms such as denigration or demonization is also not adequate. Even within a monolithic and uniform society divisions are drawn; today it is "nationalism", "border controls", right-wingers left wingers and what-not so we need to be ever vigilant that our egoistic need to assume, or feel that we somehow better/ different from everyone else is carefully managed.
As far as the Kaffir and Momin things goes, I think it is not really a rejection of their heritage or it's acheivements, but a sense akin to that one may feel for the stone age man or a mistake you made in your past. You get enlightened and grow up and then you are better for it. Yes, it is a value judgement on the past but it's much more nuanced that the way you put it. It is equally problematic to view historical ages as some form of utopia. Afterall they were human too, prone to the same frailties and needs and prey to the same vices that the human society is continously evolving to deal with under changing conditions.
My apology was tendered if the sentence construction in the article and the misuse of "granted". I agree with your reasoning for it being inappropiate, that's all.--Tigeroo 08:51, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think we have a fundamental problem with a central theme of your last post. The Kaffir and Momin was simply a statement to orient my paragraph on idiomatically and to respond to your comments on the concept you put forth vis-a-vis a view of the past heritage stated as "Day before yesterdays Kafir or Dhimmi is yesterday Momin....degenerate..demonize.." and not really oriented as a blanket equation of kaffir=caveman as you have put forth.

As for the past, yes there are mistakes that were made in the past and that I believe should not be redone today. You would not go back to monarchies, feudal lords, slavery, casteism, serfdom, de-industrialization, burning witches and what not the list goes as human society grows up. So yes, it does entail that you understand your past and gain knowledge of what they got right and what they got wrong. Learning from the mistakes of the past is important if you don't want to repeat them. If your forefathers made mistakes I think it would be extremely ignorant to repeat them. Understanding their mistakes is important as seeing what they got right. Moreover more than one of our grandfathers was indeed a caveman, and calling him that is not disrespectful. Nor is passing a value judgment on them wrong either, i.e. a lot of "grandfathers" in the sub-continent, much closer up the family tree, married really really young girls, and so no believing they were wrong would not be disrespectful either.

All of these things are unfortunately value judgments. Yes, I believe a lot of things that occurred in historical society have no place in modern society. You need of course remember that in a caveman society using flint to start a fire was the absolutely correct way to do things. Would you do that today?? Everything is relative and needs to be accounted for in the proper social, economic, ideological and technological context.

As for ideological value judgments, we make them everyday by choosing a particular religion or even rejecting religion we are saying those who ascribe to a different set are wrong. Consciously and sub-consciously by what we choose to do we make value judgments whether it is capitalism or communism, free society or autocratic rules. Even by emigrating we are saying our country is worse than the others no matter how much nationalistic jingoism we may throw up. Making moral/value judgments is human. The difference between it and bigotry is that you have a sound reason upon which you base that decision rather than a generic disdain. I am sorry, but yes I do believe some people have got it wrong, but it would also be equally insane interpret that statement as I believe that I am perfect.

As far the Saudi, I believe they are wrong too but for a different reason than the one you imply or deduce from my previous post. Simply because by erasing the past you have erased the lessons that can be learnt from them. If it is a mistake of your past, you do not erase it. If you believe it is an improvement then that would at least be justifiable. The fundamental question and shaper of human society has always been "How do you deal with those who you do not agree with?"--Tigeroo 17:54, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers from a Momin back atcha.--Tigeroo 04:33, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Arora and Khatri

You are mistaken about my POV, see my edits again, I have been readding information about Aroras onto the page. I have also been converting links from List of Arora surnames to List of Arora surnames on Wiktionary. dishant 22:31, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why did you add negative portrayal of Yudhistira on Malhotra? dishant 01:46, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
No, it's nothing like that and Yudhistira did have a gambling problem, I was just wondering what the necessity was to add that on the Malhotra page. Anyway, since the Mahabharata is one of your favourite books, can you confirm that Yudhistira was NOT a Malhotra? dishant 23:49, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

==Have undone Dishant55555 revert of Intothefire edit and further rvandalism of the Malhotra page to the last NPOV version by Intothefire Dishant5555 seems to suffer from issues as he keeps vandalising that and other pages of users who correct his exaggerated claims of the Luthra family importance in Indian history== —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 81.149.27.200 (talk) 21:01, 13 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Qasim

Btw, I had removed the Baladhuri comment which I believe prompted you talk about Baladhuris POV in the first place as unnecessary as well. So I hope that addresses the your concern of POV glorification. As an unrelated aside, all histories have a certain POV which is why wiki source prefer tertiary assessments to be quoted that would have hopefully removed the bias present in primary sources. Another reason why I felt the direct Baladhuri quotation initially present was inappropriate and possibly misleading.--Tigeroo 09:43, 14 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Huh??? Suppress what?? An exposition on Baladhuri on a Qasim page?? Maybe if you explain the point of the exposition we can acheive the ends you seek, without wandering off-topic into a summary of Baladhuri's career. I assumed the point was to illustrate the POV of the glory statement that was inserted there. Such a statement didn't belong, definitely not in the section summarizing his death.
If you are talking about the condensation of the accounts to get to the point right away, then it is good English writing practice for such articles to place the subject right at the start and develop the details further along the paragraph. Earlier it seemed like there were three accounts instead of the two mentioned in the first line. I do not follow you at all, what is being hidden or suppressed here? I don't see it, but if you enlighten me about it we can come to a ready solution.--Tigeroo 15:16, 14 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Huh?? First Egypt now Pakistan?? You need to stop thinking in terms of nationalistic or creed based jingo. First Baladhuri then Arabic you keep getting it wrong, check the facts and read the entire source and understand it before you make edits. Correcting your errors and educating you is just tedious but nothing to get worked up about. Life is good.--Tigeroo 21:20, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

case conversion

Can you justify capital letters on "clan" or "conversion"? Please use Category:Hindu clan conversions to Islam and give that category a parent category. -- RHaworth 18:38, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Change what? -- RHaworth 18:48, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Babbar

Please note i have created this article from the outset with regards to the french rapper of the same name. Rather than arbitrarily edit an existing article you will need to create a new article and add a 'disambiguation' link at the top of the current Babbar article so that people looking for information on your topic will know where to go to. If you or others keep re-editing the article i have created i'll have to refer this to someone who can arbitrate. --Baston1975 08:06, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to WP:India

Welcome!

Hi, and welcome to the India WikiProject! We're a group of editors working to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India.

A few features that you might find helpful:

There are a variety of interesting things to do within the project; you're free to participate however much—or little—you like:

  • Want to know how good our articles are? The assessment department is working on rating the quality of every India article in Wikipedia.
  • Can you code? The automation department uses automated and semi-automated methods to perform batch tasks that would be tedious to do manually.

If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to ask another fellow member, and we'll be happy to help you. Again, welcome! We look forward to seeing you around! — Lost(talk) 02:35, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Intofthefire

I have had busy week at work, I have had no time to deal with fixing the poor quality edits you usually make, but now it is the weekend so I will fix things. Please do read up all those links I gave you and look around for what consitutes good and quality material. Even the quality and contents of your posts on my discussion are an embarassment. P.S Another tip, when you create a new discussion wether on a article page or a user page, it makes like a lot easier to follow what is going on if you add the new content to the bottom of the page instead of inserting it at random any what where.--Tigeroo 11:06, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Either you have too inflated an ego if thats what you beleive or you are just yelling loud enough to try and distract attention from the shortcomings of your edit. You might even claim I am stalking you or mine and your user talk pages next!! Maybe you should scroll back the history bar on those and check, my interest in those articles predates you even beginning to post your opinions as facts on wikipedia. You didn't attribute the nursery rhyme quoted either!! Bad, bad!!--Tigeroo 09:12, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hamsaya

With respect, I find this article to be inappropriate and offensive to Jats and Awans. I have requested deletion for this.

In view of the haste in which it was created, I'd rather believe that perhaps the haste is the reason for this mistake and not a deliberate attempt to undermine an entire Awan community. You are also incorrect to my origins, I am not an Awan. I shouldn't have to be to take offence at what is written about another respectable tribe.

You are obviously passionate about your area of interest. What I would advise is take your time, do some proper research and try to be cohesive.

I suggest you curb your personal opinions and bias towards the Muslim community. They do not all hate their Indian counterparts or their Indian heritage! But simply stating one sided cases and articles trying to remind them of their ancient heritage does, as Malik Awan stated, ignore their current Islamic identity which they predominantly hold more dearer than their lineal identity. Try and understand this bro, and perhaps Inshallah you will help create a cohesive respectful bridge between our respective communities/nations rather than (indirectly/directly) offending them through insensitivity.

My job is to advise, whether you endeavour to aid this cohesion, or ignore this and continue is up to you my friend. God willing, you will understand for the best. Enjoy the weekend.--Raja 12:00, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your latest post is quite troubled, (as I can see from your other work, but hey...) either way, I statde the rest was your decision. Eithr way, I tried.
Your statement that you didnt realise we work in teams I found rather confusing, but more so, sad. If it's because I gave Tigeroo a Barnstar, it was out of respect for his contributions in area that is important, rather than an opinion of him personally. The fact YOU just compacted me and whoever you thought else was included into a team, is evident of your mentality, not mine. I dont request/expect you to understand this, so in the least, considering your immature response, I request that you dont post any further accusations or ill derived opinions on my page.
I am still open for help regarding tribal history wherever you deem me fit and I'd like to think that you are available for the same. Personal opinions and assumptions are unproductive, but thats just my estimation, you will no doubt have your own. --Raja 20:59, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Hamsaya

Intothefire

You recently left a message for me, which I have only just read. To be honest, I am far too busy to re-engage in a debate over this issue. I made my feelings abundantly clear vis-à-vis this matter (including commenting on the source material you keep referring to in defence of your article) and if you still cannot comprehend why I, along with others, quite rightly nominated your article for deletion, then so be it.

As for the analogies you provided, they bear no relevance to the points I made. And as for your desire to record "the Hamsaya practice" the "practice" you refer to is no longer practiced as was outlined by your article (and this has been the case for quite some time now). Furthermore, the groups that your article referred to have not been addressed as Hamsaya (an appellation rooted in ignorance and prejudice) in the NWFP for a considerable period of time. In fact, presently, Awans in the NWFP are widely referred to as Qazi by the Pathan community, something that I observed during my stay in the NWFP.

You say that you did not set out to cause offence - I am willing to accept that. However, your article was also erroneous - particularly in allusion to Awans residing in regions of the Punjab bordering the NWFP - and highly problematic (and I don't have time to go into this again. Suffice to say, I along with others also pointed out that defining the term Hamsaya would realistically involve including the actual, widely used and innocuous, Hindi-Urdu definitions of this term, which in itself throws up problems).

By the way, if you have carefully read through comments I have made elsewhere, you will discover that I am not amongst those of Pakistani origin who denigrate or stereotype the Hindu community, nor do I have a problem conceding that the majority of Pakistanis, including those who ancestors arrived in the Subcontinent from Arabia and Persia, can to varying degrees, trace their ancestry back to individuals who professed Hinduism.

Of course, there are just as many individuals in India who create crude stereotypes regarding the Muslim community as there are Pakistanis who indulge in negatively stereotyping the Hindu community.

I have nothing more to say on this subject. Malik Awan 1 03:03, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

See my reply on the Bomba dynasty. I agree, co operation is best. Let's hope this begins a better relationship dude. I dont bare any grudge against you, if anything, I want people from both sides of our countries to appreciate each other better, perhaps through this sites info we can. But we must follow rules etc, and hopefully, Inshallah we will get there. Until then, good luck mate.--Raja 15:30, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am not interesting in your Political motives (which I might add are becoming increasing apparent, so much for my blind trust in your words...) but what I do care about is your misrepresentation of Muslim tribes. You never answer any questions to your assertions and yet, you continue to make them? It's up to you, if you want to work together in a neutral way, I am up for it. If not, dont expect me or any other users to sit back and watch you pretty vandalise pages with nonsensical POV original research. --Raja 13:33, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reply

Hahaha! I really liked the "ai rokom cholba na!!" bit. Hehe...nice. Nice to meet you.

Regarding the removal of cuisine section in Delhi, the article follows Wikipedia:WikiProject Indian cities and Wikipedia:WikiProject Indian states. Both the projects have acted as effective guidelines for producing multiple Featured Article.The guidelines suggest to incorporate culinary specialties/notabilities within the Culture section.

Delhi is also a featured article. Any major changes in a featured article should first be discussed in the talk page of the article, per the general norms in wikipedia (no rule though). So I reverted your additions. Basically if cuisine of Delhi (or' for that matter any state or city) is discussed in a separate section, many other topic deserve similar other devoted sections. As a consequence, the article would become huge. Wikipedia, in general, follows Wikipedia:Summary style. Have a read of it. Let's rather try to build up nice daughter articles, and provide links in the main article. For example, Indian cuisine can be considered as a daughter article of India! Hope this clears things. Cheers.--Dwaipayan (talk) 02:01, 15 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment

I saw you complain on the talk pg about me removing the word terrorist and replacing it with militant. See this policy WP:TERRORIST. IP198 18:06, 1 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WP:WQA alert

Hello User:Intothefire. I have responded to the alert placed by User:Tigeroo placed at WP:WQA. My response can be found here. I hope you will take what I say under advisement and will ask me any questions you might have. Sarcasticidealist 19:32, 1 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your password

I'm not a technical expert, but I suspect that either somebody else made the edit from the same computer that you've been using (while you were still logged in) or your password has been somehow compromised. I'd suggest you bring the issue to the Wikipedia:Help desk; there should be someone there who can answer your question better than I can.

In the meantime, I've reverted the edit. Sarcasticidealist 18:12, 4 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Trouble at MbQ

I'm sorry you have to deal with that kind of treatment. Don't give up defending appropriate content. Arrow740 05:11, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Deletions by Tigeroo on article Muhammad bin Qasim

Your protection banner on this article was till the 22nd ....on the 23 when it was removed there were blanket deletions by user Tigeroo again . This blanket deletions of sourced content by Tigeroo has been going on for months ...I have been making efforts at concensus building on the talk page ...how is this deletion by Tigeroo going to stop ....what is the next step ?? Please advise .
Cheers
Intothefire 05:53, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to take a wait-and-see approach with this. I would not be surprised if the article needs to be protected again. -- tariqabjotu 03:12, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Khatri

Just want to let you know that IP struck again: [3]. I reverted it already. Is there some sort of dispute there? -WarthogDemon 01:19, 30 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In that case I'll watch the page for awhile. :) -WarthogDemon 20:24, 30 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
What about this edit?. -WarthogDemon 20:18, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reply

Thanks for dropping by. First of all I'm happy to inform you that I am not the mysterious ip User:70.174.180.38 . I am not new to Wikepedia and my edits in the Kshatriya articles are documented under this name if not Maharaj Devraj, I did not agree with the way Khatri was put into the Suryavanshi section, so I removed the demeaning comments but I did not remove the Khatri link out of the section, check in the history. Besides, I do not edit articles which I do not have any knowledge upon and if I disagree with what is written in an article I would discuss it rather than vandalize. For that reason, I have removed your reference to my name in the page of your friend User:70.174.180.38. By the way, where then should Khatri be placed in the Kshatriya article, Suryavansh or not I personally do not know, or under Other Kshatriya tribes perhaps?? it would be great if you could look into it and fix the page for what is most appropriate. Checking from his contributions I would guess that User:70.174.180.38 is a Khatri himself, as for myself I am a Kachwaha Raja, not Maharaja as you have suggested, that would be my uncle. Cheers. Devraj Singh 03:07, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

well its not entirely trash it holds some little truth, but the point i want to make is you and others would be quick to shoot down my edit but what about this bloated, falsely boastful article(jat) with some false references(how low), the incredible length, and some false facts, will those be corrected? the articles already not credible, so comments like mine wont look too out of the ordinary there.

cheers —Preceding unsigned comment added by 211.30.222.155 (talk) 14:14, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reply

Do let me know what needs to be corrected and what false facts you refer to? If there is any thing in an article that is not correct than it should be 1.) addressed, 2.) discussed and 3.) corrected!! (That’s the whole point about wikipedia). So if you find an article in wikipedia to be unjust than please raise your objections, point by point. If it is an article which I am associated with than I can assure you that all facts which I put in to wikipedia can be verified, if it deals with ancient history than it is put under 'Legend', I have my fair-share of academia decency. Being an amateur historian myself, I hope you do your readings prior to raising some protests on issues of which you are not familiar with.

Regarding the length of the articles, with the number of wiki articles, there are articles of variable lengths, some are long and some are short, depending on the details and facts that could (or has) been put into it. Rest assured.

May be the reason people are quick to shoot down your edits is because you haven't registered, and that is at times seen as vandalizing, perhaps you could start by registering yourself. Devraj Singh 05:32, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Panjabi wikipedia

Ever considered contributing to Panjabi wikipedia?--Eukesh (talk) 20:43, 24 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dewan Mokham Chand

"No Citation" tag has been removed from this page as per your request. Thank-you for adding them and making it a better article. --Pmedema (talk) 15:50, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

IP edits

Hello,

In reply to your question, no I do not post under 90.196.190.207, why do you ask anyway? :-)

Pahari Sahib, 16:22, 1 January 2008 (GMT)

Well in answer to your question, I would agree that "cited contributions are better than deletions of cited content", Happy New Year to you too.

Pahari Sahib, 16:44, 1 January 2008 (GMT)

Re: Awan page

I have just seen your note on my talk page, yeah this guy actually IS serious.... after all it is Talagang, feel free to revert my edit if you want, I agree to this - we have consensus :-)
We should have something of comedic quality on the page :-)

Pahari Sahib (talk) 08:19, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Pirooz

I have reverted your re-addition of the erroneous material to Pirooz. That material is actually about Peroz I. Please see my comments on Talk:Pirooz. --Ghostexorcist (talk) 06:41, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed the unrelated material that you added to the talk page. As I stated before, that material is about Peroz I and not Pirooz II. I will continue to delete any material unrelated to Pirooz II. This is not an edit war. Peroz I was the son of Yazdgird II and Pirooz II was the son of Yazdgird III. You are mixing one up one for the other.
You do not have to add a new thread each time something happens. Just continue the discussion under your original post. Please see Wp:Talk page. --Ghostexorcist (talk) 20:12, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry If I came off as rude, but you continued to re-add material even after I provided proof that it was placed on the wrong page. I changed the title of the page to avoid further confusion. --Ghostexorcist (talk) 19:08, 9 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Punjab Chiefs

I have nominated the article for deletion. you can comment here. Noor Aalam (talk) 00:30, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Punjab Chiefs

An editor has nominated Punjab Chiefs, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Punjab Chiefs and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 00:59, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Kakkezai are NOT Punjabi_Shaikh.

With all due respect, I have noticed that you are trying to portray that Kakkezai are Punjabi_Shaikh by using a quote from Denzil Ibbetson, Edward MacLagan, H. A. Rose, "A Glossary of The Tribes & Casts of The Punjab & North West Frontier Province", 1911, pp 502 Vol II. Here is the direct link to that pageKakazai Pashtun descent. I find it interesting that you are NOT pointing to the confusion of Denzil Ibbetson which he has outlined under a footnote, "Mackenzi says the Kakkezai are also called Bulledee (Bileladle) but he does not explain the term. Gujrat Sett. Rep., p. 27. Bulledee may be transliteration of Baledi 'one who herds oxen': Pujnabi Dicty., p. 86". Should you be able to read Urdu, then please feel welcome to read these pages, Page 176-177, Page 178-179 and Page 18-181 of Tazkara (also called "Tazkira-e-pathan"), a book by Khan Roshan Khan.

As far as the matter of Kakkezai being Punjabi_Shakih is concerned, I would like to further invite you to get hold on another book in Urdu, "Tareekh-e-Kakazai" (a.k.a. "Hidayat Afghani - Tareekh-e-Kakazai Tarkani" (Originally Published May, 1933), which debunks that theory. And last but NOT the least, you are more than welcome to visit more material on Kakazai Pashtun tribe by visiting this Flickr page, which is full of scanned material. McKhan (talk) 12:30, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for your kind response. However, with all due respect and apology, what I gather from having Kakkezaion Wikipedia along-with Kakazai that there is an attempt being made to prop up the Pujanbi_Shaikh clan which, I am afraid, also goes against the spirit of Wikipedia guidelines. I did not blank the Kakkezai page (Please, feel welcome to review the history.) but simply redirected it to Kakazai as that page is simply causing confusion for Wikipedia readers by creating an impression that there is a difference between Kakkezai and Kakazai NOT only in spellings but also in their ancestory. I would like to reiterate that I am Kakazai by myself and I have done quite an extensive research on the topic of Kakazai. The quote which is being used is a disputed quote under the light of "Tareekh-e-Kakazai" (a.k.a. "Hidayat Afghani - Tareekh-e-Kakazai) Tarkani" (Originally Published May, 1933) as well as pages, Page 176-177,

Page 178-179 and Page 18-181 of Tazkara (also called "Tazkira-e-pathan"), a book by Khan Roshan Khan. The writer of "Tareekh-e-Kakazai" (a.k.a. "Hidayat Afghani - Tareekh-e-Kakazai) Tarkani" (Originally Published May, 1933) has addressed the quote which is being used on this page quite thoroughly. Indeed, I appreciate your contention, however, I find it unfair to treat quotes written by the Western authors as authentic quotes compare to the books written by the authentic / native historians of the region on the relevant / pertinet subject matters. I, sincerely, hope that you will kindly think about it. Best regards. Sincerely, McKhan (talk) 08:16, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Categories

I noticed that in many articles in question the category Category:History of Pakistan has been deliberately replaced by Category:Pre-Islamic heritage of Pakistan. I don't find the categories for Pre-Christan heritage of Italy, Greece, France, Germany, Russia, Spain, etc. Their historical articles fall in their respective history categories. The Category:Hindu history and Category:Ancient Greeks in Asia were probably a mistake I will go back and check my changes. The Muslim heritage places in India such as Bareilly, where Barelwi sect was formed which is followed by 50% of Pakistani Muslims or Deoband of Deobandi sect, and Ajmer which is the biggest Muslim pilgrame site in India of Moinuddin Chishti does not have any Muslim tags. Actually I support this since cities should not have any religious tags unless they are exlusively pilgramage sites. We cannot have tags in small towns or villages in Pakistan if they had Hindu or Sikh population before 1947. Then over 50% of Pakistani cities and towns will have these tags. Then we should also be adding tags in Indian towns an villages that have Muslims before 1947. Lets work together to resove this issue. Misaq Rabab (talk) 13:03, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Tanoli

I see you have been putting in the references that I myself had added years ago to this article. In truth, the tribe has even been mentioned as Janjua rajput in origin too lol (I even have the sources!) but some really lame and extremist editors keep removing it....

It's good your working to enhance this part of the tribe's knowledge. I may have argued with you in the past, but I am glad someone is keeping some part of history of any tribe there.

Keep it up dude.

--~Raja~ (talk) 11:05, 8 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]


I would appreciate if you stopped making baseless accusations.

Hi, there. I understand your concern with the Cheema article. However, all of contributions to the article are cited as there was a dispute with another user who is now banned, so for that reason I specifically made sure by sources were credible and backed up. Therefore, I find it inappropriate for you to leave baseless accusations against me on my page. Unfortunately, from the time I last edited the article to looking at it today. I understand there are huge problems with the article, as all sorts of useless information is added to the article, generally under the modern subheading. However, as I don't edit much, rather being making baseless accusations against me, why not try to improve the article? Its nonsensical to leave a few comments on my talk page accusing me of something which one you can't backup and two you don't have any evidance of. --Street Scholar (talk) 12:59, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

3swordzreply

You left me a message a while back whining about bias. Care to elaborate?

"Bias" is actually having a reputation for crappy edits and a Hindutva slant, which your talk page is flooded with complaints about. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 3swordz (talk • contribs) 10:29, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your comment

I believe if you would consult this page, you will get your answers [4] about any sources of information, contentious, questionable or not. --Shanti bhai (talk) 11:37, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Shanti Bhai

Firstly are you same as user 3swordz.I have good reason to believe this may be the case , as there are blaring simmalirities and anomalies in your and 3wordz posts for example in your reply to me and the heading of the response

No, you are absolutely wrong.

Next moving to the main issue Why did you delete my post of 14th September from your talk page? a)Your deletion of my courteous post is astonishing and unmerited. as it specifically pertains to discuss with you - your insertion of citation request tags on 15 articles. Such as wikipedia articles on Parmara , Bhera ,Sabharwal , Khawaja Shaikh ,Kukhran ,Sikh Rajput ,Khatri , Suri ,Saini …

No, if you have a look below, it pertains to ask me specific questions regarding middle eastern sources, which I have provided a wiki link for you to consult and understand. I do not make wiki policies, I try to follow them. I apologise if you were offended at not recieving a more detailed reply, my work load has been somewhat strong hence I thought it best to not ignore and at least leave a quick reply. YOu have totally taken this the wrong way and I find that insulting. You also have no right to tell me what I can keep or delete from MY OWN TALK PAGE. That is my prerogative, not yours user:intothefire.

b)It is also paradoxical that considering your zealous labors to tag citation requests on scores of articles accompanied often by sardonic comments you have hardly posted any cited content yourself on any article??

That is incorrect, because all users are encouraged to challenge uncited info and claims. I have done my duty. I have also contributed to Ibbetson's info from Punjab Castes on Saini page and cited numerous other sources for the claims there. I also tidied up sections of the Sikh Rajputs article, the Parmar article (though citations tags were added for the article's betterment). You are stalking me and also making incited propoganda claims on your articles also. Loking at your edits, you have been putting Ibbetson's work all over tribes history pages. But If I did so, it is wrong? This is not done....

c)why you have even nominated an article for deletion on Sikh Rajput and are ardently discussing to have this article deleted and yet delete discussion on your own page ?

This is incorrect, I nominated the article for COMMENTS, NOT DELETION. That deletion tag was later requested by user:Mspraveen and user:Roadahead. If you read the AFD comments page, I recommended a keep for the article and even worked to tidy it up and format it to it's present wiki friendly content today. I also gave a Barnstar to the Consensus lead for keeping the article and not deleting it, despite the heat surrrounding it. I cleaned up the articles negative propoganda, which despite tags for over one year were never sourced, and hence warranted immediate clean up of the info. So please get your facts right.

Lets look at my post you have deleted from your talk page again .

As you have put the citation tags on scores of articles , it behoves you to discuss this and that this discussion is important for the reason and I am recording the sequence of posts here to put the matter in its perspective .

I believe it is because you are wiki stalking me. According to your own talk page it appears you do this alot.

[edit] Intothefire post 1 of 14th September deleted by Shant bhai Hi Shanti Bhai You seem to be an old hand at Wikipedia , and remind me of another editor ! I would like to add a few citations where you have put citation needed] tags .


As Even citations can be a contentious issue on wikipedia , so before I add them and inadvertently end up in an edit war with you . I thought I would check your views on this . a)Do you agree that medieval writers such as Farishta , and Al beruni , Ibn Batuta , Barani are fit cases for citations . Would appreciate your non ambiguous statement of position .


b)Do you completely reject recording oral tradition on Wikipedia as bogus , if yes would you apply the same standard to religious articles as well such as Hadith . Cheers Intothefire (talk) 18:46, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Your response posted on my page is completely non specific to questions I asked you , I have recorded your post here for ease of discussion

Shant bhai respone on my page: I believe if you would consult this page, you will get your answers [1] about any sources of information, contentious, questionable or not. --Shanti bhai (talk) 11:37, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Shanti bhai your answer does not respond to either of my specific question (a) or (b)in my first post you deleted .

If you see above, you can see you are wrong on the above allegations, you asked specifically about those sources and not my edits (I havent changed any info or deleted info regarding cited material at all on Wikipedia.)
Secondly, my talk page is my domain and I am more at right to delete and put up what content I see fit. YOu have no right to question what I delete and put up on my talk page. You have no right to tell me what to do to my own talk page.

Next many of your citation requests or or tags are faulty and highly selective and I will specifically come to this once you begin to engage in this discussion without deletion or indistinct responses. Intothefire (talk) 19:13, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Shanti_bhai"

I am not interested in getting into personal attacks which I believe you are engaging in. Engage with me regarding the work I have done, on the articles I have editted on their talk pages rather than with me here.
My last iteration; I have every right to challenge misleading material that doesnt cite either it's sources, or appears to be POV propoganda. Any further disputes, again, raise them at the talk pages.--Shanti bhai (talk) 09:41, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

3swordzreply2

Intothefire, You're littering my talk page with crap again, man.

I think you're just another Hindu trying to subvert Sikh names and identity under your RSS crap. I'm sick of your type swarming Wikipedia.

There is no difference between Hindu Punjabi or any other type of Hindu. Your type needs to move to Haryana and stop dictating Punjab's culture as you see fit.

I am a full Punjabi Jatt Sikh, as a matter of fact. You don't know me, so don't insult me or my identity. I am not "harjit1979" or "shantibhai". I'm sure you or one of you Hindu techie friends can verify that in one way or another.

1. I never touched the "Hanjra" article. I do not know enough about them to alter anything.

2. As for the "Cheema" article, perhaps harjit 1979 and I feel similarly about this issue: Hindu mythology has no place being the bulk of an encyclopedic clan history, and being cited by questionable sources doesn't add to its authenticity. What he deleted was neither cited nor even written in a professional manner. It started with "They say that some 25 generations back their ancestor Chima...," for goodness' sake. You're really going to defend this? Facts matter, my friend, not fairy tales and hearsay.

And Jatt clans do not have specific Hindu-like rituals based solely on their last names, that's the stupidest thing I've ever heard.

I mean, "Cheemas of Sialkot district have, in common with the Sindhu and Shahi of these parts, some peculiar marriage customs, such as cutting a goat's ear and marking their foreheads with the blood, making the bridegroom cut off a twig of jhand tree (Prosopis spicigera) and so forth. [1]." Cheemas of Gujranwala district have similar marriage customs which involves making the bride cut off a twig of "jhand" tree, followed by paying a visit to local "Peer"'s or "Jathera"s (elders) shrine.

What the hell was that? Look at the damn source, it talks about the NWFP, Pirs, Gujranwala, Sialkot. Pakistan! Maybe these are Muslim rituals of the Pashtuns (NWFP) and Pakistani Punjabis, but they sure as hell aren't specifically Sikh or clan rituals. Even if the quote wasn't written by some ignorant white "spectator," you still couldn't mistake it for a blanket statement unless you just saw the word "Cheema" and ran with it. Look at the damn context.

And I've never seen a Hindu Cheema in person or in name in my entire life; their numbers are inconsequential if not nonexistent. Even among Muslim Jatts their numbers are few and far between. So prove me wrong. And for the record, I'm not a Cheema. That's not the only Jatt article that I corrected.

And again, your talk page is filled with nothing but complaints. Only you seem have an issue with my edits; I am very able to admit mistakes, but inane posts not worth my time get deleted.

So if you'll excuse me, I'm going to go clear the crap off my talk page again. "Cheers."

3swordz (talk) 11:32, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

PS I'm not sure how you could think I wasn't a Sikh, if you look at my contributions.

WikiProject Pakistan

WikiProject Pakistan Newsletter

Shi'a-Sunni sectarianism! What next?

Wikipedia has always had its fair share of disputes. The issues surrounding debates like creationism-evolutionism had been a source of many edit wars. But recently enough, the ball-of-chaos had landed in our very own court. Pakistani issues are now polluted with a new sectarianism, especially the biographical articles celebrating some of the most influential people in Pakistani politics. These edit wars annoyed administrators who had no idea how the problems should be dealt with. Instances of religious inclination (either Shi'a Islam or Sunni Islam) were changed from one or the other. Debates have kicked off on the WP Pakistan talk page. Recently enough, a new policy has come into discussion (actually, it's just a set of rules) that defines major guidlines for such issues. It now awaits votes from all Pakistani editors.

In other news: Akhtar Hameed Khan has finally reached the FA status and Islescape is the happiest person on Earth.


WikiProject India Newsletter Volume III, Issue no. 001 - June 2008

Project News
  • Tag & Assess 2008, an assessment drive initiated by the assessment department began on June 7, 2008 and will be running until July 2008. Many Wikipedians have started contributing to this mammoth task. This housekeeping activity will help manage articles in better way. You can also get involved!
  • Bot Assisted Assessment was successfully done using Bot0612 in May 2008. 1744 articles (18.5%) of all India unassessed articles were marked if they had been assessed by some other project.
  • What's Featured and Good?
  • IPL was hot on Wikipedia too!!! During the tournament, the article was among the most frequently edited articles. It is currently the only Indian article in top 100, occupying 58th spot.
  • Do you know of an article that is currently underrated? If so, please nominate the article at the Assessment Department's request for assessment. This will allow our project to get a better idea of the quality of our articles.
Article statistics and to-do lists
Article Statistics
Make visible or invisible by clicking Show or Hide, respectively.
Complete To-Do List
Make visible or invisible by clicking Show or Hide, respectively.
Current proposals and discussions
From the Editors
  • If you've just joined, add your name to the Members section of Wikipedia:WikiProject India and also may choose to get this newsletter get it delivered as desired.
  • This is your newsletter and you can be involved in the creation of the next issue (Issue 2 – July 2008). Any and all contributions are welcome. Simply let yourself be known to any of the undersigned, or just start editing!
  • The last newsletter was more than a year ago and after feeling the pinch, we got together in working towards in renewing this feature for our members. Fresh pair of legs we are, and hence can greatly improve with your suggestions and ideas. Please feel free to let us know of your thoughts. We hope to release the newsletter on a monthly/bi-monthly basis as per our initial thoughts.
Contributors to this Issue
Did You Know?
  • ... that if you need any help, advice, or have any announcements to make regarding India-related articles then you can do it here?

To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section here.

This newsletter is automatically delivered by TinucherianBot (talk) 06:23, 16 June 2008 (UTC) [reply]

WP:PAK Newsletter


10:52, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Beauties and PR

If you were lucky enough to watch that episode on Nadia Khan's show on Geo TV where Sonia Ahmed and Mahleej Sarkari were invited, you'd know that the Miss Pakistan World pageant is really the hype. At least, when it comes to controversies, the organiser know where to bring the PR campaign. Their serious POV edits which have been proven to be made by the organisers and associates of the pageant are under debate at the article's deletion debate.

Follow-up on the last issue

In the last issue, we discussed about the sectarian issues that Pakistani articles were prone to. For an update, an advocate of the Shi'a faith and its prominent inclusion into the articles, LahoreKid has been banned for an indefinite period. In the process, a citation review project page was created for providing editors with a third-opinion on vague references.

For a in-depth coverage, read the talks here. Some news issues will be addressed shortly and new activities like contests and quizzes would be announced shortly as well.

Talking of sects...

I don't want to sound like a separatist, if I say that for the past few weeks the highest number of edits on anything related to Pakistan have been on articles that concerned Baluchistan. From major editions to the article on Quetta to the 1935 Balochistan earthquake tragedy.

In other news: It is now important for editors to look into the logistics section for gaining or providing support for various things in the article such as graphics or copy-editing. So, if you need copy-editing of an article, or your article lacks a picture, please consult at this page.

i-post

Email to Postal Mail

A convenient free postal mail service which can deliver email messages all over Pakistan. Peoples can now use their email to send letters giving you another route to communicate with others who are not connected to the Internet in Pakistan.

In recent past Internet and e-mail have revolutionized the world of communications. But those who do not have easy access to Internet and e-mail facilities could not get benefits of this facility. In its endeavour to make the benefits of e-mail available to a common man, Al Tayyeb Group has introduced i-post service. By i-post all those who do not have computer or do not have access to Internet can send e-mail by Post Office or receive e-mail through a postman. Those who have access to Internet can also send i-post to those who do not have access to Internet.

Wikipedia should have an article on this social service & must be a part of WikiProject Pakistan.Please comments. --SaqibChaudhry (talk) 09:20, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Concerning Kshatriya

Its nothing personal. Its just a troll who initially kept placing the community in the article. I have contributed significantly towards the article previously, but I tend to believe in EB over some opportunistic troll who tries to make his community look better on WP. That is not without precedent. I assure you to check the references again. All sentences can be found, in fact I can find more references rather easily if prompted. Have a good day. Trips (talk) 14:40, 10 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  1. ^ (Glossary of the tribes and castes of the Punjab and NWFP, H A Rose)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Intothefire&oldid=246558236"