User talk:Mightyjai

Welcome!

Hello, Mightyjai! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. You may benefit from following some of the links below, which will help you get the most out of Wikipedia. If you have any questions you can ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking

or by typing four tildes "~~~~"; this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you are already excited about Wikipedia, you might want to consider being "adopted" by a more experienced editor or joining a WikiProject to collaborate with others in creating and improving articles of your interest. Click here for a directory of all the WikiProjects. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field when making edits to pages. Happy editing! Peaceray (talk) 15:24, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Getting Started
Contributing to Wikipedia • Tutorial • Your first article The five pillars of Wikipedia • Simplified ruleset How to: edit a page • upload an image
Getting Help
Frequently Asked Questions Directories and indexes Where to: ask questions • make requests Tip of the day Request administrator attention
Policies and Guidelines
Neutral point of view • Reliable sources Verifiability • Citing sources • No original research What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons Manual of Style (Simplified) • Three-revert rule Copyrights • Non-free content • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism • Sock puppetry Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability

The Community
Community Portal • Adopt-a-user program Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • Resolving disputes Build consensus • Village pump IRC channels • Mailing lists The Signpost (Wikipedia's newspaper)
Things to do
Be bold in editing • Help develop an article Maintenance • Peer review • Requested articles Join a WikiProject • Translating articles Cleaning up: General • Spam • Vandalism
Miscellaneous
Categories • Disambiguity • Stubs User pages • Talk pages Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

August 2020

Hello, I'm Tayi Arajakate. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at the tutorial on citing sources. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Tayi Arajakate _Talk 00:39, 23 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please avoid adding Dawood Ibrahim is in Karachi

The subject of the article is part of the Indo-Pak dispute. India has insisted that he is in Karachi, whereas Pakistan denies and says it has no proof. Also recently Pakistan in individual terrorist sanctions list mentioned his addresses in Karachi. [1]. Later, it denied they were admitting he was there since they were merely adding details of UN terror sanctions list which lists his properties in Karachi. [2]

Despite this, you have added back he is in Karachi without bothering for a discussion and not noting the fact that you are adding he is in Karachi based on the sources which claimed Pakistan had admitted Dawood was in Karachi (over the individual terrorist sanctions list I mentioned it published), but ignore it had said it was copied from UN. Also having been in India, it is clear dispute between the two countries can easily influence feelings. Please avoid it. LéKashmiriSocialiste (talk) 07:09, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The Statutory Regulatory Order issued by Pakistan’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs is an official document.

It clearly mentions the presence of Dawood Ibrahim.

He was added to the list so that Pakistan won't be blacklisted by the intergovernmental organisation "Financial Action Task Force" (FATF).

Mentioning a person with his address in an official document is a genuine proof of location of such person and such document is an admissible evidence in any Court of Law.

Since you are a Kashmiri Socialist, it prima facie suggests that you are biased against India and supporting Pakistan instead. So, technically you should refrain from editing India Pakistan Dispute pages for maintaining the authenticity of the truth and facts. Mightyjai (talk) 20:57, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Pakistan clearly said later the terrorist sanctions list/Statutory Regulatory Order is based on the UN list of sanctioned terrorists, not its own. Read about it here [3] In that case it's not an admission of Dawood being in the country, they're just saying what the UN said. They even denied the order amounted to admitting any terrorist was in Pakistan.

Also my name is just a joke, though I am a Kashmiri and do believe in socialism as a better form of government. But I'm not biased against India, my duty here is to be unbiased. That is bad-faith presumption on your part to accuse me, I've even removed praises of militants by others in past. Accuse me of being biased again due to my name and you'll be complained. LéKashmiriSocialiste (talk) 12:34, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Complain wherever you want to. However, I specifically wrote "prima facie". So, i didn't accuse you, only suspected you. And regarding the subject's location, since everybody here on Wikipedia relies on Pakistan as the only source and believes nobody other than Pakistan is truth-worthy in this world, the subject's location will never be mentioned here as Pakistan ever even when a lot of Indian Media and International Media reported he is residing in Pakistan. Peace.Mightyjai (talk) 21:50, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Pointing out my account name as a reason just shows that you were trying dubious means to accuse me. Even if a suspicion, it's still bad faith because I informed in the beginning Pakistan government denied he was in their country. We don't take sides who is correct here or not. But your addition was clearly based on Pakistan's sanction list (as it's the only thing you cited). LéKashmiriSocialiste (talk) 03:14, 30 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Atleast, I cited an official record and that too was based on United Nations' record. Not some fake statements from a country where Osama Bin Laden was found.

So, who is taking sides. Its clearly you. Uhh !! Mightyjai (talk) 15:50, 2 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

November 2022

You recently removed cited content from the article Kesari claiming to "fix incorrect content". Considering this content is cited for anyone to verify, it is not regarded to be "incorrect" by any definition. The content has been restored. If you wish to debate this point, kindly offer a justification that meets Wikipedia policy. Thank you. Chronikhiles (talk) 13:12, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]