Talk:Pakistani Americans

Babu Butt not "Babu bhatt"

"Butt" is a pakistani last name where as Bhatt is a Indian/Hindu last name. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 120.61.53.204 (talk) 05:09, 26 May 2012 (UTC)

Integrating into American society

This section only talks about British Pakistanis. There is absolutely no mention of Pakistani Americans. Content should either be removed or re-written. Whats the point of talking about British Pakistanis on a page about Pakistani Americans anyway? A Fantasy (talk) 21:12, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

If you had posted this at the bottom of the page rather then the top you would have noticed it says copyright removal which is why that section makes no sense any more since most of the relevant info was removed. you are more than welcome to remove that section as it is no longer relevant. Hrh80 (talk) 21:41, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Aliens in America

You should also mention the show "Aliens in America" which talks about a Pakistani boy, who lives with a American family in Wisconsin! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.121.89.105 (talk) 16:13, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

done Zaindy87 01:24, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Pakistani Americans?

I don't understand the concept of Pakistani Americans. From what I can tell, Pakistanis aren't a distinct race or ethnicity from Indians. Pakistan was part of India until 1947. Before that, there WERE no Pakistanis. So it looks to me like Pakistanis are a nationality, not a race or ethnicity. Gringo300 23:50, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Calling someone "Pakistani American" is no more unusual than calling someone "Italian American" vs. "Greek American" or "German American." All caucasian, but the cultures have undeniable differences. Certainly, the cultures of India and Pakistan can be considered distinct. The majority of Indians are Hindu. The majority of Pakistanis are Muslim. While some language groups may overlap, there are also differences in languages. Tensions between the two nations also contribute to differences in culture. It is really up to the people in these groups to determine what their similarities and differences are. If someone chooses to define his or her self as Pakistani American, the rest of us can be respectful of their self-definition and learn from it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.250.197.206 (talk) 21:59, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Notable Pakistani Americans - Cleanup

This list requires major cleanup. General rule: If the person isn't notable enough to have a wikipedia article about them, they don't belong here. See Wikipedia:Bio#Lists_of_people. Toddst1 (talk) 20:27, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

And back again, this time by using the "notable contributions" section as a coat rack to list people. Meters (talk) 23:00, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

Link

www.PakUSonline.com is a website dedicated to connecting the Pakistani diaspora in US. Please add the link of the website to the Pakistani American section as it is highly relevant in the category.

Thank you. Pakusonline (talk) 04:14, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

American City of Lahore

Could someone add a section covering how the early Punjabi Muslim (Pre-Pakistani) Immigrants came to America and founded the American city of Lahore? Its somewhere in Virginia. Thank you. --Xinjao (talk) 22:17, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Nadia ali cleo magazine cover.jpg

The image Image:Nadia ali cleo magazine cover.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

• That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
• That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --00:56, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Controversies section

First of all, Muzzammil Hassan's brutal murder of his wife was more of an issue of domestic violence than an "honor killing." In any case, it hardly qualifies as sufficiently relevant to be included in an article about Pakistani Americans as a whole. I don't see individual crimes committed by members of other ethnic groups being mentioned on their wikipedia entries. Kabuli (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 09:03, 21 May 2009 (UTC).

"Citizens"?

Since when do Pakistani-Americans have to be citizens? Residence in the US should be sufficient. Who then was a gentleman? (talk) 06:49, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

Invitation to discussion

Active editors of this article are invited to join the discussion regarding the change in Asian American article's infobox. Specifically we are looking to get nominations for individuals who would fall under this article, nominations shall remain open until 9 November 2009. Comments are also welcomed. Thank you in advance --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 13:19, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

FYI, the nomination process is now over, and the voting period has began. Due to lack of nominations the slot for Laotian female representative is vacant, and will need further discussion sometime after voting has been concluded. The voting period will last until 4 December 2009. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 20:12, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Outmarriage of Pakistani-Americans incl. comparison between the sexes

Good day, I'm wondering if there's any resources available to give information about the marriage patterns of Pakistani-Americans. Particularly the outmarriage or exogamous marriage, including a comparison between the sexes, similar to the statistics available in the Asian-Nation website. Thank you! Marxolang (talk) 07:35, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

Pakistani American Diaspora

I have recently checked the 2010 figure of Pakistani Americans which is estimate to more then 700,000 over here while the current figure of 286,302 over here is 4 years old. Hence i think we should be considering the most recent figure of 700,000 rather then mentioning old figures. Regards! SyedMANaqvi (talk) 16:51, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

reasons for edit undo

the layout for the pictures are horrible, user naqvi clearly can't do there maths if they think that 700,000 is 0.16% of the population and sects of islam are not required so why is there a need to mention sunni or shia? Hrh80 (talk)

Seems like you are some how just editing the article just for the sake that it makes you satisfied with it, i have done considerable contribution to improve the article and you just can't handle it, stop acting like and ignorant and stop this vandalism, or else you'll be reported the the Admin. And yes i didn't alter this % caption since i never really focused over it. Stop this unexplained lame editing of yours. Regards! SyedMANaqvi (talk) 01:01, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

reasons for undoing some of 99.195.0.50 edits

the first edit you did including adding lower class, poverty line etc.. does not correlate with the reference provided. you also deleted the reference which included the mention of income, could you explain why as it is clearly stated in the NY times article and also deleted the reference made to millionaires deleting the link as well. you also deleted the dead link explaining about the % of degree holders, i re added this and have provided another link, and you also added something regarding welfare and government assistance if you are able to provide a link backing your statements up you are welcome to add this again however i have deleted this. you have also deleted the statements regarding philanthropy could you explain why. you've made some valid edits and some of them are kept in however some were not justified --Hrh80 (talk) 20:59, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

User 99.195.28.193 do you not know the difference between the American community survey and the United States Census Bureau? the figure quoted by the ny times uses the US census data which is far more accurate then the survey. you also seemed to be fixated to the aafny link which ONLY described the NY population and you seem to equate that to the whole of the pakistani population by adding the statement that 'The community today lives in a wide gulf of classes from poverty' and then linking that to the reference which just distorts the information and there is no mention of there being any 'gulf' in the article. talking about a segment of 1 population does not equate it to the whole population. --Hrh80 (talk) 18:46, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

Copyright problem removed

One or more portions of this article duplicated other source(s). Infringing material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. VernoWhitney (talk) 17:06, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

File:Ayesha Gilani - Miss Pakistan World 2009.jpg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Ayesha Gilani - Miss Pakistan World 2009.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests February 2012 What should I do? Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 22:04, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Infobox image discussion

You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Asian American#Infobox ethnicity representatives. RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 07:33, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

Edit warring

This is silly and pointless edit warring. Per WP:SEEALSO, only relevant and related articles should be listed. Pakistani Canadians live in a neighbouring country of North America, and are listed like other Asian American articles. Pakistanis article is also relevant as this article is on Pakistanis who migrated to America. British Pakistanis are another large group of overseas Pakistanis hence listed. Pakistan has dual nationality agreement with these countries so nationals of all these countries can legally be citizens of Pakistan and their resident countries at the same time. Stranded Pakistanis has nothing to do with Overseas Pakistanis or any of this. Stop pushing your POV at articles. Mar4d (talk) 06:59, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

Original research to push POV. Need a better and logical explanation. --Human3015 talk • 10:38, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

Human3015, just stop following me and pushing your nonsensical POV on all articles, and learn to follow policy. Your inclusion of Stranded Pakistanis violates WP:SEEALSO. Mar4d (talk) 11:13, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

Crime and discrimination section

This section currently lists the names of Ramzi Yousef, Mir Qazi, and Khalid Sheikh Mohammed even though these individuals aren't Pakistani Americans, they're just Pakistanis who were extradited to and then convicted in the US. Shouldn't the crime and discrimination section of this article only mention Pakistani Americans who were convicted of crimes in the US? I feel that including the names of any and all Pakistanis who were convicted in the US would give the impression that Pakistani Americans have committed more crimes than they actually have. Thoughts? —Human10.0 (talk) 07:14, 27 November 2015 (UTC)

"Pakistani Americans... are... Pakistanis who... [lawfully reside] in the United States." [1] Being on U.S. soil and in the U.S. federal government custody is the equivalent of lawfully residing in the United States. You don't have to be a US citizen to qualify. I think these well known Pakistani prisoners languishing in America should be mentioned in this article, especially if they are doing life in prison or are buried in the US. Removing them would imply that there are no such people in America and that Americans are unnecessarily discriminating Pakistanis. The fact is, they have a reason and its partially because of these major suspected criminals.--Krzyhorse22 (talk) 22:35, 27 November 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for sharing your thoughts Krzyhorse22. The source you're using to define 'Pakistani Americans' (i.e., this Wiki article) says Pakistani Americans are either:

1. Americans whose ancestry originates from Pakistan, or

2. Pakistanis who migrated to and reside in the United States

Those are the only two types of people who can be called 'Pakistani Americans' according to your source. But all the criminals I listed are not Americans (as you yourself have hinted when you said "You don't have to be a US citizen to qualify") and none of them are Pakistanis who migrated to and reside in the US. So I do not see how they can be classified as Pakistani Americans (the definition you've written in your response above is selectively quoting the source). I do not feel that removing the names of these non-Americans will give the impression that "Americans are unnecessarily discriminating Pakistanis", especially since the section mentions names of actual Pakistani Americans convicted on similar charges. I also do not see the relevance of mentioning non-American Pakistanis on an article about Pakistani Americans when these non-Americans Pakistanis did not even want to become future American citizens. I feel that including their names just makes Pakistani Americans seem more prone to criminality than they actually are, rather than justifying any US policy towards its Pakistani American citizens.

In this edit, you said "Anyone who is in U.S. federal custody is considered a lawfully admitted resident of the United States. See Immigration and Nationality Act (INA)." Could you quote the part of the INA that makes this statement so that people do not have to read the entire Act to find the relevant statement? If the INA does state that, does it clarify if the residence is permanent or temporary (i.e. just for the length of the prison sentence)? I feel that even if it does state what you said, being in a federal prison does not make a Pakistani a 'Pakistani American' in the same sense of the word as used in this wiki article. If consensus decides that the names of the non-Americans I listed should still be included in the crimes and discrimination section, then I think the section should clarify that they are not actually Pakistani Americans but are non-American Pakistanis lawfully admitted to the US as per the INA, so as to not give the impression that Pakistani Americans are more prone to criminality than they actually are. —Human10.0 (talk) 06:18, 2 December 2015 (UTC)

But I only quoted what was relevant, with added emphasis. I don't know what country you're from but "American" does not refer to a white person with blond hair and blue eyes. That's typically how Asians in general perceive an American or a Britain. Any person can be an American as long as he or she legally resides in the United States, and that also includes a Pakistani who legally resides in the United States. Only ones that are not Americans are illegal aliens and visitors under visas. The INA has many statutes which explain these things, you can do research yourself. [2] Besides, what I'm saying is common sense. Let me make it clear. Any person residing in the United States without the knowledge of the U.S. Attorney General, he or she is considered an illegal alien (in other words a foreigner). The Pakistanis we're discussing here were all processed by the Attorney General at some point in time. They were given American documents so they are Americans, some as a Conditional Resident while others as a Permanent Resident or Naturalized Citizen. Even if some were to renounce U.S. citizenship, they still belong in this article because they were at some point in time a Pakistani American. The same goes for a Pakistani American who is actually living outside the United States, his or her American status does not change. I see no reason why they should not be mentioned in this article. See WP:CENSOR.--Krzyhorse22 (talk) 09:45, 2 December 2015 (UTC)

No dude, you hardly quoted anything and left out key parts of the definition. I hope you were not purposely being patronising when you explained that Americans aren't all white people with blond hair. Also, for the record, the demonym is Briton, not Britain. Thanks for providing the PDF to the INA but unfortunately I cannot read it all at the moment. I would appreciate if you could quote the parts of the INA that state that "[a]nyone who is in U.S. federal custody is considered a lawfully admitted resident of the United States" and that such a person can be considered an American. I feel that the 'common sense' argument you are making is unpersuasive. By your logic, the names of all Afghan detainees at Guantanamo Bay and in federal prisons in the US should be mentioned in the wiki article on Afghan Americans. Do you feel doing so will be justified?

Which American documents do you believe Qazi or Yousef had gotten that made them American? And could you cite a source that supports the claim that "[t]hey were given American documents so they are Americans"? Here's what I know: Mir Qazi traveled to the US on forged documents (he later obtained a fake green card), Ramzi Yousef traveled to the US on a fake Iraqi passport and Khalid Sheikh Mohammed came to the US on a student visa once to study at a university, then went back. None of these individuals meet the criteria of Pakistani American being used by this wiki article, which only accepts naturalised citizens or people born in the US as 'Pakistani Americans' (with good reason). Further, none of these people could renounce American citizenship because none of them held it in the first place. I fail to see how I am censoring anything since I am not saying actual Pakistani American convicts (like Faisal Shahzad) should not be mentioned in the crimes section. I am only advocating the removal of names of people who were never Americans in the first place nor were in the process of becoming US citizens (Please see WP:DUBIOUS). Do you agree that including the names of Yousef, Qazi, KSM and any other non-American makes 'Americans of Pakistani heritage' and 'Pakistanis who migrated to and reside in the US' seem more prone to criminal/terrorist activity than they actually are? —Human10.0 (talk) 18:26, 2 December 2015 (UTC)

The Arabs, Pakistanis, Afghans and all other prisoners who where or are in Guantanamo Bay military prison have not been processed by the Attorney General, i.e., they have never been admitted to the United States or given any legal status (i.e., legal papers other than visas allowing the person to reside in the United States for years or permanently). They are in U.S. military custody as foreign combatants. That is why they were put there in the first place. Qazi and Yousef are Pakistanis who entered the United States through the Attorney General (FBI/U.S. immigration, etc.,), they legally resided in the United States.[3] Therefore, they're obviously Pakistani Americans. The argument about fake passport/visa is irrelevant.--Krzyhorse22 (talk) 01:05, 3 December 2015 (UTC)

Next thing you know all the afghan terrorists and their leaders residing in pakistan are now pakistanis lol krzyhorse22 Saadkhan12345 (talk) 19:40, 2 December 2015 (UTC)

You say that Pakistani prisoners who were or are in Guantanamo aren't Americans, yet even in your latest edit you kept the name of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed in the 'crime and discrimination' section, even though he is an extradited Pakistani-Kuwaiti-Bosnian currently imprisoned in Guantanamo (I doubt you added his name to the wiki articles on Kuwaiti Americans and Bosnian Americans). You still haven't proven your claims about the Attorney General and how 'lawfully admitted resident' equals 'Pakistani American'. You still have not pointed out how the INA says what you purport it to say. Linking to yet another lengthy document isn't going to convince me or others that what you're saying is right. You have got to explain things and quote parts of what you link to to make an understandable, convincing case for yourself. I find it interesting that you didn't comment on whether mentioning Afghan nationals incarcerated in US prisons on the Afghan Americans article would be justified or not. It's also interesting how you didn't say whether including names of non-Americans in this article makes Pakistani Americans look more susceptible to engaging in criminal activity than the actually are.—Human10.0 (talk) 17:56, 5 December 2015 (UTC)

Contrary to all the other Guantanamo prisoners, Khaid Sheik Mohammad (KSM) legally entered the United States in 1983 for study purposes. [4] He is a Pakistani who spent 3 or so years in the United States,[5] stop trying to make him a Kuwaiti (or a Bosnian, that's very silly). What do you want to know about the AG? A 'lawfully admitted resident' is someone from another country residing in the United States, carrying a green card and state ID. In the case of Pakistanis, they are Americans and Pakistanis (or Pakistani American). About Afghan Americans, Najibullah Zazi is the only one I know, and added him in September. [6] There are many non-notable Pakistani criminals in America, see, e.g., [7] [8] but I only add notable ones. If you keep removing these then I'll take this issue to the admins board.--Krzyhorse22 (talk) 18:46, 10 December 2015 (UTC)

I'm not trying to make Khalid Sheikh Mohammed a Kuwaiti and Bosnian, he really is Kuwaiti and Pakistani and Bosnian. He holds citizenship from all those countries. Some reports even say he was born in Kuwait (but other ones say he was born in Balochistan) and the wiki article on him literally says: "He grew up and spent his formative years in Kuwait, as did his nephew Ramzi Yousef (three years his junior and the son of Mohammed's older sister)." I would actually like if you took this whole issue up with the admins. I myself was thinking about contacting dispute resolution to resolve this unnecessary dispute but if you want to take the first step, go ahead. —Human10.0 (talk) 13:53, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

Show a reliable source that proves he holds citizenship of those countries. Many people make false, forged, or counterfeit documents. Don't you read in latest news that many non-Syrians are obtaining fake Syrian passports? Many immigrants live in Kuwait but they're not allowed to get a Kuwaiti citizenship. That's the law there. Unlike Western countries, Kuwait and many other countries in Asia generally do not grant citizenship to immigrants or their children who were born there. Come on now, a Wiki article cannot be used as a source here.--Krzyhorse22 (talk) 19:23, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

Khalid Sheikh Mohammed holds citizenship from Kuwait, Pakistan and Bosnia. I hope this matter is settled. Those are a few of the references given in the wiki article on Khalid Sheikh Mohammed. If you want to see more references, just go to his article. I hope it is understood that requesting you to check out references from a wiki article isn't the same as using a wiki article as a reference. —Human10.0 (talk) 14:04, 25 December 2015 (UTC)

• Support Saadkhan12345 (talk) 09:43, 27 November 2015 (UTC)
• They are not Pakistani Americans as they are not Americans. This is the stupidest thing I've seen in a long time - obviously this refers to nationality and not residence. Residing legally in the U.S. simply means you aren't here illegally; you could be on a one-year student visa or one-month vacation. That this discussion is even happening indicates a serious problem with WP:CIR. —Мандичка^YO 😜 06:29, 4 December 2015 (UTC)

  You don't get it. One month, one year or ten year visa is a completely separate issue. Those are called "foreign visitors", they have no green card (lawful permanent resident card) or any state ID. You are assuming that this article is about U.S. citizens who were either born in USA or obtained naturalization. That assumption is wrong for many reasons. Let's go by your logic. There are some Pakistanis who are legally residing in the United States, which group do they belong to?--Krzyhorse22 (talk) 20:32, 10 December 2015 (UTC)

The lead of the article clearly says it is about US citizens who were either born in USA or obtained [or will obtain] naturalization. I think Мандичка^YO's assumption is correct. —Human10.0 (talk) 13:53, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

They belong to the "group" associated with their passport. Nationality and residence are completely separate. This article is about nationality/citizenship. Krzyhorse22, you are being disruptive by arguing this ridiculous point of view. If it is because of a deliberate bias against Pakistanis as suggested below, I think you should be topic banned from this article and all articles related to Pakistanis. —Мандичка^YO 😜 16:44, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

Hey Мандичка^YO, sorry for pinging you again but I wanted to let you know that I made this edit to clarify that you were talking to Krzyhorse22 and not me. I hope that's okay. —Human10.0 (talk) 17:57, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

No prob, it should be clear now. —Мандичка^YO 😜 18:07, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

Thank you —Human10.0 (talk) 18:25, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

First of all, Wikipedia cannot be used here as a source or a reference. Secondly, what User:Wikimandia wrote is obvious nonsense. We're not dealing here with the country India but the United States. This article is about Pakistanis in the United States as citizens, immigrants or "legal residents". In America, becoming a citizen is completely optional. Immigrants residing in the United States possess green cards (federal issued documents that allow them to travel around the world as residents of the U.S. and to re-enter the U.S.), social security cards (federal issued documents for social benefits, including welfare), State-issued IDs or drivers licenses. These people own properties (i.e., homes, vehicles, bank accounts, etc.,) and businesses, they work legally, pay taxes and do everything like citizens, except vote. They serve in the U.S. Armed Forces, work for NASA, as law enforcement officers in federal and state agencies. This means that a legal resident can become a top officer in the U.S. Armed Forces. The United States is their only country or their home country, they cannot live outside the U.S. for more than 6 months. In the meantime, an immigrant can become a citizen and a citizen can lose citizenship at any time. I'm obviously not disruptive but a highly educated editor, and you're just expressing your personal uneducated nonsensical views. I'm just another editor, you should stop focusing on me but rather learn about laws of the United States before making erroneous statements. User:Wikimandia is basically saying that a Pakistani immigrant in U.S. military uniform is not an American but a Pakistani. Hahaha.--Krzyhorse22 (talk) 19:16, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

You have literally (mis)used Wikipedia as a "source or reference" here (as can still be seen in the discussion above) to argue that the three terrorists can somehow be thought of as Pakistani Americans. This article is clearly not about Pakistani nationals temporarily staying in the US. It would be more accurate if the term "Pakistanis in the United States" redirected to the article on Overseas Pakistanis. Up til now only you think "legal residents" (including students who visit the US for a few years to study and then return to their native country) can be counted as 'Pakistani Americans.' Whatever you've written further on needs citations (that at least include page numbers) and preferably an explanation of how that citation agrees with what you say (not a random link to a multi-page document) in order to be believed though I would much prefer if you just seek dispute resolution if you have a problem with the current article. —Human10.0 (talk) 14:04, 25 December 2015 (UTC)

Why remove these Pakistanis:

• Ramzi Yousef legally entered the United States through the Attorney General (AG) and is residing in the state of Colorado. To visit him you must come to the U.S., to send him a letter you must use his U.S. address. He cannot ever leave the U.S.
• Mir Qazi legally entered the U.S. through the AG and was executed by the state of Virginia. He legally resided in the U.S.
• Khalid Sheikh Mohammed legally entered the U.S. in 1983 through the AG for study purposes. He spent about three years in the U.S. He is currently held on murder of a U.S. citizen (Daniel Pearl) and terrorism related charges. His case is not settled, it's possible he could be sent to Colorado where Yousef and Faisal Shahzad are housed.

These guys are very significant, there are special documentaries made about each one of them. I think we should not remove them from this article.--Krzyhorse22 (talk) 06:20, 11 December 2015 (UTC)

Krzyhorse22, we have sufficiently discussed this matter above. This just seems like an attempt to deceive the admins into thinking that you tried to resolve the dispute in case you actually contact them like you threatened above. You could have at least pinged me if you actually wanted to discuss the matter. While I'm on this page I guess I should ask, why do you insist on calling Pakistani American criminals like Asia Siddiqi and Syed Rizwan Farook "Pakistanis" in the wiki article instead of what they actually are, i.e., Pakistani Americans? And why didn't you mention that it was Asia Siddiqui who was involved in the April 2015 New York City pressure cooker bomb plot? Her name had already been mentioned in the list of Pakistani American criminals in the 'Crimes and discrimination' section, yet you added the line about how the April 2015 New York City pressure cooker bomb plot involved "one Pakistani perpetrator" and didn't mention how the perpetrator was Asia, who had been clearly mentioned above (I have since added it for you). I hope you weren't trying to purposely make Pakistanis and Pakistani Americans look more guilty of terrorism than they actually are. I hope you would be more cautious and responsible when editing Pakistan-related articles at least, seeing as how you have been accused by others of being biased against Pakistan and its people. —Human10.0 (talk) 13:53, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

The section deals with "crimes" and discrimination. Those you mentioned are criminals or perpetrators because that's what the media calls them. If you think the media is wrong, don't take out on me. Who accused me of being biased?--Krzyhorse22 (talk) 19:19, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

Nice straw man. The issue clearly isn't whether the people are perpetrators or not, the issue is (as I have stated before) how you simply label them Pakistanis instead of labeling them as what they actually are, i.e., Pakistani Americans. Your talk page has ample evidence of people accusing you of bias (I have not linked directly to your talk page lest you tamper with posts on the talk page again: proof 1, proof 2). —Human10.0 (talk) 14:04, 25 December 2015 (UTC)

Additionally, in this section on the Administrators Noticeboard, a user observes that your comments in the section "show [Krzyhorse22's] hatred for Pakistanis in general " and that "[Krzyhorse22] thinks he owns all Afghanistan related articles and think[s] that no other editor especially a Pakistani editor has a right to edit them or challenge his edits on those articles." Interestingly, in the same section you, Krzyhorse22, use the slur "Paki" (knowing very well that it is a slur), defend your use of the term, call a person who called you out "uneducated" (for not being able to read your mind to ascertain your intention for using the slur) and imply that calling a person a 'Pakistani' is "insulting." —Human10.0 (talk) 01:30, 30 December 2015 (UTC)

• I cannot fricking believe they were still in the article. I have removed them per WP:BRD. Do not reinsert their names until there is consensus to do so (aka when hell freezes over), —Мандичка^YO 😜 16:49, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

References

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on Pakistani Americans. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20061022065513/http://www.pakistanlink.com/nayyer/12212001.html to http://www.pakistanlink.com/nayyer/12212001.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20050425120644/http://www.aafny.org:80/cic/briefs/pakistani.pdf to http://www.aafny.org/cic/briefs/pakistani.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110622052527/http://www.ama-assn.org/ama1/pub/upload/mm/18/img-workforce-paper.pdf to http://www.ama-assn.org/ama1/pub/upload/mm/18/img-workforce-paper.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 08:12, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Removed garbage crime section

I wont waste effort to explain but having a whole section about 4 criminals does not merit inclusion. If it needs to be added then other communities such as African americans, Afghan immigrants and many many others should have dedicated sections. Total nonsense pov. 2A02:C7D:14FC:C600:C167:5FC4:4602:EAB6 (talk) 19:48, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Pakistani Americans. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141129022955/http://pakpac.net/Fort%20Hood%20shooting/Pakistani%20Americans%20in%20US%20military.asp to http://pakpac.net/Fort%20Hood%20shooting/Pakistani%20Americans%20in%20US%20military.asp
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110725220920/http://www.aafny.org/cic/briefs/pakistani.pdf to http://www.aafny.org/cic/briefs/pakistani.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100209032730/http://factfinder.census.gov:80/servlet/IPTable?_bm=y to http://factfinder.census.gov/servlet/IPTable?_bm=y&-geo_id=01000US&-qr_name=ACS_2007_1YR_G00_S0201&-qr_name=ACS_2007_1YR_G00_S0201PR&-qr_name=ACS_2007_1YR_G00_S0201T&-qr_name=ACS_2007_1YR_G00_S0201TPR&-ds_name=ACS_2007_1YR_G00_&-reg=ACS_2007_1YR_G00_S0201:045;ACS_2007_1YR_G00_S0201PR:045;ACS_2007_1YR_G00_S0201T:045;ACS_2007_1YR_G00_S0201TPR:045&-_lang=en&-redoLog=false&-format=
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110725220920/http://www.aafny.org/cic/briefs/pakistani.pdf to http://www.aafny.org/cic/briefs/pakistani.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:46, 13 November 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Pakistani Americans. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110718172352/http://ir.ide.go.jp/dspace/bitstream/2344/839/1/196_oda.pdf to http://ir.ide.go.jp/dspace/bitstream/2344/839/1/196_oda.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:27, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

• Syed Javaid Anwar.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 13:22, 8 August 2019 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Iftar in Patterson New Jersey.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 11:37, 29 February 2020 (UTC)

Pakistanis lived in the United States in the 1700?

The article boldly claims that Pakistanis were residing in America in 1700s. Where is the source for this wild nonsensical claim? As far as I know, Pakistanis are of "Hindu" (Indian) race and this race was statutorily banned from residing in the United States, see United States v. Bhagat Singh Thind. A person ineligible for U.S. citizenship was not allowed to reside in the United States. [9] After the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 was enacted that's when Hindu race was allowed to reside permanently.--39.41.5.202 (talk) 13:41, 31 July 2020 (UTC)

Aoa oversized pakistani in usa

Me need cell nmbr 2404:3100:1C96:3350:1:0:F003:6B3B (talk) 16:40, 14 May 2024 (UTC)