User talk:Iamsaa

Re عالمی روحانی تحریک انجمن سرفروشانِ اسلام (رجسٹرڈ) پاکستان -- this is the English Wikipedia. Please post here in English only. NawlinWiki 13:44, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for Image:Rags.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Rags.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 06:08, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Welcome

Hello, Iamsaa, 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:

We 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! The Behnam 07:50, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for Image:Qalb.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Qalb.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 22:13, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Duplicate images uploaded

Thanks for uploading Image:Hhrags.jpg. A machine-controlled robot account noticed that you uploaded the same image twice: as Image:Hhrags.jpg and also as Image:Rags.jpg. The latter copy of the file has been marked for speedy deletion since it is redundant. If this sounds okay to you, there is no need for you to take any action.

This is an automated message- you have not upset or annoyed anyone. In the future, you may save yourself some confusion if you supply a meaningful file name and remember exactly which name you chose (file names are case sensitive, including the extension) so that you won't lose track of your uploads. For tips on good file naming, see Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions about this notice, or feel that the deletion is inappropriate, please contact User:Staecker, who operates the robot account. Staeckerbot 13:47, 22 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Riaz Ahmed Gohar Shahi

Please do not post copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder, as you did to Riaz Ahmed Gohar Shahi. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites (http://www.geocities.com/athens/acropolis/2717/page3.html in this case) or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If you believe that the article is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under the GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL) then you should do one of the following:

If you have permission from the author leave a message explaining the details on the article Talk page and send an email with the message to "permissions-en (at) wikimedia (dot) org". See Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for instructions.
If a note on the original website states that re-use is permitted under the GFDL or released into the public domain leave a note at Talk:Riaz Ahmed Gohar Shahi with a link to where we can find that note;
If you own the copyright to the material: send an e-mail from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en(at)wikimedia(dot)org or a postal message to the Wikimedia Foundation permitting re-use under the GFDL, and note that you have done so on the article Talk page. Alternatively, you may create a note on your web page releasing the work under the GFDL and then leave a note at Talk:Riaz Ahmed Gohar Shahi with a link to the details.

Otherwise, you are encouraged to rewrite this article in your own words to avoid any copyright infringement. After you do so, you should place a {{hangon}} tag on the article page and leave a note at Talk:Riaz Ahmed Gohar Shahi saying you have done so. An administrator will review the new content before taking action.

It is also important that all Wikipedia articles have an encyclopedic tone and follow Wikipedia article layout. For more information on Wikipedia's policies, see Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Your original contributions are welcome.

Additionally, since this content has been recreated several time, it may be prudent to review Wikipedia:Neutral point of view & Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. — Scientizzle 19:50, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

His Holiness Riaz Ahmed Gohar Shahi

Dear Administration,

Please be informed that I am the office bearer of Anjuman Serfaroshan-e-Islam an international spiritual movement founded by His Holiness Riaz Ahmed Gohar Shahi in 1980 in Pakistan and being an office bearer I am responsible to propagate and preach activities on Internet. His Holiness Riaz Ahmed Gohar Shahi is an internationally renowned spiritual personality with hundred thousands of followers in Pakistan and across the world. We have several online website to serve this purpose and I am officially authorized from His Holiness Riaz Ahmed Gohar Shahi.

I take full responsibility of the content placed on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gohar_Shahi by me. Therefore, may I request you to kindly restore my article on His Holiness Riaz Ahmed Gohar Shahi?

Look forward to your positive response.

Regards,

Kindly notice once again that the article on the Wikipedia are taken in the sense of being an encyclopedia. Having someone advertised is neither the mission nor allowed. Kind regards UJMi 05:46, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Attn: Administrator of En-Wikipedia

I am anxiousely waiting for your response on above.

Regards,

Attn: Administrator WIKIPEDIA

Dear Administrator,

I am surprised on such rude and biased behavior of English Wikipedia. Why such rude behavior with me? I uploaded an article on His Holiness Riaz Ahmed Gohar Shahi, a world renowned spiritual personality and I took the full responsibility of the contents in spite of that my article was deleted even I gave an explanation being a responsible person of representative of His Holiness Riaz Ahmed Gohar Shahi but no response at all!

What is this?

You claim to be world’s largest FREE ENCYCLOPEDIA THAT ANY ONE CAN EDIT but on contrary to this slogan, your policies are totally adverse to your slogan?

I am an authorized representative of His Holiness Riaz Ahmed Gohar Shahi and want to write an article, so that WIKIPEDIA should have at least a profile of world renowned spiritual personality who enlightened hundred thousands of Muslims and non-Muslims without any discrimination of cast, creed or sect.

I would highly appreciate, if you could kindly allow me to upload an article.

Look forward to an urgent response.

Regards, --سگِ گوھرشاہی 11:03, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Reply. Please read WP policies and you will understand a little better how WP works. There is no 'Administrator' for you to ask, but many many editors. There are established procedures for undeleting material. Please read the help pages and you will discover how to seek to have material undeleted. Gillyweed 11:01, 4 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright

The last time this article was deleted (by someone else, I never deleted it) it was deleted as a copyright violation of http://www.geocities.com/divinelove4all/goharshahi2.html If you are the owner of that material, the easiest way to prove this is to put a notice on it saying you release it under the GFDL. The article still has problems though. The link you gave me can be used to write about court cases against him, but claims like "Members of all faiths and religions invited His Holiness for lectures" and "He enlightened the hearts of thousands of people with the invocation of God" need to be backed up by sources, preferably sources other than His Holiness himself to avoid conflict of interest. As they stand now, they violate the verifiability and neutral point of view policies. WP:COI is a particular problem, since you said you're an official representative of this person, you probably won't be able to write about the court cases in a neutral manner. Take a look at our article on for example Gautama Buddha to get an idea of the tone an article should be written in.- Mgm|^(talk) 09:42, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just write your draft at a user subpage like User:Iamsaa/Riaz Ahmed Gohar Shahi and let me know when you're done so I can take a look at it. That avoids your work getting deleted and gives me the chance to teach you various Wikipedia policies and guidelines that are important to the article you want to write. Have you tried the Introduction and tutorial yet? - Mgm|^(talk) 11:50, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Be careful how you address people. I'm male but I've seen people from Asian countries post questions addressed "Dear Sir" a lot on the help desk too. Remember that there are plenty of women answering questions too. - Mgm|^(talk) 12:47, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you.

AfD nomination of Gohar Shahi

I've nominated Gohar Shahi, an article you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but in this particular case I do not feel that Gohar Shahi satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion; I have explained why in the nomination space (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and the Wikipedia deletion policy). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gohar Shahi and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Gohar Shahi during the discussion but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. — Scientizzle 15:59, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The main problems with the articles you've created: they're very much not presented from a neutral point-of-view and lack any external sources to verify the content (that is, sources not linked to your organization). These are two Wikipedia policies, and cannot be bypassed. Additionally, you should be able to provide evidence of notability to justify inclusion. Finally, it's important to note that Wikipedia is not an advertising service for any religion.

The way I read the article, there is currently very little that can be salvaged as neutral enough for inclusion...and I haven't yet found any sources from which to build a neutral article. If you've any links to media coverage about Shahi, that might help.

Finally, it's also worth considering that even if a neutral, sourced article were written & kept here, you might not find that desirable: once written here, you no longer own the content and anyone can modify the article. From what I have found, there's a no shortage of information about alleged misdeeds by Shahi and The Mehdi Foundation International. Wikipedia does not exist to correct misrepresentations by the media, but to report that which is already known and presented. That means that this article will be open to be edited by all the so-called enemies of Shahi & MFI with their alleged yellow journalism and negative propaganda usable to paint a picture you may not want... — Scientizzle 15:37, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The articles for deletion header will not be removed because the discussion is continuing about whether the article is appropriate for Wikipedia or not. — Scientizzle 15:12, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Commercial use of Image:Image-p11.jpg

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Image:Image-p11.jpg, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Image:Image-p11.jpg is an image licensed as "for non-commercial use only" or "used with permission for use on Wikipedia only" which was either uploaded on or after 2005-05-19 or is not used in any articles (CSD I3).

If you created this media file and want to use it on Wikipedia, you may re-upload it (or amend the image description if it has not yet been deleted) and use the license {{GFDL-self}} to license it under the GFDL, or {{cc-by-sa-2.5}} to license it under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license, or use {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain.

If you did not create this media file but want to use it on Wikipedia, there are two ways to proceed. First, you may choose one of the fair use tags from this list if you believe one of those fair use rationales applies to this file. Second, you may want to contact the copyright holder and request that they make the media available under a free license.

If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. This bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion, it did not nominate Image:Image-p11.jpg itself. Feel free to leave a message on the bot operator's talk page if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot. If you have any questions about what to do next or why your image was nominated for speedy deletion please ask at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thanks. --Android Mouse Bot 2 07:20, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User:Iamsaa being considered for deletion

Please note that your user page User:Iamsaa is being considered for deletion: Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Iamsaa. Note that Wikipedia is not a soapbox to advertise your religious views, and it is not your web space provider. Resurgent insurgent 00:04, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gohar Shahi

I have drastically stubbified the article in question...I wonder if you might give it a look. Thanks, — Scientizzle 16:56, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is not a vehicle for advertisement--including religious beliefs--so I am skeptical of attempts to provide a "complete profile" of Shahi. In fact, if the profile is anything like the previous version of the article, I can guarantee that it will only end up looking like my stub version in short order. This is an encyclopedia that seeks neutral coverage of notable subjects, not propaganda (for or against). Inclusion of small, cited (from reliable sources), biographical facts may be appropriate, but any attempt by any editor to turn this article into sycophantic flattery or malicious disparagement will be reverted. Please understand this: the dedication of editors to maintaining a neutral point-of-view may be preventing you from painting the most favorable picture of your Imam, but it will also prevent his apparently numerous enemies from creating a more negative image... — Scientizzle 16:02, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Editing Gohar Shahi

While my stubbed version of this article was likely plenty imperfect, at least it only represented Wikipedia policies of Wikipedia:Verifiability & Wikipedia:Neutral point of view. Your recent additions have added a lot of information that doesn't. Please don't turn this into a propaganda piece. If you want an article on your religious leader, you're going to have to give up the flowery prose and biased content.

Regarding Shahi's arrest: a source you provided states that "He has been booked on the alleged charges of murdering a woman, Ms Amina Khatoon, who had come to him for spiritual treatment."[1] If you can find another reliable source that explains why the charges were dropped that would be great. If not, I'm going with what's written--he was booked on murder charges. Period. I know that makes him look bad, but I've no interest in sugar coating anything for your or anyone else's comfort.

Can you cite any source regarding the attempts on his life or the bounty on his head? Can you find any information on the current number of his followers? — Scientizzle 15:26, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Religion of God

To meet the notability guidelines of Wikipedia:Notability (books), this entry must show that this book has:

The book has been the subject of multiple, non-trivial published works whose sources are independent of the book itself, with at least some of these works serving a general audience. This includes published works in all forms, such as newspaper articles, other books, television documentaries and reviews. Some of these works should contain sufficient critical commentary to allow the article to grow past a simple plot summary.
- The immediately preceding criterion excludes media re-prints of press releases, flap copy, or other publications where the author, its publisher, agent, or other self-interested parties advertise or speak about the book.
The book has won a major literary award.
The book has been made or adapted with attribution into a motion picture that was released into multiple commercial theaters, or was aired on a nationally televised network or cable station in any country.
The book is the subject of instruction at multiple grade schools, high schools, universities or post-graduate programs in any particular country.
The book's author is so historically significant that any of his or her written works may be considered notable, even in the absence of secondary sources. (For example, a person whose life or works is a subject of common classroom study.)

Shahi doesn't meet #5, and I doubt #3 or #4 apply. If you can show that the book has won any awards or received any non-trival press coverage, you should put it in the article. — Scientizzle 20:12, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It means that I might not be able to save this article on English Wikipedia.--سگِ گوھرشاہی 05:37, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

Image source problem with Image:Nusrat Fateh Ali khan Pakistan.jpg

Image Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading Image:Nusrat Fateh Ali khan Pakistan.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 15:31, 29 October 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Genisock2 15:31, 29 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unspecified source for Image:P11.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:P11.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 01:19, 9 January 2008 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Calliopejen1 (talk) 01:19, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Wasi

An article that you have been involved in editing, Wasi, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wasi. Thank you. ITAQALLAH 18:30, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of International Spiritual Movement Anjuman Serfaroshan-e-Islam

An editor has nominated International Spiritual Movement Anjuman Serfaroshan-e-Islam, 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/International Spiritual Movement Anjuman Serfaroshan-e-Islam 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) 22:59, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note

Please refrain from using your userspace as a substitute for article space. Drafts should be clearly labeled as such, and you must ensure that all material meets BLP guidelines, even if it is in a draft. I have accordingly blanked your userpage and requested a review at WP:ANI. --Haemo (talk) 19:15, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am an administrator who responded to that review and I have deleted your userpage and protected it from recreation due to major concerns raised. If you wish to create a userpage that confirms to all our policies, then you must first convince an admin (ask me, or if I'm not around post at WP:ANI) that you will keep everything apropriate this time. Blood Red Sandman ^{(Talk) (Contribs)} 20:08, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image source problem with Image:P72.jpg

Image Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading Image:P72.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 21:28, 6 December 2008 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Soundvisions1 (talk) 21:28, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:Hijreaswad66.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Hijreaswad66.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-enwikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-enwikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. MBisanz ^talk 08:58, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:Moon786.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Moon786.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-enwikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-enwikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. MBisanz ^talk 09:19, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

February 2010

Hello. Your recent edit to Younus AlGohar suggests that you do not agree with the my edits. An editor before you, User: 119.160.18.209 made edits similar to yours, and they were blocked for edit warring despite attempts to discuss the issue with them. Both Younus AlGohar and Messiah Foundation International have been made subject to edit warring, and even though they have been protected a lot the people edit warring don't seem willing to talk it out. Would you be willing to leave comments on how you think the article could be improved on the respective talk page? Thanks in advance for your cooperation and, as always, happy editing. --Omi(☺) 11:15, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well no actually I am not- I am just concerned that the fact be presented properly. Omi(☺) 19:45, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I can see that this is getting nowhere..therefore, assume whatever you like. Anyway, as you have advised in your edit summary on Younus AlGohar, I am working on finding more references so that we can reach consensus. You suggestions are always welcome. Omi(☺) 06:24, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly unfree File:Dil.gif

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Dil.gif, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. --Off2riorob (talk) 17:15, 12 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

Per Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Falconkhe, this account is also clearly related to other accounts currently blocked for abusive sockpuppetry.

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for repeated abuse of editing privileges. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest this block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here}} below, but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first.

— Scientizzle 17:23, 12 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I request you to kindly help this article and lift banned upon me.--Iamsaa (talk) 14:32, 15 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In order for me to help you, we need to figure a few things out now. Read the content below and reply. — Scientizzle 14:42, 15 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Answer these questions

First things first: please give answers to these questions, in each of the subsections below, providing enough detail such that I can be sure you understand what I'm asking.

Sockpuppeting

Do you understand what sockpuppeting is and why it is not appropriate for Wikipedia?
If allowed another chance to edit, will you promise not to violate these rules?
- I do unsdertand that sockpuppeting on wikipedia is prohibited and I will try my best to comply with policies of wikipedia.

Meancing edits

Do you understand why this edit and this edit are inappropriate?
- As per my understanding this edit is not appropriate as it contains a personal attack and beleive me, I am not behind this.

Article ownership

Do you understand that you do not own the content of any Wikipedia articles? Do you understand that this means you cannot prevent others from editing the content, even those with whom you disagree?
I do understand that once an article has been written on wikipedia, it's no more a personal property.

Sockpuppeting 2

You responded to this section at 19:45 UTC, March 15, 2010 stating that you understood and would abide by WP:SOCK. At 07:09, March 16, 2010 the new account Serfrosh (talk · contribs) edited in a manner and context similar to your previous work. Is Serfrosh your account? — Scientizzle 14:15, 16 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Don't forget User:Serfarosh as well. --jpgordon^{::==( o )} 21:55, 16 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No its not my account at all. You can't blame me of WP:SOCK as I wasn't involve at all, you can check through my IP and rest according to wikipedia.--Iamsaa (talk) 06:24, 17 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

jpgordon has checked your IP addresses. It's clear that these accounts Share an IP address and, since the have been remarkably similar and single-mindedly oriented towards a specific end, they are treated as a single account. To wit:

Closely connected users may be considered a single user for Wikipedia's purposes if they edit with the same objectives. When editing the same articles, participating in the same community discussion, or supporting each other in any sort of dispute, closely related accounts should disclose the connection and observe relevant policies such as edit warring as if they were a single account. If they do not wish to disclose the connection, they should avoid editing in the same areas, particularly on controversial topics.

That means, simply, although it is technically possible that multiple individual persons are editing through different accounts but using the same computer(s) and internet connection with Wikipedia and editing in the same manner, it doesn't matter whether it's one actual person or a dozen.

Frankly, though, I think you've been lying, Iamsaa. I am through playing games; I've given you more benefit-of-the-doubt than you deserve based on your editing history. This edit from today is even more evidence that you will not respect Wikipedia rules and guidelines. As such, I will offer no further assistance and will block on sight any accounts or IP addresses that appears to be evading your indefinite block, and will revert all edits made by those accounts as is appropriate for a banned user. — Scientizzle 13:41, 17 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You really don't get it, do you? You have lied repeatedly. There is no possible way I will unblock this account. While being blocked, you have evaded the block using registered accounts and multiple IP addresses. Since you stated that you "unsdertand [sic] that sockpuppeting on wikipedia is prohibited and I will try my best to comply with policies of wikipedia", I can only assume that you continue to deliberately break WP:SOCK because you have no respect for Wikipedia rules & guidelines.

Since there is no way in hell that any administrator will unblock on the basis of your behavior prior the block, with years of abusive sockpuppetry, and since this block, with multiple instances of further sockpuppetry, you should consider yourself banned from Wikipedia. Read that page. — Scientizzle 13:42, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Again you are blamming me, that's all you can do, and favor yonus & MFI. You are yourself promoting MFI & Younus and blamming me of sock-pupptory, which I have already said that I am not involved in, you the one who violate wp and use WP for own ill-deeds and blame others. Your attitude is irritating, your behaviour can't be tolerate by any mean.--Iamsaa (talk) 16:37, 30 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The evidence that there is abusive sockpuppetry occuring is blindingly obvious. Why continue to lie? I have no stake in the content at any of those articles beyond trying to make sure Wikipedia is as reliable a source of information as I can manage. I'd never even heard of this Shahi guy until I first tried to delete than fixed up his article on WP a coupole years ago. As far as I'm concerned, I could care less whether one cult thinks another cult is wrongly representing their shared cult leader...it's all very stupid to me.

I gave you multiple chances to contribute constructively. You deliberately ignored my advice and lied directly to me. I'm not stupid--I can tell your writing style--and there is clear evidence that the same IPs and the same computers have been used to represent "multiple" individuals in violation of WP:SOCK/WP:MEAT. If you want to be taken seriously, you have to take us seriously: you're banned because you have been repeatedly disruptive. If you want out of this ban, maybe you should demonstrate a willingness to follow Wikipedia policies and guidelines. I'd suggest beginning with no more IP socking. — Scientizzle 17:09, 30 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to say no as I was not involve in Edit Wars occured on wikipedia, you can unblock me and keep an eye on my account, I have always abide the policy of wikipedia, this article is an evident that how true you are. Thats all I can say for the time being.--Iamsaa (talk) 11:50, 31 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You say above, on your talk page, that you are "an authorized representative of His Holiness Riaz Ahmed Gohar Shahi" and "the office bearer of Anjuman Serfaroshan-e-Islam". For someone of your rank and the follower of a Sufi, I would have expected a far greater degree of moral integrity from you.

And if you are of this rank and you are not behind the edit warring sock puppets, then it should be within your powers to request that these people refrain from edit warring and IP sock puppetry. Would Gohar Shahi approve of the abusive language and disruptive tactics used by these socks who claim to be his followers? I think not. Esowteric+Talk 12:49, 31 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your message, all I can do to advise people not instruct them, I am not responding of others wrong-doing, therefore, it is my humble request to you and all administrators of wikipedia to consider my request.--Iamsaa (talk) 13:06, 31 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm about ready ...

I'm about ready to throw in the towel here and retire from Wikipedia. I didn't come here to engage in conflict but to try to give a little back to the community.

If admitting to sockpuppetry would mean a dent to one's honour and a loss of face that one would find personally—or perhaps culturally—too much to bear, then perhaps we can find some easier means of handling this? Some mutually-acceptable "exit strategy" from the conflict?

Rest assured: I am dedicated to the integrity of Wikipedia and one of my chief aims here is, if there is going to be a fight, then to keep that fight clean, above board and by the rules; with some sympathy, compassion and good humour thrown in for good measure.

Rest assured: if you can provide verifiable, reliable sources for your allegations—which I do take seriously— and details of Shahi's death and burial, then I will personally ensure that the evidence presented is used and used appropriately in the contested articles, so that all sides are justly represented. Esowteric+Talk 09:44, 17 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As an aside, you may also find the essay Writing for the opponent a useful read. Esowteric+Talk 09:51, 17 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your help but my concerned is that why others are editing false information in this article, they insist on Gohar Shahi was founder of MFI, which has now been a part of this article. Why is it so? Why wikipedia is promoting younus & MFI? Gohar Shahi was founder of ASI and MFI & Younus dont belong to Gohar Shahi. You are listening to one side and ignoring other?--Iamsaa (talk) 11:57, 17 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I, personally, take that as an accusation on User:Esowteric's dignity, as he has given his best to these few articles. He has supported the idea of including, rather than excluding information given forth into these articles. I've found a number of verifiable references saying that Shahi has founded MFI or is somehow or another related to AlGohar, (hence, his name AlGohar) as has User:Omirocksthisworld and a few others. Esowteric has justly applied verifiable information from both sides, yours and the MFI's (if they are at all indifferent to each other) thats the reason the article now includes both sides of the information. The article has no more controversial issues and brings forth verifiability and just information for the community to read. I hope you are able to understand that and learn from the mistakes you have done. -- Nasir | ناصر یونس have a chat 22:01, 17 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It was suggested by another user that you could provide a link from the ASI website where it discusses MFI...i.e. it could be mentioned in the article that "ASI doesn't consider MFI as being connected to Gohar Shahi in any way". I'm sure User: Esowteric, Scientizzle and all others are trying to keep things fair and listen to both sides, but your own attempts to cooperate and take into account others' suggestions would also be appreciated. Omirocksthisworld(Drop a line) 23:41, 17 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

But it is a lie as no reputable reference has been provided that Gohar Shahi Found MFI and here Omirocksthisworld has confessed that MFI was founded after disappearance of Gohar Shahi, when Gohar Shahi was disappeared how can he found an Organization?--Iamsaa (talk) 04:41, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Nusrullah Khan Noori

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Nusrullah Khan Noori. 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 Wikipedia:Notability and "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(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nusrullah Khan Noori. 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.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:04, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppet investigation

You are suspected of sockpuppetry, which means that someone suspects you of using multiple Wikipedia accounts for prohibited purposes. Please make yourself familiar with the notes for the suspect, then respond to the evidence at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Iamsaa. Thank you.

Hopefully this will clear you. Esowteric+Talk 13:26, 31 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I hope so.--Iamsaa (talk) 14:06, 31 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

...See the update. Will you stop lying now? — Scientizzle 15:56, 31 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I am not lying, I am unable to understand that why sockpuppetry result is coming against me, while I am not involve in sockpuppetry?--Iamsaa (talk) 10:47, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You are lying, and we've had enough. Talk page access revoked. --jpgordon^{::==( o )} 16:30, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:ROG.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:ROG.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-enwikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-enwikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. MBisanz ^talk 04:30, 11 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

utrs 30840

This user is requesting unblocking at UTRS 30840. The appeal is open. Courtesy ping @Jpgordon:. --Deep fried okra (schalte ein) 07:58, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This appeal is now closed. Response carried over:

I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that either the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or that the block is no longer necessary because you understand what you have been blocked for, will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and will make useful contributions instead. Please read https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Guide_to_appealing_blocks for more information.

--Deep fried okra (schalte ein) 20:48, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]